Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

coördination of the three persons. He differs from the orthodox standard mainly in denying the trinity of essence and the permanence of the trinity of manifestation, making Father, Son, and Holy Ghost only temporary phenomena, which fulfil their mission and return into the abstract monad. The Athanasian or Nicene formula unites the truths of the Sabellian and the hypostasian theories, by teaching the eternal tripersonality in the unity of substance.

ARTICLE III.

BAPTISM A SYMBOL OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE NEW LIFE.

BY REV. H. L. WAYLAND, M. A., WORCESTER, MASS.

THE January number of this periodical contained a very interesting Article, upon "Baptism a Consecratory Rite." The remarks which follow are designed to illustrate the view, that baptism is rather an initiatory rite—is intended to symbolize the commencement of the new Christian life.

In conversion, the soul passes through a change miraculous in its origin, marked in its character, and momentous in its results. The man is changed in his relations to God and to his law. Formerly he was the object of deserved condemnation; now he meets with the benignant smile of his Heavenly Father, and with the full approval of his law. He is changed as to his central motive and leading principle. Formerly he sought his own interests with supreme regard, while the will of God was matter of entire indifference to him. Now it is his supreme desire to please God, and he is regardless of his own interests. This is the theory of conversion, and only as it bears this character has it attained its divine ideal. Corresponding to this inward

subjective change, is one objective and outward. The man leads henceforth a new life. New enjoyments and avocations now engage him, while from those which formerly engrossed him, he turns away with repugnance. Instead of a life of pride, self-indulgence and ungodliness, he leads now a life of prayerfulness, humility, self-denial, and holiness. Resulting from all this change in his relations, in his inward and outward life, is a change in his destiny. Formerly he was tending to an eternity of remorse and woe; now to endless bliss and glory.

The Scriptures show their estimate of the magnitude of this change by designating it as a "new birth," a "new creation," a "resurrection," etc. It is natural that an event so important should have its appropriate celebration. The new relations which the man holds should be suitably impressed on himself and attested to others. Our sense of the solemnity of new obligations is deepened when these are assumed publicly and with a proper ceremonial. Shall well nigh every change of human relations be appropriately celebrated, and this change alone, transcending all others in importance, affecting our relations to God and our fellow men, want its symbolic rite? Shall the servant of a foreign potentate openly and with fitting solemnity renounce his former allegiance, and assume the duties, and claim the privileges of a new citizenship, and shall not he, who, once a servant of Satan and of the world, an alien from the commonwealth of Israel, becomes now a fellow citizen of the saints? The convert has become one of a royal priesthood; let him have his investiture; he has become the heritor of a heavenly throne and crown; let him be publicly and suitably endowed with his new dignities.

Accordingly, the author of our faith has provided a rite, which most appropriately symbolizes the commencement of the new life. This initiatory rite is baptism.

1 The theory and normal idea of the rite, would require that its administration should be coincident in time with the occurrence of the moral change which it symbolizes; and in default of this, that the two should be separated by as brief an interval as possible.

With this view of baptism agrees its history antecedent to its adoption among the Christian ordinances. The baptism of proselytes, and that practised by the Essenes (both, no doubt, growing out of the lustrations prescribed by the Mosaic ritual), were clearly initiatory in their import. The former signalized the renunciation of idolatry and the commencement of the worship of the true God. The latter marked the initiation of the neophyte into a life of freedom from the grossness of sensual and worldly pursuits, a life of spiritual purity. The baptism of John, suggested by these preëxisting customs, bore even more plainly the same impress. In neither of these cases was the rite consecratory. If it was, to whom did it consecrate the subjects? John baptized, according to his own declaration, "into reformation," els peτávolav. The subjects of the rite signified a renunciation of their open sins, the soldier of his violence, and the publican of his extortion, and professed their renovation of life. Accordingly he exhorted them to bring forth fruits correspondent to the reformation which they had professed. John did not indeed administer Christian baptism, but it was in degree only, not in kind, that the rite which he performed differed from that for which it prepared the way. It symbolized the outward cleansing of the life from gross sins, as with water only. That to which it pointed, symbolized the more thorough and radical purification which the Holy Ghost should effect, as by the all-pervading energy of fire.

Such being the general import of baptism antecedent to the time of Christ, it seems impossible that a radical change should have been made in its significance, at its introduction among the Christian ordinances, without an explicit and unmistakable statement to that effect, such a statement as we nowhere find.

The baptism which John administered to Christ is, in some sense, an äñağ λeyóμevov, and can, to but a very limited extent, be used in arguing as to the general import of the rite. It comes under the same general law as the purification of his mother (of which, in strictness, she had no

need), and his own circumcision and adherence to the various ceremonies of the ritual, as also his subjection to his parents and seniors. All these formed a part of the lot which he came to share. They were among the lighter forms of his humiliation, as his liability to temptation, his susceptibility to suffering, and his endurance of death were among the more considerable.

Yet, though incapable of being brought into an exact and minute accordance with the normal idea of baptism, it is not without a general and substantial likeness. Nay, it may be regarded as an exalted type of that which baptism at large but sets forth in a lower degree. It celebrates the commencement of his life as Messiah and King. "The baptism is the inauguration of the Messiah," says Olshausen. Neander says: "While the import of the rite varied with the subjects to whom it was administered, there was at bottom a substantial element, which they shared in common. In both it marked the commencement of a new course of life; but in the members this new life was to be received from without, through communications from on high; while in Christ it was to consist of a gradual unfolding from within; in the former it was to be receptive; in the latter, productive."

The same view of the import of this rite is supported by the formula contained in the command, on which we base our authority to administer the ordinance : " baptizing them, into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Various interpretations of these words enfold each something of their meaning, yet fail of satisfying, in full, the demands of the passage. No doubt there is here an allusion to that mysterious union with each person in the Trinity, in virtue of which the believer is "in God the Father," "in Christ," as the branch is in the vine, and "in the Spirit." No doubt there is included also a consecration to the service of the Deity. But the meaning is not yet exhausted.

The name of God, as is most justly remarked in the Article on "Baptism a Consecratory Rite," "denotes the

essence of God in its objective, rather than subjective relations; as manifesting itself, rather than remaining in its eternal state." But yet more allusion is made here to the Deity, not as simple and one merely, but in his three-fold person and relation. We baptize into the name of the Father, and into the name of the Son, and into the name of the Spirit, for the repetition of the article makes the use of the word "name" distributive. Hence we baptize into the Deity, considered in the relation and office which each person in the Trinity severally holds to us, and into a life of conformity to these relations and offices. In other words, we baptize into a life of obedience to the Father, of faith in the Son, and of sanctification by the Spirit.

[ocr errors]

The same view is confirmed when we regard baptism as the symbol of purification. In conversion, man comes into a state of purity. He becomes righteous in the sight of the law. He is regarded and treated as though he had never sinned, were absolutely innocent. He enters also a state of absolute purity. He is free from the great source of moral evil, a heart estranged from God. On the other hand, the Spirit has taken his abode in his heart, and has commenced a work which will result in his complete sanctification. Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God." On these words Calvin remarks, with much ingenuity and force: "He employed the words Spirit and water to mean the same thing; and this ought not to be regarded as a harsh or forced illustration; for it is a frequent and common way of speaking in Scripture, when the Spirit is mentioned, to add the word water or fire, expressing his power. When it is said that Christ baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire, fire means nothing different from the Spirit, but only shows what is his efficacy in us. As to the word water being placed first, it is of little consequence, or rather this mode of statement flows more naturally than the other, because the metaphor is followed by a plain and direct statement, as if Christ had said that no man is a son of God until he has been renewed by water, and that this water is the Spirit

« AnteriorContinuar »