performed it of themselves? What should have hindered them more than John from going with people into the rivers, and immersing them? Why were they first to receive themselves the baptism of the Spirit? But if it be allowed, on the other hand, that when they executed the great commission they were to perform the baptism of Christ, the case is altered. It became them then to wait for the divine help. For it required more than human power to give that baptism, which should change the disposition and affections of men, and should be able to bring them from darkness unto light, and from the power of Satan unto God. And here the Quakers observe, that the Apostles never attempted to execute the great commission till the time fixed upon by our Saviour in these words, "But tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." This was the day of

Pentecost.

After this " they preached," as St. Peter says, " with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven,” and with such efficacy, that “the Holy Ghost fell upon many of them who heard their words."

SECTION V.

Objection to the foregoing arguments of the Quahers; namely, "If it be not the baptism of John that is included in the great commission, how came the Apostles to baptize with water?"-Practice and opinion of Peter considered-also of Paul -also of Jesus Christ-This practice, as explained by these opinions, considered by the Quakers to turn out in favour of their own doctrines on this subject.

I HAVE now stated the arguments by which the Quakers have been induced to believe that the baptism by the Spirit, and not the baptism by water, was included by Jesus Christ in the great commission which he gave to his apostles, when he requested them" to go into all nations, and to teach them, baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

Against these arguments, the following question has been usually started as an objection: "If it be not concluded in the great commission, how came the Apostles to bap

tize?or, would they have baptized, if baptism had not been considered by them as a Christian ordinance ?"

The Quakers, in answering this objection, have confined themselves to the consideration of the conduct of the apostles Peter and Paul. For though Philip is said to have baptized also, yet he left no writings behind him, like the former; nor are so many circumstances recorded of him by which they may be enabled to judge of his character, or to know what his opinions ultimately were upon that subject.

The Quakers consider the Apostles as men of the like passions with ourselves. They find the ambition of James and John, the apostasy and dissimulation of Peter, the incredulity of Thomas, the dissension between Paul and Barnabas, and the jealousies which some of them entertained towards one another, recorded in Holy Writ. They believe them also to have been mostly men of limited information, and to have had their prejudices like other people. Hence it was not to be expected that they should come all at once into the knowledge of Christ's kingdom; that, educated in a religion of

2 B 2

types

types and ceremonials, they should all at once abandon these; that, expecting a temporal Messiah, they should at once lay aside temporal views; and that they should come immediately into the full purity of the Go spel-practice.

With respect to the apostle Peter, he gave early signs of the dulness of his comprehension with respect to the nature of the character and kingdom of the Messiah*;for, when Jesus had given forth but a single parable, he was obliged to ask him the meaning of it. This occasioned Jesus to say to him, "Are ye also yet without understanding?"

In a short time afterwards, when our Saviour told him †, that he himself must go into Jerusalem and suffer many things, and be killed, and be raised again the third day, Peter took him and rebuked him; saying, "Be it far from thee, Lord! This shall not be unto thee."

At a subsequent time, namely, just after the transfiguration of Christ, he seems to have known so little about spiritual things,

*Matt. xv. 16. † Matt. xvi. 21, 22.

that

that he expressed a wish to raise three earthly tabernacles ; one to Moses, one to Elias; and a third to Jesus, for the retention of signs and shadows as a Gospel-labour, at the very time when Jesus Christ was opening the dismission of all but one, namely, "the tabernacle of God, that is with men.'

Nor did he seem at a more remote pe riod to have gained more large or spiritual ideas. He did not even know that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was to be universal. He considered it as limited to the Jews; though the words in the great commission, which he and the other apostles had heard, ordered them to teach all nations. He was unwilling to go and preach to Cornelius on this very account, merely because he was a Roman centurion; or, in other words, a Gentile; so that a vision was necessary to remove his scruples in this particular. It was not till after this vision, and his conversation with Cornelius, that his mind began to be opened; and then he exclaimed, "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation, he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him."

The