Class and gossip-good and evilthese two-which is the greater? The opinion is gaining ground that the evil preponderates. It certainly does when the class is very large, and the teacher is not very wise. On the whole, however, I think the good predominates, and that these classes ought to be encouraged. The responsibilities of the teacher and her claim on the sympathy of the Church are great. Nor is the talk after class always gossip, perhaps not oftener than that of some groups more richly attired who walk to or from the house of God in company. But the main remedy lies within the smaller circle of home, not the home the young women came from --though much might be done therebut the home they come to, and of which they then form a part. Let the mistress consider her maids, let her come down sometimes from the throne of authority to the chair of friendship, and learn, and sympathize with their inner life; let her direct their reading,

provide for their due recreation, and give them continuous and faithful instruction. Let the master of the house make family worship, from which the servants should never be absent, a brief Sabbath hour, explaining the Scriptures, and so praying that they shall feel that they are on his heart. And especially let the minister and the Church make some provision for the urgent spiritual needs of this portion of the congregation. If there be a servants' class, let the minister often visit it, and occasionally take it himself, and let him once a quarter, or more seldom, preach an afternoon sermon specially to young women in service, and have under frequent instruction those of them who are already members of his Church.

Let the moral and religious elements be thus and in other ways supplied, and the nineteenth century, among its many other good things, may find it possible to have good servants also.

The

THE opinion that the baptism of children is a mere form-without any well-defined meaning or obvious practical use-is one which very widely obtains. This is not a matter to occasion much astonishment. true import of infant baptism is so seldom enunciated, and so little understood, that it is no wonder it should be so regarded. Even pious parents, not unfrequently, present their offspring for baptism as a mere service of dedication; others, only because it is a common and customary rite; and

others, because they dread the thought of their children dying and not enjoying Christian burial.

This is a state of things, both in regard to this Divine ordinance and all whom it concerns, which ought not to continue, which has, we believe, been engendered through ignorance or misconception, and which only requires to be understood, and its importance to be appreciated, to be reformed. For there is no property so valuable to the Church of God as that of immortality; no endowment to

be compared with that of childrenthe sunshine of families, the hopes of the Church, and the true wealth of empires. That system of religion, therefore, which embraces not children in its instruction and spiritual concern, leaves one of the most important portions of human society disregarded, and proclaims its own deficiency. For there is no season more appropriate to commence right training than that of childhood, and no soil more likely to respond to proper culture.

But why this indifference in a matter of so much moment? Certain it is that it is not because either the subjects or the modes of baptism have not been abundantly discussed. No ordinance, indeed, of the Christian Church has occasioned more disputation, or is encircled still with greater diversity of opinion. As Richard Baxter remarked in his time :-"It may seem strange that, after sixteen hundred and twenty-five years' use of Christian baptism, the ministers of the gospel should be yet unresolved to whom it doth belong; but so it is." This wonder has increased by the addition of more than two centuries!

We shall not arrogate to ourselves the possession of wisdom sufficient to settle this ancient dispute, for the longer we live the more we are convinced that prejudice governs more than principle in this corrupt world; while we call to remembrance that we address those who maintain the view, and we believe correctly, that from the earliest time children were dedicated to God and to the Church, and that in the new dispensation-an economy not of fewer but of more privileges infants are not excluded but accepted into the instruction of our most holy faith.

For what is baptism? What, but an ordinance of Divine appointment, in which, by the application of water

showing the need of purification— "the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost," the individual so baptized is introduced into the discipleship of the Christian Church; in other words, into the education and supervision which the Christian Church exists to impart. Hence the language of our Lord, "Go and teach," or disciple, "all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." Matthew xxviii. 19. Here the true idea of baptism appears, as the initiatory ordinance of the Church of God into its instruction, its care, its superintendence, and the enjoyment of its prayers-as being all included in its teaching or discipleship.

That water is to be used in baptism is obvious, from primitive practice, as in the cases of the three thousand, and that of the eunuch, who went down into the water-not that he plunged himself, or was plunged into it, but went to it; just as when it is said of Jesus, that "seeing the multitude he went up into a mountain "-not that he went INTO, but to the mountain and on it. Nor, indeed, could any element so appropriate as water have possibly been commanded to be used, in order to set forth the life-giving, sanctifying power of the truth as it is in Jesus.

My subject, indeed, requires not that I should discuss the mode of baptism, neither as to the quantity or the quality of the water to be used, whether much or little, whether salt or fresh. We all know that the word

Paul adds:"I thank God that I baptized none of you, save Crispus and Gaius, lest any should say that I had baptized in my own name." And what if they did say so falsely, if by baptizing Paul had regenerated them all? If baptism had been regeneration, such was Paul's love for souls, that he would have wished to have baptized the whole family of mankind.

Looking, then, at baptism as the divinely-appointed initiatory ordinance of the Church into its instruction and oversight its believing prayer and holy help--the question suggests itself, "How are these to be administered and enjoyed?" Here we must glance, in passing, at the custom of the Church of England-a custom which, it has been asserted, is right in principle, but wrong in practice; we refer, of course, to godfathers and godmothers at baptism. The first part of the practice which we consider wrong is that of setting aside parents. Parents are the natural guardians and instructors of their children, and, unless they are incapable of teaching, or have not the time and opportunity, they are bound by every tie, both of nature and of grace, to do everything that their children be educated for Christ. But suppose them not "apt to teach," or have no leisure, what then? Nay; go a step farther, and suppose the parents taken away by death. The Church of Christ, to whose instruction and oversight the children were dedicated in baptism, is bound, by every moral and spiritual obligation, to see them trained for God. But, it is said, what is the work of all in a Church, alas! soon becomes

the work of none. Hence, primarily, those who were called godfathers and godmothers were pious relatives, or

good Christian people, representatives of the Church, and, as such, appointed, who were willing to take this duty upon themselves, supposing the parents to be set aside, and to make it their own. The evil of the practice, we maintain, among other things, lies in this, that it has become a mere form, is undertaken often by unchristian persons, and is but very seldom righteously regarded.

We are now come, therefore, to consider what we believe to be a Church obligation-the oversight and instruction of baptized children—and so to show that this ordinance, rightly understood and piously acted upon, is one of noble import and rich result. Not that, personally, we have been able to realise our own views-this emphatically we wish you to know— on the contrary, they have not till lately appeared to us to be either so important or urgent. We hold, however, that this work, rightly done, cannot fail of being a great source of success to a Church. But to be able to carry out our conceptions at all so as to render them largely useful, that which is mainly necessary is a hearty union in the Church between the minister, deacons, and members, and a willingness on the part of all to take a share in the work of God; for it often so happens that our lay brethren are anxious, in expression, to see the lay element more extensively employed, while, in practice, they are most difficult to move. This is the one matter of intense concern; for no minister can do everything, and ought neither to be asked nor expected to undertake every description of service. To preach is and ought to be his chief anxiety, and so to preach as to lead, by God's blessing, to the conse

eration and service of Christ all the gifts and graces which the Church contains.

The great importance of the work which I am called to urge is strikingly set forth by Professor Miller, of the Theological Seminary, Princeton, America, in his work on "Baptism." "The great body of Pædobaptist Churches," he says, "have much to reform, in regard to their treatment of baptized children, and are bound to address themselves to that reform with all speed and fidelity. The Church is bound carefully to watch over the education, and especially the religious education, of her youthful members; and just in proportion as she has been faithful to this part of her trust she has flourished in orthodoxy, piety, and peace. A very large part of her duty, as a Church, consists in constant and faithful attention to the moral and religious culture of the rising generation. Allowing to the fullest extent the duty of parents, yet the Church has a duty to perform which is seldom realised. It is hers, by her pastor, elders, and active members, to stimulate parents. -to see that proper schools for the baptized youth are formed and selected -to put the Bible, suitable catechisms, and other compends of religious truth in their hands to convene them, at stated intervals, for instruction, exhortation, and prayerto point out their duty to receive the Saviour and join the Church. If this plan were faithfully pursued with our baptized youth, I concur with the pious Baxter in believing, "that in nineteen cases out of twenty our children would grow up dutiful and sober, orderly and serious, and before they reached mature age would recognise their membership by a personal

act, with sincerity and to edification."

In like manner does Dr. Dwight testify: "Every Church," he says, "is bound to require such parents as are members of it to instruct and govern their children. Every Church is bound to see that this is actually done, and to call to a solemn account all its members who neglect or violate these duties. these duties. Ministers ought to make it a business of their ministerial office to unfold to them their relations to God and His Church, and solemnly to enforce the duties arising from this relation. This, I apprehend, should be done not only in the pulpit, but in a regular course of catechetical instruction. Moreover, in my opinion, it is a part of the duty of each Church, at their evangelical conversation and prayer, to summon the baptized persons, who are minors, to be present at convenient seasons, while the Church offers up prayer peculiarly for them. Were these things faithfully done, a new face would, in a great measure, be put upon the condition of the persons in question. It must be acknowledged that much less attention is paid to them in modern than in ancient times, at least, by Churches in general; and less, I think, by ourselves than by our ancestors."

"I am verily persuaded," says Dr. Wardlaw, "there is utterly a fault among us upon this subject. The pastors, in public and private, ought to press upon parents the fulfilment of their trust, and upon children the improvement c their privileges; to ascertain the state of domestic instruction, and with affectionate fidelity to commend or admonish accordingly; and, by occasional or stated meetings