Page images
PDF
EPUB

But, important as was the purpose thus answered by the establishment and maintenance of the ceremonial law, it was one of a merely temporary nature. When the Messiah was come when he had revealed the spiritual character of his own dispensation—when he had died for our sins-when he had risen again for our justificationwhen he had shed forth on his disciples the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit-then were all the types fulfilled; then was the law of types abolished. "There is verily," saith the apostle, "a disannulling of the commandment going before, for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof; for the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did, by the which we draw nigh unto God." Again, "Wherefore, when he cometh into the world, he saith, sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me in burnt-offerings and (sacrifices) for sin thou hast had no pleasure: then said I, Lo! I come, (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above, when he said sacrifice and offering, and burnt-offerings, and (offering) for sin, thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; then said he, Lo! I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second." The system of types and sacrificial ordinances, therefore, being "taken away," and the spiritual system being, by the coming of Christ, established, we are no longer to worship the Father through the intervention of a human priesthood, of formal ceremonies, or of typical institutions, but solely through the mediation of the High Priest of our profession, and under the immediate and all-sufficient influences of the Holy Ghost. Although the shadows of the old law formed an essential part of the Jewish dispensation, they were no sooner imposed upon Christians than they became unlawful, and assumed the character of an unrighteous bondage and of "beggarly elements."'3 "Wherefore, if ye be dead with Christ, from the rudiments of the world," says the apostle Paul to his Colossian converts, "why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances." Having thus endeavoured to unfold the nature of that spiritual worship of God which the Lord Jesus enjoined on his followers, and to show how clearly it was distinguished from the old ceremonial

1 Heb. vii, 18, 19.
3 Gal. iv. 9.

2 Heb. x. 5-9.

4 Col. ii. 20, comp. 14. Eph. ii. 14—16.

worship practised among the Jews, I may now take up the more particular consideration of the rites of Baptism, and the Lord's Supper. These rites have both received the name of "sacraments,"a word which properly signifies oaths, and formerly designated more especially the oaths of allegiance required of Roman soldiers; but which, as applied to these religious ceremonies, may be considered as denoting "sacred and binding ordinances."

It is imagined by many persons, that the ordinances, thus held as sacred in the church, are but little connected with those Jewish institutions, which are, on all hands, allowed to have been abolished by the coming and sacrifice of the Messiah; that they are, on the contrary, (with the single exception of the baptism of John,) of an origin exclusively Christian. On the supposition of the correctness of this opinion, it is, nevertheless, undeniable, that these rites, as they are now observed, are of precisely the same nature as the ceremonies of the ancient Jews. They are actions indifferent in themselves, employed as religious forms, and as a constituent part of a system of divine worship; and, like those Jewish ceremonies, they are mere types or shadows, representing, in a figurative manner, certain great particulars of Christian truth. It is plain, therefore, that the principle on which these practices are founded, appertains to the old covenant; and equally plain (in the opinion of Friends) that such practices do not consist with that spiritual worship, which is described as so distinguishing a feature of the dispensation of the Gospel.

Although, however, the rites of Baptism and the Supper have been so generally adopted, as belonging to their own religious system, by the professors of faith in Jesus, I cannot consider it true, in any accurate sense of the terms, that they are of Christian origin. On the contrary there is every reason to believe that, before the coming of Christ, these practices actually formed a part of the customary Jewish ritual.

First, with respect to baptism in water. It is notorious, that, according to the ceremonial law of the Jews, there could be no removal of uncleanness, no purification either of things or persons, without ablution in water. On various occasions the performance of that ceremony was appointed by the divine law: and, on many others, it was observed on the authority of Rabbinical tradition. Now, these "divers washings," to which the Jews were so much

accustomed as a ritual means of purification, are, in the Greek Testament, described as baptisms; and it is certain that the principal of them were effected by dipping or immersion. Before going into the temple to minister or officiate, the priests of the Jews were accustomed to dip their whole body in water, and the house in which this ceremony was performed was called "the house of baptism." Persons of every description, who had contracted any bodily pollution, were strictly enjoined by the law to wash or bathe their flesh;3 and the learned Jews determine that, if the least part of the surface of the body was not wetted by the dipping, the purification was incomplete. In the Greek original of the book of Ecclesiasticus, a person purified, after touching a dead body, is described as one dipped or baptized. Judith, when on the point of performing an action which she erroneously deemed to be of a highly religious nature, "washed (or, as in the Greek, baptized) herself in a fountain of water." Now, although the baptism practised by John and by the apostles did not, in all its circumstances, resemble those Jewish washings to which I have now adverted, yet it was precisely similar to them in that main particular of immersion in water; and, in all these instances, this immersion was typical of one and the same thing that is to say, of a change from a condition of uncleanness to one of purity. But the Jewish dipping, from which the baptism, first, of John, and afterward, of the apostles, principally took its rise, and of which those baptisms may, indeed, be considered as mere instances, was the dipping on conversion. We read in the book of Exodus, that three days before the delivery of the law, "the Lord said unto Moses, Go unto the people, and sanctify them to-day and to-morrow, and let them wash their clothes;" in pursuance of which command, we are afterward informed that "Moses went down from the mount unto the people, and sanctified the people; and they washed their clothes." From the comparison of other similar passages, it appears probable that the washing of clothes here mentioned was a baptism or immersion in water of the whole body, together with the apparel. Such is the express judgment of

1 Heb. ix. 10; Mark vii. 4; Luke xi. 38.

2 Cod. Joma. cap. 3, quoted by Hammond on Matt. iii.

3 See Levit. xv. 5, 8, 11.

4 Chap. xxxiv. 25.

5 Chap. xii. 7.

6 Exod. xix. 10, 14.

Compare Levit. xi. 25; xiv. 47; xv. 5, &c.

the Rabbinical writers; and they further determine that this baptism was commanded and observed, on the principle that the Israelites were then about to be introduced to a new religious covenant or dispensation ;-that, in other words, it was a baptism of conversion, to a purer and more excellent system of worship, faith, and conduct, than that to which they had hitherto been accustomed.1

Hence, as it is declared by Maimonides and other Jewish writers, arose the baptism of proselytes, or of the Gentile converts to the religion of the Jews. It was a principle well understood among that people, that as it was with the Israelite, so should it be with the proselyte; and, accordingly, as the Israelites had entered into their covenant by "circumcision, baptism, and sacrifice," the same introductory rites were considered indispensable for every true convert to their religion."

Maimonides, who was a man of extraordinary sense and learning, and was deeply versed in the laws and customs of the ancient Jews, has stated a variety of particulars respecting the baptism of proselytes. It appears that, about three days after circumcision, the convert to Judaism was conducted, during the day-time, to a confluence of waters, whether natural or artificial, sufficiently deep to admit of

1 Maimonides, Issure Biah, cap. 13. Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. in Matt. iii. 6. 2 The proselytes were of two descriptions: proselytes of the gate, who forsook Idolatry and worshipped the true God, but did not conform to the Jewish law; and proselytes of justice, who went further, and embraced the whole legal and ceremonial system. It was the latter only who were baptized.

3 See Num. xv. 15.

4 According to the traditions of the Rabbins, circumcision, baptism, and sacrifice, were enjoined on every male, and the two latter on every female convert from heathenism to the Jewish faith. It was a trite axiom, as Lightfoot informs us, that no man could be a proselyte until he was circumcised and baptized. In the Babylonish Gemara, (part of the Talmud) we find the following disputation. "The proselyte who is circumcised and not baptized, what are we to say of him? Rabbi Eliezer says, Behold he is a proselyte; for so we find it was with our fathers (the Patriarchs,) that they were circumcised and not baptized. He that is baptized and not circumcised, what are we to say of him? Rabbi Joshua says, Behold he is a proselyte; for so we find it is with females. But the wise men say, Is he baptized and not circumcised? or, is he circumcised and not baptized? He is no proselyte until he be circumcised and baptized :" Jevahmoth, fol. 46, 2. Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. in Matt. iii. 6.

entire immersion. Having been placed in the water, he was instructed in various particulars of the Jewish law, by three scribes of learning and authority, who presided over the whole ceremony; and, when these doctors had received his promises of a faithful adherence to the Jewish institutions, and had fully satisfied themselves respecting his motives and condition of mind, he completed the immersion of his whole person, by dipping his head. He then ascended from the water, offered his sacrifice to the Lord, and was thenceforward considered as a complete Jew, and as a new or regenerate

man.'

I am aware that the existence of the rite of proselyte baptism, before the Christian era, is disputed by some of the learned, on the ground that such a rite is not specially mentioned either in the Old Testament or in the most ancient uninspired writings of the Jews; but this omission is very far from being sufficient to prove the negative; and the doubt which it occasions appears to be greatly outbalanced by positive evidences in favour of the antiquity of the practice. It seems necessary shortly to glance at these evidences.

1. The Jewish writers, who make mention of the baptism of proselytes, expressly describe it as an ordinance practised among their countrymen at a date long prior to the Christian era. Thus, it is said in the Talmud, that Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, was baptized as a proselyte. From Maimonides we learn that the baptism of proselytes was practised from age to age, after the Israelites themselves had been admitted into their covenant in the days of Moses; and, again, he makes mention of the proselytes in the time of David and Solomon, as of persons who had been baptized.

2. There was a marked resemblance in several leading particulars between the baptism of proselytes, as described in the Talmud and by Maimonides, and the baptism practised by John and the early teachers of Christianity. The baptism of the proselytes was a complete immersion, and was appointed to take place in a confluence of waters. The baptism of John and of the Christians is generally allowed to have been of the same character. "John baptized in

1 Issure Biah, cap. 13, 14. Wall on Infant Baptism, p. xliv. Selden de Synedriis, lib. i. cap. 3.

2 Tract. Repudii, Hammond on Matt. iii. 4 Issure Biah, cap. 13.

לדורות 3

« PreviousContinue »