An Unanswerable Question.
By Editor
AN American contemporary quotes a recent demand of the zealous French reformer, Père Hyacinthe, which is worth repeating. As our readers know, this eloquent preacher would be glad to effect a compromise with Rome—to retain some few superstitious customs and observances, while giving up grossly erroneous and notoriously corrupt practices. We are not, therefore, surprised that he contends, with Romanists, that they should observe and do what the Bible prescribes, and, with Protestants, that they should allow the authority of tradition. He ought to be a successful pleader with Pedo-baptists. Where is the answer to this appeal: "How could we baptize our children if we had not tradition to enlighten us on this point, for the Scriptures say nothing about it?" Just so. But why make the divine commandments about baptism of none effect by tradition? Why not follow the divine rule? Christianity is not supplemental or to be supplemented. Was it not a traditionary religion that the Master referred to in the parable, "No man rendeth a piece from a new garment and putteth it upon an old garment, else he will rend the new, and also the piece from the new will not agree with the old"? The Christian religion is wholly divine, and there should be no mixture of the human with it. The fact that Père Hyacinthe cannot find infant baptism in the Scriptures, should lead to his rejection of what is a mere human ordinance.—The Free Man, Dec. 22. Just so, indeed! But why make the divine commandment about the Sabbath "of none effect by tradition?" "Why not follow the divine rule," which says, "the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God"? "The Christian religion is wholly divine, and there should be no mixture of the human with it;" no, not even of consecrating Sunday either for the Sabbath, or as "supplemental" to the design of baptism—in commemorating the resurrection of Christ, which baptism plainly does—but the Sunday does not, for it is not of divine command; and the more Baptists use that day as the memorial of the resurrection, the more they lessen the import and importance of baptism. "The fact that" Baptists "cannot find," either Sunday Sabbath, or Sunday Lord's day, in the New Testament, "should lead to their rejection of what is a mere human ordinance." Baptism comes to a man personally but once in his life, but the Sabbath is a practical matter fifty-two times a year, every year of his life. The Lord wrought a miracle in the wilderness during forty years to distinguish and emphasize the Sabbath. The transgression of the fifty-two Sabbaths of the year, and year after year, is a fact for serious reflection; and especially for ministers, who "watch for souls as they that must give account." Heb. 13:17.—Sabbath Memorial.