A STRIKING EXAMPLE OF PRESUMPTION.
By Editor
A CORRESPONDENT of the Christian Union asks that paper for information upon the subject of baptism, saying that he is not a Greek or Hebrew scholar and is unable to read the original. He asks: "Does the word authorizing the ordinance mean to dip or plunge, and was this the apostolic mode?" To this the Union makes this reply:— "Thayer's 'Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament'—the latest authority—thus defines it: 'Christian baptism, according to the view of the apostles, is a rite of sacred immersion, commanded by Christ,' etc. So Smith's 'Bible Dictionary,' art. 'Baptism.' Stanley ('Christian Institutions,' p. 22) says: 'The practice of immersion, though peculiarly suitable to the Southern and Eastern countries, for which it was designed, was not found seasonable in the countries of the North and West. By the general sentiment of Christian liberty this remarkable change was effected. . . . Speaking generally, the Christian civilized world has decided against it. It is a striking example of the triumph of common sense and convenience over the bondage of form and custom.'" "According to the view of the apostles, baptism" "is a rite of sacred immersion commanded by Christ," but by "the general sentiment of Christian liberty" "a remarkable change was effected;" and this "is a striking example of the triumph of common sense and convenience over the bondage of form and custom"! Yes, we should say so; especially was it a striking example of the triumph of "convenience," for disobedience to a plain requirement of the gospel can scarcely be called an exercise of common sense. The Saviour instituted an ordinance for the whole world,—for it was to be administered wherever the gospel was preached,—but it "was not found seasonable in the countries of the North and West," and so "by the general sentiment of Christian liberty" another and wholly dissimilar ordinance was instituted in its stead! Instead of being "a striking example of the triumph of common sense," is it not rather a striking example of presumption?