36 A AVORD IN PASSING. "Very true, sir," was the triumphant reply of Mr. Kincaid, a reply "which none but a Baptist could have made, " very true, there is no Divine authority for infant baptism, it is based only on tradition^ and so / reject it altogether. Infant baptism is the offspring of a Judaizing spirit, and betrays great igno- rance of the true character of a Christian church, — through its influence whole nations, without reference to character, are brought into the church. I regard infant baptism, in its practice or tendency, as one of the worst dogmas of Popery. Let it be taken from the system, and believers' baptism be restored, and the whole superstructure of Rome will crumble dovm." The Jesuit priest soon found that he had more than his match in the unpretending Bap- tist minister, whom he had striven to convert to the dogmas of Rome; and that it was no use arguing longer with one who denied in toto the authority of tradition, and built his faith upon the Bible only ; and therefore, with liis dark piercing eyes flashing inquisitorial fire, he retired from the controversy, leaving Mr. Kincaid to his own reflections. reply but a, there ism, it ject it spring ; igno- ristian itions, 'ought sm, in worst »m the stored, le will le had I Bap- onvert no use n toto s faith , with litorial eaving |l0me Hgamst % AND THE BIBLE AGAINST Or, Pharisaism, Je-wish BY WM. S. PLUMER, D. 18mo. 129 pages. FRICS 25 Frtym the Christian Chronich " This little volume is from the pen of a mc plished scholar. Dr. Plumer, of Baltimore, ha an impressive preacher, or a vigorous writer, home with the nature, history, and results of and in this book has presented the subject be masterly manner. It will d* good in the fai in the Sabbath School Library." From the Ohristian Secretary " It shows in a clear and precise manner, wl among the Jews, and that Pharisaism amor beyond it. It also shows the hostility of po circulation of the Word of God — that this oj: tural and unreasonable, and is condemned antiquity. It concludes with an address to private members of the Romish church, and 1 From the New York Baptist Reg " The writer shows clearly that Catholics favorable to the Douay version than to any o opposition is to the Bible itself." From the Presbyterian Banm "This little volume is admirably condens solid matter in the author's usual effective i: repay the labor of several perusals." From the Presbyterian. "The kind of book which should be plac general readers, who wish to ascertain th Popery. From the Episcopal Recorde " A succinct and able compendium of the the important topic its title indicates." 4 ^ • » > 118 ARCH STREET. PIIILABEl igamst t\t IE BIBLE AGAINST ROME: Ism, Je-wish and Papal. WM. S. PLUMER, D. D. 29 pages. PRICE 25 CENTS. ' rom the Christian Chronicle, le is from the pen of a moat able and accom- . Plumer, of Baltimore, has but few equals as her, or a vigorous writer. lie is entirely at re, history, and results of the papal religion, 1 presented the subject before the public in a [t will d' good in the family, and especially ol Library." rom the Christian Secretary. ar and precise manner, what Pharisaism was nd that Pharisaism among the Papists goes shows the hostility of popery to the general Vord of God — that this opposition is unscrip- lable, and is condemned by the voice of udes with an address to Romish priests, to the Romish church, and to Protestants." , the New York Baptist Register. ns clearly that Catholics are scarcely more lay version than to any other, and that their Bible itself." •om the Presbyterian Banner. me is admirably condensed, and filled with author's usual effective manner. * * It will everal perusals." From the Presbyterian. lok which should be placed in the hands of ho wish to ascertain the true features of ^rom the Episcopal Recorder. able compendium of the Protestant view on ; its title indicates." \C,\\ STREET. PHILABELPTTIA. 8 A WORD IN PASSING. found In the church of Home all those charac- teristics which the apostle John attributes, to her, in the seventeenth chapter of the Revela- tion, and that in the following chapter you have found a command to go out from Baby- lon, " that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." It is, then, an established and admitted fact, that because the Romish church " has made the word of God of none eifect by her traditions" — Matt. XV. 6 — because she "teaches for doc- trines the commandments of men" — v. 9 — be- cause she has dared to suppress the second commandment of the decalogue, and has falsi- fied the sacraments of the New Testament, you have abandoned her^ as adding to the word of God, and taking from it, just as she finds it convenient. You have called to mind also what Jesus has declared at the close of the sacred volume: "I testify unto every man that heareth the woids of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book ; and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this Drophecy, God shall take away his part out I A WORD IN PASSING. charac- ntei^ to Revela- ber you L Baby- 3r sins, ft ed fact, ade the iitions" for doc- 9— be- second ,s falsi- nt, 1/ou 'ord of inds it id also of the J man of this things, at are I shall )f this rt out I of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." Rev. xxii. — 18, 19. In short, it is because the church of Rome is not based upon the word of God ; because she rejects and conceals that word, that you have separated yourselves from her. Let me now ask you one question. Do you believe that the church of Rome is in reality such as we have just described her to be? that she possesses ail the marks and characters of "• the man of sin, the son of perdition," of that Antichrist who teaches the doctrines of devils, — of " the great whore," — of the woman " arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls," who has "upon her forehead a name written Mystery, Babylon the great, mo- ther OF HARLOTS, AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH?" Rev. xvii., 4, 5. If you believe all these things, you have done well to come forth, without longer delay, from a church which you recognize as possessing all the cha- racteristics of the enemy of God. You are then placed upon the solid ground of the A WORD IN PASSING. Bible, and all those who love tlie word of God cannot but rejoice at your noble resolution. But I have still another question to propose to you. It is this : Do you wish to be consis- tent with the declarations you have just made ? If so, then I beseech you to examine, yet once more, the three passages of scripture which I have placed at the beginning of this treatise. You recognize them to be a portion of the word of God. At the same time, if, as I doubt not, you are sincere in the opinion which you share, in relation to the church of Rome, then she must be regarded by you as Antichrist, as Belial — in a word, as opposed to the word of God. She must be that kingdom which opposeth all that is God, " that man of sin, who exalteth himself above all that is called God," wishing himself to pass for God. Now, I ask you, what fellowship can there be between Jesus Christ and Belial ? I ask, if we can belong to the church or visible king dom of Jesus Christ here upon earth, and at the same time belong to a system which is directly contrary to him ? I ask if we can drink of the cup of the Lord, and at the same time that of devils ? Certainly not, you an- I A WORD IN PASSING. 11 of God tion. propose consis- made ? et once ^hich I reatise. of the r, as I opinion irch of you as osed to ingdom man of 3 called n there I ask, e king and at hich is we can e same ou an- I swer me. It is then a well settled fact with you, that there can be no alliance, no affinity whatsoever between the church of Jesus Christ and that of Antichrist. If the assertion which has just been made is true — and I believe it with my whole heart — it remains for me to propose yet another question to you : Is it lawful in going out of the church of Rome, for a person to retain any of her false traditions ? Does not the Bible command us to come out from Babylon, in order that we " be not partakers of her sins, and receive not of her plagues ?" The tradi- tion which makes void the word of God, is it not a sin ? Now tell me whence Home has taken her infant baptism ? Upon this point she herself is frank. Listen to what, upon this subject, says Rev. Father Sheffmacher in his " Manual of Controversy." " We find in no part of the Scripture that it is necessary to baptize infants." Page 48. " We find no example in Scripture by which we can see that infants ever were baptized." Page 59. *' Jesus Christ and the apostles baptized by immersion." Page 76. *'The Catholics prove the baptism of infants by --am 9 12 A WORD IN PASSING. TRADITION." Page 119. You have it, then, dear reader, that the baptism of infants, is nothing else than a tradition, -which the church of Rome invented in the third century — that is to say — more than two hundred years after the death of Jesus Christ. The Scriptures prove to us, as clearly as possible, that baptism was administered to the believer only, who was buried in the water, in the name of the Holy Trinity. They do not say one word of the baptism of infants, which is a comparatively recent invention. The date of the ceremony of pouring water on an infant, in order to baptize it, can easily be discovered. This then is another tradition, which makes void the commandment of God. Where are you then, dear friends ? Are you still following the traditions and the doc- trines of men ? And yet, w^as it not with this express design that you went out from the church of Rome, in order that you migRt no longer be subject to the commandments of men? But I wish to continue my argument with you yet a little further. I suppose for a moment — observe, it is only a supposition — I i ■m A WORD IN PASSING. IB k, then, ants, is ch the 3enturv .undred uirly as I to the water, hey do infants, '^ention. 5 water n easily addition, f God. ? Are the doc- rith. this om the ight no 3nts of jnt with ) for a sition — that the baptism of infants is proper. Still I ask, how can you say that the church of Rome, ^Yhich according to you, is no church of Jesus Christ, has the right to administer the ordi- nances of Jesus Christ ? " Is there any con- cord between Christ and Belial?" ''Can you drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils?*' We must be honest and candid. Either the church of Rome is the church of Jesu". Christ, and then she has the right to admin- ister the ordinances of baptism and the supper —and in this case you and I have done wrong to leave her— or else she is not. If she is not the church of Jesus Christ, she has no right to administer the ordinances, and con- sequently you have never been baptized. Consider attentively what I say to you, and you will see that it is not easy to refute this reasoning. But the scripture teaches us that the church of Rome is not the church of Jesus Christ. They also tell us that there is but "one baptism," Eph. iv. 5; and that this baptism is the burial of the Christian in the baptismal waters, as Jesus was buried in those of Jordan, Matt. iii. 16 ; as the eunuch A WORD IN PASSING. also was, Acts viii. 38 ; as the apostle Paul and the Eomans also were, Rom. vi. 3, 4 ; as the Colossians were, Col. ii. 12 ; in a word, as all Christians were in the time of the apostles. They did not make void the com- mandments of God by their tradition, but like the Samaritans, "when they believed they were baptized, both men and women." Acts, viii. 12. I appeal, then, to your conscience and your good sense. Where is infant baptism to be found in the Scriptures ? Certainly you are not able to point out a single passage, which says that new-born babes should be baptized. It is nothing else but a miserable tradition, which the church of England, and that of Calvin and that of Luther have retained aruong the numerous relics of popery, which they carried out from the church of Rome, when they separated from her. As for you, well-beloved, to whom I address myself, reject all those precepts, which are founded only upon " the commandments and doctrines of men." Col. ii. 22. Keep to the pure word of God, and since you have honestly and in good faith, gone out from the Romish A WORD IN PASSING. 15 tie Paul vl 3, 4 ; a word, i of the he com- but like ed they Acts, nd your [n to be you are 5, which aptized. -adition, that of retained 7, which Eome, address ich are tnts and p to the lonestly Romish church, because she holds to traditions in- ^ stead of the commandments of God, abandon all these traditions, even to the very least. Hearken to what the apostle Peter said to the Jews who acknowledged their sins, and wished to be reconciled to God, — " Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shaU receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." Acts ii. 38. Hear what the same f apostle says to Cornelius and his friends, — ^ " Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized, w'ho have received the Holy Ghost as well as we ? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." Acts X., 47, 48. See what Philip says to the eunuch who asked of him baptism. " If thou believest with all thine heart thou may est." Acts viii. 37. Hearken to what the Lord Jesus Christ himself said, when he gave his commission to his apostles, "• Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every crea- ture ; he that believeth and is baptized, shall De saved." Mark xvi. 15, 16. Every where faith precedes baptism. But the Church of Rome amonf^r her numerous and A WORD IN PASSING. sacrilegious innovations, has ordained that i^ is not necessary to wait in order that faith may precede ; and in her temerity she ha? reversed the order which Jesus Christ ha.*' established. Faith^ and then baptism: — such was the command of the sovereign legislator of the Christian church. 'Let us begin with baptism— faith may come when it can,' says Antichrist, the man of sin, the modern Babylon, the church of Rome. And yet, it is a lamentable fa t, that cer- tain churches which protest against the tradi- tions of Rome, have nevertheless received this error from that very church which they repu- diate on account of her traditions. Rome in her folly and its blindness, has perverted the two ordinances of baptism and the supper, both of which she administered to infants up to the council of Trent, when she ceased the practice of administering the com- munion to them, but continued to administer baptism. Certain protestant churches, such as that of Lutl.-r in Germany, that of Calvin, which is the Presbyterian church of Switzer- II A WORD IN PASSING. 17 that {*■ it faith ihe hap ist hiXF ras the of the li may man rch of it cer- tradi- 3d this ' repu- s, has m and red to sn she ) com- nister such alvin, itzer- land and France, that of Henry YIII., which is the church of England, have had the weak- ness to retain this tradition of the mother of abominations. Believe me, this custom of baptizing infants has no other authority whatever than the tradition of that very church which you have just abandoned, because, by her tradition she makes void the word of God, Is it your desire, then, to retain ant/ of the relics of popery ? Why turn your back upon Rome at all, if you wish still to retain some one of her traditions ? Can you drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of Rome at the same time ? Can you partake of the table of the Lord and the table of Rome at the same time ? Can there be any agreement between Jesus Christ, who has commanded the baptism of the believer by immersion, upon a public pro- fession of faith in his name, and the church of Rome which has established the baptism of infants by sprinkling, in order that they may be regenerated by that baptism, and become members of the church, by entering into the covenant of Abraham, which no longer exists ? Can you consistently approve of those pro (H* 18 A WORD IN PASSING. testant churches, which have separated them- selves from the church of Rome on account of her traditions, and which have notwith- standing retained infant baptism, which owes its origin only to the will and false views of that very church which they reject, on account of her traditions ? No Romish priest is afraid to meet and dis- cuss this subject with a protestant minister who admits infant baptism, because he can make that minister contradict him.self when- ever he chooses. Not so with him who admin- isters baptism by immersion to believers only.* The priest knows that Jesus Christ and his apostles baptized all those who believed by plunging them in the water ; and he knows also that it is his own church which has esta- blished the baptism of infants. He does not dare therefore, to attack the servant of God upon this point, for he knows that the latter has the holy scriptures to sustain his baptism. * A striking instance of the advantage of a Baptist over a Pedobaptist in reasoning with a Romish priest, IS furnished in the conversation between Rev. Eugenio Kincaid and a priest, which we have inserted at the close of this tract. ■■ A WORD IN PASSING. 19 td them- account notwith- ch owes 56 views sject, on and dis- minister he can f when- • admin- s only.* ist and believed 3 knows as esta- tes not of God e latter aptism. I Baptist h priest, Eugenio the close The Scriptures tell us that we ought to " be ready always to give an answer to every man, a reason of the hope that is in us, with meekness and fear." 1 Pet. iii. 15. Now suppose that while you are having your infant baptized by one of your ministers, a priest of the church of Rome enters the place where you are. He sees you bring your child to be bap- tized ; he says to himself, " that is well, it is just as we do.'* He sees your minister pour water upon the head of the child ; he says again, *' that is good, it is just as we do." He sees again that you give a name to your child ; and he says once more, " all this is very good indeeh, it is just as we do.* If you are an Anglican, or a Swiss or French Presbyterian, he sees a god-father and a god-mother, who solemnly engage that the child shall be brought up in the Christian faith ; and the priest says, " why, all this is right ; it is really equal to what is done by us catholics !" Astonished to see so much similarity between his church, which you have abandoned, and 20 A WORD IX PASSING. that church which you hnve just chosen, he asks wherefore you have separated yourselves from the ancient mother church, which couhl have baptized your child just as well as your own minister. You reply to him, that it is because you have discovered that the church of Rome makes void the commandments of God by her tradition. Hereupon the priest asks, " is it true that you have resolved to reject all tradition, and to hold to nothing but the Bible onhj r You reply in the affirmative. Then the priest, without any hesitation, immediately appeals to the word of God that you should point out to him one single pas- sage, which authorises the baptism of infants. You hesitate no longer ; you tell him that Jesus has said, " Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not." The priest replies, " Jesus did not baptize them ; he only blessed them.'* You quote to him the words of Peter, " the promise is unto you and to your children." Acts ii. 39. He replies that this promise is that of the Holy Spirit, which infants are m m A WORD IN PASSING. 21 )sen, he irselves h could as your Lise you Rome by her ue that m, and iOU tation, d that 'e pas- ifants. n that ren it The them; " the Iren/' fiise is « incapable of receiving ; and, moreover, that the word " children" does not always signify in the Bible, infavtSy but posterity , descend- ants. Pursuing the subject further, you tell him that the household of Lydia, of the Philippian jailor, of Crispus and Stephanus were bap- tized, and that probably there were infants among the persons baptized. But the priest proves to you from the Scripture that, in the household of Lydia they were "brethren," Acts xvi., 40; that the jailer "rejoiced, be- lieving in God, with all his house":that Crispus also "believed on the Lord with all his house, Acts xviii., 8 ; and that the household of Ste- phanus " addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints." 1 Cor. xvi., 15. Defeated again on this point, you tell him that baptism comes in the place of circum- cision ; and as, under the Abrahamic covenant, infants were circumcised, so the infants of Christians ought to be baptized. The priest answers you, that if baptism takes the place of circumcision, then that ordinance should be administered only to the same class of individuals as those to whom circumcision 22 A WORD IX PASSING. I was administered. Accordingly hoys onl^ ought to be baptized ; and when a father of a family is converted, his servants and slaves, if he has any, even if they are not believers, ought to be baptized, whether they consent to it or not ; because such was the law of cir- cumcision. Furthermore, the priest shows you by the apostle's own words, that the cove- nant of Abraham exists no longer, but that we have a better covenant in Jesus Christ. The last argument to which you have re- course is that of the holiness of the infant, 1 Cor. vii. 14. The priest, however, gives you no rest here, but shows you that the holi- ness to which allusion is there made, is a civil holiness, that is to say, that the children of the Corinthians to whom the apostle Paul addressed himself, were born in the ties of marriage, and were therefore legitimate. Beaten upon all these points, you perceive that theie remains not one solid argument by which you can defend your infant baptism. Then the priest of Rome says to you, "you have turned your back upon us, because we teach traditions, and we do not deny that such is the case. We are honest in acknow- I A WORD IX PASSING. 23 } onl^ her of slaves, ievers, 3nsent of cir- shows B cove- it that "ist. ive re- infant, , gives le holi- a civil ren of e Paul ties of erceive ent by ism. , "you I use we ly that ,cknow- ■ I edging that we have taught you traditions. W Your minister will not be as frank as I am. But tell me, if you please, — you who are determined no longer to follow traditions — are you able to deny that it was the church of Rome who introduced infant baptism to- wards the middle or end of the third century, and who sanctioned and approved it, at one of her councils, two centuries after she had invented it ? Yon say that you no longer desire to belong to the Romish church, because she teaches traditions ; and yet, in baptizing your child, you continue still to practise a tradition established by our church." Such would be the way in which a Romish priest would reason with those who leave his church in order to hold to the simple word of God, and who yet retain the tradition of infant baptism. Can you serve two masters at once ? Can you hold to the Bible and to tradition at the same time? If you admit the tradition of infant baptism, why not admit the tradition of administering the communion under one kind only, as the church of Rome now does ? Why not ^ive the communion to infants, as 24 A WORD IN PASSING. the cliurcli of Rome did until the Council of Trent ? What solid reason can you give for administering baptism to infants, and refusing them the communion ? Why will you deceive yourselves? Reflect seriously upon this subject. By the baptism which you administer to your infants, you follow the tradition of the Romish church, by submitting to the decree of one of her councils — that of Mela, A. D. 418 ; and in refusing to give them the communion, you still submit to the orders of the church of Rome, who, after having established infant communion, shortly after they established infant baptism, in the fifth century, as abso- lutely necessary to salvation, did, in the six- teenth century, at the council of Trent, con- voked by order of the pope, decree and ordain, that the communion should no longer be administered to infants. Tradition upon tra- dition ! Behold to what absurdity your bap- tism of new-born babes conducts you ! It seems to me, dear friends, that it would be no easy matter for you to reply, in a satis- factory manner, to all these questions. Be then <.*onsistent "v^ith yourselves. You have A WORD IN PASSING. 25 abandoned Rome on accoimt of her traditions ; retain none of them therefore, not even the least. Throw off these rags with which she has clothed you, and put on Jesus Christ, just as his holy Word directs you. Do you wish to know your duty ? Permit me to show it to you. Are you truly the disciples of Jesus ? Have you received the precious gift of faith? Then I will say to you, as the apostle Peter said to the multi- tudes of the Jews on the day of Pentecost, *' Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ," Acts ii. 38 ; or, in the language of the disciple Ananias to Paul, " And nov^, why tarriest thou ? Arise and be baptized," Acts xxii. 16. You have great reason for gratitude to God, that he has delivered you from the arts and snares of "the Man of Sin," and that he has opened your eyes to enable you to see the glorious light of his holy gospel. Why should you suffer yourself still to be held in the nets of tradition, to hinder you freely walking in the new path in which God, in his infinite mercy, has placed your feet ? Why will you shut your eyes, so as not to see the 26 A WORD IN PASSING. light, and thus expose yourself to wander in the dark labyrinth of infant-baptism. _ Was it not the church of Rome, who, in the ages of ignorance and superstition, in- vented this new kind of baptism, which she administers to new-born babes, with the design of snatching them from eternal condemnation . The church of Rome does not conceal it. She openly avows it. It is by means of tra- dition that she has established this innovation; and you, you are content to give it your sanction. No pedobaptist, unless one who is either crossly ignorant or strongly prejudiced, .vill attempt to prove infant baptism by the Holy Scriptures. The most celebrated pedo- baptist authors candidly confess that tradition is the only basis upon which their doctrine fpsts Be consistent then, and reject all the errors of the Romish church, or be sufficiently honest and intelligent, not to pretend to rebel against her traditions, and yet persist in retaining one which is considered by the Romish church herself as one of the most important and essential. For, in truth, infant baptism has been the source, the origin, the root— and A WORD IN PASSING. 27 now IS the base, the pillar, and the foundation of Popery. Believe not what men tell you ; but rather have recourse " to the law and to the testi- mony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isaiah, viii. 20 APPENDIX. >«< The great question of the present day, between genuine Protestants on the one hand, and Papists and Pusejites on the other is this —Is the Bible oniy to be received as the rule of faith, or the Bible and Tradition together ? Is no doctrine to be received, unlcs°s it is found in the Bible; or may a doctrine be received on the authority of tradition, when it is confessedly not there ? A few years since the Rev. Dr. Fook a distinguished advocate of the semi-papistie theology of Oxford, now known by the name of Puseyism, preached a sermon in the city of London, in the course of which he argued as follows, "you know, my hearers, that the Bible says nothing whatever of the baptism of infants; if then, you reject the autho- rity of tradition, how can you account for infant baptism ? With what consistency can :3 A AVORD IN PASSING. 29 you receive this doctrine, as you do, without a question, and reject other doctrines, which are established upon premely the same foun- dation T' Now we maintain that the argument of the Puseyite preacher was a sound one ; for the design of Dr. Hook was, not to pull down infant baptism, but to build up tradition; and in strict accordance with the preceding argu- nient of Dr. C6te, we may enquire-if one doctrine be received upon the authority of tradition, why not the others ? why not all the doctrines of Oxford or of Rome ? It has been remarked on a preceding page, that the Baptist, in arguing with a Papist, enjoys an immense advantage over his Pfedo baptist brother. For if the latter should accuse the priest of Rome of adding to the word of God, and of receiving the doctrine of the I ope's supremacy, indulgences, relics, and other absurdities, upon the mere authority of tradition, the Papist may retort, and often has retorted, with irresistible force—" if you condemn these doctrines, because they are received upon the traditions of the Holy 3* ^ 30 A WORD IN PASSING. Catholic Church, let me ask jou one question — ivhere do you get your infant baptism T' As an illustration of this advantage enjoyed by the Baptist over the Pajdobaptist in argu- ing with the Roman Catholic, we will append to this little treatise, the following account of a somewhat amusing conversation which oc- curred a few years ago, between the well- known Baptist missionary, Rev. Eugenie Kin- caid, and a Jesuit professor. The account is given from the pen of Mr. Kincaid himself, and was written on board of a steamboat on the Ohio. "There is," says Mr. Kincaid, "a French Jesuit priest— a professor of languages in a Popish college in Kentucky— on board the boat with me. '^ Sitting in my state room, with a small Bible in my hand, the Jesuit came along, and very politely inquired what book I had. Being informed, he said, in the most bland and win- ning manner, 'Good, good,' and then, for some minutes, went on describing the glory and perpetuity of the church— all the while fixing his dark and piercing eye on me, as if he would read my inmost soul. A WORD IN PASSIXG. 31 II " The great and cardinal dogma of popery, infallibility in morals and religion, at length showed itself; and then he appealed to me if I did not feel the importance of having an infallible guide. ' Certainly,' I replied ; ^' the reason of man utterly fails in being a safe guide in religion.' 'Good, good,' exclaimed the Jesuit ; 'you will be a Catholic yet.' '' Opening my Bible, I said, ' Here is my infallible guide in morals and religion.' ' Very good, very good,' rejoined the Jesuit ; 'but who shall be the interpreter of the Bible?' 'Do you take Luther?' 'No.' 'Do you take Calvin?' 'No.' 'Do you take Arlus and Socinus ?' 'No.' 'Well, you take Wesley then?' 'No; I take the Bible, and utterly reject all human authority.' " ' You make yourself wiser than Calvin or Luther. You must be a very great man, and have a very good opinion of yourself.' 'No; I have so good an opinion of the Bible, and such confidence in the wisdom of Paul, and Peter, and John, that their authority is every thing to me.' 'Good, good,' replied the Jesuit; 'I see you will be right yet. Did not Christ say to his church, I will be with •h\ m 32 A WORD IX PASSING. you always, to the end of the worhl ? And when the Apostles died, did they not have successors ; and was not Christ with them, and then with their successors ? and so on in the third, and fourth, and fifth centuries ? Did not Christ speak truth — I will be with you, even to the end of the world? There was only the one Catholic church for the first four or five hundred years, and is not the Catholic church the same now as it was then ? And do you not see, as in Oxford, the most learned Protestants in the world are going back to the Apostolic church ?' "'True,' I replied, 'the Apostles, as Chris- tians, had successors; but, as Apostles, they had no successors. In the early ages there were false Apostles and false Christs, and they deceived many. So Paul wrote — Let no man deceive you by any means ; for there shall come a falling away, and that man of sill be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped ; so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. And in another place — for the time will come when A WORD IN PASSING. 33 they will not endure sound doctrine ; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears ; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.' " ' Hence the oft-repeated command of Christ, — He that hath an ear to hear let him hear —what ? What Popes and Cardinals have said ? What councils have decreed ? What Prelates and Doctors have written ? No such thing. Christ says—Let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. Here is the infallible guide ; the teachings of the Spirit— and these teachings make up the word of God. Those who hold fast the doctrine of Christ are the true successors of ;he Apostles ; and there have been such in all ages, since the resurrection of Christ, and to them is fulfilled that promise— Lo I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.' '' ' Do not all the Protestants talk in this way?' exclaimed the Jesuit; 'and are there not forty different kinds of Protestants in America, and how can any one tell which is right.' . /^'Many,' I replied, * calling themselves 34 A WORD IN PASSING. t Protestants, broke off from the Roman church, and brought along more or less of the dogmas of that church. The lloman church has made up her creed partly from Christianity, partly from Judaism, and partly from Paganism; and now many, leaving Paganism behind, still blend together Judaism and Christianity.— Hence, even until this day, when Moses is read, (as authoritative in religion) the vail is upon their heart. To this source may be traced nearly all the errors of pious Protestants.' '''Is it not a little remarkable,' said the Jesuit, ' that the only two dogmas in the support of which the Catholic church depends entirely on tradition the Protestants have adopted— the change of the Sabbath, and the baptism of infants? [N'ow, you cannot prove from your Bible that the Sabbath was changed, or that infants were to be baptized.' "Very well," I replied, ''I hold to nothing but what is clearly taught in the Bible. I keep the first day of the week because the first Christians observed it, and there is no evidence that they met together on any other day for Christian worship. That the disciples met together on the first day of the week to A WORD IN PASSING. 85 engage in acts of Christian worship, and that they designed to meet on the first in prefer- ence to any other day, and that it was sane- tioned by Paul, is a recorded fact. Here, tnen, I stand on Apostolic ground.' ^ You must prove, then,' said the Jesuit, ^that the command in the decalogue is repealed.' 'No —that command stands, and is as binding on me as it was on the primitive Christians. Six days Shalt thou labor, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. The disciples, in the days of Paul, labored six days in the week ; but no more. On the first day in the week, they met together in their Christian assemblies. Here, then, is Divine authority for meeting together on the first day of the week for Christian worship.' ^''Yes,' said the Jesuit, 'you do read in your Bible that the Christians came together on the first day of the week to break bread; but 7J0U cannot find in your Bible that the Apostles baptized infants,— ihk you have got from the Catholic church, and yet you abuse the Catholic church for depending on tradi- tion. How can you say my Bible alone is my rule, and then baptize infants ?" 36 A AVORD IN PASSING. '' Very true, sir," was the triumphant reply of Mr. Kincaid, a reply which none but a Baptist could have made, '' very true, there is no Divine authority for infant baptism, it is based only on tradition^ and so / reject it altogether. Infant baptism is the offspring of a Judaizing spirit, and betrays great igno- rance of the true character of a Christian church, — through its influence whole nations, without reference to character, are brought into the church. I regard infant baptism, in its practice or tendency, as one of the worst dogmas of Popery. Let it be taken from the system, and believers' baptism be restored, and the whole superstructure of Rome will crumble dovfn." The Jesuit priest soon found that he had more than his match in the unpretending Bap- tist minister, whom he had striven to convert to the dogmas of Rome; and that it was no use arguing longer with one who denied in toto the authority of tradition, and built his faith upon the Bible only ; and therefore, with his dark piercing eyes flashing inquisitorial fire, he retired from the controversy, leaving Mr. Kincaid to his own reflections. in \ |l0me against t\t AND THE BIBLE AGAINST ROME: Or, Pharisaism, Je-wish and Papal. BY WM. S. PLUMER, D. D. 18mo. 129 pages. PRICE 25 CENTS. * From the Christian Chronicle. " Thi8 little volume is from the pen of a most able and accom- plish