The Baptism of the Prince: A Sermon Preached ... on Sunday morning, Jan. 23, 1842, in anticipation of the baptism of His Royal Highness, the Prince of Wales. — Background and Themes

A Sermon Shaped by a Royal Occasion

The sermon's occasion—the baptism of the heir apparent—gives it a specific public character. Alexander addresses his congregation as subjects, parents, and children, directly linking the royal event to domestic and ecclesiastical duties. He writes in the preface that the discourse was occasioned by the baptism of the Prince of Wales, and this framing is sustained throughout. The royal baptism is not merely a pretext but a lens through which Alexander examines the meaning of infant baptism for all Christians. He uses the prince's baptism to urge his hearers to consider their own responsibilities, both as citizens and as members of the church.

A Clear Distinction: Baptismal Regeneration Rejected

Alexander devotes a substantial portion of the sermon to refuting the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, which he calls unscriptural and injurious. He argues that no New Testament writer ascribes spiritual efficacy to water baptism, citing John the Baptist's distinction between water and Spirit baptism, and Paul's statement that Christ sent him not to baptize but to preach. He warns that substituting ceremony for faith leads to a mechanical religion, where the worldly-minded think themselves saved because they have been baptized. This critique is central to his argument and reflects his nonconformist stance.

Nonconformity as a Conscientious Duty

Alexander explicitly connects his rejection of baptismal regeneration to the necessity of nonconformity with the Church of England. He references the 1662 Prayer Book and the two thousand clergymen who refused to give unfeigned assent to its doctrines, choosing poverty and persecution instead. For Alexander, conformity would be a wilful sin. This historical reference grounds his argument in the tradition of Dissent, making the sermon not only a theological exposition but also a defense of nonconformist identity. He urges his hearers to value what is scriptural in the established church while maintaining their separation.

Infant Baptism as a Domestic and Ecclesial Practice

In the preface, Alexander describes infant baptism as a practice he warmly loves, both as a parent and as a pastor. He emphasizes the intimate connection between baptized households and church membership, urging that children be trained for communion by both parent and pastor. He quotes Philip Henry: 'If infant baptism were more improved, it would be less disputed.' This practical, pastoral concern runs through the sermon, as Alexander seeks to remind practitioners of their privilege and responsibility. The royal baptism serves as a prompt for this domestic and ecclesial reflection.

Readers approaching this sermon should note that it is not a comprehensive treatise but an occasional discourse, shaped by a specific event and audience. Alexander's arguments are directed primarily to those who already practice infant baptism, not to opponents. The sermon's structure moves from the royal occasion to doctrinal critique to practical application, and its nonconformist convictions are explicit. Pay attention to how Alexander uses the prince's baptism to address his congregation as subjects, parents, and children, and how he distinguishes his position from that of the established church.

There are mornings when the old sermon on the Prince’s baptism still feels like a quiet conversation about beginnings—how a life is claimed before it can choose. And then, shelved across the aisle, The Fallen Star, or, the History of a False Religion by E.L. Bulwer; And, A Dissertation on the Origin of Evil by Lord Brougham — Inside the Classic whispers of what happens when that claim turns to shadow. They never speak, but I’ve watched them lean toward each other for decades—innocence and its long, patient question.