In the viith Chapter of this Epistle and the 14th verse there is a text, in which (as with respect to the children brought to Christ that He should touch them) baptism is not mentioned, and yet it has so decided a bearing upon the subject, that we cannot but carefully notice it. St. Paul is speaking of the case of married persons, when one party believed, while the other believed not. This he says is not a sufficient reason for their separation: at least the separation should not be made by the one that believed. And to satisfy the mind of the believing “brother or sister” that the children did not suffer, he says,—“For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by (or in) the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by (or in) the husband; _else were your children unclean_, _but now are they holy_.” It is with the latter part of this verse that we have to do. The Apostle here declares that children, which have one believing parent, are on equal terms or in the same condition with children, both of whose parents are believers; and thus they are said to be not “_unclean_” but “_holy_.” Now, can there be a doubt, that the Apostle uses these epithets “unclean” and “holy,” in the same sense in which they were used in reference to the distinction between the Jews and the Gentiles? The latter were called “unclean,” because of their idolatries and other abominations; the former were called “holy,” because of their connection and Covenant with God. When the Apostle Peter was sent to preach the gospel to Cornelius, he applied this word “unclean” to all who were not Jews. “Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew, to keep company or come unto _one of another nation_; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or _unclean_.” And the people of Israel are repeatedly called “holy to the Lord,” because of the Lord’s choice of them and Covenant with them. “Thou art _a holy people_ unto the Lord thy God,” was the language in which Moses addressed them. (Deut, vii. 6). And in this description their children were included: for God’s Covenant with Israel embraced them also; and thus every man-child, when eight days old, was to receive circumcision, which was the token of the Covenant. From these things we may learn the meaning of the Apostle in the passage under consideration. The _uncleanness_ of the Gentiles was a barrier against their participating in the Ordinances of the Jewish Church. The _holiness_ of Israel was their title to those Ordinances; and this too in the case of their children. Surely, then, when the Apostle says to believing Christian parents, “Your children are _holy_,” he must mean that they are entitled to the Ordinances of the Church of Christ! It seems impossible, if St. Paul’s language has any meaning, to avoid _this_ conclusion,—that _the children of the faithful_, _as soon as they are born_, _have a Covenant-holiness_, _and so a right and title to baptism_, _which is now