God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Chap. iii. 26, 27.) Yet in the very next page, he says, "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." "Ye did run well: who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?" "If ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another." (Chap. v. 4, 7, 15.)

Another Epistle is addressed to "the Church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." This church is admonished to "withdraw from every brother that walketh disorderly;" ;" "for we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies."

Peter warns those to whom he wrote, that "there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies." "Spots they are and blemishes, . having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin." The brief epistle of Jude is full of similar warnings; and so are the messages of John to the Seven Churches.

Hence, when we find it a prominent charge in Mr. Spurgeon's indictment, that the Church of England styles the baptized, "children of God, members of Christ, and inheritors of the kingdom of Heaven," while the law of the land puts some of them into prison,-the obvious reply is, that so it was in the Apostles' days; and so we find the fact recorded, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, in the latest books of the New Testament. The Apostles saw with pain, in the churches over which they watched, "disorderly persons," " busybodies," contentions men, and even fornicators, lascivious men, and false teachers. And yet, addressing these churches in the aggregate, they speak of them as "holy," "elect," "sanctified," and "the children of God." Here is precisely the same phraseology which offends Mr. Spurgeon in the formularies of the Church of England.

In these two particulars, then, we see a marked dissonance between the feelings and views of Mr. Spurgeon, and the feelings and views of the Apostles. But now we come, in the last place, to that one grand defect which underlies the whole of Mr. Spurgeon's baptismal theory. In his concluding pages, he is forced to explain what, in his view, Baptism really is; and here we see at once that he differs almost in toto from the Bible view, and from the faith of all the Reformed Churches. The Apostles, and the great fathers of the churches of the Reformation, all held the Sacraments to be, mainly and primarily, means of grace, channels of spiritual blessing. So declare all the Confessions of the Protestant Churches from

which we have already quoted. With one voice they condemn those who deem the Sacraments to be mere signs. With entire agreement they declare, with the "Assembly's Catechism," the Sacraments to be "effectual means of salvation, not by any power in themselves, but by the working of the Holy Ghost, and the blessing of Christ, by whom they were instituted."

Is this Mr. Spurgeon's view? Not at all. When he is obliged, at last, to explain what benefits or advantages he finds in Baptism, he thus describes them :

1. "Baptism is the avowal of faith: the man was Christ's soldier, but now in Baptism he puts on his regimentals."

2. "Baptism is also a testimony of his faith: he does in Baptism tell the world what he believes." (Surely these two are identical; the second is merely a repetition of the first.)

3. "Baptism is also Faith's taking her proper place. It is, or should be, one of her first acts of obedience. Reason looks at Baptism, and says, 'Perhaps there is nothing in it; it cannot do me any good.' 'True,' says Faith, and therefore I will observe it. It is my first public declaration that a thing which looks to be unreasonable, and seems to be unprofitable, being commanded by God, is law to me. If my Master had told me to pick up six stones and lay them in a row, I would do it without demanding of Him, What good will it do ?'"

Thus, in Mr. Spurgeon's view, Baptism is merely something which man does, and in which he "puts on his regimentals," and "tells the world what he believes." The Reformers, on the other hand, deemed it to be an ordinance in which the Holy Ghost took part. And this difference of view is the key to the whole matter. Mr. Spurgeon confesses that he sees no use or advantage in Baptism; that "to his sense there is no good in it;" that it "looks to be unreasonable, and seems to be unprofitable." He retains Baptism merely because he finds it commanded. It is, he says, "apparently useless;" and therefore he will observe it, the better to show his obedience.

We repeat, this is an idea and a view of Baptism wholly unknown to the Apostles, and equally unknown to the first Protestant churches. In the great Confession of AugsburgLuther's Confession-we read that "Sacraments were instituted, not so much to be notes of profession amongst men (the only use Mr. Spurgeon sees in them), as signs and pledges of God's goodwill towards us." "By faith we receive both the grace promised, which is represented by the Sacraments, and also the Holy Ghost." So also in the Scottish Confession, the Confession of John Knox, we read,-"We utterly condemn the vanity of those that affirm Sacraments to be nothing else than bare and naked signs. We assuredly believe that by Baptism we are ingrafted into Christ Jesus, to be made partakers of His justice, by which our sins are covered and remitted."

The difference is total; it is as wide as possible. To the Reformers the Sacraments were means of grace-channels of mercy and of spiritual blessings. To Mr. Spurgeon they are nothing" and "useless," and he observes them simply because they are commanded. "If my Master had told me to pick up six stones and lay them in a row, I would do it, without demanding of Him, What good will it do?"" Baptism is commanded, and faith obeys because it is commanded, and not because it sees any use or beauty in the thing enjoined. Thus this great Sacrament is placed on a level with "picking up six stones and laying them in a row." Clearly, Mr. Spurgeon sees no benefit, no means of grace, in Baptism. But this blindness was not shared by Paul or Peter or John, or by Luther or Ridley or John Knox. And when, in this sermon, Mr. Spurgeon cries out for a Luther or a Knox, as if those great Reformers were of his mind in this matter, we can only acquit him of gross misrepresentation, by attributing to him ignorance or forgetfulness. Luther and Knox were not of his opinion; their recorded judgments utterly condemn his view. The proper line of duty, under such circumstances, would have been, silence. If I do not understand a thing, let me at least refrain from talking about it. Let me not get up into a pulpit to instruct two or three thousand men as to the real nature and character of the Sacrament of Baptism, if I have not yet been able to comprehend what Paul and Peter and John mean by some of the strong expressions they use. If I am conscious that my mind is not in unison with theirs, let me pause and wait until it is. They "spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost," and their words convey "truth without any mixture of error." If they, then, speak with great_reverence and esteem of Baptism, as an ordinance of value and of power, while to me "" it looks to be unreasonable, and seems to be unprofitable," let me pause and think, and pray for more light. But let me not dare to speak on such a subject hastily, and in a tone quite opposed to theirs.

Mr. Spurgeon argues rightly, that if a thing be clearly commanded, it is the duty of a servant of Christ to obey, whether he can, or cannot, understand the reason for such a command. But this duty is not limited to actions, it extends to words also. We ought not only to submit to Baptism as an ordinance; but we ought to think and speak of it as God's Word speaks. And sure we are that the terms applied to this Sacrament in the last two pages of Mr. Spurgeon's sermon, as "useless," "unreasonable," "unprofitable," and a thing which "cannot do me any good," are utterly unlike anything which is to be found in the Bible; and, therefore, we feel that they ought not to have been uttered by any Christian teacher. Mr. Spurgeon parades his obedience, saying, "If my Master had

told me to pick up six stones and lay them in a row, I would do it." But here his obedience stops. When Christ says, "Honour my ordinance : use it with reverence and with loyal respect," he answers, "No, I cannot do that. I will obey, as I would obey any other command that seemed to me senseless and unreasonable; but this Baptism appears to me a useless and unprofitable thing, and so only can I speak of it."

This is highly blamable; and, as the public teaching of a minister who possesses great influence, it is full of mischief, and will probably trouble Mr. Spurgeon's conscience in his latest hours. We are sorry to read it, and reflect with sorrow on the injurious operation of such teaching on the minds of thousands of readers and hearers. But in other respects it will do no great harm. The Church will not be shaken by it; the minds of the clergy, and of the well-informed laity, will not be perplexed by statements and reasonings so obviously unscriptural. Still, it must tend to alienation, to mutual distrust and suspicion, among Christians; and on this ground, more especially, we regard this publication as an act to which Mr. Spurgeon will, we think, recur, on some future day, with feelings of sincere repentance and regret. His Master, whom we believe he desires faithfully to serve, in one of His earliest lessons, said, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." His last injunction to His apostles was, "Go and teach all nations, baptizing them,"-" he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." This teaching the apostles loyally and dutifully accept, saying, "He sanctified and cleansed the Church with the washing of water by the Word," "He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." But Mr. Spurgeon demands, " Christ claims for His faith that it is purely spiritual, and how could He connect regeneration with a peculiar application of aqueous fluid?" This is not a dutiful or fitting reception of the last injunctions of a wise and gracious Master. It rather sounds like the perplexed demand of Nicodemus: "How can these things be?"

REACTION.

THE history of the world is the history of reaction. The human mind cannot go quite straight. Like Meander, it starts with a bend; that bend is the cause of another, and probably a greater; and the force with which the stream is sent off from the one bank, while it scoops out its hollow on the

opposite side, ensures also its subsequent repulsion from that side in its turn.

We well remember, when placed in trying circumstances in consequence of the prevalence of an exaggerated and disproportioned form of doctrine, being strongly advised to correct it by bending the stick to the opposite side," or, as the person who made use of the illustration meant, by teaching the opposite form of doctrine. Our answer was, that we wished, by God's help, to teach His truth, which, as we read it in our Bible, lies as far from the one error as from the other.

The very desire to get away from an error leads men into the opposite, if their only guide is the mere avoiding of error, and not the actual possession of that truth, by a comparison with which error is to be tried, as we try perpendiculars with a plumb-line: "Interdum in vitium ducit culpæ fuga, si caret arte." A strong dislike to anything acts on us like a current, and carries us away with it to as far a distance as possible from the thing we dislike.

No one can have carefully observed even what has passed in his own lifetime, within the sphere of his own personal observation, without remarking a succession of reactions. It cannot, in fairness, be denied that, after it had pleased God, by the earnest and loving preaching of the gospel of the grace of God by men who did not leave the communion of the Church, but stood by her and remained in her to revive the spirit of life and power which had burnt with so feeble a flame, there still remained a great amount of ignorance of the truth of God, and of that which is often, though not always, its accompaniment neglect of the decencies and proprieties that should ever mark the outward worship of His house. The noble men who had sought first that which is really first, and, if we might venture to use the word, Tржтισтоv, first of the first, had spent their strength and time and substance in efforts to extend the knowledge of that only Name whereby we must be saved. In their own individual cases, the arrangements of outward worship harmonized with their own exalted views of the glorious majesty of Him whom they worshipped. In their cases it was no mere reading prayers,"-they prayed them; their hearts were thrown into every petition, their minds intelligently appreciated every word. These men had been so "taught of God," had so "learned Christ," had so personally experienced His pardoning mercy and His renewing grace, that with them public worship was direct communion with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. Those who saw them have testified that they looked and spoke as if they were half in heaven. In their hands the preaching of the Word was no mere effort of argument, that first enunciated some truth to be proved, and then by a