these adults: we know not whether the whole household were of Abraham's own state of character. It is certain that, in one respect, Ishmael differed exceedingly from the promised son, Isaac, and from the character of his father. All I wish to observe is, that here is a company described as being circumcised, concerning whose individual character in the sight of God there is no distinct record in the Word of God.

Now here again the analogy is perfect. You will remember that baptism was first carried on amongst adults. It was instituted of God, as we have seen. The Apostles proceeded to baptize when they preached, but to baptize only adults, who professed their faith. You remember the instance of Lydia, the seller of purple at Thyatira. She having her heart opened to attend to the things that were spoken by Paul, was afterwards baptized, and her house; without any specific mention, as in the case of Abraham's house, of the peculiar and individual character of the parties composing her household: we simply read, that she was baptized, and her house. Another instance is recorded in the Acts, of the Ethiopian Eunuch, to whom Philip was desired to join himself, and go and preach the Gospel; on hearing which the Eunuch asked to be baptized, and Philip told him, if he believed he might: and he said, "I believe that Jesus is the Son of God;" and upon his profession of that faith, Philip went down with him in the water and baptized him. And thus we perceive, that as in the case of circumcision, so in the case of baptism, it commenced with adults.

We have next to consider, that it continued not amongst adults, but on children. Refer to Genesis, xxi. 4: "Abraham circumcised his son Isaac, being eight days old, as God had commanded him." And this became a custom in Israel. We do not read distinctly concerning the circumcision of Jacob or Esau; but it is clear they were circumcised the eighth day, according to the practice of their grandfather. So doubtless were Jacob's children, his sons and their sons: so that the whole nation became a circumcised nation, inclusive of characters of various descriptions. Koran, Dathan, and Abiram, were as truly circumcised in the flesh as Moses and Aaron: Jeroboam and Ahab were as truly circumcised as David or Hezekiah, as to the outward ordinance. And thus it came to pass, by the continuance of the outward ordinance, not waiting upon the individual character, but taking its rise on the eighth day of the child's age, in every instance of a Jewish family, there came to be two Israels, or Israel in two senses-Israel spiritual, inclusive of that chosen people that God reserved to himself, which should not bow the knee to the image of Baal, which should not follow a multitude to do evil, which should not go with an evil world, and live without God in the world; and Israel national, inclusive of the others, together with the mixed multitude which knew not God. And so the Apostle tells us in this Epistle, speaking on this very subject: "All are not Israel that are of Israel." So that the population of the earth might have been aptly described by three circles; one inclusive of all the heathen; another smaller one, including the baptized nation; and another smaller still, including the elect people of God.

Now observe, my brethren, the line of separation between the world and the baptized nation; between the open and visible line that God had appointed, that he might have a witness in the earth; that he might separate a people,

called by his name, and that the separation might be seen and known of all men. But the separation between them and the elect people of God, is not visible: the Lord's spiritual people was an unseen, and unknown, and hidden people: no man could designate them-distinctly put his finger on this and that man, and say they were the Lord's, while their neighbours were declared not to be the Lord's. He kept that in his own knowledge only. So that the line of separation between the baptized nation and the people of God is not the outward and visible ordinance, but something else, known unto God himself. "The Lord knoweth them that are his;" man knoweth not. So it was in Israel. We read of the prophet Elias, who at one time imagined the whole nation was gone from God, and that he himself alone was left: "They have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars, and I only am left, and they seek my life." But he was wrong; God had at that time reserved to himself seven thousand men. It is of the greatest consequence to observe this, that while God determined to have a people that should be a witness for him in the earth-should be an outward standing memorial in the face of all men, that there is a Church of God-yet his own spiritual people are not so outwardly designated before mankind, but inwardly separated, and known unto God himself. Such was the state of the case in this typical nation. The whole people, beginning at eight days old-in process of time the whole people were circumcised; and that circumcised people contained within it a spiritual people, known unto God himself.

Now the analogy here again is perfect. Baptism, which commenced with adults, soon proceeded among the children; the children of the baptized converts were themselves baptized. There is no especial commandment for the purpose in the New Testament. No especial commandment was needed, because it was the practice of the earliest Christians, who themselves were Jews, to look upon their children as involved with themselves, and as included in the privileges that they were bound in. It would have been a strange thing to those Jews, if the Christian religion, placing before them greater privileges in every other respect, had restricted their privileges in this respect: if while it seemed to throw wide the arms of Jehovah's mercy around them, it at the same time had repelled their little ones from coming there. They were in the habit of bringing them as Jews; to do so as Christians, at the same age, was natural. But if the practice was to be changed, if instead of presenting their children according to their own faith, at eight days old, to be designated, they were not to present them, if they were to keep them back, if they were to withhold them till they had made a profession of faith, till they had formed some judgment of their characters, then, indeed, a special commandment would have been required, because they would have been called to change their already established practice. But, that they fell in from the Jewish practice to the Christian practice, adopting the ancient custom, is known to every careful reader of the early ecclesiastical history. And there is one fact I may just mention to you now, which proves it beyond a doubt, I think, to all unprejudiced men; it is this-that the first council of the Church which was convened after the days of the Apostles themselves, was called together at Carthage (a city in the north of Africa), and that the object of convening that council was to determine whether it were lawful at any time, or under any circum

stances, to baptize a child before it was eight days old. It had not been lawful to circumcise a child before it was eight days old: for this there was an especial commandment. Some of the early Christians maintained, that, no matter what the circumstances of the case might be, no child should be baptized till it was eight days old; others thought they might be baptized at any age: and this council was convened for the purpose of settling this point. The decision of the council was, that as the Christian dispensation enlarged itself in mercy every way over the Jewish, so they decided, on the charitable side, that it was lawful to baptize a child at any period after its birth. I speak not of the wisdom of this decision; I merely speak of the fact of it, and that the object for which the council was convened proves beyond a doubt, that the practice in the church was, the baptism of infants.

The same consequences would naturally follow, which followed in the case of Israel. There would grow up a baptized community, a variety of characters; so that here, as before, there would be three circles-the whole people of the world as before, the baptized community, and the elect people within; and all would not be Christians which were of Christendom; as all were not Israelites, indeed, who were of Israel in the flesh. So it was, and so it is.

Now let us consider the NATURE OF THIS ORDINANCE, AND THE Abuse of IT. We read in Romans, iv. 11, that "Abraham received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith, which he had yet being uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed unto them; and the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had, being yet uncircumcised." Here the faith is distinguished from circumcision. It was enjoyed by Abraham previous to the circumcision; and he received the circumcision-a sign, and declared also to be a seal, to him of the righteousness of the faith which he had before he received that seal.

Nothing less than this could ever have been supposed to belong to circumcision by any believing Israelite; every believer of that nation, looking only to the original institution of the ordinance, remembering it was a seal to his father Abraham of the righteousness of the faith which he had, would look upon it as a seal to himself in like manner, and would ask for it as a seal upon his child also, and would give thanks unto God for the opportunity afforded him of presenting his infant before the Lord to be sealed in like manner. He would presently find, indeed, that many have that outward seal who grow up without the faith of which it was intended to be the seal. But would their falling off alter, in his view, the situation of God? Would the circumstance, that many Israelites with the seal of circumcision upon them in the flesh, grew up uncircumcised in heart, change a believing Israelite's view of the ordinance as appointed of God? Would not this have been to allow the abuse of man to alter his view of the ordinance of God? And would not every believing Israelite, therefore, be called to this distinction-to mark the nature of the ordinance as appointed in the case of Abraham, and to distinguish between the ordinance itself and the abuse of it, into which the nation had fallen? Would it not be his privilege to rise, by faith, into that standing concern in the

ordinance in which Abraham stood, when it was a seal to him of the righteousness of the faith which he had while he was yet uncircumcised. Would the circumstance of God's kindness to the nation, in commanding the ordinance to be prolonged amongst them, even amongst their children, before there was any faith, or possibility of expressing their faith; would this enlarged mercy on God's part operate to deter, or operate to cause to flag the faith of the believing Israelite? Ask yourselves, my brethren, how would a believer in Israel look upon circumcision? He would see around him many that were circumcised in the flesh, and yet were living strangers to the God of Israel. He would see that many of the priests, whose duty it was to perform that office, were themselves living strangers to the God of Israel. He would see that although the ordinance of the priesthood continued from Aaron downward, yet that the individual characters of the priests degenerated. Would he, therefore, argue that, because they were degenerated in character, the abuse of men had rendered null and void the ordinance of God, and that they ceased to have a priesthood at all? And would he conclude, because he saw circumcised persons living carelessly and in a worldly manner, that the abuse of man had rendered null and void the ordinance? Surely not: on the contrary, believing in his God, trusting in him, relying upon his faithful word, knowing that he was no respecter of persons, nor of times, nor of seasons, he would endeavour, amidst all the defection and the degeneracy of the people around him, to rise into holy confidence that God would bless his own ordinance, and to put his trust in him, to rest in it, to find it for himself, and to ask for it for his children-the seal of the righteousness of the faith which God had given him: and as he found that faith working within him, he would appeal to that ordinance as a proof of God's loving kindness to him.

Now here the analogy is the same. Baptism was, indeed, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which the first adult Christians had, being yet unbaptized. It does not follow that, even then, no persons were baptized except true believers. We know of one man who was baptized, and the Apostle immediately told him that he was "in the gall of bitterness," that he had "neither part nor lot in the matter." But all who made a profession of faith were baptized. If the answer were the answer of a good conscience, then baptism was all that it was intended to be-a seal to them of the righteousness of the faith which God had given them. But afterwards, when the infants of those believing parents were baptized, it would presently appear that many were baptized in the flesh who lived without God in the world: and the faith of the believer would then be put to a trial. If every baptized person walking with God had no trial of faith, the visible and the invisible church would be one and the same; there would be no longer any "hidden ones." How is it possible to manage these two things-to have an outward company that shall be witnesses for the name of God, and yet not to have his own people known outwardly? The only way to manage it is (which God has done), to give a sign which should be carried far and wide to all people-which should indeed be, to every one that believeth, a seal of the righteousness of the faith, and yet should be abused by many who believe not. This is precisely the state of the case. Baptism has been abused, as circumcision was. The nature of it is of God's appointment, to be a seal to the heart, an assurance to the man, that God loves

him, an assurance to him of the blessing which he receives through the faith that God has given him; but it has been abused.

Now, let me call your attention to the way in which circumcision was abused. Oh, it is a most awful thing! It is the nature of the human heart to desire to escape punishment without desiring to avoid sin: and therefore the tendency of man always has been to substitute some form for real religion; because real religion purifies the heart, and sanctifies it. But man wants to be safe without being sanctified; the natural man wants to be safe without being holy; and, therefore, if he can persuade himself that some outward form, which does not touch the heart, will save him from punishment, those outward forms become his god, become his whole dependence. This is the genius of all formality in religion this is the very root and core of the Romish Church; to make men so depend upon the outward forms, upon the doing certain things, upon the saying of certain prayers, upon attendances at certain offices-to make them so depend upon these for safety, that they are at ease in thinking they may do without holiness.

See, then, how the Jews fell into the abuse of circumcision, and all their other ordinances. They boasted themselves of being the children of Abraham; they placed their confidence in that for escape from punishment from the God of Abraham. There is nothing that the Scripture is more express against, nothing that the Holy Ghost, in the Word of God, has taken more specific pains to set before men with reiterated warnings, than this awful abuse that the Jews fell into, resting in outward privileges, as if they could give them safety with God. Remember what John the Baptist was commissioned to say to them. You find it in the third chapter of Matthew: "Bring forth fruits, meet for repentance: and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham for our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham." Now, says he, outward profession will not do; "the axe is laid to the root of the tree;" the heart-searching God is come; the kingdom of heaven is at hand; "therefore every tree that bringeth forth good fruit," no matter what soil it may stand in, no matter in what privileged garden it may grow, though in the very heart of Israel-if it have not the very life of God in it, if it have not the fruitfulness of God in it, "it must be cast into the fire.”

Take another instance in the language of the Jews, as you read it in the eighth chapter of John. Jesus had told them that the truth would make them free; and they say (at the thirty-third verse,) "We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin;" (the slave of sin;)" and the servant abideth not in the house for ever; but the Son abideth ever. If the Son, therefore, shall make you free, you shall be free indeed. I know that ye are Abraham's seed;" (Abraham's seed after the flesh;) "but ye seek to kill me because my word hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with my Father, and you do that which you have seen with your father. They answered and said to him, Abraham is our father. Jesus answered and said unto them, If ye were Abraham's children ye would do the works of Abraham: but now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham." He throws a doubt-" If ye were Abraham's children, ye