proper subjects of circumcison. The children of the members of the church were circumcised at the age of eight days, because they were the children of the faithful, and born within the covenant. Adults, who had been aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, on being morally convinced of the true God, and of the true religion, before they entered the congregation of the Lord, were commanded to be circumcised. In like manner, the infants of believers are to be baptized, because the children of the faithful, and born within the same covenant. Adults also, whose parents belonged not to the church of Christ, and who are morally convinced of the true God, and of his salvation, are to be baptized, before admission into his church.

The passover was a commemorative ordinance substantially the same as the Lord's supper. The former commemorated the redemption of Israel from Egyptian darkness and bondage, by means of the shedding and sprinkling of blood. The latter commemorates our redemption from ignorance and the bondage of guilt, by the shedding of the blood of the Lamb of God, that taketh away sin.-The former was eaten with every sign of repentance and with all holy preparation of heart, with solemn convocations, and religious self-denial, the latter is observed by all true Christians in a similar manner. Days of solemn preparation, fasting and thanksgiving accompanied the eating of the paschal lamb, and similar days of preparation, fasting, and thanks-giving, do accompany the celebration, of the holy supper.

The sabbath also amongst the Jews and Christians is a day of holy rest, of holy conyocation: a day set apart for profound contemplation, worship and edification, in which no manner of servile labor is to be performed, no part of the time appropriated to our own works, except so much as is taken up in the works of necessity and mercy.

In the ird place, the Jewish society before Christ, and the Christian society after Christ, have adopted

the same forms of worship as well as the same grand ordinances. The children of Israel sang the praises of the God of Jacob in psalms, and hymns, and spirtual songs. They lifted up the voice of praise and thanksgiving. The melody of joy, gratitude and praise was heard in the dwellings of Jacob, in the assemblies of Zion. In the stated meetings of the congregation of the Lord the psalms of David, the same psalms which are yet sung, and by many Baptists too, were sung. They stood upright, and kneeled down in their worship, and used, in general, the same forms of worship which are yet used in the congregations of the saints. Can these religious societies be essen tially distinct which have professed the true religion, worshipped the same God, observed the same ordinances of worship, and the same forms of prayer, of praise, and thanksgiving!!

The same injunctions have been laid upon the visible church in all ages, and uniformly she has been subject to the same requirements. God now requires his people to be holy, holy in all manner of deport ment, for, "without holiness no man shall see the Lord." Now the same injunctions were laid upon the Jewish society before Christ. See Lev. xix. 2. "Speak unto all the congregation of Israel and say unto them, ye shall be holy for I the Lord your God am holy." Love to God also, with all their souls, might and strength, was required from the Jewish society as well as from the Christian. And, with respect to our neighbors, the good Samaritan does not remind us more fully or forcibly of our duty, than the injunc tions laid on Israel by an ancient prophet." Do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God.”

Larose-The identity of the Jewish society before Christ, and the Presbyterian society or Episcopalian society, after Christ, may be rendered very plain and striking by mr. M.; but that the Christian church, and the Jewish, are one and the same, is another question. The very assertion that any two societies can be one and the

rame shocks all common sense, as well as oppugns the most explicit testimonies of holy writ. But we shall let mar. M. get through with his proof before we examine His argument. In the meantime we will state two facts, which, so long as you keep them in mind, volumes of such arguments as you have heard will avail nothing in reference to this controversy.

The first fact is, that Nicodemus an honorable member of the Jewish society, yea a teacher of Israel, AN OFFICER of the Jewish church could not be admitted unto the Christian church, though a LAWFUL MEMBER of the Jewish, and a REGULAR OFFICER of the church of Israel, unless born again, of water, and of the spirit. If the two churches are one and the same, mr. M.-How could this be !!

A second fact is, that NOT ONE of all the members of this Jewish society before Christ, how pious, and holy so ever; NOT ONE of the members of the church of Israel was admitted into the Christian church, after its exhibition on the day of Pentecost, until born again, of water and of the spirit: until repentance and a new faith was professed. If the two churches are one and the same mr. M. how could this be!! Unless mr. M. my friends. can disprove what I have now said, unless he can set aside these facts, it is of no consequence to tell us about the identity of two societies that withal he admits to be different in come respects!! These facts you will please keep in mind as a sufficient refutation of the misapplication of many things proposed on the subject of "identity," until more formally exposed.

But I have something to say on my opponent's plan and design in introducing the identity of the two chur ches that may, and ought to claim a place in your attention. It is this. Mr. M. theologically considered is digging his own grave. He is, in fact, about to defeat his own cause, and to subvert his own theses; for as soon as he has proved the identity of the two societies so soon will he have destroyed his whole scheme. This we now assert, and we pledge ourselves to make it manifest as soon as, he says, he has proved the point.

The case will stand thus If mr.M. does not prove the "identity" of the Jewish and Christian societies, this being fundemental in his scheme, he is, on his own

principles, defeated. And I now assert, and pledge myself to prove hereafter that if he does prove their identity he has not only killed, but buried himself. In either case, his cause is lost. On this ground it will be proven that the Paido-baptist cause is untenable.

While I am noticing this position of my opponent, it may not be amiss to express my astonishment not only at the boldness of my antagonist, but at his imprudence in calling the Christian church a "branch" of the Abrahamic church. He should not have laid himself open to be discredited, or to be put to silence by every strippling who could ask the following question: Is not a branch inferior to the stem or trunk from which it grows? Look at these trees around us, shew us a branch that is not inferior to the trunk from which it receivs its nourishment. And is, mr. M. the Christian church but a branch of the Abrahamic, inferior to the Jewish!!! Tell it not to those who admire the superlative glory, and dignity of the Christian religion, and Christian church, in comparison of the commonwealth of Israel, and the weak and beggarly elements that mr. M. has proved it to be only A BRANCH of the Abrahamic ! ! !

I now proceed to finish, if possible, my third argument in proof of my first proposition, viz: that a believer is the only subject of baptism. You will recollect that mythird argument is drawn from the import and design of Christian baptism. I have in my two last addresses, paid some attention to this consideration. In my first address this morning, I read sundry portions of the New Testament expressive of the important place that baptism occupies in the Christian religion, and of its great significance. In my last address I contra-distinguished its design from that of John's baptism. In exalting baptism to its proper place. I did not exaggerate its import, as mr. M. would haveit. Nor did I elevate it so as to displace hope and charity. These are graces, the fruits of true faith, and true baptism. I know it will be said that I have affirmed that baptism "saves us," that it "washes away sins." Well, Peter and Paul have said so before me. If it was nėt criminal in them to say so, it cannot be criminal in me. When Ananias said unto Paul, "arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." I suppose Paul believed him, and arose, was bap

tized, and washed away his sins. When he was baptized he must have believed that his sins were now washed away, in some sense, that they were not before. For if his sins had been already in every sense, washed away, Ananias' address would have led him into a mistaken view of himself; both before, and after baptism. Now we confess that the blood of Jesus Christ alone cleanses us from all sins. Even this, however, is a metaphorical expression. The efficacy of his blood springs from his own dignity, and from the appointment of his Father. The blood of Christ, then, really cleanses us who believe from all sin. Behold the goodness of God in giv ing us a formal proof and token of it, by ordaining a baptism expressly "for the remission of sins!" The water of baptism, then, formally washes away our sins. The blood of Christ really washes away our sins. Paul's sins were really pardoned when he believed, yet he had no solemn pledge of the fart, no formal acquital, no formal purgation of his sins, until he washes them away in the water of baptism.

To every believer therefore, baptism is a formal and personal remission, or purgation of sins. The believer never has his sins formally washed away or remitted until he is baptized. The water has no efficacy but what God's appointment gives it, and he has made it sufficient for this purpose. The value and importance of bap tism appears from this view of it. It also accounts for baptism being called the waSHING OF REGENERATION. It shews us a good, and valid reason for the despatch with which this ordinance was administered in the primitive church. The believers did not lose a moment in obtaining the remission of their sins. Paul tarried three days after he believed, which was the longest delay recorded in the New Testament. The reason of this delay was the wonderful accompaniments of his conversion and preparation for the apostolic office. He was blind three days, scales fell from his eyes, he arose then forthwith and was baptized. The three thousand who first believed, on the selfsame day were baptized for the remission of their sins. Yea, even the Jailer and his house would not wait til! day-light, but the "same hour of the night, in which he believed, he and all his were baptized." I say, this view of baptism accounts for all these otherwise un