CHILDREN'S BAPTISM 169 



in morals, and intellectual dishonesty or suicide. 

 There are certain conceptions of infant bap- 

 tism that appear to us as little better than gross 

 superstition on the one hand, or based on imag- 

 inary necessities on the other. They dwell in the 

 region of mystical relations and imaginary bene- 

 fits. It is impossible to trace the moral benefit to 

 children, as supposed, in their actual life. The 

 announcement of these views has doubtless done 

 much to discredit the true benefits of baptism. 

 Some speak of the good children derive from it 

 as coming to them under the influence of a cov- 

 enant. For myself, I can not see that the idea, 

 which seems to bind some formal obligation on 

 to God, adds much to the notion of His universal 

 love for all His creatures. Furthermore, omitting 

 the idea of their inherent sinfulness, and there 

 seems to be no barrier to be overcome by a com- 

 pact to the full display of His love and fellowship. 

 But to those who seem to see some force in it 

 I would quote the words of F. D. Maurice. "I am 

 deeply persuaded, ' ' he says, * l that a covenant pre- 

 supposes an actual relation; and therefore object 

 wholly to those phrases which speak of the rela- 

 tion as if it were constituted by the covenant." 

 ("Life," I, 209.) 



The Anabaptists of the sixteenth century ' ' in- 

 stead of infant baptism had a ceremony in which 

 children were consecrated to God." (Lindsay: 

 "Reformation," II, 435.) This seems to us to 

 secure the central idea quite effectively, while it 



