The history of infant baptism : together with Mr. Gale's Reflections, and Dr. Wall's Defence

tihvaxy of t:he theological ^emmarjp

PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY

Librar^^ of
Dr. W. H. Green
1903

BV 813 .W3 1844 v.l
Wall, William
The history of
infant-baptism

rr.

ir Ji

CVVA.

>

u

THE HISTORY

OF INFANT-BAPTISM.

BY//'

V ''

WILLIAM WALL, M.A.

VICAR OF SHOREHAM, KENT, AND OF MILTON NEXT GRAVESEND.
/ TOGETHEB WITH

MR. GALE'S REFLECTIONS,

/^ AND

DR. WALL'S DEFENCE.

SECOND EDITION,
BY THE REV. HENRY COTTON, D.C.L

LATE STUDENT OF CHRIST CHURCH.

IN FOUR VOLUMES.
VOL. I.

OXFORD:

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
MDCCCXLIV.

ADVERTISEMENT

BY THE EDITOR.

IN offeriijo- to the public this edition of Dr. Wall's
works on infant-baptism, accompanied by the
treatise of his antagonist Mr. Gale, it appears desirable
to premise some few observations respecting- these
two authors ; es])ecially such as may throw light
upon the publications which are here reprinted.

Of Dr. Wall's personal history the materials are
very scanty ; and little pains appear to have been
taken towards preserving them, at a period when
such information could readily have been obtained.

No life of him is given in the Biographla Bri-
tannica. And the account which Mr. Chalmers has
inserted in his more recent ' Biographical Dictionary,'
is extremely barren of details, and in some few
points incorrect.

He was born in the year 1645, or 1646 ; but
what was the place of his nativity, at what school
he was educated, or whether he ever became a mem-
ber of either of our universities, does not appear
to be known.

About the year 1676 he was presented to the
living of Shoreham in Kent; a vicarage in the
diocese of Rochester, in the gift of the dean and
chapter of Westminster.

Here he resided, in the faithful discharge of his

a 2

iv ADVERTISEMENT

pastoral duties, during the long space of fifty-three
years. It is said that he once declined the offer of
a second benefice (Chelsfield), of the value of three
hundred pounds a year, from conscientious motives,
although it was situate within three miles of Shore-
ham ; but subsequently he accepted one, of about
one fifth of that value, namely Milton near Graves-
end, at the distance of twelve miles from his re-
sidence ^.

In 1676, or 1677, he married Catharine, daugh-
ter of Edward Davenant, esq. by whom he had two
sons, William and Thomas, both of whom became
citizens of London, but died before their father :
also two daughters, who died in their infancy ; and a
third, Catharine, married to Mr. Waring of Roches-
ter, by whom he left sixteen grandchildren, eight
sons and eight dauohters.

After a long life, silently but honourably passed
in professional studies, and the duties of his sacred
calling. Dr. Wall expired, on the 13th of January,
172-5-, at the age of 82. lie lies buried in the north
aisle of Shoreham church ; and over his grave is a
marble slab, with a brass plate bearing the following
inscription : * Hie situm est corpus Wilhelmi Wall ;
' in quem ob scrijjta ab eo edita Academia Oxon.
' gradum Doctoris in Theologia sponte contulit.
' Qui decessit 13 die Januarii anno D. 1727, astatis
' suae 82 ; postquam animarum populi hujus curam

a The duty of this parish was discharged by a curate, the
Rev. Mr. Thomas ; of whom his rector speaks in high terms,
particularly ' as helping him much in bringing the people to a
' conformity in the office of baptism, and other things.' (See
Atterhury's Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 365.)

BY THE EDITOR. v

' vicarius gesserat per annos 53. Item et pojmli sui
' de JNIilton rector per annos fere 20.

' Prope aiitem jacet uxor ejus Catliarina, filia
' Edwardi Davenant generosi, quae decesserat 10 die
' JNIaii A.D. 1706, a^tatis 48. Filius etiam Thomas,
' civis Londinensis, qui obierat 30 die Januarii 1709,
' 9ctat. 25. Dua} etiam filia; infantulae, Elizabetha et
' Rebecca. Filius etiam Wilhelmus, civis Londinen-
' sis, qui decessit 15 die Junii, anno D. 1725, setat.
'46.'

This inscription was printed sixty-five years ago,
in Thorpe's ' Registrum Roffense ;' and has been re-
cently verified for me by the kindness of a reverend
friend on the spot.

It appears from a passage in Dr. Wall's first
volume, that his thoughts were originally turned to a
deep consideration of the question of infant-baptism^
by the circumstance of the part of England where
he resided containing a large number of baptists.
After perusing the publications of their chief ad-
vocates, he was so satisfied of the insufiiciencv of
the arguments put forth in defence of adult-baptism
as the only true form ; and so moved by the hardy
and unsupported assertions of Mr. Danvers ; that he
determined to sift the whole question from the be-
ginning ; to search in ancient authors, ' how the
' first Christians did practise in this matter ;' and
to give the result of his researches to the world.

At what period this resolution was first formed,
we have no means of knowing ; but from the slow
and cautious habit which seems to have been his
characteristic, as well as from his own expression,,
that he ' had for some years made it his business to
' observe,' &c. it may be presumed that he spent

vi ADVERTISEMENT

several years in collecting his materials, before he
ventured to submit them to the public eye.

The ' History of Infant-baptism' was first publish-
ed in 1705, in two octavo volumes. It immediately
attracted considerable notice; and obtained for its
author most honourable testimonies of approbation.
The clergy of the lower house assembled in Convo-
cation passed a vote, * That the thanks of this house
' be given to Mr. Wall, for the learned and ecV-
' cellent book he hath lately written concerning in-
' fant-baptism.' And bishop Atterbury hesitated
not to affirm, that 'it was a book for which the
' author deserved the thanks, not of the English
' clergy alone, but of all Christian churches.^

The attention of foreigners was directed to it, by
a review contained in the periodical publication en-
titled, ' Nouvelles de la republique des Lettres,' con-
ducted by M. Jacques Bernard, at Amsterdam.

Of the spirit of that review Dr. Wall thus speaks :
' Upon the whole, I take M. Bernard's remarks on
' my book to be such as become a learned and also
' a civil and friendly writer. As for the difference
' of opinion concerning some points of less moment
' in religion, it will always happen.'

But objections having been made to a passage or
two in the work, as conveying personal imputa-
tions ; and farther consideration having induced
the author to alter some and strengthen others of
his arguments, he put forth in 1707 his second edi-
tion, ' with large additions,' in quarto ; in the pre-
face to which he defended himself at large against
the insinuations which had been thrown out.

M. Bernard (' Nouvelles,' &c. 1708. p. .592) in-
forms us, that Dr. Wall had published a small piece.

BY THE EDITOR. vii

of 45 octavo pages, containing the alterations, addi-
tions, and corrections, which he made in his second
edition. This little tract I have never met with.
It is briefly mentioned by the author, in his ' De-
' fence,' p. 110.

Previously to the appearance of his second edi-
tion, Dr. Wall, either at the suggestion of friends,
or from his own feeling of the usefulness of such a
tract, published a compendious abridgement of his
larger work, in the form of a Dialogue between a
supporter and an opponent of infant-baptism; in
which he insists chiefly and almost exclusively on
the arguments derived from Scripture, as best suited
to the capacity and studies of unlearned readers.

The title of this piece is, * A Conference ween
' two men that had doubts about Infant-baptism.
* By W. Wall, vicar of Shoreham in Kent.' 12«, Lon-
don, 1706 ; (containing 83 pages, price ^d. or 25s.
per hundred). A second edition of this appeared in
I7O8, 12". And we may judge of its extensive popu-
larity, from the author's remark to IMr. Gale, that
upwards of four thousand copies had been circulated
before his 'Reflections' were published (in 1711).
A siicth edition of it was printed in 1795, for the
society for promoting Christian knowledge : a se-
venth, for the same society, in 1801 : and a ninth
in I8O9, for the same. On comparing this last
with the first edition, I find it the same, word for
word, but less carefully printed.

After a second edition of the History had appear-
ed, the question of infant-baptism was taken up by
several opponents ; amongst whom Dr. Wall, in' his
'Defence,' specifies Mr. Emlyn, Mr.Whiston, and

viii ADVERTISEMENT

especially Mr. Gale ; to whose ' Reflections' he at
length felt himself called on to reply, not so much
from any pertinence or cogency of the arguments,
as from the vaunting style of his performance, and
the high character which the author bore among
those of his sect.

This reply, 'in vindication,' he says, ' partly of the
' cause and partly of himself,' he published in the
year 1720, being then seventy-five years old, under
the title of ' A Defence of the History of Infant-
* baptism, against the Reflections of Mr. Gale and
' others :' having previously holden a personal con-
ference with his opponent, in the presence of Mr.
Whiston and other friends, and having obtained
more full and correct information concerning the
present state and opinions of the English baptists,
from a distinguished member of their communion,
Mr. Joseph Stennet, of whom he makes honourable
mention.

For the good service performed in this ' Defence,'
Dr. Wall received from the university of Oxford
the honour of a Doctor of Divinity's degree : which,
it appears from the catalogue of graduates, was con-
ferred on him by diploma, on the 31st of October,
1720.

The greater portion of the work is occupied in
closely following and replying to the statements of
Mr. Gale ; whose learning he deems much overrated,
and of whose accuracy he has but a mean opin-
ion : sixty-four pages at the beginning are de-
voted to the observations of M. Bernard, Mr. Em-
lyn, and Mr. Whiston ; and about twenty-five at
the end, to a work of Mr. Davye of Leicester, who

BY THE EDITOR. ix

had recently entered the field of controversy in behalf
of adult-baptism ^.

At the same time our author was preparing for
the press a third edition of his History, with such
alterations and additions, as his further reading and
communication "with learned men during the inter-
val of thirteen years had suggested as desirable.
And to the Defence he subjoined an Appendix, of
twenty-five pages, containing the most material ad-
ditions and alterations which would be found in the
forthcoming edition ; for the benefit of those per-
sons who had been purchasers of the former ones.

In the same year, 1720, was completed, in two
volumes octavo, the third edition of the History,
* with large additions :' from which, as having re-
ceived the author's last revision, and being publish-
ed under his own inspection, the present one has
been carefully prepared : with the addition of some
short notes by the editor, designed as references or
illustrations for the reader's assistance, but leaving
the main arguments and proofs exactly as they were
delivered by the author.

It may be mentioned, that Dr. Wall's History
and Defence having become very scarce and much
called for a few years ago, a reprint of them was
undertaken by a London bookseller in the year
1819- But as one chief object in this speculation

^ Dr. Wall seems fully persuaded, that the greater part of
Mr. Gale's book had been compiled, either by himself or others,
a considerable time before its publication, and was not ori-
ginally designed for an answer to him in particular : (See De-
fence, p. 1 06. 121.) and even asserts that the third letter was
actually published ' a good while before the rest, as a specimen of
' what the book should be.' {Defence, p. 1 18.)

X ADVERTISEMENT

was profit, so little care seems to have been be-
stowed on publishing the text correctly, that the
impression is not deserving of further notice. It is
in three octavo volumes.

Walchius, in his valuable ' Blbliotheca Theolo-
' (jica, (5 torn. 8". 1762, &c.) at vol. iii. p. 648, as-
serts that a fourth edition was published in 1731.
Perhaps he was mistaken ; as I can neither find
such an edition, nor discover any other notice of
it. He likewise acquaints us, that it was holden
in so great estimation on the continent, that a Latin
translation was published, by professor Schlosser,
of Bremen, with observations and confirmations
of the arguments, in two vols, quarto, in 1748 and
1753. I was most anxious to peruse this version,
while the present edition was in course of prepara-
tion : but could not find it in any library, public or
private, nor could I procure from the continent more
than the second volume, which of course could not
alone be made use of. It is clear that the trans-
lator had seen the second edition only. The notes
of M. Schlosser are voluminous, and sometimes con-
vey additional illustrations of importance : but much
of them relates particularly to disputes on the sub-
ject of baptism, carried on by writers of his own
time and country. For his main scope and design,
he refers to a general Dissertation, prefixed to the
first volume, which I had no opportunity of seeing.

It may here be noticed also, than an abridgement
of the History was published in the Dutch language
by Conradus Bremerus, (with the addition of five Dis-
sertations,) at Amsterdam, in the year 1740 ; Bre-
merus having been induced to this step, by learning,
on a perusal of Dr. Wall's work, that the practice of

BY THE EDITOR. xi

infant-baptism in the Christian Church coukl chiim
a much higher antiquity than he liad previously
supposed.

Besides the foregoing works on the subject of
baptism, a few other pieces of Dr. Wall's have been
given to the public. Among these are,

1. A little tract, or rather prospectus of a designed
treatise, bearing the following title : ' Some new
' inquiries relating to the following curious subjects :
' viz.

' A threefold Motion of the Earth.

* The Rectification of the Calendar.

' The Flowing and Ebbing of the Sea.

' The Nature of the Loadstone.

' The Variation of the Compass.

' The Cause of Sea-currents and Trade- winds.

' The various Motions of all the Coelestial Orbs.

' The finding out the true place of the Moon :

' And facilitating the discovery of the Longitude.

' To which is added an Appendix, containing an
' inquiry into the nature of Comets, and of the dis-
' solution of the World by Fire. By William Wall,
' author of the History of Infant-baptism. Most
' humbly proposed, and oifered to the consideration
' of the learned and ingenious as subjects of further
' contemplation and improvement. But in a more
• particular manner to the honourable, the learned,
' and ingenious Gentlemen of the Royal Society.'
London, (no date,) 4to.

This tract consists merely of pages 1-12. and
23, 24 ; beside a Dedication to George Prince of
Wales, and an address to the Royal Society, iboth
signed B. IL J. ; also a short address to the reader,
without any signature. The author does not actually

xii ADVERTISEMENT

produce all which his title had promised, but con-
tents himself with observing-, that upon the two
subjects, of facilitating the discovery of the Longi-
tude, and the manner of finding out the true place of
the Moon, ' he has something to offer to the public
' hereafter.'

2. Nichols, in his {A^iecdotes of Bowyer, or)
Liter arif Anecdotes, vol. i. p. 114, states that in the
year 1715, Bowyer printed a Sermon by Dr. Wall ;
which is not mentioned by Cooke, in his Preacher''s
Assistant. He does not inform us either of the
subject or the text : and I have not been able to
meet with the Sermon itself.

About this period he devoted much time to the
critical study of the Holy Scriptures ; marking the
various readings of the original texts, and com-
paring together the principal versions. The result
of these studies he committed to paper, intending
them for publication : but so great was his caution,
or distrust of his own attainments, that he himself
did not publish any portion, although he lived twelve
or thirteen years after this time.

3. After his death, a friend, in whose hands
his papers were placed, sent forth, in an octavo
volume, ' Brief critical notes, especially on the va-

* rious readings of the New Testament books ; with

* a Preface concerning the texts cited herein from
< the Old Testament ; as also concerning the use of
' the Septuagint translation. By Will. Wall, S.T.P.'
London, 1730. The anonymous editor assures his
readers, that the author had designed these papers
for the press, subject to the revision and judgment
of himself and a learned friend : and that he found
himself, on their perusal, fully justified in presenting

BY THE EDITOR. xiii

them to the world, ahnost in the precise state in
which they had come into his hands.

The volume commences with a long and valuable
preface ; the opening sentence of which unfolds to
us the pious feeling which led to the composition of
these ' Notes.'

' Since I have grown old,' says the author, ' I have
' chosen to do what many pious clergymen have
' advised to be done by any Christian that has a near
' prospect of forsaking this world : viz. to leave off

* in great measure the reading of other books, and to
' spend the remainder of his time in reading (only,

* or at least chiefly) the Holy Scriptures themselves :
' and, if his time be prolonged, to read the whole of
' them over and over.'

From a note appended to the volume we learn
the period of his life at which it was composed,
and also the fact that it received mature revision :
' Soli Deo Gloria. Septuagenarius scripsi. Octo-

* genarius descripsi.'

The Annotations extend to all the books of the
New Testament. Those on St. Paul's Epistles (and
the Acts) are in chronolocjical order ; a plan which
he judged very useful towards the clearing up of
difficulties, and declared ' he thought it great pity
' that there was not an edition of them placed

* in that order.' A work, which has recently been
accomplished by JNIr. Townshend.

4. After an interval of four years, the remainder
of Dr. Wall's labours in this department was pub-
lished, probably by the same unknown friend, with
the following title : ' Critical Notes on the Old
' Testament ; wherein the present Hebrew Text is
' explained, and in many places amended from the

xiv ADVERTISEMENT

^ ancient versions, more jmrticularly from that of
' the LXXII. Drawn up in the order the several
' books were written, or may most conveniently be
' read. To which is prefixed a large introduction,
' adjusting the authority of the Masoretic Bible, and
' vindicating it from the objections of Mr. Whiston
' and the author of the " Grounds and Reasons
' of the Christian Religion," By the late learned
' W. Wall, D.D. author of the History of Infant-
' baptism. Now first published from his original
' manuscript.' 2 vols. 8°. London, 1734.

The Introduction is that which had been pre-
viously attached to the Notes on the New Testa-
ment; not indeed with due propriety, but because
at that time it was not intended that those on the
Old Testament should see the light : a determina-
tion which probably was changed by the favourable
reception given to the former volume.

It has been handed down to us that Dr. Wall was
warmly attached to bishop Atterbury, his diocesan''.
It appears that he carried on a correspondence with
that gifted Prelate, especially concerning the times
in which the four Gospels were written. In ' Atter-
' bury's Epistolary Correspondence,' &c., S*'. 1784,
vol. iii. are three letters addressed to him by Wall,
in the years 17211 and 1722 ; the former two on the
above subject, the latter on finding out who was ' the
' brother' spoken of by St. Paul at 2 Cor. viii. 18, 19,
an inquiry to which his attention had been specially
invited by the bishop. There are two letters of

c His daughter is reported to have declared, that his zeal was
so intense in this direction, that in case of the bishop's recall
from exile, he would have lighted up all Whittlebury Forest at his
own expense.

BY THE EDITOR. xv

Atterbury in reply, expressing liis high sense of the
Doctor's worth and learning.

Besides the above, I am not aware of any thing-
having been published bearing our author's name.

That Dr. Wall enjoyed a high reputation, de-
servedly acquired by his works, is shewn, not only
by the abovementioned honourable testimonies of
the House of Convocation and the University of Ox-
ford ; but likewise by the publicly expressed opinions
of many learned men, both Englishmen and foreign-
ers ; some of whom agreed with him in sentiment,
while others entirely differed. — Among these, the
following few may be perused with interest.

Mr. Whiston, — who had published a treatise
against Infant-baptism, and late in life declared
himself a Baptist, and finally forsook the communion
of the Church of England on Trinity Sunday, 1747; —
JNIr. AVhiston, in a pamphlet entitled ' Friendly ad-

* vice to the Baptists, (8'\ 1748,) asserts, ' The body
' of these Baptists have in general a very fair cha-

* racter ; and not only from Bishop Burnet, — but
' from the greatest of their adversaries, I mean the

* very honest, learned, and pious Dr. Wall : whose

* History of Infant-baptism (not as to the contro-

* versial part, but as to the facts therein contained)
' seems to me most accurately done ; and may, I
' think, be depended on by the Baptists themselves.
' Now with this Dr. Wall I became particularly
' acquainted, soon after I had published my " Primi-
' tive Infant-baptism revived," and went twenty
' miles on foot to debate that matter with him. He
' afterwards came up to London, and had a confer-
' ence with Mr. Gale, his learned antagonist, myself,
' and other Baptists, at my house : and appeared to

xvi ADVERTISEMENT

* me all along utterly unable to justify himself in
' opposition to the evidence produced by us against

* him. However, Dr. Wall gives the Baptists this
' character,' &c.

Crosby, the historian of the English Baptists,
though an opponent of his principles, styles him
' the ingenious Dr. Wall ;' and pronounces his work
to be * an elaborate history.'

Waterland speaks of him as ' a learned and

* judicious writer :' and frequently refers to his au-
thority Avhen treating of the subject of baptism.

Bingham, in his ' Antiquities of the Christian
' Church,' book ix. chap. 4. sect. 5. on the subject
of Baptism, gives a high character of this work.

WoTTON, in his •' Miscellaneous Discourses,' vol. i.
p. 103j when discussing the usefulness of Talmudic
study to a Christian divine, writes as follows : ' The
' substance of the reasonings of learned men' (viz. on
the point of Infant-baptism having been derived
from the manner of admitting proselytes among the
Jews in our Lord's time) ' has been with great

* judgment digested and published in our own lan-
' guage within these few years, by JNIr. Wall, in his
' " History of Infant-baptism." That work of his, (as
' far as it goes, which is for the first four centuries
' after Christ,) is by much the most finished col-
' lection of testimonies from Christian writers that

* has been made upon that subject.'

With respect to the reputation which he maintain-
ed among foreign scholars, I have mentioned above
some honourable testimonies to the worth of our
author's works ; and will merely add here the cha-
racter given to his History by Walchius : ' Historia
' est haec opus quod auctoris singularem eruditionem

By THE EDITOR. xvii

' atque industriam commendat : quodque ad dogma
' de Baptismo infantum illustrandum ac confirman-
' dum multa praebet adjumenta.' Bihl. Theol. tom. v.
p. 401.

As for his general habits, they seem to have been
studious, and domestic. In his family he had to
sustain several trials ; his wife having been taken
from him more than twenty years before his own
death, and four out of his five children having died
before their father.

From some anecdotes communicated by his sur-
viving daughter to a corresi)ondent of the ' Gentle-
' man's JNIagazine,' where they are printed (vol. i.
for 1784, p. 434,) he appears to have been of rather
a lively turn of mind, and sometimes disposed to
indulge in sportive sallies of wit.

But, as was observed above, so little of the
personal history of this conscientious divine and
laborious scholar has been committed to writing ;
that having nothing to produce in an authentic and
satisfactory shape, it is better to be silent on this
head ; and to rest his claim to the gratitude of
posterity, on the result of his persevering exertions
to vindicate and uphold the pure forms of worship
adopted by our excellent Church.

Of his opponent, the details are more ample.
Mr. John Gale, a man of high character for learn-
ing, especially among the Baptists, to which sect
he belonged, and in whose communion he for some
years acted as a minister, although (on Whiston's^
authority) he was never ordained a presbyter, was

" ' Friendly Advice to the Baptists,' 8". 1748. p. 13.

WALL, VOL. I. b

xviii ADVERTISEMENT

born on the 26th of May, 1680, in London, of
which place his father was an eminent and worthy
citizen. From some early proofs of capacity dis-
played by his son, the good man destined him to
the ministry ; and with that view spared no expense
in giving him a liberal education. We are told
that his early youth exhibited an uncommon appli-
cation to study, and the improvement and adorning
of his mind with literature ; accompanied by a
careful avoidance of every kind of vice.

Thus early prepared, he was sent to Leyden, to
finish his studies, and qualify himself for the duties
of his future profession.

Soon after his arrival at that university, being
then seventeen years of age, he lost his mother :
an event which determined him to return home, so
soon as he should have finished his course of philo-
sophy, the principal point of his study. This having
been accomplished in less than two years, he
received the degree of Master of Arts and Doctor
of Philosophy ; on which occasion a highly com-
plimentary letter was dispatched to his father by
his tutor.

His first publication took place at this period : it
is said to have been a Thesis ' De Ente ejusque
' Ccnceptu ;' which he dedicated to his father and
his two uncles, sir John and sir Joseph Wolf.

From Leyden Mr. Gale proceeded to Amsterdam,
where he studied under the celebrated Limborch ;
and formed an acquaintance with M. Le Clerc, with
whom he kept up a correspondence for many years.

After his return to England, we find him study-
ing the ancient classics, and the Oriental languages,
with assiduity. * He also,' says the writer of his

BY THE EDITOR. xix

life prefixed to his Sermoiis, ' read over and consi-
' dered tlie primitive writers of the Christian cliurch :
' by whicli he contracted a just esteem for them,
' neither approving- the conduct of those who sliglit
' them, nor tljat of others who rely too much upon
* their autliority.'

Four years afterwards he was offered the degree
of Doctor in Divinity by the university of Dort, on
the condition of giving liis assent to the articles
of their synod ; l^ut this offer, from motives of con-
science, he declined.

Dr. AVall's History of Infant-Ba'ptism making
its appearance in the year 1705, and being highly
lauded, Mr. Gale prepared a reply — (it is said, be-
fore he was twenty-seven years old :) when subse-
quently published, this piece met with many eulogists,
among whom were Dr. Whitby, Dr. Wotton, and
Mr. Whiston, whose friendship, together with that
of other eminent men, he enjoyed.

About the age of thirty-five he began to preach
regularly with unwearied diligence; ' resolving firmly
' to regard no man in the discharge of his duty.'
' His style was easy and natural, his expressions
' strong and lively, his reasonings clear and cou-
' vincing.' — ' The grand principle which he endea-
' voured to root the deepest, and cultivate with the
' greatest care, in his own mind, as well as in the
' mind of his hearers, was that of sincerity : upon
' which he thought our happiness or misery in a
' future state will depend. lie therefore considered
' that this would be of the highest importance, when
' many of the acquirements we here gain one above
' another, will fade and wither away. Which made
' him very humble, notwithstanding his great abilities.

b2

XX ADVERTISEMENT

' This also disposed him to judge charitably of
* those who differed from his sentiments ; and to
' be very diligent in his inquiries after truth. His
' embracing the doctrine of the Trinity was one
' effect of this : for he did not run into this belief
' from any prejudices of education, or bias put upon
' his mind in his youth ; having been early intro-
' duced into the conversation of those who examined
' the several doctrines of the Christian revelation
' with the utmost freedom ; amongst whom were
' some (foreigners as well as others) of the first
' rank for learning and abilities.'

Some time before his death, Mr. Gale had formed
the design of publishing an Expodtion of the New
Testament in the form of Lectures ; and had drawn
up an Introduction opening his method, which
seems to have included a neio translation and a
paraphrase, giving the interpretation of various
and perhaps opposite expositors, leaving the student
* to judge for himself with just liberty and true
' freedom of thought.'

His conversation was sweet, but not abundant :
he preferred to say much in a few words. His
manner was affable and courteous to all, particu-
larly to the lower classes. He never overpowered
the ignorant with his learning. He sympathized
with the afflicted, and aided the distressed. * In
' fourteen years' intimate converse with him,' says
his biographer, ' I never knew him mastered by
' anger, or disturbed by any irregular passions.'

He had entertained several useful designs before
his death : as, that of making the study of the
Oriental tongues more easy ; of giving a translation
of the Septuagint agreeable to Dr. Grabe's edition :

BY THE EDITOR. xxi

also, a liistory of the notion of Original Sin,
tracing the opinion from its first rise, and shewing
how little gronnds there are for the supposition that
God could be its author.

He wrote to his father, on the appearance of
Dr. Wall's ' Defence' twelve \Jege nine] years after
his ' Reflections' had appeared, as follows: ' Dr. Wall
' has written a Defence of his History of Infant-
' baptism; in which he has treated me very roughly,
' and has endeavoured to enrage the clergy as well
' as our own people against me : beside which there
' appears not to be much in his book : however, I am
' preparing an answer, which,' &c.

But all these good intentions were frustrated by
a slow fever, which carried him off in the forty-first
year of his age, in the year 1721.

Such is the brief outline of Mr. Gale's life and
pursuits, as extracted from a memoir prefixed to
his Sermons, in 4 volumes S''. published in 1726 ^

Crosby, in his ' History of the English Baptists,'
vol. iv. has abstracted the foregoing account, (only
mistaking Leyden for Dort, as the university

f In a note to ' Atterbury's Correspondence,' vol. iii. p. 372,
the editor states that an original portrait of Mr. Gale by High-
more, from which Vertue engraved the print prefixed to his
Sermons, was then (1784) in possession of the Rev. Mr.
Duncombe.

At page ^38 of the same volume is given a letter, (reprinted
from the ' British Journal' of April 27, 1723,) stating that Dr.
Gale's widow, being left with a large and destitute family, had
been enabled, by contributions raised among her friends, to "set
up a coffeehouse in Finch-lane, London : where her excellent
character and exemplary conduct entitled her to the public en-
couragement and support.

xxli ADVERTISEMENT

which offered him the degree of Doctor of Di-
vinity.)

Mr. Gale states, in the advertisement to his Re-
flections, that being originally written for the private
perusal of a friend, they were not intended for
publication : indeed that an answer to Dr. Wall was
expected from an eminent Baptist minister, Mr.
Joseph Stennett^; who had already published a
treatise on the subject, was possessed of great
learning, and had personally discussed the point
with Dr. Wall. But on its being found that no-
thing was to be expected from that quarter, his
friends urged him to the attempt, lest Dr. Wall's
work, having already obtained a high degree of
popularity, should be taken for unanswerable. The
piece was imblished in 1711, although said to be
written in 1705 and 1706, when only the first
edition of Dr. Wall's History had appeared : and is
justly charged by Dr. Wall with containing ob-
jections to passages which had been either altered
or wholly expunged in a second edition, published
four years before its appearance.

No reprint of the Reflections took place for
upwards of a century : but the appearance of a new
impression of Dr. Wall in 1819, ' induced an editor
' to think of sending Dr. Gale's book again to
' press.' The new impression came out in octavo at
London, in 1820. The editor has omitted the
larger quotations in learned languages which were
given at length in the notes to the preceding one :
and has added, of his own, ' A Review of the

o His works, consisting of the Answer to Russen, Sermons, and
Poems, with some account of his hfe, were published in five
vols. 8". London, 1732.

BY THE EDITOR. xxiii

' Authorities for the Existence of Jewish Proselyte
' Baptism,' directed against Dr. Wall's Introduction.
As this piece did not belong to either of our authors,
and concerns itself with a much more modern state
of the question, no notice is taken of it here ; and I
have, in this instance, as before, printed from the
original edition, published under the author's own
superintendence ; merely adding a few illustrative
notes, as in the other volumes.

We have seen above the various pieces w^hich
Mr. Gale had designed : I am not aware that any
were actually published, at least with his name,
besides four volumes of Sermons. In these, as
might be expected, he frequently discusses the
subject of baptism, with allusions to the con-
troversy. As in vol. ii. Sermon V. by the instance
of our Saviour's baptism he defends the custom
of dipping, and evidently alludes to Dr. Wall's pre-
ference of that mode above sprinkling.

In Sermon VI. p. 159, he repeats his argument
from INIatthew xxviii. that all who are to be baptized
are first to be tauglit. He alludes to his own sense
of iJ.a6}]Tevoo, to teacJi, although some men ' of great
* learning and reputation' interj^ret it to disciple.
P. 169, he briefly sums up the arguments used by
Dr. Wall and others in defence of Infant-baptism.
P. 170, he asserts, that among the Jews pots and
cups, &c. were baptized. P. 174, abuses the Jewish
rabbis as fools and blasphemers. This whole dis-
course is very strong in defence of adidt-haptism.

In Sermon VII. he argues against those who
undervalue all baptism.

In the eighth, he states the ' scheme' of such as
deny baptism : and argues against the Jews' and the

xxiv ADVERTISEMENT

Talmud's assertion, that the practice existed in our
Saviour's time, and that he derived it from the
Jews: or that this original of baptism can be any
good foundation for the baptizing of infants.

In the next three Sermons, the same argument
is followed up ; baptism is maintained to be indis-
pensable ; and that there is no baptism but that of
adults, and by immersion.

I have stated above, that Mr. Gale enjoyed a
considerable reputation as a scholar, and was on
terms of intimacy with learned men, both in England
and on the Continent.

Among the latter class was Mr. Le Clerc, whose
acquaintance he assiduously studied, and to whom on
several grounds he seems to have looked up with
much respect.

Of our own countrymen, Dr. Whitby, who indeed
had been frequently eulogized by him, is disposed to
think and speak highly of his attainments. In the
preface to his ' Answer to Edwards,' (8*^. 1712,) he
calls Gale a ' very learned antipnedobaptist :' and in
that to his treatise, ' Dissertatio de S. Scripturarum
' interpretatione secundum Patrum commentaries,'
(8°. 1714,) he speaks of the ' Reflections' as ' literge
' ad invidiam doctse ;' and asserts that the author
has demonstrated the point of infant-baptism in the
primitive ages of the Church to be a dubious and
unsettled one.

Crosby, as I observed above, repeats the account
of his life and works given by the editor of his
Sermons.

Dr. WoTTON is sometimes adduced as speaking in
high terms of his performance. But if any person
will take the trouble of reading over the eighth

BY THE EDITOR. xxv

chapter of Dr. Wotton's first volume of his ' Miscel-
' laneous Discourses,' lie will be able to judge bow
far this writer concedes to him that degree of
merit which his biographers would claim on such
authority.

Whiston, as holding (late in life) similar senti-
ments on the subject of baptism, writing on the
same question, and being personally acquainted with
him, is led to speak of his performance and acquire-
ments, which he does in terms of high praise :

' — The most learned Baptist you ever had, INIr.

* John Gale.'

' — INIr. Gale, their most eminent defender,'

' — The learned Mr. Gale, who was so very hearty

* and indefatigable in forming and supporting our
' " Society for promoting Primitive Christianity," in
< which he was our chairman for a considerable time.'

' I once heard their 7?iost learned vindicator, Mr.
' Gale, who was never ordained so much as a pres-
' byter, put up such public prayers, as well as preach,
' in a congregation of baptists in London, many years
' ago.' Friendly Advice to the Baptists. 8". Stamford,
1748.

It only remains to add, that with a view of ren-
dering this edition deserving of public attention,
all the quotations, both from ancient and modern
authors, have been carefully examined and verified ;
and their several passages referred to with more
minute exactness, agreeably to the latest and best
editions : a task of urgent necessity, since the errors
which had crept in were very numerous and often
remarkable ; — but one of much tedious labour, for
which no return appears upon the page.

xxvi ADVERTISEMENT BY THE EDITOR.

I regret however to say that some few instances
still remain unexamined : where either I was unable
to meet with the work in question — as for instance,
that of Mr. Davye — or the particular edition which
had been used, and which perhaps contained some
peculiarity of reading.

Whatever has been added in the shape of notes is
enclosed within brackets, for the sake of distinction :
in order that the outliors may not inadvertently be
made responsible for any errors into which the editor
has fallen.

HENRY COTTON.

Cashel, Ireland,
October, 1835.

THE AUTHOH'S PREFACE.

FORASINIUCH as tlie commission given by our
Saviour to his disciples, in the time of his mor-
tal life, to baptize in the country of Judcca, is not at
all set down in Scripture ; only it is said, that they
ba]5tized^ a great many : and the enlargement of that
commission given them afterwards, Matth. xxviii. 19,
to perform the same office among all the heathen
nations, is set down in such brief words, that there is
no particular direction given what they were to do
in reference to the children of those that received the
faith : and among all the persons that are recorded
as baptized by the apostles, there is no express men-
tion of any infant ; nor is there, on the other side,
any account of any Christianas child, whose baptism
was put off till he was grown up, or who was bap-
tized at man's age : (for all the persons that are
mentioned in Scripture to have been baj^tized, were
the children of heathens, or else of Jews, who did
not believe in Christ at that time when those their
children were born :) and since the proofs drawn by
consequences from some places of Scripture, for any
one side of this question, are not so i:)lain as to
hinder the arguments drawn from other places for
the other side, from seeming still considerable to
those that have no help from the history of the
Scripture-times for the better understanding of the
rules of Scripture : it is no wonder that the readers

" John iv. I, 2 ; and iii, 22, 26.

xxviii AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

of Scripture, at this distance from the apostles' times^
haye fallen into contrary sentiments about the mean-
ing of our Saviour's command, and the practice of
the apostles in reference to the baptizing of infants.

But since the practice of the ancient Christians,
that lived nigh the times of the apostles, being more
largely delivered, is more easily known : that such
as have o'one about to oive an account thereof out of
the ancient records, should give so contrary accounts
as they do, is a great wonder and a great shame.

For they do not only differ in the understanding
of the meaning of several of the places produced '■>
but also as to matter of fact, (whether they be
rightly cited or not,) do charge one another'' Avith
forgery : and are come, as INIr. Baxter complains, to
* Thou liest,' and * Thou liest.' And indeed among
all the books of controversy between Papists and
Protestants, or others, that are scandalous for false
quotations, there is none comparable to one that is
written on this occasion, which I shall at present
forbear to name.

Such a thing done by mistake, or for want of
skill, is bad enough ; but if it be done wilfully, it is
hard to think of any thing that is a greater wicked-
ness ; for it goes the way to destroy the common
faith of mankind, by which ^re are apt to rely upon
a writer, that how zealous soever he may be for his
opinion, he will not forge matters of fact, nor S2)cak
icickedly (though it be) /or God, as Job says <^.

Some other accounts also are very partial, men-
tioning only that which makes for their side, and
leaving out parts of the clauses which they cite.

^ More Proofs for Infants' Church-membership and Bap-
tism, p. 346. c Job xiii. 7.

AUTHOR^S PREFACE. xxix

The inconvenience of this is the worse, because it is
in a matter wliich would have a great influence to set-
tle and determine this unlucky controversy ; provided
that the accounts of the eldest times were given
fairly and impartially, and so that the reader might
be satisfied of the truth and impartiality of them.

For Mhen there is in Scripture a plain command
to proselyte or make disciples all nations, baptizing
them ; but the method of doing it is not in all par-
ticulars expressly directed ; it not being particularly
mentioned whether they were to admit into this dis-
cipleship and baptism the infants of those that were
converted ; as the Jewish church had always done to
the infants of proselytes (giving them circumcision,
as we know by Scrijiture, and baptism as we are
d assured by their records) : or whether they were to
proceed in a new way, and baptize only the adult
persons themselves : there is nobody that will doubt
but that the apostles knew what was to be done in
this case : and consequently, that the Christian
churches in their time did as they should do in this
matter.

And since the apostles lived, some of them, to
near the end of the first century, and St. John some-
thing beyond it ; and had in their own time propa-
gated the Christian faith and practice into so many
countries ; it can never sink into the head of any
considering man, but that such Christians as were
ancient men about one hundred, or one hundred and
fifty years after that time of the ajiostles' death,
which is the year of Christ 200 or 250, must easily
know whether infant-baptism were in use at the
time of the apostles' death or not : because the fa-
thers of some of them, and grandfathers of most of

^ See the Introduction.

XXX AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

them, were born before that time, and were them-
selves infants in the apostles' days ; and so were
baptized then in their infancy, if then that were the
order : or their baptism deferred to adult age, if that
were the use then. For such a thing as the general
baptizing of infants, being a rite public and noto-
rious, and in which the Avliole body of the people,
poor and rich, pastors and laymen, men and women,
are concerned, cannot be forgotten in a short time,
nor altered without a great deal of noise. In a
23oint of doctrine delivered by tradition, a mistake
may happen : or in the account of some matter of
fact done by some particular man : but for a rite
of universal concern, a whole church cannot forget
it, much less all the churches in several parts of the
world in so short a time. We Englishmen cannot
be ignorant whether infants were usually baptized
in England or not, in queen Elizabeth's days, which
is the same distance. The man that thinks this
possible, is one that is not used to consider.

It is to be remembered likewise, that the apostles,
before they died, chose men of whom they had good
proof, to teach the churches the same things that
they had done ; many of whom lived till a great
while after the apostles were dead : which makes
the time that needs to be kept in memory so much
the shorter.

Some pretend to slight this argument, as not
being a Scripture one : but it is that too by a direct
consequence. For since the Scripture promises that
the church shall be led into all truth, i. e. all truth
that is necessary or fundamental ; to follow the ex-
ample of the primitive church must be, by the rule
of Scripture, a sure way not to err in fundamentals.

It were (as bishop Stillingfleet observes in an-

AUTHOR'S PREFACE. xxxi

other case®) 'a great blot and dishonour to Christian

* religion, if the primitive churches could not hold

* to their first institution, not for one age after the
' apostles : no not the purest and best churches.'

But the truth is, there is no man that does really
slight this argument ; though those that have no
skill in it, or do suspect that it will go against their
side, will make as if they did. And therefore you
shall see, both on the one side and on the other,
those men who, for a flourish, do pretend that they
lay small stress on it, as having proof enough from
Scripture, yet take all the pains jDossible to bring
this argument to bear on their side ; and that so
zealously, that they often do it unfairly. There is
no Christian that loves to hear or to admit, that all
the ancient churches practised otherwise than he
does in a controverted matter.

Seeing therefore that all the arguments from
ScrijDture for each side, have been so searched and so
often bandied to and fro, that not much more can be
said to illustrate them : and that where a command
in Scripture is given in brief and general words, the
practice of the primitive church thereupon gives us
the best direction for the sense in which it is to be
applied to particular cases : and that a great many
have desired to see the history of this practice fully
and fairly represented : I have thought it worth my
pains to draw up and publish such a collection as is
expressed in the title.

And if any one ask, what there is done in this
more than in others that have been already ; I
answer,

e Unreasonableness of Separation, p. 226. Edit. 167-. or in his
collected Works, vol. ii.

xxxii AUTHOR^S PREFACE.

1. That the best collections of this nature have
not been published in the English language ; and it
is for the use of Englishmen that this is intended.

2. That this is more complete than any I have
seen : because among those I have seen, each one
omitted some testimonies which the other had : and
it is easy for one that collects out of all of them, to
have more than any one : beside that, no inconsider-
able number of these have been gathered from my
own reading.

The first and best collection that I have seen, is
Cassander's ; then Vossius', and of late Dr. Ham-
mond's, and out of him Mr. Walker's. The rest
are mostly intermixt, by those that produce them,
with their proofs and arguments from Scripture, and
must be picked out : so there are many in the books
of Calvin, Bullinger, Featly, Tombes, Marshall,
Cobbet, Baxter, Danvers, Wills, &c.

3. I pretend it to be more impartial than the rest :
for most of them are collections of such quotations
only as make for that side of the question for which
they are disputing. And here my reader will say ;
* If those produced by you do make some for one
' side, and some for the other, they will leave us in
' the same ambiguity that they find us.' To which
I must answer; that if he will come to the reading
of them with the same resolved impartiality that I
set myself to the writing of them, I believe he will
find it otherwise. However, the only way to pass
a true judgment, is to see both together.

4. I have recited the places more at large than
others have done. One single sentence, or (as they
frequently cite) a bit or scrap of a sentence, gives
but a very imperfect, and oftentimes a mistaken

AUTHOR^S PREFACE. xxxiii

account of the author's meaning; but the context
added shews the tenor and scope of his discourse.

After all J I acknowledge that there are in the
books I mentioned, and others, several quotations
which I have not here : and the reason is partly
because I confine myself to authors that lived and
wrote within the first four hundred years (though
some of them outliving that term, wrote some of
their works after it) : and that I do, because all men
of reading know, that from that time to the time of
the Albigenses, about the year 1150, the practice is
unquestionable : and partly because many of the
quotations were false, and so altered, that when I
came to search the original, there was there nothing
to the purj)ose ; or they were out of spurious books,
&c. I have been forced to write one chapter *^ of
this work to give an account what sort of quotations
I have left out, and for what reasons : and if any
one will inform me of any passage in any author
within the term limited, which he, after the reading
of the said chapter, shall yet judge to be to the
purpose ; I will, if I live to see any more editions of
this mean work, put it in (if it seem to me to be
to the purpose) ; and that indifferently, whether it
make /or or against psedobaptism. For I desire that
this collection should be as complete and impartial
as may be.

When I say in the title, ' of all the passages,' I
do not pretend but that in St. Austin there are a
great many more ; but all to the same purpose. For
he in his disputes with the Pelagians has whole •
books, wherein he proves original sin from the prac-
tice of paedobaptism. In those I have only taken

f Part ii. chap, i .

WALL, VOL. I. C

xxxiv AUTHOR^S PREFACE.

here and there a piece : since every body knows his
doctrine.

I have recited the originals of all the principal
quotations ; because in this matter writers have so
accused one another of forgery or perverting of tes-
timonies by false translations, &c., that people are
grown distrustful. Now they will be satisfied that
if I have mistranslated any thing, I did not do it
willingly; for then I should never have added the
author's own words for the discovery of it.

I have made two parts of this work. The first
contains the principal quotations, with some notes
drawn from them. I have rejected all the spurious
ones : only I have put a few of the most ancient of
them together in the last chapter. The first two
chapters have no quotations that speak ea^pressly
of infant-baptism : but of infants being discipled to
Christi (which must, I think, import their baptism,)
and of original sin as it affects infants : of the ne-
cessity of baptism to salvation : of baptism succeeding
circumcision, &c. But all the rest are concerning
infant-baptism expressly, either ybr or against it.

The other part contains an account of some mat-
ters proper for the fuller explication of the primi-
tive practice. Of which the chief is, the inquiry
concerning the baptism and parentage of those who
are brought as instances of persons not baptized in
infancy, though born of Christian parents : for which
work I wish I had been a little better furnished.
Yet I think I have rectified some mistakes concern-
ing some of them that had passed currently.

I have noted in the margin, over against every
author, the age wherein he flourished, (or began to
be a man of note, by writing books, &;c.) viz. how

AUTHOR^S PREFACE. xxxv

many years it was after the apostles' time : (which
I make to end with the year of Christ 100, though
St. John lived a year or two beyond it :) and this I
do, because during- all the apostles' time, every body
is satisfied that the church had an infallible direction^

I think it needful to give the reader notice be-
forehand, that in the sayings of the Fathers here
recited, he will find, that as we, beside the word ' to
' baptize' do use the word ' to christen' in the same
sense, so they used several words to signify baptism.
The most usual was avayewdv, to regenerate ; which
is also a Scripture word for it : sometimes they
express it Kaivo-jroielv, or apaKaivi^eiv, to renew ; and
frequently dyia'^eiv, to sanctify. They frequently
by this word ' the grace'' do mean baptism. Some-
times they call it the seal, and frequently (pcoTca-jULOf,
illumination, as it is also called, Heb. vi. 4, and
sometimes reXeicocri^, initiation. The sense of the
places will shew that where the words are of an
infant, or other person, regenerated, renewed, sealed^
eriUghtened, initiated, sanctified, &c., we must under-
stand baptized.

I have added a Dissuasive from Schism, or men's
renouncing Christian communion with one another,
on account of this difference in opinion : for which
I wish I had a vein of speaking more powerfully.
For I am fully persuaded, and clearly of opinion,
that neither this nor most of our other differences,
are any sufficient or reasonable ground of flying to
that dreadful extremity, of separation.

One thing I was resolved on : that if I wrote
any thing, it should be something which should
give nobody any occasion to force me to write
again. I said in the first edition, that if any one
would write against this, they should cither write

c 2

xxxvi AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

against the men that have been dead these thirteen
hundred years ; or, if they found fault with the notes
that I have here and there made on their words, as
not naturally drawn from them; my answer was
beforehand, that I would refer it to the readers,
whether they be or no.

But I find that I must partake of the fate of
writers ; only mine has been in the main a much
more favourable one than came to my share. It
becomes me humbly and thankfully to acknowledge
on one side, that the honour publicly done to my
book, and the kind reception it has had from many
worthy men, has been far greater than I can ever
think it does deserve?. But on the other side, a
certain anonymous author of a pamphlet, called
' An Account of the Proceedings in the Convoca-
' tion, 1705,' did presently upon the first edition
give me a rebuke. To which I in the preface to
the second edition gave what answer I thought
needful. But that pamphlet being now, I suppose,
out of print and forgotten, I do not think my
answer to it worth reprinting.

Since the second edition, I have had more adver-
saries. Two or three of which being antipnedobap-
tists, though they could not charge the quotations
with any falsehood, yet disliking the consequence
which naturally follows from them, (which is, that
the Christians in the time of those authors do appear
plainly to have baptized their infants,) have laboured
strenuously, and by different ways and evasions, to
enervate that.

One of them has done this in so large an oration,
in such a ])opular way of pleading, Mith such wrest-
ing of the sense of the places, and in so challenging

s [See Advertisement to vol. iii. p. vi. also vol. iv. p. 4.]

AUTHOR'S PREFACE. xxxvii

and insulting a manner ; that I have been forced to
write a Defence of this History a^^ainst their seve-
ral attacks. But I was resolved, that I would not,
bj mixing such various squabbles pro and contra,
interrupt the thread of it : but print the Defence
separate. If any reader have been moved with any
of their objections, and do think it worth his while
to see what I have to say in answer to them ; I
must desire him to look for it there, and not here.

I have in this third edition added some quota-
tions, which either I have met with in the ancients
since the last, or which have been communicated to
me by learned men : and some few new remarks.
The new quotations do make for infant- baptism :
and if I had met with, or there had been commu-
nicated, any new ones that had made against it, I
would, as I once jDromised, freely have inserted
them. But I meet with none. There are some
passages of Barnabas, of Dionysius Alexandrinus, of
Eusebius concerning Polycrates, &c., which Mr. Gale
(one of my said adversaries) has quoted and tried
to enforce for antipoedobaptisra. I have in the said
Defence shewn them, I think, to be not to the pur-
])ose. And as upon an impartial consideration of
them, I think they are not ; I have not encumbered
the history with them.

I conclude with a story told by Cassander'S which
he makes long, but the substance is this : ' A man
' of note among the antipaedobaptists, being told
' that there was a full agreement of all the ancients
' who do with one mouth affirm, that this custom

* of baptizing infants has been in use ever since the
' apostles' times, confessed ingenuously, that he did

* put a great value upon such a consent of the

'' Praefat. in Testimonia de Paedobaptismo.

xxxviii AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

' church ; and shoiikl be much moved with such an
' agreement of the ancient Christian writers ; and
' that if this could be proved by competent tes-
' tiraonies, he was not so obstinate as to slight so
' forcible a reason : especially if such authors were

* produced to prove this, as lived very nigh the
' apostles' times. And therefore he earnestly desired

* that the testimonies of this matter should be shewn

* to him. And having read them, and (as he was a

* man of good sense) diligently considered them ;
' he altered that opinion which he had taken up
' from a mistaken understanding of the Scripture.
' Which happened in him because he was endued
' with these three good qualities :

1. ' The fear of God and reverence for his word :

* so that it was by occasion of that zeal for truth,
' that he fell into this way.

2. ' Judgment and good sense : so that he quickly
' perceived the force of an argument.

3. ' Modesty, and a meek temper, which caused
' that when he had heard and comprehended the
' truth, he did not obstinately withstand it.' To
which I shall here add an advice of bishop Stilling-
fleet to his clergy S whose sayings and advices all peo-
ple love to hear. ' Where the sense [of Scripture]
' appears doubtful, and disputes have been raised
' about it; inquire into the sense of the Christian
' church in the first ages, as the best interpreter of

* Scripture : as whether, &c. and whether baptism
' were not to be administered to infants,' &c.

' Duties and Rights of the Parochial Clergy, p. 1 1 8. [or in his
collected Works, folio, vol. iii. p. 659.]

THE

HISTORY

OF

INFANT-BAPTISM.

PART I.

THE

CONTENTS OF THE INTRODUCTION.

I. The Jews baptized all proselytes of the nations that were
converted to their religion. §. 2. Their proof from Moses' law
that they ought so to do. §. 3. They baptized also the infant
children whom such proselytes brought along with them to be
entered into the covenant of the true God. §. 4. They baptized
all such infant children of the heathens as they found, or took
in war, Sec. §. 5. The great light that this gives for the better un-
derstanding the meaning of our Saviour's commission to baptize
the nations, Matth. xxviii. 19. The testimony of St. Ambrose,
whose meaning seems to be, that John the baptist baptized in-
fants. §. 6. The Jews called such a proselyte's baptism his
being born again. Which makes our Saviour's speech to Nico-
demus, John iii. 3, 5, more easy to be understood. §. 7. A
parallel instituted between the Jewish and the Christian bap-
tism. §. 8. The arguments of sir Norton Knatchbull, Mr.
Stennet, &c., brought to disprove this custom of the Jews,
answered.

THE

CONTENTS OF THE BOOK.

PART I.

CHAP. I.

Ill the apo- Quotations out of Clemens Romanus and Hernias, p. 47.

§. I. Of original sin, as it affects infants, p. 48. §. 2. Of the
necessity of baptism to salvation, ibid. §. 3. The substance of
that rule of our Saviour, John iii. 5, Except one be born of
water, &c. expressed by Hermas before it was written by St.
John, p. 52. §. 4. The holy men of the Old Testament repre-
sented in a vision as baptized into the name of Christ by the
apostles, after they were dead. The explication given by the
ancients of those texts, i Pet. iii. 19, and iv, 6, of the Gospel
being preached to them that were dead, p. 53. §. 5. Of God's
tender regard to infants, p. 54. §. 6. That these books of
Clemens and Hermas are genuine, p. 55. §. 7. That they were
written before St. John wrote his Gospel, p. 56. §. 8. But not
so soon after the death of St. Peter and St. Paul as bishop
Pearson and Mr. Dodwell place them ; proved from Irenseus^
p. 59. §. 9. That this Clement is not probably that Clement
mentioned Phil. iv. 3, nor this Hermas he that is named
B-om. xvi. 14, p. 62.

CHAP. H.

Year after Quotations out of Justin Martyr, p. 64.

the apostles

40. §• I- Of original sin, needing redemption and forgiveness,

beside the guilt of actual sins, p. 64. §. 2. He speaks of baptism,

as being to us instead of circumcision. Note on Col. ii. ii^ 12,

p. 65. §.3. The plain and simple way of baptism at that

CONTENTS OF THE FIRST PART. xliii

time, p. 66. §. 4. They used the word regeneration to express Year after
baptism; and constantly understand that text, John iii. 5, of '^^ "P""'^*
water-baptism, p. 69. §, 5. The modern writers have altered
the sense of the word regenerated, p. 70. §. 6. St. Justin speaks
of infants made disciples, ibid.

CHAP. III.

Quotations out of Irenceus, and Clemens Alexandrinus, p. 7 1 . ^7-

§. I. Jrenaeus speaks of original sin as affecting all mankind ;
and calls baptism redemption, p. 71. §.2. He expressly reckons
infants among those that are regenerated, p. 72. §. 3. He in all
other places uses the word regenerating for baptizing, p. 73.
§. 4. Several instances shewing that the ancients do use this
word for baptism, so as to exclude that conversion or repentance
that is not accompanied with baptism, from being signified by
it, p. 77. §. 5. When infants are said to be regenerated, there
can in their case be nothing else understood but baptized, p. 79.
§. 6. Of the time when Jrenaeus wrote, and the country where he
was educated : and how impossible it is to conceive that the
Christians then should be ignorant, whether in the apostles' time
children were baptized or not, ibid. §.7. A testimony of any
Father is not to be so much regarded, as it speaks his opinion ;
as it is for that it gives an evidence of the practice or belief of
the church at that time, p. 82. §. 8. Clemens Alexandrinus
uses the word regenerate for baptized very commonly : and says
at one place, that that word is the name for baptism, ibid.
§. 9. He advises for the sculpture of a seal, the picture of an
apostle drawing children out of the water, which must be meant
at their baptism, p. 84.

CHAP. IV.

Quotations out of Tertullian, p- 87. 100.

§. 1 . A praemonition concerning Tertullian and Origen ; that
they were guilty of great errors, yet may serve for evidence of
the practice of the church at that time. Origen's strange opinion
of original sin, that it is derived from sins which the soul has
committed before it was united to the body, p. 87. §. 2. Ter-
tullian reckons the time or age of one's receiving baptism among
those questions that are not essential to it, p. 88. §. 3. He
takes it for a prcescription or standing rule, ' That none can be
' saved without baptism :' and answers the objection of the

xliv CONTENTS OF

Year after apostles not being baptized : refuting those that say, ' Faith 13
100^ ^^ ' sufficient for salvation without baptism,' p. 89. §. 4. He allows
laymen to baptize in case of the danger of death ; and says. If
they refuse to do it, they are ' guilty of the party's perdition,'
p. 91. §. 5. Speaking of the weightiness of baptism, he advises
the delay of it in the case of several sorts of persons ; as of in-
fants till they are of age to understand : of unmarried persons
and young widows, till the danger of lust be over. And in con-
tradiction to what he had said before, says, ' That an entire
' faith is secure of salvation.' And of infants says, 'What need
' has their innocent age to make such haste for the forgiveness
' of sins ?' p. 92. §. 6. He in another book speaks of infants as
being unclean and sinful ; and that they are not holy, nor can
enter into the kingdom of God till they are baptized : contrary
to what he said before, p 94. §. 7. An attempt to reconcile
these differences in his sayings. He seems to have thought, that
in case of danger of death, infants, virgins, widows, &c. must be
baptized presently ; otherwise they might better be delayed,
p. 95. §. 8. This is agreed to have been his opinion by several
both of the psedobaptists and antipiedobaptists. The unfair
dealing of Rigaltius, to leave out of the last edition (without
giving any reason from the MSS.) those words of Tertullian
that were in the former edition, which do plainly express this
meaning, p. 98. §. 9. It appears by his words, that baptism of
infants and godfathers for them^ were then in use, p. 99.
§. 10. His absurd comment on Matth. xix. 14, Suffer little
children, &c. p. 100. §. 11. He says the heathens bad a rite of
baptizing, and called it regeneration, p. loi. §. 12. He takes the
holiness mentioned i Cor. vii. 14, for baptismal holiness designed
to them, ibid. §. 13. His book of baptism had not come into
the hands of most of the learned men of the next centuries : or
else they would not quote him, as being an heretic. Yet,
St. Hierome had seen it, p. 102.

CHAP. V.

''°' Quotations out of Origen, p. 103.

§. I. That infants were then baptized by the usage of the
church, p. 103. §.2. His inquiry for what sins they were bap-
tized, p. 104. §. 3. His testimony that the apostles ordered in-
fants to be baptized, p. 105. §.4. Some passages of his that are
to this purpose, but are spurious or doubtful, rejected, p. 106.

THE FIRST PART. xlv

§. 5. His homilies on St. Luke were certainly translated by Year after

St. Hierome, p. 107. §. 6. What credit is to be given to the ^^'^ ^P°^''^^

others that were done by Rufinus, p. 108. §. 7. An objection

of Mr. Tonibes' against their being authentic, considered. And

in what sense Origen laid any foundation for Pelagianism,

p. no. §. 8. That Rufinus would never have inserted any

thing making for the doctrine of original sin : that his private

opinion was against it, p. iii. §. 9. He inquires whether the

guardian angel given to infants, and spoken of Matth. xviii. 10,

be given at their birth or at their baptism, p. 114. §. 10.

St. Hierome's testimony that Origen spoke of infants' baptism,

p. XI 8. §. II. A passage in his Greek remains, like to the

foregoing ones, and from whence infant-baptism is proved,

p. iiy. §. 12. The advantages that Origen had to know the

practice of Christians from the beginning, p. 1 24.

CHAP. VI,

Quotations out of St. Cyprian, p. 125.

§. I. The letter written by him and sixty-six bishops in
council with him, in answer to Fidus, who had asked their
opinion, whether an infant might be baptized before he were
eight |days old, p. 125. §. 2. There is not in all antiquity any
piece more clearly proved to be genuine than this letter, p. 133.
§. 3. The ignorance of those that inquire, why this council is not
in the volumes of councils, p. 135. §.4. A reflection on that
observation of Grotius, that there is in the councils no earlier
mention of infant-baptism, than in the council of Carthage,
ann. 418. ibid. §. 5. St. Austin, who had said that infant-bap-
tism was not instituted in any council, but was ever in use, does
not contradict himself in citing this council, which does not in-
stitute it, but takes it for granted, p. 136. §. 6. The reason why
the arguments used by these Fathers to satisfy Fidus, seem to
some men frivolous, ibid. §. 7. The force of the argument for
infant-baptism from such a debate, managed by so many ancient
men, and so nigh the time of the apostles ; of whom not one
made any doubt but infants were to be baptized, p. 138. §. 8.
Of the kiss of peace, then usually given to the new baptized
person, p. 139. §. 9. They then held. That to suffer an infant to
die unbaptized, was to endanger its salvation, ibid. §. 10. A
mistake of ]\Ir. Daille in the reading of this letter, ibid. §. i i.
Another passage of St. Cyprian, speaking of infants as bap-

iio.

xlvi CONTENTS OF

Year after tized, p. 141. §. 12. St. Austin's note on it, p. 143. §. 13.

t le apostles Another, of the absolute necessity of baptism to salvation,
p. 145. §. 14. Note on that text, John iii. 5, and the argument
drawn by some antipaedobaptists from it, p. 146.

CHAP. VII.

205. A quotation out of the council of Eliberis, p. 148.

§. I . They speak of some infants carried over from the catho-
lic church to the sectaries, p. 148. §. 2. The severe penance
they inflict on such as have, after years of discretion, revolted
to the schismatics, and would return to the church, p. 149.

CHAP. VIII.

214. Out of the council of Neoceesarea, p. 150.

§. I. Can. 6. 'That a woman with child may be baptized
' when she please,' &c. p. 150. §. 2. The antipaedobaptists' ex-
plication of the reason of this canon, p. 151. §. 3. The psedo-
baptists' explication of it, p. 152. §.4. That the words are ca-
pable of either of the senses : but the notation of the word 'ibios
inclines more to the latter, p. 153. §. 5. The emphasis of that
word, useful likewise to shew the force of that text, i Cor. vii.
I, 2, against polygamists, p. 154. §. 6. Grotius cites Balsamon
and Zonaras, as if they had represented the council as deter-
mining against infant-baptism, p. 155. §. 7. The words of
those two commentators produced at large to the contrary, ibid.
§. 8. The words of this council prove nothing for or against
infant-baptism, p. 158.

CHAP. IX.

260. Out of Optatus, bishop of Milevis, p. 160.

§. I. The Donatists had no difference with the Catholics
about the manner or subject of baptism, p. 160. §. 2. Optatus
speaks of baptism as fit for infants, p. 161.

CHAP. X.

260. Out of Gregory Nazianzen, concerning St. Basil's being baptized

in infancy, p. 162.

§. I. Gregory describes baptism by a peculiar sort of peri-
phrasis, ' the diurnal formation,' &c. p. 162. §. 2. He speaks of
the same as applied to St. Basil in infancy, p. 164. §. 3. Other
proofs of his baptism in infancy, p. 166.

THE FIRST PART. xlvii

CHAP. XL

Other quotations out of St. Gregory, concerning the doctrine of Vear after

infant -baptism, p. i68. the apostles

260.

§. I. He had the most reason to be prejudiced against the
doctrine of the necessity of infant-baptism, p. 168. §.2. An
abstract of his sermon concerning baptism. The several names
of baptism : it is a seal for those that enter into this life, &c.
There is no other regeneration but that, p. 169. §. 3. Against
the delay of baptism, p. 170. ^. 4. His exhortation to parents
to baptize their infants without delay, p. 171. §.5. His an-
swer to the pretences of those that put off baptism, p. 172.
§. 6. Infants dying unbaptized, and others that miss of baptism,
not by their own fault, will not be punished : but yet neither
will they be glorified, p. 174. §. 7. Infants that are in any
danger of dying must be baptized presently : others, he advises,
should be baptized about three years old, p. 177. §. 8. He
declares he will baptize no adult person that is an Arian, or
does not believe the Trinit3^ p. 178. §. 9. Some observations
from the whole: i. A plain specimen of Grotius' foul dealing
in perverting the sense of Nazianzen's words concerning the
loss suffered by infants dying unbaptized, to a quite contrary
purpose ; as if his meaning were, that infants did not use to be
baptized, p. 179. §. 10. 2. An abstract of what Nazianzen ap-
pears to have held about the fate of those infants that did ob-
tain baptism, and of those that missed of it, p. 180. §. 11. 3.
His and other authors' frequent use of the word sanctified or
holy, for baptized. The paraphrase of St. Paul's discourse
I Cor. vii. 14, given according to their sense : several observa-
tions from Scripture and antiquity that do confirm that sense.
The inconvenience of some other explications, p. 181. §.12.
An inquiry on occasion of St. Gregory's refusing to baptize
Arians, and the Catholics then refusing communion with them :
how far the Catholics now can admit the project of the So-
cinians, called, 'The agreement between the Unitarians and the
• Catholic church,' p. 188. §.13. They explain the divinity of
Christ only by God's inhabiting in him, p. 191. §.14. They
have altered their notion of the Xdyoj from one extreme to the
other; and yet keep their main article still, of Christ's having
no nature but the human, p. 192. §. 15. The ill colours they
put on the Catholic faith, p. 196. §. i6. The progress they

xlviii CONTENTS OF

Year after boast they should make, if they had a toleration, has no prece-
the apostles ^^^^ ^^ former ages, p. 198. §. i 7. Difference in lesser opinions
is no bar against communion : but it is otherwise in funda-
mentals, p. 200. §. 18. The mean opinion they have of Christ's
satisfaction, p. 203. §. 19. The distinct assemblies which they
say they will hold for preserving the doctrine of the unity of
the Godhead are needless, p. 205. §. 20. Their virulent endea-
vour to blacken the Nicene Creed, ibid.

CHAP. XII.

260. Out 0/ St. Basil, p. 208.

§. I. An abstract of his sermon persuading people to baptism,
p. 208. §. 2. Anytime of one's life proper for baptism, p. 209.
§. 3. He speaks to several of his auditory, as having been in-
structed in Christian religion from infancy, and not yet bap-
tized, ibid. §. 4. Many at that time were persuaded of the
truth of Christian religion, and intended to be baptized into it
some time or other, but put it off. These men's children were
instructed in it, but not yet baptized ; because the parents
themselves were not yet baptized, p. 218. §.5. He proves the
necessity of baptism from the threat denounced against an in-
fant that was not circumcised on the eighth day, p. 211. §.6.
His pathetical discourse against the delay of repentance and
baptism, p. 212. §. 7. He tells some people that had wrote to
him of baptism, that they must first be instructed, and then ad-
mitted to baptism, p. 2 14. §. 8. His explication of John iii. 3, 5,
ibid. §. 9. He speaks of boys and little children joining in the
Divine offices, ibid. §. 10. He advises Valens to have his child
baptized by the Catholics ; but Valens would have it done by
the Arians, p. 217. §. i i. A disquisition concerning the age of
that child, p. 219.

CHAP. XIII.

274- Out of St. Ambrose, p. 220.

S. I. He speaks of infant-baptism being in use in his and in
the apostles' time, and as supposing it practised by John the
Baptist, p.''22o. §. 2. He makes it a question, whether an
infant can be saved without baptism, p. 222.

CHAP XIV.

2^0- Out of St. Chrysostom, p. 226.

§. I . He says, One in infancy, or one in middle age, or one in

THE FIRST PART. xlix

old age, may receive baptism, p. 226. §.2. He often affirms, Year after
that there is no entering the kingdom of heaven without bap- * ^ ^^"'*' ^*
tisra, p. 229. §. 3. He says. Infants are baptized, though they
have no sins, p. 23r. §. 4. St. Austin's defence of him against
the Pelagians, who challenged him for one of their side, p. 232.
§. ^. He speaks of infants as ordinarily baptized, p. 236. §. 6.
His mention of the sign of the cross made on the infant's fore-
head at its baptism, p. 237.

CHAP. XV.

Out of St. Hierome and St. Austin, before the rise of the Pelagian 280,

cont7-oversy.

Sect. I. Out of St. Hierome' s Letter to Leta, p. 238.

St. Hierome says. If infants be not baptized, the sin of omit-
ting it is laid to the parents' charge, p. 238.

Sect. II. Out of St. Austin's book de Sermone Domini in

monte, p. 241.

St. Austin explains those words, i Cor. vii. 14. Now are your
children holy, thus, ' Now are your children baptized,' ibid.

Sect. III. Out of St. Austin's books de libero Arbitrio, p. 244.

§. I. He makes answer to those that asked, What good bap-
tism does to children before they have any faith, p. 244. §. 2.
A reflection on that saying of Grotius, that St. Austin, before
he was heated by the Pelagian controversy, never wrote any
thing of the condemnation of unbaptized infants, p. 246.

Sect. IV. Out of St. Austin's books de Baptismo, contra Dona-

tistas, p. 248.

§. I. St. Austin's way of managing against the Donatists,
p. 248. §. 2. He proves, that infants or others baptized in the
right form, though in a schismatical or heretical church, have
their baptism valid, p. 250. §. 3. He speaks of infant-baptism
as a thing practised by the whole church, and not instituted by
any council, but having ever been in use, and ordered by the
apostles ; and that it is to us instead of circumcision. And
though God has commanded both faith and baptism, yet either
of them, where the other cannot be had, is available to salva-

WALL, VOL. I. d

1 CONTENTS OF

Year after tion, p. 251. §. 4. The mistake of those who say, The Donatiats

the apostles j]g^|g(j infant-baptism, p. 257,
280.

Sect. V. Out of St. Austin's Letter to Boniface, p. 260.

§. I. He answers the question, How the faith of parents
stands their children in stead for their baptism, and yet the
apostasy of the parent afterward does not hurt the child, p. 260.
§. 2. That the validity of the baptism does not depend on the
right faith or intention of those that bring the child : the child
is supposed to be offered to baptism by the whole congregation
that pray for it, p. 363. §. 3. That the parents at that time
were usually the godfathers ; but that this office might be done
by any other that was owner of the child, p. 264. §. 4. In what
sense the answer made by the godfather in the name of the
child, * that he does renounce, believe,' &c. is to be understood,
p. 265. §.5. St, Austin speaks of these questions and answers
as necessary, p. 273. §. 6. He supposes it to be the belief of all
Christians ; that children baptized, and dying before actual sin,
are undoubtedly saved, p. 274. §. 7. He had no notion of tran-
substantiation, p. 275. §. 8. The custom then to receive the
holy communion every day, or at least every Lord's day, ibid.
§.9. He does not pretend that infants have faith : the opinion
of the Lutherans, and the fancy of F. Malebranche on that
subject, p. 276.

Sect. VI. Out of the books de Genesi ad literam, p. 282.

§. I. A debate concerning the origin of the soul; whether
it be by propagation or immediate creation. St. Austin shews
that the former agrees best with the doctrine of original sin,
p. 282. §. 2. The true reading of a place in St. Austin de
Genesi ad lit.l. x. c. 23, of 'infant-baptism being ordered by
' the apostles,' restored by bishop Stillingfleet out of the MSS.
p. 287.

Sect. VII. Out of St. Justin's Letter to St. Hierome, p. 290.

§. T. St. Austin desires St. Hierome's opinion, how original
sin can be explained if the infant's soul be anew created, p. 290.
§. 2. The opinion of some moderns of tlie nature of the soul;
and of the antipsedobaptists concerning the sleep of the soul,
p. 298. §. 3. Private baptism of children in houses not used in

THE FIRST PART. H

St. Austin's time, except in cases of the utmost extremity. How Year after
much the English presbyterians have changed their sentiments'^^ apostles
about that matter, p. 302.

CHAP. xvr.

Quotations out of some councils of Carthage before the Pelagian 297.

controversy, p. 306.

§. I. The bishops make a question, whether they shall admit
to holy orders those who had been in their infancy baptized
by the Donatists, and were since come over to the Catholic
church. They ask the opinion of neighbouring bishops, p. 306.
§. 2. They determine afterwards that such may be admitted,
p. 309. §. 3. A canon for abating to poor people the fees due
for baj)tizing their children ; but thought to be spurious, p. 31 1.
§. 4. A canon made for the case of such as had been in their
infancy carried captive into the country of barbarians, and when
returned, could not tell whether they had been baptized before
their captivity or not ; ordering that such should be baptized,
ibid. §. 5. A canon of a former council of Hippo to the same
purpose, p. 3 16. §. 6. A decree afterwards of pope Leo to the
same purpose, ibid.

CHAP. XVH.

Out of the Decretal Epistles of Siricius and Innocentius, bishops 28^

of Rome, p. 321.

§. I . The gross way of forging decretal epistles for the bishops
of Rome of the first ages, p. 321. §. 2. Siricius' epistles are
the first that are genuine, all before him are forged, p. 324.
§.3. He declares the order and practice of the churches to be,
that none be baptized but at the set and appointed times of the
year for baptism, viz. Easter and Whitsuntide ; except infants,
sick persons, or others that may be in danger of death before
that time, p. 325. §.4. Proof that this epistle is not forged, as
the foregoing are, p. 3 29. §. 5. The reason of that order, that
no adult person, except in case of necessity, should be baptized
but at the times aforesaid : and of the custom of catechising in
Lent, p. 331. §.6. He informs the Christians of Spain, that
bishops and presbyters ought to be chosen, not out of new con-
verts, but of such as have been baptized in infancy, p. 333.
§. 7. Innocentius infoims Decentius, that though presbyters
may baptize infants, only bisliops may give them chrism, or
confirmation, ibid. §. 8. He repeats to the council of Toledo

d2

lii CONTENTS OF

Year after the advice of Siricius, that the clergy ought to be chosen, not
* ^ 28^^^ '^^ ^^^ ^^ novices, but of such as have been baptized in infancy,
p. 335.

CHAP. XVIII.

293. Out of Paulinus bishop of Nola : and another Paulinus, deacon qf

the church of Milan, p. 336.

§. I. An inscription composed to be set over the font, men-
tioning infants there baptized, p. 336. §. 2. That all new bap-
tized persons, young or old, were about this time called infants,
P-337' §• 3- An epitaph made on a child seven years old,
mentioning his baptism, p. 339. §. 4. Paulinus desires St. Hie-
rome's opinion, how St. Paul, i Cor. vii, 14, calls the children
of Christians holy, whenas without baptism they cannot be
saved, p. 341. §.5. St. Hierome's answer^ agreeing, that with-
out baptism they cannot be saved, p. 342. §.6. Paulinus the
deacon, in relating St. Ambrose's death, mentions some infants
then newly baptized, p. 346.

CHAP. XIX.
310. Out tf St. Hierome and St. Austin, after the rise of the Pelagian
controversy : as also out of Pelagius, Calestius, Innocent the
First, Zosimus, Julianus, Theodorus Mopsuestensis, 8;c. and out
of the councils of Diospolis, Milevis, Carthage, S(C. p. 348.

§. I. The occasion the Pelagian controversy gave to speak of
infant baptism, p. 348. §. 2. The account of this controversy
given by Mr. le Clerc is very partial for Pelagius, p. 349.
4. 3. Pelagius was a Briton, not a Scot : and Caelestius an
Irishman, p. 353. §.4. They vented their opinion against the
•doctrine of original sin, at first covertly, and by way of objec-
tion, p. 355. §. 5. Caelestius being examined at the council of
Carthage, anno 412, would not own original sin; yet granted
the necessity of infant- baptism, p. 357. §.6. St. Austin proves
against the Pelagians, that infants have sin, because it was
acknowledged that they must be baptized, p. 358. §. 7. He
refutes that evasion of theirs ; that they are baptized not for
forgiveness of sins, but to gain them admission into the kingdom
of heaven, p. 359. §. 8. And another evasion : that they are
baptized for sins committed by their souls in a state of prae-
existence, 362. §.9. He proves that Christ came to save only
such as were in a lost condition ; and that only such are to be

THE FIRST PART. Uii

baptized, ibid. §. lo. That there is no middle state between Year after
salvation and some degree of damnation, p. 363. §. 11. Refutes ^ ^^^^
those that said. Infants have actual sins, as peevishness, &c. and
that they are baptized for them. All the Pelagians owned, that
infants are to be baptized, p. 365. §. 12. Cijelestius owned that
infants have redemption by their baptism, hut would not say
forgiveness, p. 366. §. 13. The dispute between the Catholics
and Pelagians about the necessity of God's grace, p. 367. §. 14.
The unfair account of this dispute given by Mr. le Clerc,
p. 369. §. 15. How far Pelagius owned God's grace, p. 373.
§. 16. How far he recanted what he had said against it, p. 379.
§. 17, St. Austin asserts, that the whole church has from of old
constantly held, and that he never read or heard of any Chris-
tian catholic or sectary, who denied that infants are baptized
for forgiveness, p. 381. §. 18. How parents that are by baptism
cleansed from original sin, do yet beget children liable to it,
p. 384. §. 19. Several interpretations given by the ancients of
that text, I Cor. vii. 14, Now are your children holy, conferred
together, p. 385. §. 20. St. Hierome's letter to Ctesiphon.
Some blasphemous tenets of the Pelagians. St. Austin's letter
to Hilarius, and management of the argument for original sin,
from Rom. V. p. 391. §. 21. Dispute between St. Austin and the
Pelagians, of the possibility of a rich man's being saved, and of
the lawfulness of swearing in any case, p. 396. §. 22, The
sophistical way of arguing used by the Pelagians, p. 402. §. 23.
Pelagius was the first that ever affirmed the blessed virgin Mary
to be sinless, p. 404. §. 24. What Pelagius owned, and what
he denied, and how he came off in the meeting at Jerusalem,
and in the synod of Diospolis. He was forced there to anathe-
matize all those that say, ' unbaptized infants may have eternal
' life,' p. 407. §. 25. The Greek Fathers condemn Pelagianism
as well as the Latin. A reflection on some sayings of Chrysostom
and Theodoret, p. 413. §. 26. St. Hierome shews that Pelagius
must either own that the baptism of infants is for forgiveness
of sins ; or else he must make two sorts of baptism, one for
infants, and another for grown persons : whereas the Constant
tinopolitan creed had determined that there is but one baptism,
and tliat for the forgiveness of sins, p. 418. §. 27. Pelagius
openly denies original sin, and explains what he had said at
Diospolis in an equivocal sense, p. 422. §. 28. Synodical epistles
from the councils of Carthage and IMilevis, anno 416. to pope

liv CONTENTS OF

Year after Innocent against Pelagius. And Innocent's answer, p. 424,
the apostles ^ _ 29. Pelagius' creed, which he sent to Innocent for his own
vindication, recited at large ; wherein he owns that baptism is
to be administered to infants with the same words as it is to
elder persons, p. 430. §. 30. His letter sent at the same time ;
wherein he declares he never heard any one Catholic or sectary
deny infants' baptism, p. 446. §.31. Cselestius' creed, owning
that infants are to be baptized for forgiveness of sins, according
to the rule of the universal church ; and yet maintaining, that
they have no sin derived from Adam, p. 451. §. 32. Pelagius
also was at last brought to this contradiction ; that the baptism
of infants is for forgiveness of sins; and yet they have no sin.
How he endeavoured to make sense of this, and then gave over
disputing, p. 452. §. 33. Pope Zosimus first declares forCseles-
tius ; and sitting in judicature, pronounces his creed (wherein
he denied original sin) to be catholic; and afterwards condemns
both him and his doctrine, and confesses all persons to be under
the bond of original sin till they be baptized. His letters pro
et contra on this subject, p. 455. §. 34. St. Austin's charitable
endeavour to salve the credit of Zosimus, p. 462. §. 35. Cseles-
tius pleads, that so long as one gives baptism to infants, the
question whether they have original sin, or not, is not a funda-
mental one ; and a mistake in that is no heresy. St. Austin
holds the contrary, p. 464. §. 36. How great opportunities
Pelagius and Cslestius had, to know whether there were any
Christians in the world that denied infants' baptism ; and how
much it had been their interest to mention them, if there had
been any such, p. 465. §. 37. The second canon of the council
of Carthage, anno 418, condemning the Pelagians, who said.
Infants were to be baptized for forgiveness of sin, and yet that
they had no original sin, p. 467. § 38. Julian continues the
dispute with St. Austin after Pelagius was condemned. He
pretending that the Catholics had gone about to make the
people believe that he denied baptism to infants, anathematizes
any that deny it, p 472. §. 39. A new device of Theodorus
bishop of Mopsuestia, to reconcile these two things ; that infants
are to be baptized for forgiveness of sin, and yet that they have
none, p. 476. §. 40. The tenets of the Semipelagians concern-
ing God's decree about infants obtaining baptism, viz. which
shall partake of it, and which not, p. 478.

THE FIRST PART. Iv

CHAP. XX.

Out of St. Austin and Vincentius Victor, p. 480. Year after

the apostles
§. 1 . The time when Vincentius published his new Hypothesis, 318.

p. 480. §. 2. The substance of it, viz. that unbaptizecl infants

should be admitted to paradise, though not to heaven : with

St. Austin's answer, p. 482. §. 3. He adds something more to

it, viz. that they may possibly go to heaven, but not till the

resurrection. St. Austin's answer. The practice of those times

in praying for the dead, p. 487. §. 4. The mistake of a late

writer in thinking that Vincentius denied infants' baptism,

p. 491. §. 5. Vincentius recants what he had written, p. 493,

§. 6. A clause that in some copies is added to the second canon

of the council of Carthage, anno 418, and a conjecture at the

reason why some copies have this clause, and others not, p. 494.

CHAP. XXI.

IrencBUs, Epiphanius, Philastrius, St. Austin, and Theodoret, wTio From the
wrote each of them catalogues of all the sects of Christians that ^jjg apostles
they had heard of, do none of them mention any that denied (>7 ^ ^o 3?i°-
infants' baptism, p. 497.

§. I. The Donatists, Ai-ians, Pelagians, and all other sects
that St. Austin or Pelagius had heard or read of, if they were
such as used any baptism at all, did use to give it to infants,
p. 498. §. 2. The sects recited by Irenseus ; their monstrous
tenets about the Deity ; the reason of inserting that clause into
the creed, ' the INIaker of heaven and earth.' What they held
singular about baptism, p. 499. §-3. Of some sects that bap-
tized people after they were dead, and others that baptized a
living person in the name of another that was dead : the various
interpretations given by the ancients and moderns of that saying
of St. Paul, Why are they then baptized for the dead? p. 505.
§. 4. No sect is said to have had any difference with the church
about the baptizing of infants ; but the Pelagians differed in
their opinion about the effects of it in infants, p. 509. §. 5-
Of the Hieracites, who held that no infant can go to heaven..
They thought it unlawful to marry or get children, p. 512.

CHAP. XXII.

Containing references to the books of some authors of the next From the
.succeeding age, p. 516. y^^"" '-^^^^^

They do all speak of infant-baptism as a thing taken for 3°° t" 4oo-

Ivi CONTENTS OF THE FIRST PART.

granted. A story that will shame our merchants that take no
care of instructing and baptizing their negroes> p. 522.

CHAP. XXHI.

Year after Quotations out of some books that are spurious, i. e. not written by
the apostles tJigse whose names they bear ; but yet are proved to be ancient,
p. 524.

§. I. Out of Clement's Constitutions, ordering Christians to
baptize their infants ; with some account of that book, p. 524.
§. 2, Out of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy of Dionysius the
Areopagite ; answering the objections of the heathens, who de-
rided the Christians for baptizing infants, and for their use of
godfathers, p. 526. §. 3. Out of the Qucestiones ad Orthodoxos
ascribed to Justin Martyr, and the QucEstiones ad Antiochum
ascribed to Athanasius, concerning the future state of infants of
the heathens, and of the infants of Christians dying unbaptized,
P-53I-

THE INTRODUCTION

,

THE

INTRODUCTION.

§. I. npHE meaning and full import of a rule given
-M. in any old book for the doing of any thing-
is not so well apprehended by us, unless we under-
stand the history of that nation and of that time in
which the said rule was given. And this holds
especially for such rules as are expressed in very
short and general words.

For it is common for a rule or law to be so
worded, as that one may perceive that the lawgiver
has supposed or taken for granted, that the people
to whom it was given, did already know and under-
stand some things which were previous to the ap-
prehending of his meaning ; so that it was needless
to express them. But though these things were or-
dinarily known to the people of that time and place,
yet we that live at so great a distance of time do
not know them, without an inquiry made into the
history of the state of that time\ as to those things
which the law speaks of: and consequently without
such inquiry the law or rule, that was plain to them,
will in many particulars be obscure to us. So, for'
example, many of the Grecian and Roman laws,
whereof we have copies yet extant, would not be
well understood by us, unless they were explained
to us by such as have skill in the history of the

WALL, VOL. I. B

2 Jews Baptism.

state of affairs in those empires. And so many
passages in the books of the New Testament of our
Saviour Christ are not rightly apprehended, without
having recourse to the books of the Old Testament,
and other books wherein the customs of the Jewish
nation are set forth, for understanding the state of
religion among that people at that time when our
Saviour gave his rules.

And another thing that does much help us in un-
derstanding the meaning of any such old law that
is given in such short words, is, to observe and
learn how the men that lived in or so near that
time, that the meaning of the lawgiver must easily
be known by them, did practise it. For in what
particulars soever we may doubt how or in what
manner it is to be executed, their actions and decla-
rations do serve as precedents to us upon the said
law. And this holds especially in such laws as have
been in continual use from the time of their enacting
to this time.

Now our Saviour's law concerning baptizing all
the nations, is, as I shewed in the preface, set down
in scripture in very short and general words : and
many people of later times have doubted whether it
is to be understood to reach to the baptizing of in-
fants, or only of adult persons. All that have any
doubt, ought to have recourse to the two several
helps for understanding the said law which I have
here proposed.

I mean, they ought to learn as well as they can,
what was the state of the Jewish religion as to bap-
tism, at and before that time when our Saviour gave
his order for baptizing all the nations ; and what
we must suppose the apostles did of themselves

Jews" Baptism. 3

already know conceruing its being i)roper or im-
proper for infants ; which it might not be so need-
ful for our Saviour to express in his new direction to
them.

And also they ought to learn as well as they can,
how the first Christians did practise in this matter ;
whetlier they baptized their infants or not.

It is the latter of these two things that I have
taken upon me as my task to shew ; viz. how the
primitive Christians did practise : and this I do by
giving you their own words, without omitting any
that I know of for the first 400 years after Christ.

But yet some knowledge of the other point also
(viz. how the Jews in and before our Saviour's time
did use to act in reference to the baptizing of in-
fants) is so verv necessarv to a right understanding:
of the words both of our Saviour and his apostles,
and also of the primitive Christians ; and he that
knows nothing of it, is so incompetent a judge of
the force of their sayings ; that I think it needful for
the use of ordinary readers, to ]>remise, by way of
introduction, some account of that matter also.

But I do not pretend in this introduction, in
wdiich I treat of the custom of the Jev\s in baptizing
infants before our Saviour's time, to do as T do in
the book itself, wherein I treat of the custom of the
Christians in baptizing them after it; that is, to re-
cite all the authorities that are about that matter.
Partly because the quotations for that purpose are
to be searched for in books with which T am not s,o
well acquainted ; and partly because those few which
I shall produce, will make it clear enough that there
was such a custom. I shall therefore content my-
self with reciting such of them as have been already

B 2

4 Jews' Baptism.

made use of by learned men : such as Ainsworth on
Gen. xvii : Dr. Hammond's Annotations on Matt. iii.
xix. xxiii : John iii : item, Six Queries : item, De-
fence of Infant Baptism : Selden de Jure Nat. et
Gent, juxta Hebricos : item, de Synedriis : item, de
Successionibus, &c. : Dr. Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. on
Matt. iii. and John iii : item. Harmony on the New
Testament : Luke iii. Jacob Alting, Pmelectio 7. de
Proselytis : Godwyn's Moses and Aaron, &c. : and
the learned author of the Discourse concerning Lent^
part ii. chap. 2.

First then, it is evident that the custom of the
Jews before our Saviour's time (and, as they them-
selves affirm, from the beginning of their law) was
to baptize as well as circumcise any proselyte that
came over to them from the nations. This does
fully appear both from the books of the Jews them-
selves, and also of others tliat understood the Jewish
customs and have written of them. They reckoned
all mankind beside themselves to be in an unclean
state, and not capable of being entered into the co-
venant of Israelites without a washing or baptism,
to denote their purification from their uncleanness.
And this was called the baptizing of them unto
Moses.

This custom of theirs is fully and largely set
forth by

Maimonides ; Issuri Bia, capp. 13, 14.

He had been saying there that the Israelites
themselves were entered into covenant by circum-
cision, baptism, and sacrifice. And then he adds :

■^ A Discourse concerning Lent, in two parts, (published
anonymously, but by Dr. George Hooper, bishop of Bath and
Wells,) 8vo. London, 1695.

Jews' Baptism. 5

* And so in all ages when an ethnic is willing to
enter into the covenant, and gather himself under
the wings of the majesty of God, and take upon
him the yoke of the law, he must be circumcised,
and baptized, and bring a sacrifice ; or if it be a
woman, be baptized and bring a sacrifice. As it is
written ^ As yon are, so shall the stranger be.
How are you ? By circumcision and baptism, and
bringing of a sacrifice. So likewise the stranger
(or proselyte) through all generations ; by circum-
cision and baptism, and bringing of a sacrifice.
And what is the stranger's sacrifice ? A burnt of-
fering of a beast, or two turtle-doves, or two young
pigeons, both of them for a burnt ofi^ering.

' And at this time, when there is no sacrificing,
they must be circumcised and baptized ; and when
the temple shall be built, they are to bring the
sacrifice.

' A stranger that is circumcised and not baptized,
or baptized and not circumcised, he is not a prose-
lyte till he be both circumcised and baptized : and
he must be baptized in the presence of three, &c.

' Even as they circumcise and baptize strangers ;
so do they circumcise and baptize servants that are
received from heathens into the name of servi-
tude, &c.

' When a man or a woman comes to join as a
proselyte, they make diligent inquiry concerning
such, lest they come to get themselves under the
law for some riches that they should receive, or
for dignity that they should obtain, or for fear. If
it be a man, they inquire whether he have not set

^ Numb. XV. 15.

6 Jews baptized Proselytes.

' his afifection on some JeM'isb woman ; or a woman,
' lier affection on some young man of Israel. If no
' such like occasion be found in them, they make
' known unto them the weightiness of the yoke of
' the law and the toil that is in the doing thereof,
' above that which people of other lands have, to see
' if they will go back. If they take it upon them
' and withdraw not, and they see that they come of
' love, then they receive them, &c.

' Therefore the judges received no proselyte all
' the days of David and Solomon. Not in David's
' days, lest they should have come of fear : nor in
' Solomon's, lest they should have come because of
' the kingdom and great prosperity which Israel
' then had. For whoso comes from the heathens
' for any thing of the vanities of this world, he is
' no righteous proselyte. Notwithstanding there
' were many proselytes that in David's and Solo-
' men's time joined themselves in the presence of
' private persons ; and the judges of the great Syne-
' drion had a care of them. They drove them not
' away, after they were baj^tized, out of any })lace ;
' neither took they them near to them, until their
' after-fruits appeared.'

Maimonides gives at the same place an account
of several circumstances of time, place, &c., observed
in this action of baptizing a proselyte. As that,
' they baptized not a proselyte on the sabbath,
' nor on a holyday, nor by night, &:c. They do it
' in a confluence of waters, &c. As soon as he
' grows whole of the w^ouud of circumcision, they
' bring him to baptism ; and being placed in the
' water they again instruct him,' &c. And such a
confluence of waters, Jonathan's Chaldee Paraphrase

Jeim baptized Proselytes. 7

determines ought not to be less than forty of the
measures called Sata, where he paraphrases on
Exod. xxix. Lev. xi. and other places.

The Talmud says the same thing of receiving
j>roselytes by baptism ; only, whereas Maimonides
speaks of the number of three as necessary to be
present at the baptizing ; the Talmud Babylon, does
not insist on any more than two grave men.

Talmud Babylon. Mass. Jevamoth. fol. 47.

' When a proselyte is received, he must be cir-
' cumcised ; and then when he is cured (of the wound
' of circumcision) they baptize him in the presence
' of two wise men, saying, Behold he is an Israelite
' in all things : or if it be a woman, the women lead
' her to the waters,' he.

But the Talmud Hierosol. Jevamoth says as Mai-
monides does, that ' a proselyte has need of three ^.'
And directs the other circumstances as he doeSj viz.
' They do not baptize a proselyte by night '^.' And,

* they were not baptized till the pain of circumcision
' were healed*'.'.

And the same continues to this day to be the
practice of the present Jews. For so Leo Modena^,
in his history of them, part v. chap. 2, speaking of a
proselyte's admission ; ' They take and circumcise
' him ; and as soon as he is well of his sore, he is to
' wash himself all over in water: and this is to be
' done in the presence of the three rabbins, &c.

* And so, from thenceforth, he becomes as a natural
' Jew.'

c Fol. 46. 2. '' Fol. 46. 2. e Fol. 41. 2.

f The History of the Rites, Customs, and Manner of Life of the
present Jews throughout the World ; translated (from the Italian)
into English, by Edmund Chilmead. i2mo. London, 1650.

8 Jews haj)tized Proselytes.

The books do speak of tliis washing, or baptism,
as absolutely necessary ; and an ordinance, without
which none was to be counted a proselyte. So
Gemara Babylon, ad tit. Cherithoth, cap. ii.

' The proselytes entered not into covenant, but by
' circumcision, baptism, and sprinkling of blood.'
And Tit. Jabimoth, cap. iv.

' He is no proselyte unless he be circumcised and
' baptized.' And ' if he be not baptized, he remains a
' Gentile' (or Pagan). And there is in that chapter
a proof given of that opinion of the necessity, which
I shall have occasion by and by to mention.

Maimonides says the same thing, as we saw in
the chapter I quoted before^.

Also the Talmud, Tract. Repudii, speaking of
Jethro, Moses's father-in-law :

' He was made a proselyte by circumcision and
' immersion in waters.' Godwyn, in his Moses and
Aaron, lib. i. cap. 3.

To the making of a male proselyte at first three
things were required: 1. circumcision; 2. a kind
of purification by water; 3. the blood of oblation.
Moses Kotsen*^, fol. 20. Of a woman proselyte were
required only purification by water, and oblation,
Drusius* de tribus Sectis.

This custom of the Jews continued after Christ's
time, and after their expulsion from the Holy Land ;
and continues (as I shewed from Leo Modena) to
this day, if there be any that nowadays do turn pro-

ic Issuri Bia, c. 13.

^ Rabbi Moses ben Jacob Kotsiensis, ' Liber Prpeceptorum
magnus,' fol. Venetiis, 1522. ibid. 1547.

' Johannes Drusius ' de tribus Sectis Juda;orum.' 8vo. Frane-
kerae, 1605. 4to. Arnhemii, 1619.

Jeics baptized Proselytes. 9

selytes to their religion. Wherever they sojourned,
if they found any of that country that chose to be
of their religion, they would not admit him, unless
he would first be washed or baptized by them. And
some heathen writers do express a great deal of
scorn and disdain at this their ^'aluing themselves
upon their own purity in comparison with other
nations. So Arrianus, a philosopher at Rome, (about
the year of Christ 147,) jeers'^ those that turned
proselytes to the Jews, calling them ^e^afxfxivovi,
dipped : and describes their custom to be, that when
a man is so dipped by them, then he is accounted
Tw ovTi 'louSaiog, a right Jew : and calls one that is a
counterfeit proselyte to them, Trapa^a-n-TicrTrji', one
that puts an abuse upon their ceremony of baptism.

This solemn baptizing of proselytes differed from
the rest of their divers baptisms (which St. Paul,
Heb. X. 10, says were customary among the Jews)
in this : that those others were upon new occasions
of uncleanness, &c. many times repeated ; but this
was never given but once to one person. It was
called (as Dr. Lightfoot shews^) ' baptism for prose-
' lytism,' distinct from ' baptism for uncleanness.'

II. It is not very material to our purpose to inquire
upon what reasons or authorities this custom of the
Jews, of baptizing all proselytes, was grounded. All
that is material, is to know that they had time out
of mind such a custom. And for that, the sayings
of their own writers here produced are a sufficient
evidence. Yet I shall spend a few words in shewing-
how they prove the necessity of this washing, or
baptizing, from ISIoses' law.

k Dissert, in Epictet. lib. ii. c. g.
1 Hor. Hebr. on Matth. iii. 6.

10 Jews haptized Proselytes.

They take notice that Moses, Numb. xv. 15, or-
ders thus, One ordinance shall he both for you of
the congregation., and also for the stranger (or pro-
selyte) that sojourneth with you. An ordinance for
ever in your generations : As ye are^ so shall the
stranger be before the Lord. One laiv and one
manner shall be for you and for the stranger., &c.
Now they reckon that the Israelites themselves were
at their entering into covenant with God at the time
of their receiving the law in mount Sinai, all of
them washed or baptized. So they understand
those words, Exod. xix. 10, And the Lord said
unto Moses, Go unto the people, and sanctify them
to day and to morrow, and let them wash their
clothes, and be ready against the third day : for
the third day the Lord will come down, &c. They
understand the meaning of that command by which
Moses was to sanctify the people on those two days,
to be the washing of them : and so that word, to
sanctify, does commonly signify in the Jewish law,
(as several writers have shewn by many instances,
and I also do in this book*" give some) especially
when it is s])oken of a man sanctifying other men.
And Maimonides, Mickvaoth. item More Nebochim,
part iii. c. 33, says ; This is a rule ; that ' whereso-
' ever in the law the washing of the body or gar-
' ments is mentioned, it means still the washing of
' the whole body.' And the same is affirmed, Ge-
mara Babvl. Tit. Jabimoth, c. iv. fol. 46. And so
Aben Ezra, on that place of scripture" where Jacob
being to meet with God at Beth-el, said to his
household ; Be clean, and change your garments ;

>" Part i. chap. ii. §. ii, n Gen. xxxv. 2.

Jetos baptized Proselytes. 11

understands the washing of their bodies. And
Selden" sliews by the expositions which the JeAvish
commentators give on Levit. xi. 25, 28, 40 : xiv. 8,
47 : Numb. xix. 10, 21 : xxxi. 24. and several other
texts where washing of garments is mentioned, that
they always understand Avashing of the whole body.
And for the like understanding of the foresaid place
in Exod. xix. 10. quotes Mechilta, Nachmanid, R.
Bechai, Moses Mikotsi, &c.

That they gave this (baptism of the Jews, and the
command for proselytes to be as the Jews were) as a
proof that proselytes must be baptized, appears by
the words of Maimonides in the place before quoted.
For he first says thus : ' By three things did Israel
' enter into covenant, by circumcision, and baptism,
' and sacrifice. Circumcision was in Egypt, as it is
' written, No iincircumcised "c person shall eat there-
' of, &c. Baptism was in the wilderness just before
' the giving of the Law : as it is written'!, Sanctify
' them to day and to morrow, and let them ivash
' their clothes. And sacrifice ; as it is said*", Atid he
' se7it young men of the children of Israel which
' offered burnt offerings,^ &c.

And then he adds that which I recited before,
concerning proselytes ; ' and so in all ages when an
' ethnic is willing, &c., he must be circumcised, and
' baptized, and bring a sacrifice ; as it is written, As
' you are, so shall the stranger be,' &c.

And so says the Talmud^ Tract. Repud.

' Israel does not enter into covenant but by these
' three things, by circumcision, ba[)tism, and peace
' offering ; and the proselytes, in like manner.'

° De Synedr lib. i. r. 3. i' Exod. xii. 48. Q Exod. xix. 10.
<■ Exod. xxiv. (5.

12 Jews baptized Proselytes.

And again, ad Tit. Cherithoth^ cap. ii.

' As you are, so shall the stranger he. As you
' are, that is, as was done to your fathers. And
' what was done to them ? Your fathers did not
' enter into covenant but by circumcision, and bap-
' tism, and sprinkling of blood. So neither do pro-
' selytes enter into covenant but by circumcision,
' and baptism, and sprinkling of blood.'
And Rabbi Solomon, in loc.

' Our rabbles teach that our fathers entered into
' covenant by circumcision, and baptism, and sprink-
' ling of blood,' &c.

The ancient Christians, especially such of them
as lived in places where they could have converse
with the learned Jews, and might learn from them
the meaning of the Hebrew phrases used in the Old
Testament, do also speak of this baptism of the Jews.

So Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. 39. shewing the pre-^
ference of the Christian baptism before the Jewish,

says, 'E/3a7rT<cre Mcocr^?, a\X' ev uoaTi' kg), irpo tovtov
ev veipeXrj kol ev QaXacra-rj. TVTTiKcog Se tovto rjv, (09 Koi Tiav-

\w SoKei, &c. ' Moses gave a baptism, but that was
' with water only. And before that they were baptized
' in the cloud and in the sea. But these were but a
' type (or figure) of ours ; as Paul also understands it.'
And St. Cyprian, Epist. 73. ad Juhaianum.

' Alia enim fuit Judtieorum sub apostolis ratio,
' alia est Gentilium conditio. Illi, quia jam legis et
' Moysi antiquissimum baptisma fuerant adepti, in
' nomine quoque Jesu Christi erant baptizandi.'

' The case of the Jews who were to be baptized
' by the apostles w^as different from the case of the
' Gentiles ; for the Jews had already, and a long
' time ago, the baptism of the Law and of Moses ;

Jews hcupt'ized Proselytes. 18

' and were now to be baptized in the name of Jesus
' Christ;

Also St. Basil, in his oration of Baptism, com])ares
together the baptisms of Moses, of John, and of
Christ. Whose words I shall quote, part i. chap. 12.
sect. 7. of this collection.

And before them all, Tertullian, having in his
Book of Baptism, chap. v. sect. 5. shewn by several
j)articnlars, that the heathens had used of old a cer-
tain rite of baptizing, which they said vi'^as for their
regeneration, and for the forgiveness of their sins,
apjilies to it this observation ; Hie quoqiie stiidmm
Diaboli cognoscimus res Dei rsmulantis, cum et ipse
baptismum in suis ed'ercei. ' Here we see the aim
' of the Devil to ape (or imitate) the things of God ;
' since he also sets up a baptism for his disciples.'

Now the divine baptism, which, he says, the Devil
imitated, must be the Jewish baptism. For the rites
of Apollo and Ceres (in which he there instances, as
those in which the said baptism was used) were
long before the times of the Christian baptism. The
place I recite among some other passages of Tertul-
lian, part i. chap. 4. sect. 11.

And Mr. Selden, de Synedr. lib. i. cap. 3. observes
that that saying of St. Paul, 1 Cor. x. 1, 2, All 02ir
Fathers were haptized unto Moses in the cloud
and in the sea^ would have been difficult for those
to whom St. Paul wrote, to make any sense of; had
it not been a thing well known at that time when
the apostle wrote, that the Jews looked upon them-
selves as having been entered into covenant by bap-
tism : and that St. Paul spoke as alluding to that.
And Dr. Hammond concludes the same*.

s Six Queries, Inf. Bapt. sect. 7, S. [in vol. i. of his works.]

14 Jevis baptized th^

III. Secondly, it is to be observed, that if any such
proselyte, who came over to the Jewish religion and
was baptized into it, had any infant children then
born to him ; they also were at the father's desire
circumcised and baptized, and admitted as prose-
lytes. The child's inability to declare or promise
for himself was not looked on as a bar against his
reception into the covenant : but the desire of his
father to dedicate him to the true God, was counted
available, and sufficient to justify his admission.
So that it was with such a proselyte as it was with
Abraham at his first admission to the covenant of
circumcision : as Abraham of ninety-nine years old,
and Ishmael his son of thirteen years old, and all the
males in his house that were eight days old or
upward, were circumcised at the same time ; so such
a proselyte with all his, were both baptized (and
circumcised if they were male children) and had each
of them a sacrifice (such as was by law* required
for a Jew's child) made for them ; but if females,
they were baptized, and a sacrifice was offered for
them.

And the reason which the Jewish writers give,
why it was not necessary to stay to see whether the
child, when come to age, would be willing to engage
himself in the covenant of the true God, or not,
is this ; that it is out of the reach of any doubt or
controversy, that this is for his good. Where there
may be any question made whether a thing be
beneficial, or not; the concerns of a child are not
to be disposed of by another: but here the benefit
of being dedicated to Jehovah, (of which dedication

t Luke ii. 24.

Children of Proselytes. 15

these rites were the sacrament and seal) is evident
and unquestionable. One may (as they give the
reason) ' privilege a person, though he be inca])able
' of knowing it ; but one ought not to disprivilege a
' person without his knowledge/

They judge therefore that a proselyte had no more
need to expect his child's consent to be cleansed by
this baptism or washing from the unclean and ac-
cursed estate in which he was born, than a natural
Jew had to make any such delay in giving his child
circumcision, the seal of the covenant. Which delay,
instead of being cautious, would have been impious.
This reason of theirs will appear in their sayings,
which I am now going to produce.

Gemara Babylon. Chethiihoth, cap. i. fol. 11.

' If with a proselyte his sons and his daughters
' be made proselytes ; that which is done by their
* father redounds to their good.'

And it is not only the Gemara, (which ])erhaps
some will object against as not being ancient enough,)
but the text of the Misna itself, (which is a system
of the traditions and received customs of the Jews,
compiled within one hundred years of the time of
John's and Christ's baj)tizing, as learned men" have
computed the distance,) mentions the same usage.
For the Misna Chethuboth, both in the Babylonian
and in the Jerusalem Talmud, speaks of a child be-
coming, or being made, a proselyte. The Jerusalem
Misna says, ' that if a girl, born of heathen parents,
' be made a proselyte after she be three years and a
' day old, then she is not to have such and such pri-
' vileges there mentioned.' And that of the Babylon

^ Dr. Prideaux, Connexion, book v. and Dr. Wotton, Preface
to Miscellaneous Discourses, 2 vols. 8vo. Lond. 1718.

16 Jev^s haptized the

edition says, ' that if she be made a proselyte before
' that age, she shall have the said privileges.' Both
agreeing (as Selden, reciting^ those places observes,)
' that a child of never so little age might by their
' custom be made a proselyte.' Which is also shewn
by Dr. Wotton to be a just consequence from the
words of that law, which he cites more largely, and
in the original. Misc. Disc. vol. i. c. 8. And then
the Gemara there gives the reason, or rather takes
off the objection which might be made because of
their nonage ; saying,

' They are wont to baptize such a proselyte in
' infancy upon the profession of the House of judg-
' ment (the court). For this is for his good.'

And the gloss there (having first put in an excep-
tion, that if the father of the child be alive and pre-
sent, the child is baptized at his request ; but if not,
on the profession of the court) comments thus on
those words :

They are wont to baptize. ' Because,' says the
gloss, ' none is made a proselyte without circumci-
' sion and baptism.' Upon the profession of the
House of judgment. ' That is, the three men have
' the care of his baptism, according to the law of
' the baptism of proselytes, which requires three
' men, who do so become to him a father. And he
' is by them made a proselyte,' &c.

So that, as Selden there expresses it, ' A prose-
' lyte, if of age, made profession to the court that he
' would keep Moses' law. But in the case of
•• minors the court itself did profess in their name
' the same thing. Just as in the Christian church

" De Synedriis, lib. i. caj). 3.

Children of Proselytes. 17

* the godfathers do ; at least if their parents were
' not there to do it for them.'

And Maimonides, in the chapter I quoted before,
Tssuri Bia, c. 13. §. 7- after he has discoursed what
I there recited of the bajitism of grown persons
made proselytes, adds the same that the Gemara had
said.

' A proselyte that is under age they are wont to

* baptize upon the knowledge (or profession) of the
' House of judgment (or court) ; because this is for
' his good.'

If a child were fatherless, and his mother brought
him, they baptized him at her desire ; but the court
professed for him, as the Gemara says at the place
forecited.

Concerning the age of the child to be baptized,
they had this rule : ' Any male child of such a pro-
' selyte, that was under the age of thirteen years

* and a day, and females that were under twelve

* years and a day, they baptized as infants at the
' request and by the assent of tlie father, or the au-
' thority of the court ; because such an one was not
' yet the son of assent, as they phrase it, i. e. not ca-

* pable to give assent for himself, but the thing is
' for his good. If they were above that age they
' consented for themselves.' This Selden shews,
both in his book de Jure Nat. et Gent, juxta He-
braeos, lib. ii. cap. 2, and also de Synedr. lib. i. cap. 3,
by particulars too large to be inserted here.

Rabbi Joseph indeed gives this sentence, that
when they grow to years they may retract. Where
the gloss writes thus : ' this is to be understood of
' little children who are made proselytes together

* with their fathers.' And the same is the opinion

WALL, VOL. I. C

] 8 The Jews baptized the Infants

of some people concerning Christians' children bap-
tized in infancy. But the council of Trent anathe-
matizes-' this opinion.

What has been said of the baptism of children of
proselytes is to be understood of such children as
were born before the parents themselves were bap-
tized ; for all the children that were born to them
afterward, they reckoned were clean by their birth ;
as being born of parents that were cleansed from the
polluted state of heathenism, and that were in the
covenant of Abraham, and were become as natural
Jews. They therefore did by them only the same
thing that the natural Jews did by their children ;
that is, for the male children they used circumcision,
and sacrifice, or offering ; and for the females only a
sacrifice.

Dr. Hammond did indeed once maintain the con-
trary in a dispute^ with Mr. Selden and Mr. Tombes%
and thought that both the children of natural Jews
were wont to be baptized, and also the children of
proselytes born after their parents' baptism. But
the learned men that have since made a more exact
inquiry in the books of the learned Jews, have found
and given their verdict, that Selden was in the right,
and the doctor in a mistake in that matter. And

y Sess. 7. Can. de Baptismo 14.

z Defence of Infant Baptism^ 4to. 1655 : reprinted in the
second volume of his works, in folio.

^ [John Tombes, a learned baptist minister, published several
pieces on tbe subject of infant-baptism, chiefly against S. Mar-
shal, R. Baxter, H. Savage, J. Cragg, and H. Vaughan, between
the years 1646 and 1659. Dr. Hammond replied to part of his
' Anti-psedobaptism.' See the opinion which Dr. Wall enter-
tained of his abilities^ in part ii. ch. 2, of this work.]

of Proselytes, but not their own. 19

Bishop Taylor, Mr. Walker^ &c., have followed him
in that mistake.

The natural .Jews reckoned that neither they
themselves nor their children did stand in any need
of this baptism, never since the time (which I men-
tioned before) when their whole nation, men,
women, and infants, were baptized before the giving
of the law on mount Sinai. It was our Saviour who
first ordered by himself and by his forerunner, that
every particular person, Jew or Gentile, or of what
parents soever born, must be horn^ again of water.
As for the proselytes' baptism, it was a rule among
them, as Mr. Selden shews ^, that ' it was never re-
' iterated on him or his posterity.' And as other
learned men do shew, that Jilius baptizati habetur
pro baptizato ; ' he that is born of a baptized parent
' is accounted as baptized.' And Dr. Lightfoot*' gives
this as their rule, ' The sons of proselytes, in follow-
' ing generations, were circumcised indeed, but not
' baptized — as being already Israelites.'

And though the child were begotten and conceived
in the womb before the i)arents were baptized ; yet
if they (and particularly if the mother) were baptized
before it was born into the world, the Jews had a
saying (which is quoted by Dr. Hammond '^ himself)
recorded by Maimonides, Iss. Bia. cap. 13. and also
in the Talmud.

b [See A INIodest Plea for Infants' Baptism, wherein the Law-
fulness of the baptizing of Infants is defended against the Anti-
paedobaptists, &c., by W. W[alkerJ, B. D. i 2mo., Cambridge,
1677.]

f John iii. 3. 5.

^ De Jure Nat. et Gent. lib. ii. cap. 2.

e [Horae Hebraic* on St. Matthew, iii. 6 : in his Works, vol.
ii. p. 120.] f Six Queries, Inf. Bapt. §. 109.

C 2

20 InfathU found, or taken in War, baptized.

* A heathen woman, if she is made a proselytess
' when big with child, that child needs not baptism ;
' for the baptism of the mother serves him for bap-
' tism.'

IV. Thirdly, this is also plainly proved and agreed
by all the learned men aforesaid, and by all others,
to have been the custom of the Jews ; that if they
found any child that had been exposed in the fields,
woods, or highways by the heathens, or if they took
in war any infant children, whom they brought
home as booty, and intended to bring them up in
their religion, they baptized them in infancy, and
accounted them as proselytes. So says

MaimonideSy Halach Aibdim, c. 8.

* An Israelite that takes a little heathen child, or
' that finds an heathen infant, and baptizes him for
' a proselyte : behold he is a proselyte.'

At this baptism of such a child the owner of him
was wont to determine whether he should be a slave
or a freeman : and he was baptized in the name of
the one or of the other accordingly. To which pur-
pose is that rule of rabbi Hezekiah, set down in the
HierosoL Jevamoth, fol. 8. 4.

* Behold, one finds an infant cast out, and bap-
' tizes him in the name of a servant. Do thou also
' circumcise him in the name of a servant. But if
' he baptize him in the name of a freeman : do
* thou also circumcise him in the name of a free-
' man.'

These cases were very frequent. For besides that
many proselytes of the Gentiles came over with
their children ; the Jews' custom in war was to
bring away the children of the people whom they
conquered, that they might either make servants of

The Argument from Jewish Pwdobaptism 4*c. 21

tliem, or if they took a liking to them, adopt them
for their own. And it was a common thing with
the heathens to expose their infants, whom they
would not be at the charge to bring up, in the
highways, &c. So that Dr. Lightfoot says s, * The
' baptizing of infants was a thing as well known in
' the church of the Jews, as ever it has been in the
' Christian church.'

V. Now this gives great light for the better under-
standing the meaning of our Saviour, when he bids
his apostles^' ' Go and disciple all the nations, and
' baptize them.' For when a commission is given
in such short words, and there is no express direction
what they shall do with the infants of those who
become proselytes ; the natural and obvious interpre-
tation is, that they must do in that matter as they
and the church in which they lived always used
to do.

As now at this time, if an island or country of
heathens be discovered, and a minister be sent out
to them by the bishops of the church of England,
who should say, ' Go and convert such a nation, and
' baptize them ;' he would know without asking any
question, that he must baptize the infants of those
who, being converted, offered them to baptism ; be-
cause he knows that to be the meaning and the
custom of that church or bishop, by which he is
sent. And on the contrary, if any one were sent
from a church or congregation of antipaedobaptists
with a commission of the same words, ' Go and cOn-
* vert such a nation, and baptize them ;' he would
take it for granted that he must baptize none of

g Hor. Hebr. on Matt. iii. 6. '' Matt, xxviii. 19.

S2 The Argument from Jewish Pwdohaptism,

their infants, because he knows that to be contrary
to the meaning and custom of the church that sends
him.

So when the apostles were sent out to the heathen
nations with a commission of no other words than
these, Go and disciple (or proselyte) all the nations^
baptizing them in the name of the Father^ and of
the Son, and of the Holy Spirit : when the case
came in hand, of the infant children of those that
M^ere discipled, what could they think other but
that they must do with them as had been usually
done in that church in which they and their Master
had always lived ? Since the nations were to be
proselyted, how could they, without particular order,
alter any thing in the customary way of receiving
proselytes of the nations ? For to disciple the
nations to Christ, is the same thing as to proselyte
them to him : and probably in the Hebrew text
of St. Matthew, was the same word : and we see
that the customary phrase and language of the Jews
was to call the infants yoimg proseli/tes, or disciples ;
as I shall shew that Justin Martyr', one of the
eldest Christian writers, calls the Christian infants
likewise.

If our Saviour meant that the apostles should
make any alteration in that matter, and not baptize
the infants, as had been usually done ; it is a wonder
He did not say so.

The antipsedobaptists depend upon this as an
unerring rule ; that since our Saviour did not say
(or at least St. Matthew does not recite that he said)
baptize the infants also ; his meaning must have
been that they should not baptize them.

f Part i. ch. 2. §. 6.

for Christian Pcedohapthm. 23

But if they would put this case ; suppose our Sa-
viour had bid the apostles. Go and disciple all the
nations, and (instead of bai)tiziiig had said) circum-
cise them : an antipncdobaptist will grant that in
that case, without any more words, the apostles
must have circumcised the infants of the nations as
well as the grown men, though there had been no
express mention of infants in the commission : so
that that is not always an unerring rule.

And what is the reason that in case circumcision
had been appointed for the nations, it must have
been of course given to infants, though they had
not been expressly named ? The reason is this : be-
cause the apostles knew of themselves, that circum-
cision was usually given to infants. If it do appear
then, that baptism was also usually given to infants,
and the apostles must know it, the same reason would
direct them to the same interpretation.

If it had been circumcision that had been ordered,
the apostles going out into the nations must have
circumcised the grown men at the age that they
found them of: but they would have circumcised
the infants also ; because one that is to be circum-
cised at all should be circumcised in infancy, if one
has then the power or direction of him. So they
must baptize the grown men among the nations at
the age that they found them of: and we have reason
to conclude that they must think themselves obliged
to give baptism (or order it to be given) to the in-
fants also ; because by the rules of baptism received
in their nation, all that were to be baptized at all,
were baptized in infancy, if they had then the
power and direction of them.

And though the proof that circumcision was

24 The Argument from Jewish

usually given to infants, is taken from the writings of
the Old Testament ; but the proof that baptism was
usually given to- the infants of proselytes is taken
only from the testimonies of the Jews themselves :
yet the Jews themselves (how fallible soever they
are in judging of the meaning of the law, what
ought to be done, or how necessary it was, yet) can-
not fail of being sufficient witnesses of the matter of
fact, and able to tell what was actually done among
themselves.

The difference which the Jews made between
themselves and other nations in giving baptism to
Gentile proselytes and tlieir children, but not to
themselves nor their own children, does not at all
affect the question that is disputed between the
Christian paedobaptists and antipaedobaptists : be-
cause in respect of the Christian religion the Jews
themselves have the same need of becoming prose-
lytes and of being baptized, that other nations have.
The gospel has concluded all under sin : and St.
Paul, speaking of this very matter of baptism '^j says,
that in respect of it there is 7ieither Jew nor Greeks
i. e. there is no difference between them. The Jews
themselves do seem to have understood, that when
the Christ came, their nation must be baptized as
well as others : and therefore they asked John, (who
baptized Jews,) Whi/ baptizest thou then, if thou be
not that Christ, nor Elias^f &c., signifying that if
he had been the Christ or Elias, they should not
have wondered at his baptizing of Jews.

The same thing is to be said of that tenet of the
Jews, that the infant children of a proselyte, born
to him before his baptism, are to be baptized ; but

^ Gal. iii. 27, 28, 1 John i. 25.

to Christian Pcedobapfism. 25

not the children born to him after his ba])tism, nor
any of their posterity in any succeeding generations,
they being now looked on as natural Jews.

This, I say, does not affect the question of Chris-
tian psedobaptism. Because that privilege which
the Jew had, or supposed himself to have, above
other people, is as to the Christian dispensation
abolished : and because both the psedobaptists and
anti])a3dobaptists are agreed that all persons do now
need baptism ; as well those that are born of bap-
tized, as those that are born of unbaptized parents :
our Saviour having satisfied Nicodemus'" that that
which is born of the flesh (whether of a Jewish or
Gentile, baptized or unbaptized parent) is flesh, and
must he born again.

The antipsedobaptists are satisfied of this ; the
only question is, at what age they must be baptized.
Now the practice of the Jews before and in our
Saviour's time was, that all persons whom they bap-
tized at all they baptized in infancy, if they had, as
I said, the power or possession of them in infancy.
And in this matter our Saviour gave no direction
for any alteration. ' He took' (as Dr. Lightfoot"
says) ' into his hands baptism such as he found it ;
' adding only this, that he exalted it to a nobler
* purpose and to a larger use.'

Some Socinians indeed would have the use of bap-
tism to be abolished in all Christian nations, where
the body of the people has once been generally bap-
tized : and do say of Christian baptism, as the Jews
did of theirs, that the baptism of the forefathers is
sufficient for them and all their posterity. This
reason against the continuance of baptism, which

m John iii. 6, 7. ^ Hor. Hebr. in Matt. iii. 6.

26 The Argument from Jewish

was never thought a reason by any Christians be-
fore, Socinus gave about 150 years ago; 'Water
' baptism seems unnecessary for those that are born
' of Christians, and do imitate their parents in the
* profession of Christianity. It matters not vrhether
' such be baptized or not. And if they be, it is all
' one whether it be at their adult age or in infancy ".'
Which opinion, or one more against baptism, the
Quakers have since taken up. But the antipaedo-
baptists do hold it necessary, as I said, for every
particular person, and not only for a nation at the
first planting of Christianity.

And it is easy to guess what it was that swayed
Socinus into the other opinion ; viz. his desire of
abolishing the doctrine of the Trinity : which it was
hard to accomplish so long as persons were continu-
ally baptized into that faith.

There never was any age (at least since Abraham)
in which the children, whether of Jews or proselytes,
that were admitted into covenant, had not some badge
or sign of such their admission. The male children
of Abraham's race were entered by circumcision.
The whole body of the Jews, men, women, and chil-
dren, were in Moses's time baptized. After which
the male children of proselytes that were entered
with their parents, were (as well as their parents)
admitted by circumcision, baptism, and a sacrifice :
the female children by baptism and a sacrifice. The
male children of the natural Jews, and such male
children of proselytes as were born after their pa-
rents' baptism, by circumcision and a sacrifice : and
the female children by a sacrifice offered for them
by the head of the family. Now after that circum-

" Epist. de Baptismo, apud Vossium de Baptismo, Dii?p. 13.

to Christian Pti'dobaptlsm. 27

cisioii and sacrifice were to be abolished, there was
nothing left but baptism, or washing-, for a sign of
the covenant and of professing- religion. This our
Saviour took (})rol)ably as being the easiest and the
least operose of all the rest ; and as being common
to both sexes, making no difference of male or fe-
male) and enjoined it to all that should enter into
the kingdom of God^. And St. Paul does plainly
intimate to the Colossians, ch. ii. 11, 12. that it
served them instead of circumcision : calling it the
circumcision of Christ, or Christian circumcision.

The baptism indeed of the nations by the apostles
ought to be regulated by the j^ractice of John and of
Christ himself, (who by the hands of his disciples
baptized many Jews,) rather than by any preceding
custom of the Jewish nation ; if we had any good
ground to believe that they did in the case of infants
differ, or alter any thing from the usual way. But
we have no kind of proof that they made any such
alteration. The commission which our Saviour gave
to his disciples to baptize in the country of Judaea,
during his abode with them, is not at all set down,
as I said. And what John did in this particular,
we have no means left to know, but by observing
what was done before and after.
U There is no express mention indeed of any chil-
dren baptized by him ; but to those that consider
the commonness of the thing (which I have here
shewn) for people that came to be baptized to bring
their children along with them, that is no more a
cause to think that he baptized no children, than
one's minding that in the history of the Old Testa-
ment there is sometimes 500 years together without.

P John iii. 5.

28 Jewish Baptism.

the mention of any child circumcised, is a cause tc
think that none were circumcised all that while.
And whereas it is said of the multitudes that came
to John, that they were baptized by Mm confessing
their siiis, (which confession can be understood only
of the grown persons,) that is no more than would
be said in the case of a minister of the church of
England (which I put before) going and converting
a heathen nation. For in a short account which
should be sent of his success, it would be said that
multitudes came and were baptized, confessing their \
sins : and there would need no mention of their
brinsfinof their children with them ; because the con-
verting of the grown persons was the principal and
most difficult thing, and it would be supposed that j
they brought their children of course.

I shall, at ch.',13. of this my collection, shew it to
be probable that St. Ambrose does take it for granted
that John must have baptized infants as well as
others : for he does by way of allusion make a com-
parison between Elias and him ; and speaks of Elias*
turning the waters of Jordan back toward the spring-
head, as a type of the baptism of infants, by which
they were reformed from their natural corrupt state
back again to the primitive innocence of nature. And
St. Ambrose does not there stand to prove that any
infants were baptized : but speaks of it as of a thing
commonly so understood by all Christians. And so
Dr. Lightfoot says on this account % 'I do not be-
' lieve the people that flocked to John's baptism
' were so forgetful of the manner and custom of the
' nation, as not to bring their little children along
' with them to be baptized.'

q Hor. Hebr. on Matt. iii.

Jewish Baptism. 29

And the same man, who was most excellently
skilled in the books and customs of the Jews, says
at another place*"; ' If bai)tism and baptizing infants
' had been a new thing, and unheard of till John
' Baptist came, as circumcision was till God ap-

* pointed it to Abraham ; there would have been, no
' doubt, as express command for baptizing infants,
' as there was for circumcising them. But when
' the baptizing of infants was a thing commonly
' known and used, as appears by incontestable evi-
' dence from their writers; there need not be ex-
' press assertions that such and such persons were
' to be the object of baptism : when it was as well
' known before the gospel began, that men, women,
' and children were baptized, as it is to be known

* that, the sun is up, when' &c.

And he deduces the argument with great evidence
in this fashion' ;

' The whole nation knew well enough that infants
' were wont to be baptized. There was no need of

* a precej)t for that which was always settled by
' common use. Suppose there should at this time

* come out a proclamation in these words : Every

* one on the Lord's day shall repair to the public

* assembly in the church. That man would dote,

* who should in times to come conclude that there
' were no prayers, sermons, psalms, &c. in the public

* assemblies on the Lord's day, for this reason,
' because there was no mention of them in this

* proclamation. For the proclamation ordered the
' keeping of the Lord's day in the public assemblies
' in general : and there was no need that mention"

' Harmony on John i. 25. * Hor. Hebr. on Matt. iii.

30 Jewish Baptism.

' should be made of the particular kinds of divine
« worship there to be used ; since they were both
' before and at the time of the said proclamation
' known to every body, and in common use.

' Just so the case stood as to baptism. Christ
' ordered it to be for a sacrament of the New
' Testameijt, by which all should be admitted to the
' profession of the gospel, as they were formerly to
' proselytism in the Jews' religion. The particular
' circumstances of it, as the manner of baptizing, the
' age of receiving it, which sex was capable of it, &c.,
' had no need of being regulated or set down, be-
' cause they were known to every body by common
' usage.

' It was therefore necessary on the other side,
' that there should have been an express and plain
' order that infants and little children should not be
' baptized, if our Saviour had meant that they should
* not. For since it was ordinary in all ages before
' to have infants baptized ; if Christ would have had
' that usage to be abolished, he would have expressly
' forbidden it. So that his and the scriptures' silence
' in this matter does confirm and establish infant-
' baptism for ever.'

VI. Fourthly, another thing observable about the
Jewish baptism of proselytes, is this ; that they
called such an one's baptism his new-birth, regene-
ration, or being born again.

This was a very usual phrase of the Jews.
Gemara, tit. Jevamoth, cap. 4. fol. 62. 1.

' If any one become a proselyte, he is like a child
' new born.'

Maimonides, Iss. Bia, cap. 14. s. 11.

' The Gentile that is made a proselyte, and the

Jeicish Baptism. 31

' slave that is made free; behold, he is like a child
' new born.'

The rabbies do much enlarge on this privilege of
a proselyte's being- put into a new state, and putting
off all his former relations : those that were akin to
him before are now no longer so ; but he is just as
if he were born of a new mother, as the Talmud
often expresses it. And it was probably from the
much talk that they made on this subject, that Ta-
citus the Roman historian (who lived in the apostles'
time) drew the notion he had of the Jews' practice
in initiating proselytes.

' The first thing,' says he*, ' that they teach them
* is, to despise the gods, (which they worshipped be-
' fore,) to renounce their country : parentes, liberos,
' fr aires, vilia habere; to make no account of their
' parents, children, or kindred.'

And some do think that St. Paul alludes to this
notion, when he says, 2 Cor. v. 16, 17, Henceforth
know we no man after the flesh, 8^c. If any one he
in Christ, he is a new creature. Old things are
passed away, 8^c. And St. Peter, when he calls the
Christians new horn hahes^.

The Talmudical doctors do indeed carry on this
metaphor of the new birth too far in all reason :
they determine that it is no incest for such an one
to marry any of his nearest kindred, because upon
his being new born all former relations do cease ; so
that if he marry his own mother, he does not sin.

But letting pass the vain and absurd consequences
which they drew from this figurative speech, it is
abundantly evident that the common phrase of the

t Hist. lib. V. c. 5. "1 Ep. ch. ii. 2.

32 Jewish Baptism styled a new Birth.

Jews was to call the baptism of a proselyte, his
regeneration or new birth.

And the Christians did in all ancient times con-
tinue the use of this name for baptism, so as that
they never use the word regenerate, or born again,
but that they mean or connote by it baptism. Of
which T shall produce no proof here, because almost
all the quotations which I shall bring in this book
will be instances of it.

Now the knowledge of this makes those words of
our Saviour to Nicodemus in the third chapter of
St. John to be much more intelligible to us ; where
he tells him, that, except any one be born again,
he cannot see the kingdom of God, He used that
which was then the ordinary phrase. All that was
new in that saying of our Saviour was this ; the
Jews knew that any Gentile that would enter the
kingdom of God must be born again ; but our
Saviour assures Nicodemus, that every one, Jew or
Gentile, must be so born. And when Nicodemus
did not apprehend his meaning, but took the words
in a proper sense, our Saviour speaks plainer, and
says, that every one must he born of water, S^c,
wondering at the same time, that he, being a master
in Israel, had not understood him.

This puts it beyond all doubt that our Saviour is
to be understood there of baptism, (of which some
people, since the disuse of the word regenerated or
born again for baptized have made a doubt,) and
also guides us into a ready conception of the sense
of those sayings of the ancient Christian writers
where they use the word ; and of St. Paul for one,
when he mentions the washing of regeneration^ .

"" Tit. iii. 5.

A Parallel between Jewish and Christian Baptism. 33

There are some other more plain and gross mis-
lakes made by some men in the nnderstanding- of
those words of our Saviour to Nicodemus : as, that
of those who beins" able to read none but the
English translation, where it is worded, E.rcept a
7nan be born again, &c., do conceive that they con-
cern only grown men : and that of those who tell
us, that by the kingdom of God in that text is
meant, not the kingdom of glory, but something
else. The absurdity of which mistakes will be oc-
casionallv shewn in the following collection of the
sayings of the eldest Christians, who do very fre-
quently quote this text.

VII. It maybe useful to illustrate the point in hand,
if we do here institute a parallel between the Jewish
and the Christian baptism, and the modes and cir-
cumstances used in each ; by which it will more
plainly appear, that St. John, and our Saviour, and
the apostles and primitive Christians, had an eye to
the Jewish baptism in many of the rites and cir-
cumstances which they used at the administration
of the Christian baptism : as all agree they had to
the Jewish passover in the ordering of the other
sacrament.

1. As there was a stipulation made by the Avhole
people of the Jews just before their baptism, Exod.
xix. 5, If you will keep my covenant, &c. the
people answering, ver. 8, All that the Lord has
spoken ive will do, &c. And Moses returned the
words of the people to the Lord, &c. And the
Lord said, ver. 10, Go and sanctify them, a)id let
them wash their clothes, (i. e. their whole bodies.)

And as the Jews did accordingly afterwards

WALL, VOL. I. D

34 A Parallel between Jewish

require, of any that were to be proselyted or entered
as disciples to their religion, a stipulation to re-
nounce idolatry, &c. Maimonid. Iss. Bia. cap. 13.
§. 14, 15 ; and to believe in Jehovah :

So the Christians required a like sort of stipula-
tion of all whom they baptized : and being taught
that all idolatry is offering to devils, they expressed
it, Renouncing the Devil and all his works, &c.
And to believe in the Trinity. From whence it is
probably, that St, Peter, 1 Ep. iii. 21, calls baptism
e-rrepwTrjiJLa, the interrogation, or stipulation, of a good
conscience.

2. As the Jews, though the person to be bap-
tized had before made this profession, yet inter-
rogated him again as he stood in the water; as ap-
pears by the words of Maimonides, quoted §. 1 :

So the Christians required of all adult persons A
that were to be baptized, that beside the profession
made before in the congregation, they should answer
to each interrogatory of it over again, when they
were going into the water : as I shew, pt. ii. c. 9- §• 13.

3. As the Jews baptized the infant children of
such proselytes as desired that their children should
be entered into covenant with the true God ; so I
have, through all the first part of this work, given
the history of what the Christians did in respect of
the infant children of Christian proselytes. And I
believe all impartial readers of it will conclude that
they did the same.

4. As the Jews required, that for an infant pro-
selyte either his father or else the consistory (or
church) of the place, or at least three grave persons,
should answer or undertake at his baptism : (and

and Christian Baptism. 35

tliey required the like at circumcision, as Buxtorf in
bis Synag-. Jud. has fully shewn, and is not by any
denied :)

So the Christians (as I shall shew at pt. ii. c. 9-
i^. 13.) did the same; putting the several interroga-
tories of the Creed, and of the renunciations, and re-
quiring the child's answer by his parents or other
sponsors.

5. As such a proselyte of the Jews, when bap-
tized, was said to be born again: so our Saviour,
and the apostles and primitive Christians, gave the
same term to Christian baptism. As appears, John
iii. 3, 5 ; Tit. iii. 5, and in almost all the passages of
this my collection.

6. The Jews told such a proselyte, that he was
now taken out of his unclean state, and put into a
state of sanctity or holiness, Iss. Bia. cap. 14. i^. 14.

So the scriptures of the New Testament do call
the baptized Christians, the saints, the holt/, the
sanctified in Christ Jesus ; and say, that the church
of them is sanctified with the washing of water ^ &c.
Rom. i. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 2. item, vii. 14 ; Eph. v. 26. And
it will appear by many quotations which I shall
produce from the ancient Christians, that there is
nothing more common with them than to call bap-
tism by the name of sanctification^ and to say sanc-
tified or holy inst*^«i.d of baptized, and to give to
persons, while they continue unbaptized, the name
of unclean.

7. The Jews declared the baptized proselyte to be
now under the wings of the divine majesty, or She-
chinah : Iss. Bia. c. 13. \. 4.

This was more visibly made good to the new bap-
tized Christians, by palpable signs and effects of the

D 2

36 A Parallel between Jewish

Holy Spirit coming on them. And as the laying
on of the hands of an apostle was in the primitive
church employed to procure this, (or of a bishop as
the supreme pastor when the apostles were dead,
for obtaining the more ordinary gifts of the Holy
Spirit ;) so there is good reason to believe that the
Jews had before used this ceremony of laying on of
hands on this occasion, for it was a thing used by
them on almost all occasions that were solemn.

8. The paschal season is known to have been the
most solemn time, both with the Jews and Christ-
ians, for admitting proselytes or disciples by bap-
tism. The Jews did then baptize all the proselytes
that were ready, for this reason, that they might be
admitted to partake of the passover and sacrifices.
The Christians observed the same time for a like
reason.

9. In the Jews' time, some Gentiles were absolute
idolaters ; some came nearer to the Jews' religion,
believing their God to be the true God, and were
called proselytes of the gate. And of these last,
some Avho declared their desire to be circumcised
and baptized, and submit to the whole law, were
(for some time before their circumcision and baptism)
distinguished from the rest.

So in the first preachings of Christianity in hea-
then places, some slighted it ; some gave so much
regard to it, as to hear at least what the Christians
preached, and were called audientes. Some, be-
ginning to approve it, submitted to a course of cate-
chising, and were called catechumens. And of these,
such as desired baptism, and were now fit for it,
were called coinpetentes.

Now both under the Jewish and Christian dis-

and Christian Bajjfism. 37

})ensatioii, these men, as they stood in the said
different degrees of preparation to baptism, had
different places and liberties of access, both among
the Jews to their temple and synagogues, and among
the Christians to their churches and public offices ;
as is largely shewn from Jewish and Christian an-
tiquities by the author (whom T mentioned before)
of the Discourse concerning Lent^.

And those degrees of preparatory admission did
so resemble one another, that it is plain that the
first Christians imitated the Jews in the steps that
they made towards admitting a ])roselyte to bap-
tism.

It is true, that sometimes a person was convinced,
converted, and believed, and was baptized, all in a
short time ; as the eunuch, the jailor, &;c. But this
was extraordinary, and the ordinary course w'as as
I have said.

10. There were some other customs constantly
used by the most ancient Christians at and after the
baptizing of any person ; which (since they are not
mentioned in any command of our Saviour or the
apostles recorded in the New Testament) one might
M'onder from whence they had them. As namely,

1. When they baptized any one, whether infant
or adult, they thought it not enough to |)ut him
once into the water ; but as his body was in the
water, they put his head also three times into the
water, so that his whole body was three several
times under water. This was the ordinary way,
(but with an exception of sick, weakly persons, &.c.)
as I shew pt. ii. c. 9- §• ^. and 4.

2. And after he came out of the water, they gave

y See note at p. 4.

38 J Parallel between Jewish

him to taste a portion of milk and honey mixed
together.

S. And also they then anointed him with a sort
of precious ointment.

The first Christians were too plain men to invent
these things of themselves. And yet they were uni-
versally used. The books of the second century do
speak of them as customs used time out of mind,
and of which they knew no beginning.

The heretics also of the same time used them, as
I shew in pt. ii. c. 9- §• 6. item 8. So that the be-
ginning of them must have been from a principle
universally received.

And this could not probably come, but from such
like customs used by the Jews at their baptizing of
a proselyte. The author, whom I last mentioned,
shews the probability of this for the two last ; viz.
the anointing, and the milk and honey : one, a cere-
mony much used by the Jews (and probably the
Jewish proselyte was anointed with the blood of
his own sacrifice that he offered) : the other, the
emblem of the Holy Land, to the enjoyment whereof
he was now entitled. And for the first of the three,
viz. the trine immersion ; another person very learn-
ed in Jewish customs assures me, that their way of
washing any person, or any thing, that was by their
law to have a tevillah, or solemn washing, was to
do it three times over : so that a vessel that was to
be washed, was drawn three times through water.
And Mr. Selden says^, ' it must be the same quan-
' tity of water as that wherein a proselyte was bap-
' tized.' Whence it is probable that they gave the

z De Synedr. lib. i. c. 3.

and Christian Baptism. 39

proselyte a trine immersion ; and that the Christians
by their example did the like.

VIII. I shall conclude this introductory discourse
with observing what a weak attempt that is, which
sir Norton KnatchbuU'^ has made to disprove this
custom of the Jews to baptize proselytes ; and how
unlike to the rest of his annotations on the New
Testament, which are deservedly valued. That
learned gentleman seems to have had some disgust
against Dr. Hammond, and to have endeavoured to
oppose him in several of his criticisms and observa-
tions. Such a prejudiced endeavour does often lead
men from a true judgment of things into a vein of
cavilling. The doctor (but not he alone, but with
him all that ever had any skill in the Jewish learn-
ing) had spoke of this custom of giving baptism
to proselytes : and he had produced, among other
proofs of it, a quotation out of the Gemara, (which I
pur])osely omitted before, because it must be set
down here.) Sir Norton picks out^' one clause of
that quotation, which taken by itself might seem to
make for his purpose ; which is, that rabbi Eliezer
had said, of one that was circumcised, and not bap-
tized, that he was a proselyte. Now see the quota-
tion at large.

Gemara, tit. Jevamoth, c. 4.

' Of him that was circumcised, and not bai)tized,

3- [Annotations upon some difficult Texts in all the Books of
the New Testament, by sir Norton KnatchbuU, Kt. and Bart.
This work was first published in Latin, in 1659, and twice re-
printed in that language : but the author left at his death an
English version with his last remarks and corrections ; which
was published at (^inibridgc in 1693, and is the edition here re-
ferred to.]

^ Annot. on i Pet. iii. 2f. p. 306 — 309.

40 Jewish Baptism of

' rabbi Eliezer said, that he was a proselyte. Be-
' cause, said he, we find of our fathers (Abraham,
' Isaac, &c,) that they were circumcised, but not
' baptized.

' And of him that was baptized, and not circum-
' cised, rabbi Joshua said, that he Mas a proselyte.
' Because, said he, we find of our mothers, that they
' were baptized, and not circumcised.

' But the wise men pronounced, that till he were
' both baptized and circumcised, he was not a prose-

' lyte.'

The question here was not whether proselytes
ought, or were wont, to be baptized : but whether
one that had neglected it, or by some chance had
missed of it, could be counted for a proselyte. And
the like question was made of one that had missed
of circumcision. And Eliezer's maintaininof that
one might possibly without baptism go for a prose-
lyte, is no more an argument that proselytes were
not usually baptized, than Joshua's maintaining that
one might without circumcision go for a proselyte,
is an argument that proselytes were not usually
circumcised. So far is that from being a good con-
clusion which sir Norton there draws from Eliezer's
words, viz. that he did expressly deny this baptism.
On the contrary, the tenor of the discourse shews
that it had been taken for granted and agreed, that
a proselyte ought of right to have both circumcision
and baptism : only Joshua had a favourable opinion
against the absolute necessity of the first, as Eliezer
had of the latter (and both of them were also de-
clared singular in such their opinions) ; so that upon
the whole this quotation does prove that which sir
Norton Knatchbnll brought it to disprove.

Proselytes 'vindicated. 41

I give an account in the twentietli chapter of
this book, how one Viiicentius Victor maintained a
dispute against St. Austin, that a child dying un-
baptized might yet possibly be partaker of all that
measure of glory which is promised to Christians.
From whence a certain late antipa^dobaptist raised
an argument, that Vincentius held that children were
not to be baptized. Whereas Vincentius's words do,
as I there shew, sufficiently prove, that he knew that
children ought of right to have baptism : only he puts
the case of a child that had missed of it. This ar-
gument, drawn from Eliezer's words to prove that
proselytes were not wont to be baptized, runs on the
same foot, and is as weak as that. It is certainly
one thing to say, a person though not baptized
might be accounted a proselyte, or, a child dying
unbaptized may be saved : and another very different
thino- to say, that either one or the other were not
wont, or ought not to be baptized. So that it is
hard to guess what Mr. Stennet thinks he has gained
to his cause by quoting so largely this discourse of
sir Norton KnatchbuU in his late book*^.

Some objections Mr. Stennet adds there of his
own, to overthrow this argument taken from the
Jewish baptism : as that, ' If the Jews practised
' baptism to initiate proselytes, it must have been
* an invention of their own ; for no such initiation
' is commanded in the law of God.'

' [Answer to Mr. David Russen's book, entitled Fundamentals
without a Foundation, or a true Picture of the Anabaptists. 8vo,
London, 1704. Dr. Stennet, a learned baptist divine, was born
in 1663, and died in 1713. See an account of his character and
works, in Crosby's History of the English Baptists, vol. IV.
p. 319. &c. and in Ivimey's Hist, of the Engl. Baptists, vol. III.]

42 Jewish Baptism of

But, 1, he may see that they quoted texts in the
law of God for what they did in this matter.

And, 2, putting the case that they mistook the
sense of those texts ; yet when they liad upon
that authority established a practice of baptizing
proselytes and their children ; and that practice had
now continued for many ages : if our Saviour had
meant that his apostles in baptizing proselytes of
the nations should have altered that practice, we
have all the reason in the world to think that he
would have forewarned them of it. And since he
did not, we have reason to think that the Jews
were not mistaken in what they did.

Suppose our Saviour had ordered his apostles to
require the nations to keep the feasts. If he had
meant that they should not keep the feast of the
dedication, (which had no divine institution, but yet
being become customary was observed by all the
Jews, and even by Christ himself,) as well as the
passover and the rest, (which had been commanded
in the law,) he would doubtless in that case have
excepted that. And there is the same reason in the
case before us.

But that which Mr. Stennet there says in a chal-
lenging manner to Mr. Russen'*, (who had mentioned
this practice of the Jews,) ' Where does he find that
' the Jews always did and do still baptize infants ;
' and that, to initiate them into the mysteries of re-
• ligion ?' is too securely spoken. He may see here as
in a specimen, but much more largely in the books of
vSelden, Lightfoot, &;c. to which I have here referred,
that they bring full proofs of the ancient practice of
the JeM's in this matter. And that the Jews do still

^ [-'^ee the preceding- note.]

Proselytes vindicated. 43

continue so to do, there is no other question ; than
as it is a question, whether any proselytes do now-
adays either come over themselves, or bring their
children to be at all initiated in their religion : for
the books that order the initiating of infants by
ba])tism, are such as the present Jews do own for
orthodox and authentic. Sir Norton Knatchbull has
one argument which I wonder much at him for
using, and at the other for borrowing it of him :
because it had been very commonly answered long
before he used it : which is ; that if baptizing of
proselytes had been in ordinary and familiar use
with the Jews, the Pharisees would not have said to
John ; Whi/ baptizest thou then, if thou be not the
Christ, nor Elias^f &c.

If John had been then baptizing Gentile proselytes,
and had not baptized the natural Jews ; the Phari-
sees would not at all have wondered to see converted
Gentiles baptized. Though the office of doing even
that was probably not accounted lawful for any
but such as had a commission from the Sanhedrim ;
which John, we suppose, had not : and therefore
they might even in that case have examined by what
authority he did it.

But the case here was quite otherwise. The
multitudes whom John baptized, were mostly, if
not all, natural Jews. And the Pharisees and other
Jews (knowing that their own nation was not to
have any other baptism than what they had already,
till the Christ should come, or Elias his forerunner)
looked upon this ])ractice to be in effect the setting
himself up for tlie Christ, or at least for Elias, (as
he was indeed that ^ Elias (or forei-vmner) which

e .Tohii i. 25. f Matt. xi. 14.

44 Jeioish Baptism of

was for to come,) and therefore it was that they sent
priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him ; Who
art thou'^f And that all men mused in their hearts
concerning him., whether he were the Christ or not.
Luke iii. 15.

Ainsworth, Lightfoot, Hammond, and every one
that has occasion, do shew the easiness of solving
this doubt. The first of these, having largely shewn
how common and known a custom this baptism of
proselytes was, adds at the end of it ^\ ' Hereupon
' baptism was nothing strange to the Jews when
' John the Baptist began his ministry, Matt. iii. 5, 6.
' They made question of his person that did it ; but
' not of the thing itself, John i. 25.'

And it is plain that their questions put to John
do naturally import no other. They do not ask
him, What meanest thou ? or, What wouldst thou
signify to us by this new ceremony of baptizing?
nor any question like that : but Who art thou? And
when he confessed, John i. 20, / am not the Christy
they say. What then? Art thou Eliasf &c. and
when he said, / am not, (meaning that he was not
Elias in that proper sense that they dreamt of; for i
they expected that very same person that had been
carried to heaven,) they asked further ; Who art
thou ? What say est thou of thyself? Why baptizest
thou then, (meaning the nation of the Jews,) if thou
he not the Christ, nor Elias, &c. I

All this has nothing in it to evince the contrary
but that the Jews themselves did use before to bap-
tize such heathens as came over to them. And in-
deed such a pompous recital of arguments that have
been long ago commonly answered, may serve to

S John i. 't Gen. xvii.

Proselytes vindicated. 45

amuse such as have not read the answ^ers : but it is
not fair nor ingenuous deahng for any learned men
to use them for that purpose. It brings on the
workl that o-reat inconvenience of being forced in
books to say pro and contra the same things over
and over again.

THE HISTORY

OF

INFANT-BAPTISM.

PART I.

CHAP. I.

Quotations out of Clemens Romanus and Hernias.

Clemens Romanus, Epist. 1 ad Corinthios, xvii.

^. I. "' Lj^ TI (5e Koi irep] 'lu)(3 oi/'rw yeypainai, 'Iw^ ^u CHAP. I.

-I— i SiKai09 Ka\ afxefXTTTO?, a\riOivo<;. Oeocre^tj?, In the apo-

,A.>,, ', y r ^ sties' time.

aire-^o/mepos airo TravToq kukov. AAA ai^ro? eavrov

Kart^yopwv Xeyei' OvSe]^ KaOapo? airo pvirov, ovce ei fiia^

rjjj.epa'i i] Cf"^ avTOv.

' Again of Job it is thus written, That he was
'just and blameless, true, one that feared God, and
' eschewed evil. Yet he condemns himself, and says,
' There is none free from pollution ; no, not though
' his life be but of the length of one day.'

These words of Job are quoted from chap. xiv. 4,
where the English translation is. Who can bring a
clean thing out of an unclean f not one. But in the
Greek translation made by the Septuagint, which
was in use in the times of our Saviour and the apo-
stles, they are as Clement here renders them ; and
they are accordingly so read by all the primitive

48 Clement and Hermas.

CHAP. I. Christians. And you will see in the following quo-
in the apo- tations that they often from thence conclude the

st IPS tiinp

necessity of baptism for the forgiveness of sins, even
of a child that is but a day old. And in the next
chajjter he brings in, to the same purpose, the saying
of David, Psalm li. 5.

Ibid. cap. 38.

'Ai/aAoytcrw/ueOa ovv, aSe\(po\, €K Tro/a? uXrjg eyevvrj-
6r)iJ.eVi iroloL Ka\ Tiveg eia-rjXOojuiev €19 tov koct/uov, wg €K
Tov Ta(pou Kai a-Korovg. 'O Troi/jcrag }'jfA.ag /ca< SrjjULioup-
yi^a-ag eicr/jyayev eig tov koctiulov avTou, irpoeTOLixacrag
Tag evepye(Tia<i avTOv irpiv rnuag yevvrjQfjvai.

' Let us consider, therefore, brethren, whereof we
' were made ; who and what kind of persons we
' came into this world, as if it were out of a sepulchre,

* and from utter darkness. He that made and
' formed us, brought us into his own world, having
' prepared for us his benefits before we were born.'

That which I produce these places for is, to shew
what the doctrine of this apostolical man was, con-
cerning the pollution and guilt with which infants
are born into this world.

Hermas Pastor, lib. i. Visione 3. c. 3.

II. He having there described an emblem or
vision, shewed him by a woman who represented the
church, concerning a certain tower built on the
water, by which the building of Christ's church was
signified, has these words :

' Interrogavi illam, Quare turris axlificata est
' super aquas, Domina ? Dixeram tibi et prius versu-

* tum te esse, circa structuras diligenter inquirentem :
' igitur invenies veritatem. Quare ergo super aquas
' a^dificatur turris, audi. Quoniam vita vestra per

* aquam salva facta est, et fiet.'

Clement and Herma$. 49

* I asked her, Why is the tower built on the chap. i.

' water ? She ansx^ered, I said before that you were i,, the apo.
' wise to inquire diligently concerning the building ;^*^^* "'"*'•
' therefore you shall know the truth. Hear, there-
' fore, why the tower is built on the waters ; Be-
' cause your life is saved, and shall be saved by
' water.'

By this is denoted, that baptism with water is
appointed the sacrament of salvation to such as are
saved ; which meaning will more plainly appear by
the import of the passage following.

Hennas Pastor, lib. iii. Similitud. 9- c. 15 et 16.

He is there relating a vision of the same import
as the other ; the building of the church represented
by the building of a tower, wherein all things are
shewed and ex})lained to him by an angel. He sees
some stones put into this building that were drawn
up from the deej) ; and others that were taken from
the surface of the earth ; the first denoting persons
already dead ; the other, persons yet alive.

Of those drawn up from the deep, he saw first ten
stones, which filled one range of building next the
foundation, then twenty-five more, then thirty-five
more, then forty more. And afterward in the
ex])iication of the vision, he asks the angel :

' Lapides vero illi, domine, qui de profundo in
' structura aptati sunt, qui sunt ? Decem, inquit,
' qui in fundamentis collocati sunt, primum seculum
' est : sequentes viginti quinque secundum seculum
' est justorum virorum. Illi autem triginta quinque**
' ^)rophetce Domini ac ministri sunt. Quadraginta

" [Cotelerius omits the word quinque in this clause, but it
seems to be merely a typographical error ; compare c. 4.]

WALL, VOL. I. E

50

Clement and Hennas.

CHAP. I.

Ill tlie apn.
sties' time.

vero, apostoli et doctores sunt prsBclicationis Filii
Dei. Quare, inquam, de profiindo hi lapides as-
cenderuiit, et positi sunt in structuram turris hujus,
cum jam pridem portaverint spiritus justos ? Ne-
cesse est, inquit, ut per aquam liabeant ascendere,
ut requiescant : non poterant enim aliter in regnum
Dei intrare, quam ut deponerent mortalitatem
prions vitae. Illi igitur defuncti sigillo Filii Dei
signati sunt, et intraverunt in regnum Dei. Ante-
quam enim accipiat homo nomen Filii Dei, morti
destinatus est : at ubi accipit ilhid sigillum, hbera-
tur a morte et traditur vitae. Illud autem sioillum
aqua est, in quam descendunt homines morti obli-
gati, ascendunt vero vit^ie assignati. Et illis igitur
pra?dicatum est illud sigillum, et usi sunt eo ut
intrarent in regnum Dei.

' Et dixi, Quare ergo, domine, illi quadraginta
lapides ascenderunt cum illis de profundo, jam ha-
bentes illud sigillum ? et dixit, Quoniam hi apo-
stoli et doctores, qui proedicaverunt nomen Filii
Dei, cum habentes fidem ejus et potestatem de-
functi essent, praedicaverunt his qui ante obierunt :
et ipsi dederuut eis illud signum. Descenderunt
igitur in aquam cum illis, et iterum ascenderunt.
Sed hi vivi descenderunt'^ : at illi qui fuerunt ante
defuncti, mortui quidem descenderunt, sed vivi
ascenderunt. Per hos igitur vitam receperunt et
cognoverunt Filium Dei; ideoque ascenderunt cum
eis, et convenerunt in structuram turris. Nee
circumcisi, sed integri aedificati sunt, quoniam
aequitate pleni cum summa castitate defuncti sunt :

^ [Cotelerius reads in the text ascenderunt, and gives in the
margin as a conjecture, f. ' descenderunt et iterum vivi ascen-
derunt.']

Clement and Hennas. 51

* sed tantuimnodo hoc sigillum defuerat eis. Habes <^'^ap. i.

' lioruin exjtlanationem.' in the a])o-

' But, sir, what are those stones that were taken
' out of the deep and fitted into the building- ?

' The ten, said he, which were laid in the founda-
' tion, are the first age : the next twenty-five, the
' second age, of righteous men. The next thirty-
' five, are the prophets and ministers of the Lord :
' and the forty are the apostles and teachers of
' the preaching of the Son of God. Why, said I, did
' these stones come up out of the deep to be placed

* in the building of this tower, since they had the

* just spirits before: (viz. of justice, temperance,
' chastity, &c., which he had mentioned before.)

' It was necessary, said he, for them to come up
' by (or through) water, that they might be at rest ;

* for thev could not otherwise enter into the king:-
' dom of God, than by putting off the mortality of
' their former life : they therefore, after they were
' dead, were sealed with the seal of the Son of God,
' and so entered into the kingdom of God. For be-
' fore any one receives the name of the Son of God,
' he is liable to death : but when he receives that
' seal, he is delivered from death, and is assigned to
' life. Now that seal is water, into which persons
' go down liable to death, but come out of it as-

* signed to life. For which reason to these also was
' this seal preached ; and they made use of it that
' they might enter into the kingdom of God.

' And I said, Why then, sir, did those forty stones
' which had already that seal, come up with them
' out of the deep ?

' He answered. Because these apostles and teachers
' that preached the name of the Son of God, dying

E 2

52 Clement and Het'mas.

CHAP. 1. ' after they had received his faith and power, preach-
in the apo- ' ed to them that were dead before, and gave to
sties' time. , ^\^q^ ^|^jg gg^l. For that reason they went down

' into the water with them, and came up again.
' But these last were alive before they went down :
' but they that died formerly, went down dead, but
' came up again alive. So that it was by the means
' of these, that they received life, and knew the Son
' of God : and accordingly they came up with them,
' and fitted in the building of the tower. And they
' were not hewed, but put in whole, because they
* died in great ])urity, being full of righteousness :
' only this seal was wanting to them. So you have
' the meaning of these things.'

III. When he says, that ' the seal of the Son of
' God is necessary for their entering into the king-
' dom of God ;' and that ' that seal is water,' it is
plainly an expression of that sentence or definition
of our Saviour, which St. John did afterward put
into writing in these w^ords, Ecvcept a man (so it
is in the English, but the original is, euv ixh r\<i,
exce])t one, or except any person) be born of water
and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God\

I say afterward, because this book was written
before St. John wrote his gospel, as I shall shew.
And though Hernias here speaks of the apostles
indefinitely, as being dead ; it is to be understood
of the major part of them : for St. John was not
dead.

IV. The passage itself, which represents the pa-
triarchs and prophets of the Old Testament to stand
in need of baptism, and of the apostles preaching

^ .John iii. ^.

Clement and Hennas. 53

the name of Christ to them after they were dead, < map. i.
before they coidd be ca])able of entering the king- in the apo-
dom of God, does indeed seem strange to us, and is" *^''
the oddest passage in all the book. But we must
consider it is represented by way of vision, where
every thing is not to be taken in a proper sense :
yet Clemens Alexandrinus, who lived about one hun-
dred years after this book was written '^, cites this
passage, and takes it for real matter of fact. And
those texts, 1 Pet. iii. 19- and iv. 6, which speak of
the gospel being preached to them that ivere dead,
though they be now by most protestants understood
in another sense, were by most of the ancients "^ un-
derstood in a sense like to this.

This passage does also lead one to think anew of
St. Paul's mentioning a practice of some men in
those times being baptized for the deadK A thing
that has never yet been agreed on in what sense it is
to be understood. Of the explications that are, I
give some account ^ hereafter.

There is, if we compare this passage with those
sayings of the apostles, something like, and some-
thing unlike. St. Peter mentioning the gospel
preached to the dead, (if he be so to be understood,)
makes it to be done by Jesus Christ himself in or by
the Spirit : which Hermas represents as done by the
apostles after they were dead ; and Clemens Alex-
andrinus^ by both : for he makes Christ to have
preached to the deceased just men of the Jewish na-
tion ; and the apostles to the deceased heathen men.

d Strom. 6.

e Iren. lib. v. c. 31. Clem. Alex. Strom. 6. Origen. c. Cels.
lib. ii. Tertul. de Anima, c. 7.

f J Cor. XV. 29. g Chap. x.\i. s. iii. h j^qc. citat.

54 Clement and Hermas.

CHAP. I. gt_ Paul speaks of some persons baptized for the
In the apo- dead ; but Hermas in the way of vision represents
ime. ^^^ ^Q^(\ themselves that died under the Old Testa-
ment, to be baptized in the name of Christ. And
Origen^ speaks much to the same purpose as Her-
mas.

But whether these were true visions, or only the
author's sense given under such a representation,
still the scope of the place is to represent the neces-
sity of water-baptism to salvation, or to entrance
into the kingdom of God, in the opinion of the then
Christians, i. e. the Christians of the apostles' times.
Since even they that were dead before the institu-
tion of baptism in the name of Christ, are in way of
vision represented as uncapable of the kingdom of
God without it.

Hermas Pastor, lib. iii. Similitud. 9- c. 29-

V. He having there spoken of martyrs, confessors,
and some other degrees of Christians, comes to speak
of a sort of harmless people, represented there by the
white colour, who have always been as little chil-
dren ; and adds these words :

' Quicunque ergo permanserint, inquit, sicut infan-
' tes, non habentes malitiam, honoratiores erunt om-
' nibus illis quos jam dixi. Omnes enim infantes
' honorati sunt apud Dominum, et primi habentur.'

* Whosoever therefore shall continue as infants,
' without malice, shall be more honourable than all
' those of whom I have yet spoken. For all infants
' are valued by the Lord, and esteemed first of all.'

This being to the same effect as our Saviour's
embracing infants, and saying, Of such is the king-
dom of God, is one of the reasons used to prove

i Horn, in Luc. xiv.

Clement and Her mas. 55

that they are fit to be admitted into the covenant of ^'"^^''- ^■

God's grace and love by baptism. And whereas in the apo-
the antipaedobaptists expound our Saviours words,
not of children themselves, but of men that are of
an innocent temper like children : not only that is
affirmed here, but it is moreover said of the infants
themselves, that they are greatly valued and esteemed
of God.

VI. These books of Clement and Hernias, when,
after they had in tlie ignorant age lain hid and nn-
minded, they came again into the hands of learned
men, were at first questioned, whether they were the
genuine pieces of those authors, and the same that
Eusebius'^ testifies to have been reckoned by many for
books of holy scripture^ and to have been read in
many churches accordingly. But after that so many
quotations of them by the ancients have been ex-
amined, and found to be verbatim the same, there is
no longer doubt of that matter. They were ac-
counted divinely inspired by some, but rejected
from that rank by others. They may therefore very
well pass for the two Apocryphal books of the New
Testament, as Tobit, &c. are of the Old : and so
they are reckoned by Eusebius', Rufinus'", &c. The
greater commendation is due to the pains of our pre-
sent most reverend metropolitan", for putting them
and some other of the most ancient pieces into
the hands of the English reader : and the more

k Eccl. Hist. lib. iii. c. 3 et 16. 1 Ibid.

M In Symbolum.

" [Archbishop Wake, who published The General Epistles of
the Apostohcal Fathers, translated, &c. 8vo. 1693 : the second
edition, corrected and improved, 8vo. 1710; third edit. 17 19.]

56 Clement and Hermas.

CHAP. I. preposterous is the humour of many, that prefer the
In the apo- reading of modern things before them.

VII. I said that these books were written before
St. John wrote his gospel, which may be made ap-
pear thus : St. John lived to sixty-eight years after
our Saviour's passion, viz. to the year of Christ 101,
as is attested by St. Hierome, who says it in two
places", and in one of them says, ' that the church

* histories do most plainly shew it.' And it is cer-
tain he cannot be mistaken considerably, because
Irenseus, who often recounts how greedily he had in
his younger years heard Polycarp discourse of St.
John and his aifairs, and of the conferences he had
had with him, says in several placesP, ' that St. John

* continued to the times of Trajan;' and the year
of Christ 101 is but the third year of Trajan. And
it is agreed by all, that he wrote his gospel but a
very little before his death.

It is true indeed, that St. John seems, ch. v. 2, to
speak of Jerusalem as if it were then standing. But
many learned men understand these words. There
is at Jerusalem, &c., that is, in the jilace where Je-
rusalem was, or in the ruins ; as if one had said
during the ruins of London, There is in Cheapside a
conduit.

The current tradition is, that he wrote it upon
his return to Ephesus, after that violent persecution
of Christians in the fourteenth year of Domitian,
anno Dom. 94, remembered by all writers. In that
persecution St. John was banished into the island
Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testi-

° De Script. Eccl. et lib. i. contra Jovinian.
V Lib. ii. c. 39. et lib. iii. c. 3.

C lenient and He dims. 57

monij of Jesm C//risf^ : where he had that vision or chap. i.

Revelation whioh he has i)iib]islied, which Irenams iJTthT^-

shews to have been in the latter end of Domitian's*"^®*' *""®'

reign in these words : ' We will not run the hazard of

' affirming- any thing positively concerning the name

' of Antichrist,' signified by the number 666 ; ' for if

' it had been expedient to be published plainly at

' present, it would have been exj)ressed by him him-

' self that saw the vision; since it is not very long

' ago that it was seen ; being but a little before our

' time, at the latter end of Domitian's reign V

Domitian dying anno 96, and Nerva, a mild
prince, succeeding, the prisoners and banished men
were released : and St. John returned to Ephesus,
where, as Trenoeus * and Athanasius * testify, he
wrote his gospel. And St. Hierome mentions the
occasion of it^^; 'He, last of all the rest, wrote his
' gospel, being entreated so to do by the bishops of
' Asia, against Cerinthus and other heretics, and espe-

* cially the then new sprung up opinion of the Ebion-
' ites, who affirm, that Christ had no being before
' Mary ; for which reason he thought it needful to
' discourse concerning his divine nativity also.' And
this is, as to the main, confirmed out of Irenaeus
himself; for he says that 'he wrote it at Ephesus'':'
and, that * he aimed thereby to extirpate the error
' which had been sowed in the minds of men by

* Cerinthus >.' These things are reported by such
men as had the ojiportunity of easily knowing the
truth in such matters of fact.

Now for the asfe of these books of Clement and

'O"

^ Rev. i. g. ^ Lib. v. c. 30. ^ Lib. iii. c. i.

t In Synopsi. « De Script. Eccl. v. Joan. " Lib. iii. c. i.

> Lib. iii. c. 1 1.

58 Clement and Hennas.

CHAP. I. Hennas, one need only inquire for the time Cle-
in the apo- mint's death : for Hernias wrote his while Clement
sties' time. ^^^^^ living and bishop of the church at Rome, and
mentions him therein as such^. And though the
time of Clement's death be not so exactly to be dis-
covered from the ancients, but that they that have
gone about to settle it have varied ; and some from
others twenty years : yet they that have placed it
the latest, have placed it as soon as St. John's death
is placed by those that have placed that the soonest,
viz. anno 101: for in giving that date of St. John's
death, I gave the earliest that is pitched upon.
St. Chrysostom and the Chronicon Alexandr. make
him live some years longer.

The two that of late have made the most exact
disquisition about the time of St. Clement, are
bishop Pearson and Mr. Dodwell. Bishop Pear-
son ** having found by undeniable proofs that the
times of Hyginus, bishop of Rome, are set too low
in the chronological tables by fifteen or twenty, or
(as some writers place him) thirty years, and that
he must have entered upon his office anno 122 at
the latest, does proportionably set all the foregoing
bisho])S higher : and so he has made St. Clement
come into the bishopric immediately after the death
of St. Peter and St. Paul, which he place sanno 68,
(thirty-five years after our Saviour's passion,) and to
continue alive till the year 83. And he supposes
Linus and Anencletus, who are commonly placed
before St. Clement, to have been no otherwise bishops
there, than as they acted under the said apostles in
their lifetime.

' Lib. i. Vis. 2. c. 4.

'^ Pearsoni Opera posthuma Chronolog. Dissert, ii.

Clement and Hernias. 59

W\\ Dodwell'^ j"<^g'<'s that after the said apostle's chap. i.
death, uhich he places anno 64, Linus was bishop, i„ ti,e apo-
and after him Aneiu-letus. But that they both ^''^^' '''""•
died in a very short time, about a year; and that
Clement succeeded anno %^, and continued to 81.
By either of these accounts Clement was dead a
great while before St. John had wrote any of his
books.

VIII. But there is a passage in Irenfeus (whose
authority every one owns to be in this matter beyond
compare) wherein the time of Clement's succession,
and the distance thereof from the time of those apo-
stles, is purposely insisted on : and that though it
mention not the years, yet as it supjioses his entry
on that office to be nigher St. Peter and St. Paul's
time than some had placed it, so it will by no
means suffer him to be jdaced so early, as to suc-
ceed within a year or two after their death. It is
lib. iii. c. 3, where he is confuting that plea of the
Valentinians, (heretics that held that there is an-
other God, superior to hira that created the world,)
whereby they pretended to have this doctrine by
tradition from the apostles; who would not write
it, nor tell it to every body, but to some more
perfect disciples, by whose hands it came to them.
The words are these ;

' It is easy for any one that would be guided by
' truth, to know the tradition of the apostles, de-
' clared in all the world. And we are able to reckon
' up those that were placed bishops by the apostles in
' the several churches, and their successors, to this
' time ; who never taught nor knew any such thing
' as these men dream of. Now the apostles, if they
'' Dissertatio sine:, de Success. Rom. Pont. c. it, 12, &c.

h

60

Clement and Her mas.

CHAP. 1.

In the apo-
stles' time.

had known of any deep mysteries whicli they
would communicate to those that were perfect,
privately and by themselves, would have taught
them to those men sooner than any, to whom they
committed the churches : for they desired that
such should be very perfect in every thing, and
wanting in nothing; whom they left as their suc-
cessors, delivering to them their own place of go-
vernment. Since, if these men did well, there
would ensue great advantage ; but if they mis-
carried, great mischief.

' But it being a long business in such a book
as this, to reckon up the successions of all the
churches : if we shew the tradition left by the
apostles, and the faith taught the Christians de-
rived by successions of bishops to our time, in that
church which is one of the greatest and most an-
cient, and known to every body, founded and built
by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul ;
we shall shame all those who by self-conceit or
vainglory, or by ignorance and mistaken opinion,
hold things that they ought not. For every church,
I mean the Christians of all places round about,
have necessary occasions to come to this church,
by reason that the government and power is there,
(meaning the seat of the empire,) and so in this
church the tradition of the apostles is always
preserved, by means of those that from all places
resort thither.

' The blessed apostles, then, having founded and
built this church, delivered over to Linus the office
of the bishopric. This Linus, Paul mentions in
his Epistles to Timothy*^.

c 2 Tim. iv. 21.

Clement and Ilenuas. 61

' The next to him is Anencletus. chap. i.

' After him, in the third phice from the apostles, i„ the apo-
Clenient comes into the bishopric, who had botli^'''^* ''"^^"
seen the blessed apostles and conferred with them,
and had the preaching' and tradition of the aj)ostles
as yet sounding in his ears; and that, not he alone;
for there were many then left alive who had been
personally tanght by the apostles. It was under
this Clement that a great dissension happening
among the brethren that were at Corinth, the
church that was at Rome sent a most powerful
epistle to the Corinthians, persuading them to
peace, stirring up their faith anew, and declaring
to them the tradition which they had lately re-
ceived from the apostles, which teaches, that there
is but one God Almighty, maker of heaven and
earth, creator of man, &c. — And that the same
God is declared by the churches to be the Father
of our Lord Jesus Christ, whoso will may see, e^
ipsa scriptura, by that scrijiture (or writing) it-
self, and may understand the apostolical tradition
of the church : for that ejiistle is older than they
are that now teach these false doctrines, and invent
another God above the Creator and Maker of the
things that are seen.' He proceeds to name the
bishops from Clement to Eleutherus, who was then
bishop, the twelfth from the apostles ; and to appeal
to the church of Smyrna, which had had Polycarp :
and to the church of Ephesus, which had had St.
John so lately living among them ; and that none
of these had taught or ])retended to know of any of
those secret traditions that these men set up.

Now, when it was for his purpose to shew how
near Clement and this epistle of his were to the

62 Clement and Hermas.

CHAP. 1 times of St. Peter and St. Paul, and he says no
7~Z more, but that Clement had seen and heard them,
sties' time, ^nd that Several others were then alive beside him,
that had done the like ; he plainly supposes that
they had been dead a considerable time. For we
never speak so of men that have been dead but a
year or two. When we say, * There are many yet
' alive that can remember such a man, and have
' conversed with him ;' a stander by will conclude
we speak of one that has been dead a good while ;
it may be fifteen or twenty years. And yet even
so, if we reckon with Eusebius'' and other ancient
accounts, that Clement held the seat but nine years,
he will yet die before St. John, and before the time
when, by all accounts, he wrote his gospel.

This also is considerable ; that Clement, who
quotes many places out of other books of the New
Testament, seems never to have seen any of St.
John's writings.

Therefore, though bishop Pearson has convinced
every body that Hyginus is to be placed as he has
placed him ; yet it seems improbable that Clement
should have been bishop so soon as he places him.
Rather, some vears are to be taken from the times
of the bishops that were between those two.

IX. For the same reason, I think it very impro-
bable that this Clement was the Clement mentioned,
Phil. iv. 3, as St. Paul's fellow labourer, when he
was at Rome the first time, six years before his
martyrdom ; though Eusebius^, St Jerome ^ and
Epiphanius do guess him to be the same. For
would not Irenaeus have mentioned that, instead of

d Chronic, it. Hist. lib. iii. c. 34. ^ H. E. lib. iii. c. 1 2.

f De Script. Eccl. v. Clemens.

Clement and Hermas. GJ

saying what he does? It was much more to his chap. i.
purpose, than to observe the like of Linus, of whose i„ theapo-
authority he makes no such use. '*'^^^' ""'^'

And more improbable it is, that this Hermas
should be the same whom St. Paul salutes as his
acquaintance eleven years before he died, Rom. xvi.
14, though Origen^ guess it to be he; and Eusebius''
and 8t. Jerome' tell us that several thought so.
For this Hermas, as he was no young man, because
he had children ** then guiltv of fornication, so he
was no very old man when he wrote ; because he
mentions the woman ^ that had been brought up
with him, as a woman of such great beauty at that
time. To conclude men to be the same, because of
the same name, as it is very obvious, so it is of little
weight.

And if they be not judged to be the same, nor to
have had any such familiarity with the apostles, but
only to have seen or heard them, &c., then that
argument falls to the ground of those that say.
These books are either spurious, and then. Why do
we regard them ? Or else, if they be counted
genuine, why are they not put into the canon,
as well as the writino-s of St. Luke and St. Mark ?
St. INIark and St. Luke were for certain contempo-
raries, companions, and intimate acquaintance with
the apostles for a long time of their life ; the same
is not certain, and I believe not true of the authors
of these books ; though it be plain that they lived
in the apostles' age, and wrote before the death of
St. John.

g Horn, in Rom. xvi. •' Lib. iii. c. 3. » De Script.

Eccl. V. Hermas. ^ Lib. i. Vis. 2. c. 2. ^ Lib. i. Vis. i.

64 Justin Martyr.

CHAP. II.

Quotations out of Justin Martyr.
Dialog, cum Trypho7ie, sect. 88.

CHAP. II. ^. I. KAI ov-^ w? ev^ea avrov tou ^a-TrricrQrivai, t] toO
Year after eTreXOovTO? ev e'lSei TrepicTTepag TTvevfxaTOS, o'lSajuev avTOV

the apo- '^ A A ' 1 \ \ in i's\ \ n^-

sties. 40. eA}]Avuevai eiri rov TrorajULOv' cocnrep ovoe to yei/vrjUijvai

■ ■ '■i°- avTOv Kai (TTaup(ioO)jvai to? ej/(5e>79 toJtwj/ V7re fxeivev, aXX'

virep TOU yevov? tov tcov avOpcoTTCov, o airo tov Aoaju

UTTO 6avaT0v koi ifKavriv Trjv Tov"0(pe(io^ eTreTrrco/cet, irapa

Tt]V loiav aiTiau CKacrTOV avTwv ■wovrjpevcraiJ.evov.

' And we know that he did not go to Jordan, as
' having any need of being baptized, or of the
' Spirit's coming on him in shape of a dove. As
• also, neither did he submit to be born and to be
' crucified, as being under any necessity of those
' things. But he did this for mankind, M'hicli by
' Adam was fallen under death, and under the guile
' of the serpent, beside the peculiar guilt of each of
' them who had sinned.'

I recite this only to shew that in these times,
so very near the apostles, they spoke of original sin
affecting all mankind descended of Adam ; and un-
derstood, that, besides the actual sins of each parti-
cular person, there is in our nature itself, since the
fall, something that needs redemption and forgive-
ness by the merits of Christ. And that is ordinarily
applied to every i)articular person by baptism. In
answer to the exceptions made against my translat-
ing irapa here by prwter, I have, in a Defence which
I have been forced to write since the second edition,
shewn that all whom I have seen, and I believe ab-
solutely all, who have translated this place, have so

Justin Martyr. 65

rendered it. And that Justin's ordinary phrase, chap. ii.
and particularly in this dialogue, is to use it so. ^

Dialog, cum Try phone, sect. 43. (a.d. [40.)

II. Kat rjixel^, 01 Sia toutou irpoa-ywpijcravTe^ tu> 0ew,
ov ravTrjv ti]V Kara crapKci 7rape\a(3o/uL€v TrepcTO/utjv, aWa
trvevixariKi^v, ^i/'Ej/(o^ kol 01 ojuoioi ecpuXa^av' rj/xelis ^e Siu
Tov ^airTicrixaTo^ avTrjv, eTreiSij djuapTcoXo). eyeyoueijuev
via TO eAeof to rtrapa tov Qeov eXa^o/uev' /cat Tracriv
€(peTOv 0/1X010)9 Xain^aveiv.

* We also who by him have had access to God,

* have not received this carnal circumcision, but the

* spiritual circumcision, which Enoch, and those like

* him observed. And we have received it by bap-
' tism, by the mercy of God, because we were sin-

' ners ; and it is allowed to all persons to receive it <

' by the same way.'

It is plain that this most ancient father does here
speak of baptism being to Christians in the stead of
circumcision ; and the analogy between these two is
one of the arguments used by the psedobaptists to
prove that one ought to be given to infants, as well
as the other was. It is to the same sense, as is that
saying of St. Paul, where he calls baptism, with the
putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, which
attends it, the circumcision of Christ, (or aSs it would
be more intelligibly rendered, the Christian circum-
cision,) in these words : In whom also ye are cir-
cumcised with the circumcision made without hands,
in putti7ig off the body of the sins of the flesh, by
the circumcision of Christ : bu7'ied with him in bap-
tistn^. For by those words, the circumcision of Christ,
must be understood either that action by which
Christ himself in his infancy was circumcised ; and

"' Col. ii. II, 12.

WALL, VOL. I. F

66 Justin Martyr.

CHAP. II. it is no sense to say, that the Colossians were eir-
^^^ cumcised with that ; or else, that circumcision which

(A.D.I 40.) chrigt has appointed, the Christian circumcision ;
and with that he says they were circumcised, being
buried with him by baptism. Only he, as well as
Justin, refers both to the inward and outward part
of baptism ; whereof the inward part is done with-
out hands : and accordingly the ancients were wont
to call baptism, Trepirofxrjv ayeipoirolrjrov, ' the circum-
' cision done without hands ;' as will appear by some
following quotations °. So that it seems hard for
the antipsedobaptists to maintain, as some of them
do, that the scripture and ancient Christians do
not make any resemblance between these two
sacraments.

The paraphrase given of this text of St. Paul, in
the Qusest. ad Orthodox, ascribed to Justin Martyr,
q. 102, is this: the question there is, * Why, if
' circumcision were a good thing, we do not use it
' as well as the Jews did V The answer is, * We are
' circumcised by baptism with Christ's circumcision,'
&c. And he brings this text for his proof.
Justini Apologia prima {vulgo secunda) ad Anto-

ni7ium Pium^.
III. This holy man and good martyr of Jesus
Christ does in this Apology, presented to the em-
peror and senate in behalf of the Christians, vin-
dicate them from the absurd and abominable slanders
which the people raised on them ; as that they did
in their assemblies eat young children, and commit
promiscuous fornication, &c. And having spoke of
their doctrine and conversation, and shewn that they

^ See ch. xii. s. iii. ch. xiv. s. i. ° Prope finem.

Justin Martyr. 67

neither believed nor practised any such mischievous chap. ii.
things as were reported, he proceeds to speak of the 40.
two most solemn rites that they used, viz. of initiating (^-^-ho.)
or entering the converts that came to them by
baptism ; and of confirming their faith by receiving
the Lord's Supper. And of baptism says thus : '^Oj/

Tooirov Se /cat aveOtiKafxep eavrovs tw Oec5, KaivoTroiijOevTeg
Sia Tov X|0/(TTOi', e^riytja-o/ueOa' ottw? fjirj tovto irapaXi-
TToVre? So^w/mev 'Kovr]peveiv r\ ev tTj e^tjyi'jcrei. ' Oaoi dv
TreKrOwcri Kal 7ri(TT€vo)un> aXrjdij raOra ra iKp' ^fxcov oioa-
erKO/ueva koi Xeyofxeua, elvai, Ka\ ^lovv oureog SuvacrOai
viricrvyuivTaif ev^ecrQai re Kai aiTeiv vrjarevovTe^ Trapa tov
QeovTMV irpornxapTrjixevcov a(pecriv SiSacrKOurai, tj/xuiv avvev-
yoixeviav kol (rvvvrjcrTevovTOOu avTOcg. "ETretra dyoprai vcp^
i}IJ.(Jov evOa vSwp ecrr], ku] Tpoirov avayevvj](xe(io<i ov Kai ^juei?
avTo\ aveyevpi'iOrj/ixev, aiayevvcovTai. 'Ett' oi/ofxaTO^ yctp

TOV YLaTpOg TOOV oXwV Koi AeCTTTOTOV QeOVf Ka} TOV 2ft)-

T)]pog rjjULCov 'Ij/ctoi; XjOtcrroi/, Km TlvevjuaTog dyiov to ev tw
vSaTi t6t€ \ovTp6v TTOiovvTai. Kal yap 6 ^pia-TOS eiirev,
'''Au fxi] a.vayevv)]Ot]T€, ov fxr; eicreXOrjTe eig Tr]v /SaaiXelav twv
ovpavoov' oTi Se Koi aSuvaTOv eif Tag fx^Tpa? twv TeKOvcrwv
TOV9 aira^ yevvcojuevovg e/m^Pjvai, (pavepov iracriv ecTTi. K.ai
Sia 'Haaiov tov Tlpo<p)]TOv, w? Trpoeypdy^afxeu, e'iprjTai^
TLva TpoTTOv (pev^ovTUL Ta? dixapTiag 01 dfxapTT^cravTe? Kai
jmeTavoovvTeg, eXe-^^Or] Se ovtwi}, AovcraarOe, Ka6apo\ yevecrOe,
&C. — Kal Xoyov Se et? tovto Trapa tu)v ^AttocttoXcov efxa-
dofxev tovtov' eTreiSr] Tt]v TrpdoTrjp yevecriv ^/jlwv dyvoovvTe<;
/car dvdyKriv yeyevvriixeQa e^ vypd<i cnropd<} KaTa fxi^iv Trjv
TOOV yoveoov kut dXXtjXovs, Kai ev eOecri (pavXois Ka] Trovt}-
paig dvaTpocpah yeyovajxev, oiroof} ixrj dvayK)]^ TeKva /a;;o'
dyvoiag /j-evco/nev, dXXa Trpoaipecreco? Kai eTTiarT^firis, acpeaewg
T€ dfxapTiwv virep wv Trpotj/xdpTOfxev Tv-^oDfxev ev too vSuti,
CTTOvofid^eTai too eXofJievu) avayevvrjOtjvat Kai lueTavorjcravTi
eir] TOig ri/ui.apTt]iuLevoig to tov JlaTpog tu>v bXwv Kai

F 2

68 Justin Martyr.

CHAP. II. Aea-TTOTOv Qeov ovofxa, &C. KaXerrat ^e tovto to \ovrp6u
^o. cf)cori(Tiui.6g^\

(A.D. 140,) 4 J ^y-jj ^^^ declare to you also after what manner
' we being made new by Christ [or baptized] have
' dedicated om-selves to God : lest, if I should leave
' out that, I might seem to deal unfairly in some

* part of my apology. They who are persuaded and
' do believe that those things which are taught by
' us are true, and do promise to live according to
' them, are directed first to pray and ask of God
' with fasting, the forgiveness of their former sins :
' and we also pray and fast together with them.
' Then we bring them to some place where there is
' water ; and they are regenerated by the same way
' of regeneration by which we were regenerated :
' for they are washed with water in the name of '
' God, the Father and Lord of all things, and of our
' Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit. For

* Christ says, Unless ye be regenerated, ye cannot enter
' into the kingdom of heaven^ : and every body knows
' it is impossible for those that are once generated [or
' born] to enter again into their mother's womb.

' It was foretold by the prophet Isaiah •■, as I said,
' by what means they who would repent of their
' sins might escape them : and was written in these

* words ; Wash you, make you clean, put away the
' evil, &c.

' And we have been taught by the apostles this
' word [or this reason] for this thing : because we,

* being ignorant of our first birth, were generated

* by necessity [or course of nature] of the humid
' seed of our parents mixing together, and have
' been brought up in ill customs and conversation ;

V Apol. I. s. 6t. q John iii.5. >■ Isa. i. 16.

Justin Martyr. 69

' that we should not continue children of that ne-cnAP. ii.
' cessity and ignorance, but of will, [or choice,] and ~^
' knowledge, and should obtain forgiveness of the(^-^'-^°)
' sins in which we have lived, by water, [or in the
' water.] There is invoked, over him that has a
' mind to be regenerated, the name of God, the Fa-
' ther and Lord of all things, &c. — And this wash-
' ing is called the enlightening,' &c.
P If I am asked to what purpose I bring in this in
a discourse of infant baptism ; my answer is, that I
do not produce it as making directly or immediately
either for or against it. He being here to shew that
the ceremony of entering proselytes that came to them
from the heathens, had no ill thing in it, had no occa-
sion to speak of the case of infants. But I bring it,

1, Because it is the most ancient account of the
way of baptizing, next the scripture ; and shews
the plain and simple manner of administering it.
The Christians of these times had lived, many of
them at least, in the apostles' days.

IV. 2. Because it shews that the Christians of
these times used the word regeneration [or being
born again] for baptism : and that they were taught
so to do by the apostles. And it will appear by the
multitude of places I shall produce, that they used
it as customarily, and appropriated it as much to
signify baptism, as we do the word christening.
They used also avaKuivicrixo^ or KaivoTroua, ' renewing,'
and cpMTia-fxo?, ' enlightening,' for the same thing : as
appears by the first and last words of this passage.

And thirdly, because we see by it, that they un-
derstood that rule of our Saviour, Ecvcept one be re-
generated [or born again] of loater and the Spirit,
he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, of water-

70 Justin Martyr.

CHAP. II. baptism ; and concluded from it, that without such
' ~^, baptism, no person could come to heaven. And so
(A.D.140.) ^j^ g^ij ^j^g writers of these 400 years, not one man

excepted.

V. This is of the more use to note, because many
modern writers use the word regeneration, or neiv-
bii'th, for repentance and conversion, whether it be
accompanied with baptism at that time or not. But
the ancients do not so. The scripture also uses it
for baptism : The wasJmig of regeneration^ Tit. iii. 5,
is the washing of baptism.

And I shewed before in the introduction, that
this phrase was not first used by our Saviour or his
apostles : but that it was a usual word of the Jews,
to denote that baptism by which any proselyte was
baptized unto Moses.
Justin Martyr, Apol. 1 . {vulgo 2da) prope ah initio.

VI. Kai TToXXoi Tive? Ka\ TroWal et^tjKOvrovTai kci
e^SoiJ.r]KOVTOVTai, ot e/c iraiSuiv ejULaOtjTevOtja-av tw XjOicrTW,
acpOopoi SiajULevovcri. ' Several persons among us of sixty
' and seventy years old, of both sexes, who were disci-
' pled [or made disciples] to Christ in, or from their
' childhood, do continue uncorrupted [or virgins.]'

St. Justin's word, e/uaOtiTevO^arai', 'were discipled, or
* made disciples,' is the very same word that had
been used by St. Matthew in expressing our Sa-
viour's command, nxaOfjrevarare, disciple [or, make
disciples] all the nations. And it was done to
these persons, Justin says, in or from their child-
hood. So that whereas the antipaedobaptists do
say, that when our Saviour bids the apostles dis-
ciple the nations, baptizing them; he cannot mean
infants; because he must be understood to bid them
baptize only such among the nations as could be

Justin Martyr. 71

made disciples ; and infants, they say, cannot be chap. ii.
made disciples. They may perceive that in the 40.
sense in which Justin understood the word, they^''^*^''^*'*^
may be made disciples. And Justin wrote but ninety
years after St. Matthew, who wrote about fifteen
years after Christ's ascension. And they that were
seventy years old at this time must have been made
disciples to Christ in their childhood, (as he says
they were,) about thirty-six years after the ascen-
sion ; that is, in the midst of the apostles' times,
and within twenty years after St. Matthew's writ-
ing.

CHAP. III.

Quotations out of St. Irenceus and Clemens Alexan-

drinus.

^. I. IRENjEUS does in many places speak of 67.
original sin, as affecting 'all mankind V all our

* race^' putting them in a state of ' debtors to God,

* transgressors, and enemies to liim^' ' under the
' stroke of the serpent, and addicted to death ^.
And that it is only in and through Christ that they
have ' reconciliation and redemption^.' He also so
speaks of baptism, as of the means or instrument by
which this redemption is conveyed and applied to
any one, and calls it by the name of XvTpcoa-ig and
a7roXvTp(jo(ji9f ' redemption^.'

But though this laid together do make an argu-
ment for the baptizing all persons, infants as well
as others, yet I shall pass by this and other such

a Lib. contra Hser. v. c. 19. ^ Ibid. c. 21. c Ibid. c. 16.
d Lib. iv. c. 5. et lib. v. c. 19. ^ Lib. iii. c. 20. f Lib. i. c. 18.

72 Irenwus.

CHAP.iii. places in this and other authors, that speak of ori-
67. ginal sin, and the necessity of baptism only in gene-
^ ■ *' ^'^ral: intending henceforward to recite such only as
do more directly and immediately concern infants,
and speak of their baptism ; either for or against it.
Irenceiis adv. Hcereses, lib. ii. c. 39- (edit. Grabe ;
but cap. 22. s. 4. in ed. Benedict. 1710.) speak-
ing of Chr ist .

II. ' Magister ergo existens Magistri quoque ha-
bebat setatem. Non reprobans nee supergrediens
' hominem, neque solvens [suam] legem in se humani
' generis : sed omnem setatem sanctificans per illam
' quae ad ipsum erat similitudinem. Omnes enim
' venit per semet ipsum salvare : omnes, inquam, qui
' per eum renascuntur in Deum ; infantes, etpar-
' vulos, et pueros, et juvenes, et seniores. Ideo per
' omnem venit setatem : et infantibus infans factus,
* sanctificans infantes : in parvulis parvulus, sancti-
' ficans hanc ipsam habentes a3tatem ; simul et ex-
' emplum illis pietatis effectus, etjustitiae et subjec-
' tionis : in juvenibus juvenis,' &c.

' Therefore as he was a Master, he had also the
' age of a Master. Not disdaining nor going in a
' wav above human nature ; nor breaking in his
' own person the law which he had set for man-
' kind : but sanctifying every several age by the
' likeness that it has to him. For he came to save
' all persons by himself : all, I mean, who by him
' are regenerated [or baptized] unto God ; infants
' and little ones, and children and youths, and elder
' persons. Therefore he went through the several
' ages : for infants being made an infant, sanctifying
'' infants : to little ones he was made a little one,
' sanctifying those of that age ; and also giving

Irenceus. 7S

' tbem an example of godliness, justice, and dutiful- chap.iii.
' ness : to youths he was a youth,' &c. ~Z

This testimony, which reckons infants among (^^'^^^
those that are regenerated, is plain and full ; pro-
vided the reader be one that is satisfied that the
word regeneration does, in the usual phrase of those
times, signify baptism : and this cannot be doubted
by any that are at all acquainted with the books of
those ages. As for those that are not, I have al-
ready had occasion to refer ? them to the use of the
Jews before and in Christ's time, and to some places
of scripture : and it may be worth the while to turn
back to the passage of Justin Martyr last quoted,
(he lived but thirty or forty years before this man,)
and to observe how he uses the word. The reader
will also see, in almost all the passages that I shall
have occasion to produce, the same use of the word
constantly observed ; that to say regenerated is with
them as much as to say baptized.

III. At present take these three evidences of it :
1. Irenaeus himself uses it so in all other places of
his book that I have ever observed : as for instance,
1. iii. c. 19, [c. 17. 1.] where he is producing testi-
monies of scripture concerning the Holy Spirit, he
has this ; ' Et iterum, potestatem regenerationis in
' Deum dans discipulis, dicebat eis,' &c. And again,
when he gave his disciples the commission of rege-
nerating unto God, he said unto them, Go and teach
all nations, haptiziiig them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Sjnrit. Where
the commission of regenerating plainly means the.
commission of baptizing.

And 1. i.e. 18. [c.21.1.] Concerning the Valentinian

? Introduct. s. vi.

74 Irencem.

CHAP.iu. heretics, who altered and corrupted both the form of

67. Christian baptism and the manner of administering

(- • •»o7-)it, (of which corruptions I have occasion to speak

particularly hereafter, chap. xxi. s. ii. and part ii.

ch. V. s. i.) he says,

Ei'? e^apv}](Tiv Tou ^a-TrTicriuiaTog r^9 e<V Qeov avayev-
i't]cre(i)^, Kai iraarj^ t*;? irlcrTecoi aTroOecriv, viro^efiXrjTaL to

elSog TovTo viro rod 'Earava. ' This generation of
' heretics has been sent out by Satan for the fi-ustrat-
' ing [or denying] of the baptism of regeneration
' unto God, [i. e. the true Christian baptism, instead
' of which they set up a mock baptism of their own,]

* and the destruction of our whole faith [or religion].'
And it appears by the following parts of the chapter,
that the Valentinians also aped the Christians in
calling their mock-baptism by the name of regene-
ration and redemption, Xeyoua-i Se avrijv avajKalav

elvai 'iva eig Tr]v virep iravTa Awajmiv wcriv avayeyev-

vrinevoi. ' They say that it [their way of baptism] is
necessary for all true Gnostics, that they may be
' regenerated unto that power which is above all,
' i. e. above the God of the Christians.'

And 1. V. C.15. [c.l5. 3.] speaking of the blind man
whom our Saviour cured by clay and spittle, and bade
him wash in the pool of Siloam ; and calling this ap-
plication of clay, and this washing, in an allegorical
way, a creation, or new formation of his eye ; and a
baptism ; he styles that washing, lavacrum regene-
rationis, ' the washing of regeneration.' And a little
after, ' Simul et plasmationem et eam quse est per

* lavacrum regenerationem restituens ei.' * He gave
' to him at the same time his formation [viz. that of
' his eye] and that regeneration which is by the

* laver [viz. baptism.]'

Trencpiis. 75

And 1. iv. c. 59. [c. 33. 4.] disputing against theCHAP.iii.
Ebionites, (who denied our Saviour to have been 67.
conceived in the womb in any miraculous manner, ^^"^ '^^'^
but thought him to have been begotten by Joseph
in the ordinary way.) he asks them, how they think
to escape the generation of death, [or the curse
attending the natural generation,] if they do not
believe that new way of generation which was
foretold to Ahaz, {Behold, a virgiii shall conceive,)
and so ' eam recipiant quaj est per fidem regene-
' ratioiiem,' ' receive that regeneration [or baptism]
' which is by the faith [or creed] ?'

This place is mangled in the old copy. And
Dr. Grabe*^ shews that the sense requires the words
eam recipiant qiice est to be restored in the blank.
And it is to be noted that the ancient creeds always
had that clause, of the conception of a virgin, in
opposition to these Ebionites. And a common name
for the creed was (as Mr. Bingham shews) IT/o-Tt?,
' the faith.' According to which faith Irenaeus advises
the Ebionites to receive their baptism.

As the ancients, when they speak of regeneration
as applied to a person in this world, do always by
that word mean, or connote, his baptism ; so when
they speak of the regeneration of the world itself, or
the earth, they mean its restitution or renovation
after the day of judgment ; which may be called its
new birth, or new formation. And in that meta-
phorical way of speaking, they sometimes call the
resurrection of the body its regeneration. So there
is one place in Irenaeus, lib. v. c. 2, where, by the re-
generation of the flesh, one does not know whether
he mean the baptism of it in this world, or its

*' [Compare the xmAq of the Benedictine editor on this point.]

76 Irenceus.

CHAP.iii. resurrection in the world to come. He is there dis-
Z^ puting against the Valentinians, and all those sorts

(A.D.i67.)of heretics who denied either the truth of Christ's
natural body and its resurrection, or the resurrec-
tion of ours ; and says, ' Vani autem omnimodo, qui
' universam dispositionem Dei contemnunt, et carnis
' salutem negant, et regenerationem ejus spernunt ;
' dicentes non earn capacem esse incorruptibilitatis.'
' They are altogether vain, who undervalue the
' whole economy of God, and deny any salvation of
' the flesh [or body] and do slight the regeneration
' of it ; saying that it is not capable of a state of
' in corruption.'

By their slighting the regeneration of the flesh,
he must mean either their denying its resurrection,
as many of them did ; or else their refusing to give
it baptism ; which several sects of the Valentinians
did, who are mentioned by Irenseus at other places
which I recite, part ii. ch. 5. ^. i. By his making
two sentences of it, his meaning seems to be, that
they, not believing any resurrection of the body, but
that the soul is all that survives, did not think the
body worthy of a baptism.

These, and one piece more, are all that I know of,
where he uses the word : lib. iii. c. 33. [c. 22. §. 4.]
He is speaking of Christ, at his descent to Hades,
freeing the patriarchs from that power of death, or
Hades, under which they had been held : and says,
' Primogenitus enim mortuorum natus Dominus, et
' in sinum suum reeipiens pristinos patres, regene-
' ravit eos in vitam Dei.' ' Our Lord being made the
' first begotten from the dead, and receiving the an-
* cient patriarchs into his bosom, regenerated them
' to the life of God.' — And a httle after ; ' Hie illos

Irenceus. 77

' in evangelium vitae regeneravit. ' He regenerated ruAP. in.
' them to the gospel of life.' ^7

These phrases at this place, he means, I think, as ^^^'^•'^^'^
a comment on those texts of St. Peter; He imni
and preached to the spirits in prison : and, the
gospel preached to those that were dead. For that
he understood them so, is plain by what he says, lib.
iv. c. 45. [c. 27. ^. 2.] ' Dominum in ea quae sunt
' sub terra descendisse, evangelizantem et illis ad-
' ventum suum,' &c. Many of the eldest Christians
(beside Hernias, whose words I gave before) con-
ceived, that the gospel of life was preached, and bap-
tism in the name of Christ given to the patriarchs in
their separate state.

But however that be ; in all the places where he
uses the word regeneration^ as applied to the case of
any persons in this life, he refers to their baptism.
Which confirms that sense of it in the place I first
quoted.

IV. 2. There are several sayings both of the
Latin and Greek fathers, which do plainly shew
that they not only used that word for baptism, but
also that they so appropriated it to baptism, as to
exclude any other conversion or repentance that is
not accompanied with baptism, from being signified
by it. As these that follow :

Greg. Nazianzen, when he deters the baptized

person from falling back into sinful courses, tells

IhimS ' There is not another regeneration afterward

to be had, though it be sought with never so much

(* crying and tears :' and yet grants in the next

words, that there is repentance after baptism : but

> Orat. 40. prope ab initio. Ovk ovarjs devrepus dvayevvr)(T€(os.

78 Irenceus.

CHAP. III. shews a difference between that and the free forgive-
67. ness given in baptism.

(A.D.167.) St. Austin being asked, whether a parent carrying
his child, which had been baptized, to the heathen
sacrifices, do thereby obliterate the benefit of his
baptism^, gives this rule: 'An infant does never lose

* the grace of Christ which he has once received, but

* by his own sinful deeds, if when he grows up

* he prove so wicked, for then he will begin to
' have sins of his own, qiice non regeneratione au-
^ fera7itur, sed alia ciiratione sanentur, which are

* not to be done away by regeneration, but by some
' other way of cure.' These kind of sayings do
plainly contradistinguish regeneration from repent-
ance, conversion, &c. except in case of baptism.

27°- So St. Hierome, discoursing in praise of virginity,
has this^ among the rest, that Christ was ' natus ex

* virgine, renatus per virginem,' ' born of a virgin, and
' regenerated by a virgin ;' meaning he was baptized
by John, that was unmarried. To say that Christ
was regenerated, taking the word, as many modern
writers do, for conversion, repentance, &c. would be
an impious speech.

And St. Ambrose, Z^e Us qui initiantur, c. 4. says™,
' Nee sine aqua regenerationis mysteriiim est,' ' There
' is no reireneration without water.'

St. Austin calls the persons by whose means in-
fants are baptized, ' eos per quos renascuntur,' ' those
' by whom they are regenerated,' which would be a
strange speech in the dialect of some late English

^ Epist. 23. ad Bonifacium.

^ Lib. i. contra Jovinian. circa medium.

>» [Or. De Mysteriis ; vol. ii. p. 325. ed. Benedict.]

Ireneeus. 79

writers, who use the w^ ' .or the conversion of thernAP.iii.

heart. Z

67.

V. 3. When Irenseus does here speak of infants > ad. 167.)
regenerated ; it is plain enough of itself, that they

are not capable of regeneration in any other sense
of the word, than as it signifies baptism ; I mean the
outward act of baptism, accompanied with that grace
or mercy of God, whereby he admits them into
covenant, though without any sense of theirs.

I shall in the places that I must cite hencefor-
ward, where we meet with the word regeneratus,
renatus, &;c., translate it regenerated, without any
further explication ; but the reader will find that he
must understand by it baptized ; or else that he will
make no sense at all of the place. If any one doubt
whether Irenaeus by infants does mean children be-
fore the use of reason, I refer to the Defence of my
book against Mr. Gale and Mr. Whiston, who have
suggested the contrary, and do here only advise the
following words to be read, where he mentions the
benefit of Christ's example to all the rest, the par-
vidi, the Juvenes, and the seniores, but says no such
thing of the infants.

VI. Since this is the first express mention that we
have met with of infants baptized, it is worth the
while to look back, and consider how near this man
was to the apostles' time. Mr. Dodwell, who has
with the greatest care and skill computed his age",
makes him to be born in the apostolic age, viz. the
year after Christ's birth 97, four years before St.
John died ; and that he was chosen bishop of Lyons
anno Dom. 167, which is after the apostles 67. His
proofs are too long to repeat here. So much is plain,

" Dissertationes ad Irenaeum, 8vo. Oxoniae, j68y.

80 Ireneeus.

CHAP.iii. that he wrote the book I here quote within eighty
67! years after the apostles, and that he was then a very

(A.D.167,) ^1^ man. For he wrote the two first of his live
books against heresies first, and published them ",
in which tliese words are ; and he published his
third book in the time of Eleutherus, bishop of
Rome, for he mentions him as then bishop p. Eleu-
therus's time is set by bishop Pearson 1 from the year
of Christ 170 to 185; but by Mr. Dodwell «• from
162 to 177. So that the year of Christ 180 is the
latest that the two first books can well be supposed
to have been written. Therefore whether we agree
or not with Mr. Dodwell, that he was born before
St. John's death ; yet it could be but very little after,
by the age he must be of when he wrote. And be-
sides, he himself says ^ as I also recited before, that
the Revelation made to St. John in Patmos, was ' but
' a little before his time,' and that Revelation was
five or six years before St. John died. The learned
man* that has given the last edition of his works,
though he differ from Mr. Dodwell, yet makes him
born but six years after St. John's death. Every
body that was at this time eighty years old must
have been born in the apostles' time. Irenaeus's
parents must have been born then, if he were not
himself.

I shall say no more, but leave it to every body to

o Vide Prolog, lib. iii. P Ibid. c. 3.

q Pearsoni Opera Posthuma, 4to. Londini, 1688.

r Dissert, sing, de Rom. Pontif. Successione, c. 14 et 15.
[This dissertation of Dodwell is subjoined to Bishop Pearson's
Opera Posthuma.]

s Lib. V. c. 30.

* [Dr. Grabe ; for the Benedictine edition had not appeared
in 1 7 05, the year in which this was printed.]

IrencLUS. 81

judge whether it were possible for the church thenCHAP.iii.

to be ignorant what was clone as to the baptizing of ^.,

infants in the apostles' time; when many then '^^•^■' 9^-)

living, and the parents of most then living, were

themselves infants in that time. Yet this I may

add, that Irenreus, though at this time he lived in

France, being bishop of Lyons, yet was brought up

in Asia, (where St. John had died but a little before,)

and probably born of Christian parents. For he

had in his younger years often heard Polycarp (who

was St. John's acquaintance, and was^ chosen by

him bishop of Smyrna, and was probably that angel

[or bishop] of the church of Smyrna that is so much

commended Rev. ii. 8.) discourse of St. John and his

teaching. This he relates of himself in his Epistle

to Florinus* : and he says, he remembers the thing

as if it were but yesterday : for, says he, ' I remem-

' ber the things that were done then, better than I

' do those of later times, (which is the property of

' old men,) so that I could describe the place where

' he sat, and his going out and coming in, his man-

* ner of life, his features, his discourse to the people

' concerning the conversation he had had with John,

' and others that had seen our Lord ; how he re-

' hearsed their discourses, and what he had heard

' them that were eyewitnesses of the word of life,

' say of our Lord, and of his miracles and doctrine :

' all agreeable to the scriptures.'

In an age so nigh the apostles, and in a place
where one of them had so lately lived, the Christians
could not be ignorant what had been done in their
time in a matter so public and notorious as is the
baptizing or not baptizing of infants.

s Iren. lib. iii. c. 3. * Apud Euseb. Hist. lib. v. c. 19.

WALL, VOL. I. G

82 Clemens Alexandrinus.

CHAP.iii. VII. It is to be noted, that this testimony of Ire-
~ nseus, or any other of any of the fathers, is not so

(A.D, 192.) much to be regarded as it speaks their opinion or
sense, as it is for that it gives us an evidence of what
was then beheved, taught, or practised by the church.
If he had only signified that he thought fit that in-
fants should be regenerated, it had been but one doc-
tor's opinion : but he speaks of it as a thing generally
known that they were then usually regenerated.

VIII. Near the time that Irenseus wrote these
his books against heresies at Lyons in France, and
therein uses the word regeneration for baptism, and
speaks of infants as usually regenerated, St. Cle-
ment was catechist to the Christian auditors at a
very distant place, viz. at Alexandria in Egypt.
And he also in all his works commonly uses the
phrase of regenerate and regeneration to signify, or
connote, the Christian baptism ; (as I have largely
shewn elsewhere ; which is a plain evidence that it
w^as all over the Christian world at that time (as it
has been ever since till of late) the usual way of
speaking ; and does confirm the argument taken
from Ireneeus's words. I shall here recite but one
of the places, which is,
Cle7n. AlecV. Pcedagog. lib. i. c. 6. prope ah initio.
He is here disputing against some heretics (the
Valentinians and some other Gnostics) who affright-
ed the ordinary Christians ; telling them, that bap-
tism, as administered by the Catholics, did not put
any one into a comi>lete state of Christianity. They
said that some of their other rites were necessary.
The Valentinians added a great many (of which I
mention some, part ii. ch. v.) without which they
said baptism in the form mentioned in scripture did

Clemens Alexandrinus. 83

not make up a complete redemption (as they styled ^■^''^p" '•
it), nor was the baptized person reXeio^, perfect, or 92.
perfectly initiated. Against whom Clement arguing ' "'^^
has there such sayings as these :

^AvayevvfjOeuTeg ovv, evdeco^ to TeXeiov axetX>;(i)a/xei/.
' When we are regenerated [by which he plainly
' means here baptized~\ we then have received the
' perfection.' And a little after, Avr'iKa yoOv ^uttti-
^o/uevo) Tw y^vpio) air ovpavoov eTn'jyjicre (pcovi] juaprv?

riyairrjij.evov. ' As soou as Christ was baptized, pre-
' sently the voice came from heaven, declaring him
' the beloved/ &c. — Let us then ask these wise men;
^tj/mepov avayepvtjOe]^ 6 J^picTTog t'/of] reXeio? ecTTiv \ 5;
oirep aroTrcoraroi', eWnrtj^ ; ' Was Christ, as soon as

* he was regenerated, perfect? or will they be so

* absurd as to say, He still wanted any thing ?' &c.
"A^ua Tolvvv T(S ^aTTTi^ea-Oai avrov viro tou ^Icodvvov,
ytverai reXeio?. * As soon as baptized by John, he is

* perfect.' TeXeiourai Se rw Xovrpw laovu), kq] tou Tluev-
/uarof rrj KadoSw dyid^eTai. ' He is perfected [or per-
' fectly initiated] by the washing [or baptism] alone,

* and sanctified by the coming of the Holy Spirit on
' him.' And a little after he concludes thus: 'O fxovov

avayevvr}6e).^, wcnrepovv Kai rovvoixa eyei, Kai (paiTicrOeig,
dTTtjXXaKTai /xev irapay^prjixa, &C. ' He that is once

* regenerated, as the name of that [sacrament] is, and
' enlightened, has his state immediately changed,' &c.

Here the words ^a7rTiC6iJ.evo<s and avaycwriQeh^
baptized and regenerated, are all along used pro-
miscuously. And Christ himself is in some of the
paragraphs said to be baptized by John, and in some
regenerated. And moreover Clement says expressly,
the word regeneratio7i is the name for baptism :
so that though he do not here speak of the case of

G 2

84 Clemens Alexandrinus.

CHAP.iii. infants; yet his use of the word, and his declaring
^7 it to be the common use, confirms the sense of
^^^•'92-) that saying of Irenseus, which speaks of infants
regenerated.

IX. But in another book of the same treatise
Clement himself also does so speak, as to suppose
and take for granted that the apostles did baptize
infants, or little children, TraiSla, viz.

Pcedagog. lib. iii. c. 11. prope ah initio.

He is in this chapter giving direction to Christian
men and women concerning the gravity and mo-
desty to be used in their apparel and ornaments.
And among other things speaks of the rings then
usually worn on their fingers, and the seals en-
graven on them. He earnestly forbids all idolatrous
and lascivious pictures or engravings ; and advises
to such as are innocent, modest, and useful ; and
says thus :

' Let your seal be a dove, or a fish, or a ship
* under sail, or a harp, as was that of Poly crates, or
' an anchor, which Seleucus made his choice.' Kai/
oKievoiv t\^ fi, ^A^TTOcTToXov iui.eiui.v}](TtTai Ka] Twv i^ uoaT09

avaa-Trwfxei^wv TraiSiwv. ' And if any one be by trade a
' fisherman, he will do well to think of an apostle,
' and the children taken out of the water.'

I was, since the last edition, advertised of this
passage of Clement by two learned men from dis-
tant places of England, much about the same time ;
the reverend Dr. Jenkins, master of St. John's col-
lege, Cambridge, and the reverend Mr. Holland,
rector of Sutton in Wiltshire ; as a passage proving
infants baptized by the ajDOStles, which I had omit-
ted. I am something ashamed of myself for not
having observed it. For though it be expressed in

Clemens Alexandrinus. 85

but three words, and therefore might the more chap. in.
easily be overlooked ; yet such transient supposals (,2.
of a thing, and taking it for granted, are in an^^"^''^^'^
ancient author rather plainer proofs of its being then
generally used or known, than a larger insisting on
it would be.

An apostle's taking, drawing, or lifting a child
out of the water, cannot refer to any thing that I
can think of, but the baptizing of it. And infantem
de fonte levare, is a phrase used by the ancients,
denoting the baptizing of it, almost as commonly
as the word baptizing itself. And as the emblem
of an anchor, or of a ship under sail, used for the
impress of a seal-ring, does suppose those things to
be commonly seen, known, and used; so St. Clement's
advising the emblem of an apostle baptizing an
infant to be used by the Christians in his time
(which was but about ninety years after the apostles)
for the sculpture of their seals, does suppose it
commonly known by them that the apostles did
perform that office.

I do not find either by any suggestion of the
foresaid learned men, or by any search that I have
been able to make, that there is in the editions or
manuscript copies any variety in the reading of this
place ; nor that any commentator has understood it
in any other sense. Gentianus Hervetus gives (as
Dr. Jenkins has been pleased to inform me) this
comment upon it :

' Si insculpatur autem in gemma signum piscan-

* tis ; Meminerit, inquit, qui gestat annulum, Petri,

* quern Christus fecit piscatorem hominum ; et
' puerorum qui baptizati ex aqusc lavacro, sen piscina
' extrahuntur.'

86 Clemens Alexandrinus.

CHAP.iii. * If there be engraved in a seal ring the picture
^7 ' of a fisherman, [or rather as Clement's own words

(A.D. 192.) < ^j,g^ ij' a jjsherman will have an engraving on Ms
' seal^ let him think of St. Peter, whom Christ
' made a fisher of men ; and of the children, which
' when baptized are drawn out of a laver of water,
* as out of a fish-pool.'

Whether there be now remaining any memoir of
any such emblem as this, used by the Christians in
their seals, I know not. But there is proof that in
very ancient times they used this very sculpture on
their font stones. For there is at Bridekirk in
Cumberland a font stone" so ancient that Camden
confesses he could not read the inscription on it, nor
guess what was meant by several little images which
were as he says, ' curiously engraven on it.' But
the present bishop of Derry, Dr. Nicholson, late
bishop of Carlisle, has both explained the inscrip-
tion ; and by the imagery, he says, there is ' fairly
' represented a person in a long sacerdotal habit,
' dipping a child into the water , and a dove, the
' emblem no doubt of the Holy Ghost, hovering
' over the infant,' &c. This I took notice of in my
former editions, part ii. ch. ii. §. xiv.

But I did not then know that St. Clement had
advised such a sculpture for seals.

u [For more full accounts and engravings of this font, see Phi-
losophical Transactions for 1685, No. 178; Camden's Britannia
by Gibson, and especially by Gough, vol. iii. p. 183 : Nicholson's
History of Westmoreland and Cumberland, 4to. vol. ii. p. loi ;
Archseologia, vol. ii. p. 131 ; and vol. xiv. p. 1 13.]

TertuUian. 87

CHAP. IV.

Out of TertuUian.

§. I. TERTULLIAN and Origen being the two chap iv.
next that have said any thing of this matter, their ~
character is such as requires something to be said ^^■^■^°°''
of it. They were both of them very learned men ;
but both inchned to be singular in their opinions,
and accordingly both fell into great and monstrous
errors in the faith.

The first fell into the heresy of the INIontanists,
who blasphemously held that one Montanus was
that paraclete or comforter which our Saviour pro-
mised to send : and that better and fuller discoveries
of God's will were made to him than to the apostles,
who prophesied only in part. He commonly calls
the catholics psi/chicos, ' the carnal men.' And he
afterward forsook the Montanists too, and set up a
new sect of his own called TertuUianists^ : some
remainders of which sect continued at Carthage till
St. Austin's time, and he had the happiness to con-
vert the last of them, and to get them to give up
their church or place of worship to the catholics.

The other being a great Platonist, taught the
preexistence of souls : that the souls of all men had
a former being before the world, and had sinned in
that former state, and were sent hither into bodies
as a punishment : and he derived original sin from
thence, which the scripture derives from the fall of
Adamy. He had also other errors about the resur-

" Augustin. de Hseresibus, c. 26, et 86.
y Augustin. de Civit. Dei, lib. xi. c. 23.

88 Tertullian.

CHAP.iv. rection and the future state, &c., so that St. Hierome

loo. giving advice to Tranquilinus ^ of the caution where-

°° with one must read Origen's works, says, ' My

' opinion is, that Origen is sometimes to be read

' because of his learning, but so as we read Tertullian,

' Arnobius, Apollinaris, and some other ecclesiastical

* writers, both Greek and Latin, taking care to
' choose the good that is in them, and avoid th©

* contrary.'

As for the occasion I have here to quote them,
the rule I mentioned before is chiefly to be minded ;
that so far as they do, as historians, give us an
account of the faith and practice of the church in
their times, their testimony is considerable : but
where either of them has any particular opinion of
his own, it is not of any great authority.

Tertullian has spoke so in this matter of infant-
baptism, as that it is hard to reconcile the several
passages with one another. The reader shall havQ
the particulars.

Tertullianus de Baptismo, c. 10.

II. Having spoken of the matter of baptism,
water, and the form of it, In the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, he adds,

' Diximus, quantum mediocritati nostras licuit, de
' universis, quae baptism! religionem struunt : nunc
' ad reliquum statum ejus seque, ut potero, pro-
' grediar de qutestiunculis quibusdam.'

* I have, according to my mean ability, discoursed
' of all things that make up the religion [or essence]
' of baptism : now I will proceed to speak of some
' lesser questions about the other state thereof.'

Afterward, c. 12, 13.

'^ Ep. ad Tranquilinum, 76.

Tertullian. 89

ITT. 'Quum vero praescribitur nemini sine baptismoCHAPiv.
competere saliitem, ex ilia maxime pronunciatione '^,
Domini, qui ait ; Nisi tiattis ew aqua qiiis erit, non ^^•^•'^'^•)
Jiabet vitam : suboriuntur scrupulosi, imo temerarii
retractatus quorundam, quomodo ex ista pra^scrip-
tione apostolis salus competat, quos tinctos non in-
venimus in Domino, proeter Paulum : imo cum
Paulus solus ex illis baptismum Christi induerit,
aut proejudicatum esse de cseterorum periculo, qui
careant aqua Christi, ut prsescriptio salva sit : aut
rescindi praescriptionem, si etiam non tinctis salus
statuta est. Audivi (Domino teste) ejusmodi : ne
quis me tarn perditum existimet, ut ultro exagitem
libidine styli quae aliis scrupulum incutiant. Et
nunc illis, ut potero, respondebo qui negant apo-
stolos tinctos. Nam si humanum Johannis bap-
tismum inierant et Dominicum desiderabant (qua-
tenus unum baptismum definierat ipse Dominus,
dicens Petro perfundi volenti ; Qui semel lavit non
liahet necesse rursum : quod utique non tincto
omnino non dixisset) et hsec est probatio exerta
adversus illos qui adimunt apostolis etiam Johannis
baptismum, ut destruant aquae sacramentum.' Paulo
post, 'Hie ergo scelestissimi illi provocant quaestiones :
adeo dicunt, Baptismus non est necessarius, quibus
fides satis est : nam et Abraham nullius aquae nisi
fidei Sacramento Deo placuit.

' Sed in omnibus posteriora concludunt, et se-
quentia antecedentibus praevalent. Fuerit salus
retro per fidem nudam ante Domini passionem, et
resurrectionem : at ubi fides aucta est credendi in
nativitatem, passionem, resurrectionemque ejus ;
addita est ampliatio sacramento, obsignatio bap-
tismi, vestimentum quodammodo fidei, quae retro

90

Tertullian.

CHAP. IV.

lOO.

(A.D.200.)

erat nuda, nee potest jam [esse] sine sua lege. Lex
enim tinguendi imposita est et fomia priescripta ;
Ite, inquit, docete nationes, tingue7ites eas in nomen
Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Huic legi col-
lata definitio ilia, Nisi quis renatus fuerit ew aqua
et Spiritu, non intrahit in regnum coelorum ; ob-
strinxit fidem ad baptism! necessitatem. Itaque
omnes exinde credentes tinguebantur,' &c.

' Whereas it is an acknowledged rule, that none
can be saved without baptism, grounded especially
on that sentence of our Lord, Unless one be borti
of water he cannot be saved : some scruples do
arise, and even rash discourses of some men, how
according to that rule the apostles could be saved,
whom we do not find to have been baptized with
our Lord's baptism, except Paul. And when Paul
only of them had the baptism of Christ, either the
rest, who wanted this water of Christ, must be
supposed in a dangerous condition, that so the rule
may stand fast ; or else the rule is broken, if any
persons not baptized, can be saved. I have heard
some men (God is my witness) talk at this rate,
and would have nobody think me so lewd as by
the itch of my pen to raise questions purposely,
which may cause scruples in other men.

' I will here give an answer, as well as I can, to
those men that deny the apostles to have been bap-
tized. For if they received only the baptism of
John as of a man, and had not that of our Lord,
(inasmuch as our Lord himself had determined that
there is to be but one baptism, saying to Peter
when he desired to be washed, He that has been
once washed, has no need again : which he would
not have said to one that had not been washed at

Tertullian. 91

all,) even this is a plain proof against those whociiAP.iv.
take away from the apostles even the baptism of ~^
John, that they may abolish as needless the sacra- (^-^^oo-)
ment of water.' — And a little after — ' Here again
these impious men raise cavils, and say, Baptism
is not necessary for those that have faith, which is
sufficient ; for Abraham without any sacrament of
water, but of faith only, pleased God.'

' But in all matters the later injunctions bind,
and the following rules take place above those that
were before. Though there were salvation for-
merly by bare faith before our Lord's passion and
resurrection ; yet when the faith is enlarged to be-
lieve in his nativity, passion, and resurrection, there
is an enlargement of the sacrament, the sealing of
baptism, as it were a garment to our faith ; which
formerly was bare, but cannot now be without its
law : for the law of baptizing is given, and the
form of it appointed ; Go, says he, teach the na-
tio?iSf baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. And
when to this law that rule is added, Except one
he regenerated of water and the Spirit, he shall
not enter into the kingdom of heaven, it has bound
up faith to a necessity of baptism. And therefore
all believers from thenceforward were baptized,' &c.
And afterward, c. 17-
IV. Having said that it is not absolutely unlawful
for laymen to baptize, he adds :

' Sed quanto magis laicis disciplina verecundise
* et modestiae incumbit ; cum ea majoribus compe-
' taut, ne sibi adsumant dicatum episcopis officium
' episcopatus? i^mulatio schismatum mater est.
' Omnia licerc, dixit sanctissimus apostolus, sed non

92

Tertullian.

CHAP.IV.

100.
(A.D.2G0.)

omnia ea^pedire. Sufficiat scilicet in necessitatibus
utaris, siciibi aut loci aut temporis aut personae
conditio compellit. Tunc enim constantia succur-
rentis excipitur, cum urget circumstantia pericli-
tantis. Quoniam reus erit perditi hominis, si su-
persederit praestare quod libere potuit.'
' But how much more necessary for laymen is it
to keep the rules of humility and modesty ; that
since these things belong to men of higher order,
they do not arrogate to themselves the office of the
bishojjs that is proper to them? Emulation is the
mother of schism. The most blessed apostle said,
that all things ivere lawful, but all things were not
ejcpedient. Let it suffice that thou make use of
this power in cases of necessity : when the circum-
stance either of the place, or of the time, or of the
person requires it. For then the adventuring to
help is well taken, when the condition of a person
in danger forces one to it : because he that shall
neglect at such a time to do what he lawfully may,
will be guilty of the person's perdition [or damna-
tion.]'

Let the reader mind how all this is to be reconciled
with what he says afterwards, c. 18.
V. ' Cseterum baptismum non temere credendum

' esse sciant quorum officium est. Omni petenti te

* dato, suum habet titulum, proinde ad eleemosynam

* pertinentem. Imo illud potius perspiciendum ; No-
' lite dare sanctum canihus, et porcis projicere mar-
' garita vestra : et, Manus ne facile imposueris, ne
' participes aliena delicta Itaque pro cujusque

* personas conditione ac dispositione, etiam aetate,
' cunctatio baptismi utilior est : prsecipue tamen

* circa parvulos. Quid enim necesse est [ ]

T^rtuUian. 9S

sponsores etiam periculo iiigeri ? quia et ipsi peroiiAP.iv.

lOO.

mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possuiit,
et proventu malne indolis falli. Ait quidem Domi- ^^^^^°°'^
nus, Nolite illos iwohihere ad me venire. Veniant
ergo dum adolescunt, veniant dum discunt, dum
quo veniant docentur : fiant Christiani quum Chris-
tum nosse potuerint. Quid festinat innocens setas
ad reniissionem peccatorum ? Cautius agetur in
secularibus; ut cui substantia terrena non creditur,
divina credatur. Norint petere salutem, ut petenti
dedisse videaris. Non minori de causa innupti
quoque procrastinandi, in quibus tentatio praepa-
rata est ; tarn virginibus per maturitatem, quam
viduis per vacationem, donee aut nubant aut con-
tinentise corroborentur. Si qui pondus intelligant
baptismi, magis timebunt conseeutionem quam
dilationem. Fides integra secura est de salute.

' Diem baptismo solemniorem Pascha praestat ;
cum et passio Domini in quam tingimur, adimpleta
est,' &c.

' But they whose duty it is to administer bap-
tism, are to know that it must not be given rashly.
Give to every one that asketh thee, has its proper
subject, and relates to almsgiving : but that com-
mand rather is here to be considered. Give not
that which is holy to dogs, neither cast your pearls
before swine ; and that, Lay hands suddenly on
no man, neither be partaker of other metis faults.
.... Therefore according to every one's condition
and disposition, and also their age, the delaying of
baptism is more profitable, especially in the case of
little children. For what need is there [ ]

that the godfathers should be brought into danger?
because they may either fail of their promises by

94 Tertullian.

CHAP.iv. « death, or tliey may be mistaken by a child's prov-
loo. ' iiig of wicked disposition. Our Lord says indeed,

(, • .200.J ^ jj^ ^^^^ forbid them to come to me. Therefore let
' them come when they ai-e grown up ; let them
' come M'hen they understand ; when they are in-
' structed whither it is that they come ; let them
' be made Christians when they can know Christ.
' What need their guiltless age make such haste to
' the forgiveness of sins? Men will proceed more
' warily in worldly things ; and he that should not
' have earthly goods committed to him, yet shall
' have heavenly. Let them know how to desire this
' salvation, that you may appear to have given to
' one that asketh.

' For no less reason unmarried persons ought to
' be kept off, who are likely to come into tentation,
' as well those that never were married, upon
' account of their coming to ripeness, as those in
' widowhood for the miss of their partner : until

* they either marry or be confirmed in continence.
' They that understand the weight of baptism will
' rather dread the receiving it than the delaying
' of it. An entire faith is secure of salvation.

' The most solemn time for baptism is Easter, at
' which time the passion of our Lord, into which we

* are baptized, was fulfilled,' &c.

Let there be also compared with this, what he
says in another book.

Tertidlianus de Anima^ c. 39, 40.
VI. ' Adeo nulla ferme nativitas munda est,

* utique ethnicorum. Hinc enim et apostolus ex
' sanctificato alterutro sexu sanctos procreari ait :
' tam ex seminis praerogativa, quam ex institutionis
' disciplina : caeterum, inquit, immundi nascerentur.

TertiiUian. 95

Quasi designates tamen sanctitati, ac per hoc etiamcuAP.iv.

lOO.

saluti iiitelligi voleiis fidelium filios : ut hiijus
spei pigiiore matrimoniis quae retinenda censuerat " ■^°°*^
patrocinaretur. Alioquin meminerat Dominicae de-
fiuitionis, Nisi qiiis nascetur e.v aqua et spiritu,
non ibit in regmim Dei, i. e. non erit sanctus. Ita
omnis anima eousque in Adam censetiir, donee in
Christo recenseatur ; tamdiu immiinda, quamdiu
recenseatur : peccatrix autem, quia immunda.'

' So there is almost no being born clean, [or free

from sin,] that is of heathens. For hence the

apostle says, that of either parent sanctified, the

children that are born are holy, by reason of the

prerogative of that seed, and also the instruction in

their education. Else, says he, were they unclean.

But yet meaning to be understood thus : that the

children of the faithful are designed for holiness,

and so for salvation ; that by a pledge of such hope

he might plead for those marriages which he would

have to be continued. Otherwise [or, as for any

other meaning] he knew well enough what our

Lord had determined, Ecvcept one be born of water

and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom

of God ^ that is, he shall not be holy. Thus every

soul is reckoned as in Adam, so long till it be

anew enrolled in Christ, and so long unclean, till

it be so enrolled, and sinful because unclean,' &;c.

VII. I have cited these passages at large and

all together, that the reader may try if he can pick

any coherent sense out of them. It is the property

of warm men, when they are speaking earnestly

on one subject and urging that, to overlash so, as

that when they are speaking on another with like

earnestness, they fall into contradiction of what they

96 TertuUian.

CHAP.iv. said before. This author in tlie places here first
~^ cited, treating of the necessity of baptism, speaks of

(A.D.200.) that necessity as absolute ; and of those that die
unbaptized, as lost men : and is enraged at those
that maintain that faith without it is sufficient to
salvation. Yet afterward, when he is discoursing
of the weight, as he calls it, of baptism, he advises
several sorts of people to delay it ; and to encourage
them, tells them that if they should by that delay
happen to miss of it, ' an entire faith is secure of
' salvation.'

The most probable guess that I can make of that
which was his steady meaning (if he had any) is,
that those who put off their baptism negligently, or
as slighting it, do, if they finally die without it, lose
their life : but that in those that put it off only
that they may be fitter for it, and in a more likely
condition to keej) it unstained, if by that means they
happen to die without it, the will and purpose of
being baptized shall be accepted for the deed.

And when he is discoursing on the aforesaid
subject of the weight of baptism, he finds fault
with the custom of baptizing infants, and would
have them delayed till they are able to understand
and consider what they do, and then further till
they are married ; and if they do not marry, or if
their consort die, then further till the danger of lust
is over, which is frequently not till old age. A
strange advice, and which no men, either of the
ancients or moderns, either of the one or the other
side in this controversy, do approve of. And to urge
his opinion the more, he speaks of infants as if they
were innocent or sinless, and so had no need of the
forgiveness of sins granted in this sacrament.

I

TerUdlian. 97

Yet in the last cited place, when he is on an-CHAP.iv.
other theme, he plainly owns the catholic doctrine ,00.
of original sin in infants; and that every soul born^'^-^-^^*^-
of Adam is unclean and sinful, and continues so till
it be enrolled or ranked anew in Christ : and cites,
as pertinent to their case, the prescription, as he
calls it, or the standing rule, John iii. 5, Except
any one he born of water and the Spirit, he cannot
enter into God's kingdom.

How to reconcile this diversity, I know not, un-
less his meaning (when he would have spoken for
good) were, that the baptism of infants, and of those
other sorts of persons, should be delayed till the
times he speaks of, in case there were no danger of
death in the mean while ; but that in case of such
danger it should be administered presently : in Avhich
case he says it is so necessary, that any- one that is
present (whether in orders or not, so he determines
it) ought to administer it, or else he is guilty of the
person's ruin or perdition.

VIII. And I like this my resolution of his opinion
the better, because I find it to be what several of
each of the disagreeing parties do agree to have
been his sense. For as Mr. Baxter^ makes this ac-
knowledgment, ' Yet again I will confess, that the

* words of Tertullian and Nazianzen shew, that it

* was long before all were agreed of the very time,
' or of the necessity of baptizing infants, before any
' use of reason, in case they were like to live to

* maturity.' So Mr. Danvers^ his antagonist owns

a More Proofs of Infants' Church-membership and conse-
quently their right to Baptism; in three parts. Pt. ii. ch 4. ^. 59.
8vo. Lond. 1675.

b First Answer to Wills, p. 9. 8vo. Lond. 1675.

WALLj VOL. I. H

98 Tertullian.

oHAP.iv. this, ' Tertullian, that, as Dr. Barlow tells us, was

loo. ' so great an opposer of infant baptism, as irrational

( • 200.) , ^^^ unwarrantable, yet had this fancy of baptizing

* a dying child to save it.' Somebody or other had
so strangely imposed ui)on this man, that he thought
the modern paedobaptists were ashamed to own this
doctrine, that a child or other person is to be bap-
tized that he may be saved. Also Mr. Tombes
says'^, ' If he [Tertullian] did allow it, it was only

* in case of necessity, as may appear by his words in
' his book de Anima, c. 39-' And to name one of
the church of Rome, Vasquez says, that ' those
' places in the book de Anima, and those where he
' makes baptism necessary to salvation, do not prove
' that he recanted his opinion*^, for he might well

* enough assert that baptism is necessary for all,
' and yet think that it was not to be given before
' adult age in any other case but only that of ex-
' treme necessity.'

This explication of his meaning is also confirmed
from the older editions of this book, de Baptismo,
which instead of those words in Rigaltius's edition,
' Quid enim necesse est sponsores,' &c. ' What need
' is there that godfathers,' &c. read thus : ' Quid
' enim necesse est, si non tarn necesse, sponsores,' &c.
' What occasion is there, except in case of necessity,
' that the godfathers,' &c. So it is in the edition of
Pamelius : and so, as Pamelius affirms, Gaigneus
the first editor of this book, de Baptismo, has it.
But I have followed the edition which I had, which

•■ Examen of Marshal's Sermon, [forming part of his Two
Treatises concerning Infant Baptism, 4to, 1645.] p. 10.

^ Gabriel Vasquez, Commentaria in tertiam partem Thomse,
fol. i6io. &c. torn. ii. disp. 154. c. i.

Tertullian. 99

is Rigaltius's, (only leaving a blank at the place,) chap.iv,

snpposing- he had some ground froni the manuscripts "^^
to leave out that clause. Yet it cannot be denied (-'-•D--'^'')
that he has (as Mr. le Clerc^ observes) set some pas-
sages false, that were true in the former editions ;
nor that he has otherwise shewn himself partial for
the antipajdobaptists, as I shall shew hereafter,
pt. ii. ch. xi. §. 5. And therefore I incline now to
the opinion, that the old editions are the truest,
and that it ought to be read, ' except in case of ne-
' cessity.' And then the case is plain how his mean-

mg was.

IX. But that which most deserves the reader's ob-
servation is, that the words of Tertullian do not im-
port that the custom of the Christians at that time
was to leave infants unbaptized : but on the con-
trary, they plainly intimate that there was a custom
of baptizing them : only he dislikes that that cus-
tom should be generally used. For when he says,
' Why does that innocent age make such haste,' &c.
his words shew the matter of fact to have been so,
together with his opinion against it. But the thing
we now inquire of, is the practice of the church,
and not one doctor's opinion, especially when it does
not appear that any body was prevailed on by him
to alter that practice ; for there is no appearance
that either the Montanists (to whom he turned) or
the Tertullianists (whom he set up) were against it.
On the contrary, St .Austin ^ reciting the opinions of
both these sects, does not mention any such thing-
held by either of them, and says at other places,

e Qusestiones Hieronyniie. Q. ix. c. 3. 8vo. 1701.
' Lib. de Haeresibus, c. 26. 86.

H 2

100 Tertullian.

CHAP.iv. that he never read of any sect that did deny it, as I
loo. shew hereafter.

(A.D.200.) rpi^^ same observation ought to be made concern-
ing the sponsors or godfathers, whom he speaks of
as used in the baptism of infants that could not an-
swer for themselves. Which shews the great mis-
take of some of the more ignorant persons among
the antip?edobaptists, who derive the use of godfa-
thers from I know not what pope of Rome of late
years; whereas this was within a 100 years of the
apostles.

X. It is a heedless answer that he makes to those
words of our Saviour, Suffer little children to come
to me, 8fC., when he says, ' Let them come when
' they are grown up, when they understand,' &c.
For that seems to be the very thing that the disci-
ples said, when they rebuked those that brought
them, for which rebuke our Saviour blamed the dis-
ciples. It is something a better answer which the
antipnedobaptists nowadays give, viz. that our Sa-
viour would indeed have infants brought to him
in their infancy, and before they understood, and
that he blessed them, &c. but we do not read that he
baptized them. To which the other reply, that he
declared the love of God to them, by his blessing
and embracing, and saying. Of such is the kinffclom
of God. Which shews them to be capable of the
covenant of mercy, and that infants are expressly
admitted to enter covenant, Deut. xxix. 10, ^ou,
your little ones, Sfc, and in the Old Testament had
the seal of the covenant. From whence it will fol-
low that it is no absurdity by reason of their
nonage; which is the only thing Tertullian argues
from. And besides, when our Saviour says, Of

TertulUan. 101

such is the h'uujdom of God; (wliicli shews theniciiAP.iv.
to be capable of his kingdom,) and thereupon orders ,00.
tliem to be brought to him, and says, forbid [or^^'^*^°°*^
withhold] them not: since he is now present with
us only in his ordinances and sacraments, what way
have we to bring' our children to him, as he orders,
but by baptism to offer and dedicate them to him?

XI. In the same book of baptism, c. 5, he observes
that the heathen nations also used baptism as a re-
ligious rite, and particularly in the Mysteries of
Apollo and Ceres, persons were baptized, ' Idque se
' in regenerationem et impunitatem perjuriorum suo-
' rum agere praesumunt.' ' And they say, they do
' this for their regeneration and the pardon of their
' former peijuries.' And he says, ' Here we see
' the aim of the Devil imitating the things of God.'
He means, the heathens imitated the Jewish bap-
tism.

XII. One thing more ought to be observed out of
the passage I cited from Tertullian's book, de Ani-
ma, viz. that he expounds that text, 1 Cor. vii. 14,
Else were your children unclean, bat now they are
holy, much after the same rate as many modern
poedobaptists do of baptismal holiness : only he
thinks the apostle speaks of it, not as then given,
but as designed for them. He paraphrases, sancti,
' holy,' by sanctitati designati, ' designed for holi-
' ness,' (viz. when they come to be baptized, as his
following words in the said passage shew, if the
reader ^^^ll turn back to them.) This sense of a
baptismal holiness the antipaedobaptists (who under-
stand no more by it but that such children are not
bastards) would condemn as a new exposition : but
I shall shew by more instances that will come in my

102 TertulUan.

CHAP.iv. way, and especially in eh. xix. ^. 19, where I com-
loo. P^i'e together all the expositions of this text given

(A.D.2UO.) ijy the ancients, that it was the most general one.

XIII. It is plain that St. Austin, and Pelagius,
and several others that managed the Pelagian contro-
versy, had never seen Tertullian's book of baptism.
For v/hen St. Austins' pleaded that no Christian,
catholic or sectary, had ever taught to the contrary,
but that one reason for the baptizing of infants was
for the forgiveness of original sin; Pelagius granted'*
that there was none that denied that they were to
be baptized : but when he, and Gelestius, and Ju-
lian, do ransack antiquity for places to shew that
they are baptized on other accounts, and not for
forgiveness; how neatly would that saying of Ter-
tullian have fitted them, ' What need their innocent
' [or sinless] age make such haste for the forgive-
' ness of sin ?' Or else we must say, they would not
quote it, because he contradicts himself in this point.
Or else they would not use his authority, which
was in no good repute, because he revolted to he-
resy: though Dr. Allix' concludes this book to have
been written before.

It was customary in those times, if any one made
use of Tertullian's authority in any controverted
matter, to stop his mouth with that saying of St.
Hierome'', ' Ilium hominem ecclesia3 non fuisse,'
' that Tertullian was not a man of the church ;' and

§ See ch. 19. §. 17. '•• See ch. 19. §. 30.

' [See ' Dissertatio de TertuUiani vita et scriptis,' (an octavo
, tract of 88 pages, without date, place, or author's name, but
written by Dr. P. AUix, and printed at Paris in 1680,) ch. 4.
p. 28.]

^ Adv. Helvidium.

Tertullian. 103

Pelagius had a great mind (if it had been possible foi-cHAiMV.
him, continuing in his opinion of denying original ,00.
sin) to have continued a member of the catholic ^'^•^•^°°*^
church.

Baronius likewise observes, that when the Dona-
tists maintained against St. Austin and the catholics,
that ba})tism given by heretics is null, and the party
must be baptized again ; if St. Austin could have
shewn, that this opinion was first set on foot by
Tertullian, (whose name was in ill repute for his sin-
gular opinions,) that that one thing would have served
much to discredit it. And that he might have done,
if he had ever seen this book of baptism, where that
opinion is asserted, c. 15, which is the earliest men-
tion we find of it.

Yet St. Hierome had seen this book either in
Greek or Latin, (in both which languages it was
written,) for he quotes some passages out of it about
the story of St. Paul and Tecla, but nothing about
the matter of infants.

CHAP. V.

Quotations out of Oricien.

Homilia 8. in Levit. c. 4.

^. I. 'AUDI David dicentem ; In inuiuitatibuSy no.
. . . . •, (A.D.210.)

' mquit, conceptus sum, et m peccatis peperit me

' mater mea : ostendens, quod quaecunque anima in

' carne nascitur, iniquitatis et peccati sorde pollui-

' tur : et propterea dictum esse illud, quod jam su-

* perius memoravimus ; cpcia nemo mundus a sorde,

' nee si unins diei sit vita ejus. Addi his etiam

104 Origen.

CHAP. V. ' illud potest, ut requiratur, quid causae sit, cum

,io. ' baptisma ecclesiae pro remissione peccatorum tletur,

(A.D. 2TO.) < gecundum ecclesiae observantiam etiam parvulis bap-

' tismum dari : cum utique si nihil esset in parvulis,

' quod ad remissionem deberet, et indulgentiam

' pertinere, gratia baptismi superflua videretur.'

•^ Hear David speaking, / urns, says he, con-
' ceived in iniquity , and in sin did my mother briiig

* me forth : shewing that every soul that is born
' in the flesh is polluted with the filth of sin and
' iniquity : and that therefore that was said which
' we mentioned before ; that ?ione is clean from
*■ poUution, though his life be but of the length of one
' day.

* Besides all this, let it be considered, what is the
' reason that whereas the baptism of the church is

* given for forgiveness of sins, infants also are by
^ ' the usage of the church baptized : when if there

' were nothing in infants that wanted forgiveness

* and mercy, the grace of baptism would be needless
' to them.'

Homil. in Lucam 14.

IT. ' Quod frequenter inter fratres quaeritur, loci
' occasione commota [1. commotus] retracto. Par-
' vuli baptizantur in remissionem peccatorum. Quo-
' rum peccatorum ? Vel quo tempore peccaverunt ?
' Aut quomodo potest ulla lavacri in parvulis ratio
' subsistere, nisi juxta ilium sensum de quo paulo
' ante diximus ; nullus mundus a sorde, nee si unius
' diei quidem fuerit vita ejus super terram ? Et quia
' per bajjtismi sacramentum nativitatis sordes depo-
' nuntur, propterea baptizantur et parvuli.'

' Having occasion given in this place, I will men-
' tion a thing that causes frequent inquiries among

Oricten. 105

' the brethren. Infants are baptized for the forgive- chap, v.

' ness of sins. Of ^vhat sins? Or when have they no.

' sinned? Or hov^^ can anv reason of the laver in ' ^'°

' their case hold good, but according to that sense

' that we mentioned even now : none is free from

' polkition, tliough his life be but of the length of

* one day ujion the earth ? And it is for that reason

' because by the sacrament of baptism the pollution

' of our birth is taken away, that infants are bap-

' tized.'

Comment, in Epist. ad Romanos, lib. v. c. 9-
III. ' Denique et in lege pro parvulo, qui natus
fuerit, jubetur offerri hostia, par' turturmu, aut
duo pulli columhini : ed- quibus units pro peccato,
et alius in holocautomata. Pro quo peccato offer-
tur hie pullus unus ? Nunquid nuper editus parvu-
lus peccare jam potuit ? Et tamen habet peccatum,
pro quo hostia jubetur offerri, a quo mundus ne-
gatur quis esse, nee si unius diei fuerit vita ejus.
De hoc ergo etiam David dixisse credendus est
illud quod supra memoravimus, Quia in peccato
concepit me mater mea : secundum historian! enim
nullum matris ejus declaratur peccatum. Pro hoc
et ecclesia ab apostolis traditionem susce])it, etiam
parvulis baptismum dare. Scicbant enim illi qui-
bus mysteriorum secreta commissa sunt divinorum,
quod essent in omnibus genuinne sordes peccati,
quae per aquam et Spiritum ablui deberent : propter
quas etiam corpus ipsum, corpus j)eccati, nomina-
tur.'

' And also in the ]a\\ it is commanded, that a sa-
crifice be offered for everv child that is born, a
pair of turtle doves, or two young pigeons : of
which one is for a sin offering^ the other for a

106 Origen.

CHAP.v. < burnt offering^. For what sin is this one pigeon
»io- ' offered? Can the child that is new born have eom-

(A.D.2 10.)

* mitted any sin ? It has even then sin, for which
' the sacrifice is commanded to be offered ; from

* which even he whose life is but of one day is de-

* nied to be fi-ee. Of this sin David is to be supposed
' to have said that which we mentioned before, In

* sin did my mother conceive me : for there is in

* the history no account of any particular sin that
' his mother had committed.

^ For this also it was, that the church had from
' the apostles a tradition [or order] to give baptism
' even to infants. For they, to whom the divine

* mysteries were committed, knew that there is in
' all persons the natural pollution of sin, which must

* be done away by water and the Spirit : by reason

* of which the body itself is also called the body of

* sin.'
IV. The plainness of these testimonies is such as

needs nothing to be said of it, nor admits any thing
to be said against it. They do not only suppose the
practice to be generally known and used, but also
mention its being ordered by the apostles.

But concerning the authenticalness of them there
does need something to be said. For the Greek
(which is the original) of all Origen's works being
lost, except a very few, there remains only the Latin
translations of them. And when these translations
were collected together, a great many spurious ones
were added and mixed with them, and went under
Origen's name. But upon the renewal of learning,
the critics quickly smelt them out, and admitted
none for his, but such as appeared to have been done

' Levit. xii. 8.

Or'mn. 107

into Latin either by St. Hierome or else by Rufinus : chap. v.
both of whom lived within the time limited for our ,,o.
present inquiry, viz. the first 400 years. ^^' '^^°''

For which reason I have rejected the quotations
brought by some for infant baptism out of Origen
on Job, which is plainly a spurious })iece written by
some Arian.

V. Of these which I have brought, the Homilies
on St. Luke were translated by St. Hierome ; but
those on Leviticus and the Comment- on the Epistle
to the Romans, bv Rufinus. St. Hierome added a
preface to his translation, which is printed with it ;
a passage out of which, is quoted by Rufinus*", and
also some part of the translation itself. And St.
Hierome himself mentions this work in the cata-
logue of his own M^orks". So that of this there is no
doubt. Erasmus once doubted whether even these
homilies were the genuine works of Origen, as Hue-
tius observes in these words °: 'Erasmus in his

* Epistle to Francis Ciglianus, had written that

* these Homilies did seem to be some other man's
' and not Origen's : but in his Censure aflfixed to
' the books of Origen, he recanted his opinion, and
' acknowledged the true author.' Which I the ra-
ther note, because Mr.TombesP and Mr. Dan vers ^
do quote Erasmus on Luke i. 3, saying thus : ' For
' so he seems to think, whoever he was, whose Com-
' mentaries are extant upon Luke, under the title
' of Adamantius, [ov Origen.] From whence they

«» Apolog. adv. Hieronym. secunda.

" De Scriptoribus Eccl.

° Origenianorum. lib. iii. p. 253. edit. Rothomagi, 1668.

P Third Review, or third part of Antipaedobaptism, 4to. 1657.

q First Reply to Mr. Wills, p. 87

108 Origen.

CHAP.v. ' conclude that Erasmus took them not to be Ori-
iio. ' gen's, or at least doubted of it.' Which is not fair,
.2I0.J .^ ^j^^^ knew that Erasmus had recanted his doubt,
as is to be seen in his edition of Origen s works.

VI. Neither does any one raise any question of
the translatio^n of the other two, on Leviticus and
the Romans, but that it was done by Rufinus. But
these two men used several methods in translating.
For, whereas Origen's books contained in them se-
veral expressions not consistent with the faith in
some points ; St. Hierome ^ changed nothing, but
expressed every thing as it was in the original, as
he owns himself: but Rufinus altered or left out
any thing that he thought not orthodox. And in
the Homilies on Leviticus he himself says, that he
took a greater liberty than ordinary.

All the world since have approved the method of
St. Hierome, and blamed that of Rufinus : for it is
fit for a translator to give a true account of what
his author says, be it good or bad. Whereas now
in these translations of Rufinus, the reader is un-
certain (as Erasmus angrily says) whether he read
Oriofen or Rufinus.

Some antipsedobaptists do for this reason reject
the quotations here brought out of the Homilies on
Leviticus and the Romans : it being uncertain whe-
ther they are the words of the author, or the addi-
tions or interpolations of the translator. This plea
must needs give some abatement to the authority of
these two testimonies : yet it is the less in this
matter, because,

1. That on St. Luke, translated by St. Hierome,
contains the same thino- in effect : it is as full an

^ Vide Erasmum in Censura operum Origenis.

Origen. 109

evidence of the then practice, only it does not men- ciiaf.v.
tion the tradition from the apostles. ~^

2. There is no kind of probability that Rufiniis '^^^•'^•^'° )
(^vhatever intcr])olations he might make in other
matters) made any alteration in this ; since this was

none of the subjects on which Origen's opinion was
questioned by the church in Rufinus's time. Those
things in which he was singular, are largely can-
vassed both by St. Hierome and Rufinus themselves
in their invectives and apologies one against an-
other : and also by Epiphanius", and TheophilusS
bishop of Alexandria, who reckons thirty-five
singular opi ions that Origen held : and they are
about the resurrection of the same body, the eternity
of hell torments, the preexistence of souls, some
expressions about the Trinity, &c., but not one word
about this matter. And there is no pretence that
Rufinus had any other occasion to alter any thing,
but only as being a great lover of Origen, whatever
was in his comments expressed in a doubtful or
heterodox sense concerning any of the aforesaid
points, he left it out, or else gave it a favourable
turn in the translation, or in some explication that
he added. But what is this to the baptism of
infants, concerning which it is not pretended that
Origen's enemies challenged him as holding any
singular opinion ?

3. lUifinus (who confesses that in the translation
of the Comments on Leviticus, he had used more
freedom) says only this of his management in the
Translation of the Comments on the Epistle to the
Romans, that he had ' shortened this work by one

s Epist. ad Joannem Hierosolymit.
t Epistolae Paschales, B. P. torn. iv.

110 Origen.

CHAP. V. ' half".' He speaks of no addition to that ; and it
no. is in that that there is mention of the tradition
(A.D.2io.)fj.ojn apostles.

VII. Mr. Tombes says% that ' if one read these
' passages, and consider how they are brought in,
' and how plain the expressions are against the Pe-
' lagians, one shall conceive that they were put in
' after the Pelagian heresy was confuted by Hierome
' and Austin, who often tells us that the fathers,
' afore that controversy arose, did not speak plainly
' against the Pelagians. And of all others Origen
' is most taxed as pelagianizing.'

If the passages did speak of, or relate to any
contest about the doctrine of original sin, or any
adversaries to it ; or did set themselves to prove it
as a thing controverted : this exception would have
some weight. But they speak of it as a supposed
and known thing from scripture, and as of a thing
denied by none, and in no other style than many
sayings of other fathers do before Pelagius's time,
some of which I cited out of Irenseusy. And the
opinion in which Origen pelagianized, was not, as
Mr. Tombes would intimate, in denying that corrupt
state in which all are born into this world, (his
asserting of that in many other places is notorious,
and he built his opinion of preexistence on it,) but
in affirming that it is possible for a man in this life
to arrive at such a perfect conquest of the said cor-
ruption, that he may afterward live without sin :
which was another of the false doctrines of Pelagius.
This is plainly proved to have been the opinion
of Origen, from the few words of St. Hierome in

" Prsefat. in Epist. ad Romanes.

■"* Examen, p. 7. y Ch. 3. §. i.

Origen. Ill

the Prologue to his Dialogues against the Pelagians ; chap. v.
where, having recited the opinions of some former ~^
heretics that vaunted themselves to be without sin, (A.D.210.)
he adds, ' Illud autem Origenis proprium est,' &c.
' But Origen had this peculiar oj)inion, that it is im-
' possible for a human soul to be without sin from
' its beginning to its death : and on the other side,
' that it is possible, when a man turns himself to a
' good life, to arrive to such strength, that after-
' wards he shall not sin.' It was on account of this
tenet that St. Hierome calls Origen ' the Pelagians'
' beloved^.' Which he does at the latter end of the
last of the dialogues above-mentioned. Mr. Tombes
might easilv have observed in those few works of
Origen, that are left in the original, as plain expres-
sions against the Pelagians (as he calls it, i. e. as
plain mentions of original sin) as there are in these
passages. As in his seventh book against Celsus,
({. 50.) p. 365. ed. Cant. 1658, he discourses much
as he does here, how the books of the Old Testament
do order a sin offering to be offered, koi irep) rcov
aprt yeyewrj/uei'dop, oog ov KaOapwv airo a/uapria^ : ' even
* for infants new born, as being not clear from sin.'
Where he proceeds, on the same argument, to quote,
as he does here, the saying of David, psalm li. 5, and
several such texts.

VIII. But this aro^ument of Mr. Tombes may be
well retorted against those that think these passages
were put in by Rufinus. (Mr. Tombes in one part of
his discourse seems to lay it on him, and yet in an-
other, seems to think they were put in by somebody
afterward : or else he speaks absurdly when he

' \^' Amasium vestrum.' See Hierom. opera, toni. ii. p. 792.
edit. Vallarsii.]

112 Origen.

CHAP.v. makes it to be done after tlie Pelagian times.) For
~^ whoever had put in any thing of original sin, iiufinus
(A.D. 2 10.) would not: he had been more likely to rase it out,
if he had not been afraid of censure. For though
he seems to have concealed his opinion from the
world, except some few confidents, it was proved
after his death, that he was an enemy to the doctrine
of original sin, at least as derived from our first
parents. St. Hierome does once or twice reckon him
by the name of Grunnius^ among the precursors, or
those that had given occasion to Pelagius. He him-
self tells how some had accused him to Anastasius
bishop of Rome, as having unsound opinions about
the origin of the soul : and he makes but a lame
answer to it, in the letter which he writes to him for
his apology. But Celestius discovered all, when
being upon his trial at a council of Carthage, (in
which he was condemned for this heresy,) there
were these examinations and answers, which St.
Austin has quoted out of the Acts of that Council'^,
which was held anno Dom. 412.

' The bishop Aurelius said, Let the rest [of the
' articles charged on him] be read.

' And there was read, That the sin of Adam hurt
' himself only, and not mankind.

' Celestius answered, I said, that I was unresolved
' concerning the derivation of sin, (yet so as to sub-
' mit to any one to whom God has given the grace
* of knowledge,) because I have heard different opin-
' ions of this from those that have been presbyters of
' the catholic church.

' Paulinus the deacon said, Tell us their names.

a Ep. ad Ctesiphontem ; item, Preefat. lib. iv. in Jeremiam.
b Lib. de Peccato Originali, c. 34.

Origen. 1L3

* Celestius said, The holy presbyter Rufinus, who chap.v.
'dwelt at Rome with holy Pammachius ; I have ,,o.

* heard him say, that there is no derivation of sin. (AD.210.)

' Paulinus the deacon said. Are there any more ?
' Celestius said, I have heard others also say the

* same.

* Paulinus the deacon said, Tell us their names ?

' Celestius said, Is not one presbyter enough for

* you V

And afterward, in another place [of the Acts].
' Aurelius the bishop said, Let the rest of the
' charge be read.

* And there was read, That infants when they

* are born are in the same state that Adam was in

* before his transgression.

' Aurelius the bishop said. Did you ever teach so,
' Celestius, that infants, &c. ?

' Celestius said. Let him explain how he means ;

* before his transgression, &c.

' Aurelius the bishop said. Whether the state of
' infants now to be baptized, be such as Adam's
' was before his transgression : or whether they do

* derive the guilt of transgression from the same

* sinful origin from whence they are born ? This is
' what the deacon Paulinus would hear from you.

' Paulinus the deacon said. Whether he has taught

* that or not, let him deny.

' Celestius said, I told you before concerning the

* derivation of sin, that I have heard several in the

* catholic church deny it : and some I have heard
' affirm it. It is a matter of question [or contro-

* versy] not of heresy. As for infants, I always said,

* that they stand in need of baptism, and that they
' ought to be baptized,' &c.

WALL, VOL. I. I

114 Origen.

cHAP.v. We see that though Celestius pretended he could
no, have named others, yet he named none but Rufinus,
(A.D.210.) ^j^^ ^g^g dead, as holding this tenet. Rufinus there-
fore was not likely to insert any thing into Origen's
works about original sin.

I know that Garner the Jesuit would have it,
that the Rufinus intended by Celestius was another
of the same name, and not he whose works we have :
and that, because Mercator calls him a Syrian ;
whereas this Rufinus whose works we have, was of
Aquileia. But others with more reason think, that
Mercator calls him a Syrian only because he lived
thirty years in Syria and those eastern parts, and
brought his errors and his love of Origen from
thence. And the Rufinus meant by Celestius, has
always been taken for the same that is ordinarily
known by that name.

IX. There would have been the less need of this
long disquisition to prove that the forecited passages
of Origen are genuine, if that passage of his, which
sir Peter (now lord chief justice) King has found
out in the original Greek of his Commentaries on
St. Matthew, and produces*^ to this purpose as an
evidence for infant baptism, were not a very ambi-
guous one. If the sentence had ended there where
sir Peter cuts it off, it had been a plain case that
Origen must have been understood to speak there
of infants in age. But some words which he has
left out, do, when they are read with the rest,
very much puzzle the cause, and make it doubtful
whether Origen be to be there understood of infants
in age, or of such Christian men as are indued with the

<= Inquiry into the Constitution, Discipline, &c. of the Primitive
Church, p. 57. 8vo. Lond. 1712.

Origen. 115

innocence and simplicity of infants. The impartial chap. v.
management which I have promised, obliges me to no.
set down the whole place, or else none of it.

Origen is there commenting on those words
of our Saviour, Matt, xviii. 10, Take heed that ye
despise not one of these little ones : for I say unto
you, that in heaven their angels do always behold
the face of my Father tvhich is in heaven. He has
a long discourse, and something rambling : speaking
sometimes of infants in age (such as our Saviour
had one then before him, mentioned ver. 2.) and
sometimes of men resembling infants. After which
he puts this question :
Comment, in Matt, tom.xiii. p. 331. ed. Huetii, ^/^o-

tomag. 1668. [§.27- tom. iii. p. 607. ed. Benedict.]

Erra ttoKlv (^t^Trjcreiev av rt?, Trore twv oeiKvv/uevcov vtto
Tou ^(jOT>]po9 [xiKpuiv 01 Xcyofxevoi avTwv ayyekoi TrpoLcr-^
Tavrai ; iroTepov Se^afxeuoi Tt]u oiKOvoixiav irepl avrov^
SioiKCcv ad) ov Sia Xourpov TraXiyyevecrla?, w eyevvrjOrjcrav^
W9 apriyevvriTa ^pecprj to XoyiKOv kuI aSoXov yaXa ctti-
TToOovcri, Koi iuLr]K€Ti VTroKeijuevot TTOvrjpa Tivi SvvajULei ; ^
OTTO yevecrecog, Kara Trjv tov kJcov irpoyvuKJiv Kai tou
irpoopicrixov avTOv, &C.

' Then again one may inquire, when it is that
' the angels here spoken of are set over those
' little ones shewed [or signified] by our Saviour?
' Whether they take the care and management of
' them from the time, when they by the washing of
' regeneration, whereby they were new born, do, as
* new born babes desire the sincere milk of the word,
' and are no longer subject to any evil power ? Or
' from their birth, according to the foreknowledge of
' God and his predestinating of them,' &:c.

If Origen meant to say, that it is a question

T ^

1 f^

116 Origen.

CHAP.v. whether such a Httle child as our Saviour then set
before the apostles, have his guardian angel given

I lO.

(A.D.2IO.) jjiuj ]3y Qq(| fi-om his birth, or from his baptism;
then it is a plain supposal that such infants were
baptized. But his mention of their desiring of the
milk of the word at the time of their baptism,
makes it doubtful whether he meant of such who are
infants in a proper sense, or whether he had in his
mind at that place such men as he had before called
Christ's little ones, i. e. men, who when converted
and baptized, do become humble in spirit, &c. And
this doubt is increased by observing the answer that
he gives to this his own question : for he says, that
for one side of it, (viz. that the guardian angel is
given to every one from his birth,) these places of
scripture do make : God, who separated me from
my mother'' s ivomb^: and, Before thou camest forth
out of the womb, I sanctified thee^-, &c. But for the
other side (viz. that it is at baptism that the good
angel is given) this does make, that the time of
people's imhelief is under the angels of Satan : and
then after their 7iew birth, he that has bought ?is
with his O'wn blood, delivers them to a good angel.
He has also another fancy, that possibly the evil
angel that presides over a man during his hea-
thenism, is at the man's conversion converted also
himself, and becomes a good angel to him.

Moreover in the text itself, though our Saviour
had begun his discourse with taking a little child,
and telling them they must humble themselves as
that little child; yet in the process of it, (and be-
fore he came to speak the forecited words,) viz. at

•1 Gal. i. 15. e Jer. i. 5.

Origen. 117

ver. 6. he uses the phrase of little ones which believe cifAP.v.
in him, t,o.

So that upon the whole, the proof of infant bap- '^■^■^'°*'*
tism from this place of Origen, does labour under
considerable ambiguity ; and it is better for the
pa^dobaptists not so to rely upon it for a proof of
Origen's sense, but that they do adhere likewise to
those passages of his which I recited before ; which,
though they are but translations of such books of
his, the original whereof is not now extant, yet they
are, as I have shewn, translations well attested.

I will add to this one passage more, in which
Origen brings in this text of scripture, which is,
Horn. 9. in Josuam. ^. 4.

He is speaking of that text, Joshua viii. 33, how
Joshua wrote a copy of the law of Moses on the
stones of the altar : and that he did it in the presence
of the children of Israel. And in allusion to this,
speaking of our Saviour's writing his law, not on
stones, but in the hearts of his disciples, he finds this
way to })rove that this also is done in the presence
of the children of Israel. He says that the word
Israel signifies a mind that sees God ; and that that
definition fits well to angels : and that the angels are
to be thought to be present at the giving of the holy
sacraments. And then he adds :

' Secundum Domini sententiam dicentis de infan-
' tibus (quod et tu fuisti infans in baptismo) quia
' angeli eorum semper vident faciem Patris mei qui
' in ccelis est. Coram istis igitur filiis Israel qui

* aderant illo in tempore cum tibi fidei sacramenta
' tradebantur, videntibus faciem Dei, Jesus in corde

* tuo deuteronomium scri])sit.'

' According to that saying of our Lord concerning

118 Origen.

CHAP.v. ' infants, (and thou wast an infant when thou wast
no. ' baptized,) their angels do always behold the face

( • •^^°-> ^ of my Father which is in heaven. So then Jesus
' wrote his law in thy heart in the presence of those
' children of Israel, beholders of God's face, at the
* time when the sacrament of faith was given thee.'

All that is doubtful in this place too, is, whether
when he says, ' Thou wast an infant when thou wast
' baptized,' he mean an infant in age, or only an infant
in the foresaid spiritual sense. Erasmus takes it in
the former sense, for in his edition of Origen's
works, he, or else Grynaeus the editor, sets in the
margin of that place, the word pcedobaptismus.

Though this part of Origen's works be not extant
in Greek, yet we may the more depend upon it, be-
cause Rufinus assures us, that in the translation of
these Homilies, and those on Judges, he has neither
added nor omitted any thing, but truly rendered
what he found in the Greek books. Perorat. in Horn,
ad Romanos.

X. But whatever be determined concerning the
sense, or concerning the authenticalness of this, or
of any other one particular saying of Origen ; that
he in his books did generally speak of baptism as
given to infants, is plain by this : that St. Hierome
(who was of all the Latin fathers the greatest reader
of Origen's works in their original language) does
acquaint us, both that he did so, and also that he
built his false hypothesis of the preexistence of souls
on this ground partly ; that by it he might give
the better account of the sins for which an infant is
baptized. For St. Hierome in his Third Dialogue
against the Pelagians, having upbraided them that
they could not apprehend what the scripture teaches

Origen. ] 1 9

of original sin in infants, as derived from Adam, for chap. v.
the forgiveness whereof they should be baptized, no.
says to them in the last words of that book : (A.D.210.)

' Quod si injusta vobis videtur alienorum remissio
' peccatorum ; qua non indiget, qui peccare non po-

* tuit : transite ad Amasium vestrum, qui prseterita
' in coelis et antiqua delicta solvi dicit in baptismo.
' Ut cujus in cseteris auctoritate ducimini, etiam in

* hac parte errorem sequamini^'

* And if the forgiveness of sins, which are the

* sins of another, do seem to you unjust, or such as
' he [an infant] that could commit no sin himself,

* has no need of; then march over to your beloved
' [plainly meaning Origen], who holds that in baptism

* are forgiven those sins which have been committed

* in a former state in the celestial regions : and
' as you are influenced by his authority in your
' other points, partake of his error in this too.' The
place, with the context, I must recite hereafter, ch.
xxix. §. 26.

XI. Now Origen, or any other ancient, mentioning
a practice as received, and giving a false ground for
it, is as good a witness of the practice itself as the
most orthodox mentioner of it.

If there were found in these translations of Origen
but one or two places, and those in Rufinus alone,
that did speak of infant baptism ; there might have
been suspicion of their being interpolations. But
when there are so many of them, brought in on
several occasions, in translations made by several
men, who were of several parties and enemies to one
another, (as St. Ilierome and Rufinus were,) and
upon no tentation (for it is certain that in their
f Opera, torn. ii. p. 792.

120 Origen.

CHAP.v. time there was no dispute about infant baptism) that
no. they should be all without any reason forged, is
■^'°'' absurd to think.

Especially if we consider that these translators
lived not much more than an hundred years after
Origen's time ; and the Christians then must know
whether infants had been used to be baptized in
Origen's time, or not ; the very tradition from father
to son must have carried a memory of it for so short
a time. And then, for them to make Origen speak
of a thing which all the world knew was not in use
in his time, must have made them ridiculous.

And besides, in the Greek remains there are
sentences and expressions so like and parallel to
those which I have here brought translations of, and
citations of texts of scripture applied so much to the
same purpose, that they do confirm these to be
genuine translations. I will recite one of them,
(which I have observed since the last edition,) which
though it has not in so express words as the other,
the particular mention of giving baptism to infants ;
yet the reader will see that it supposes it to be
necessary for them. It is in his

Comment, in Matt. tom. xv. p. 391. ed. Huetii.
{§. 22, 23, ed. Benedict.)

He is there commenting on that answer of our
Saviour to St. Peter's question, Matth. xix. 28, Ye
which have followed me, in the regeneration when
the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory,
shall sit upon twelve thrones, &c. He says, that by
the regeneration in this jilace is meant the time of
the resurrection of the dead. Tavrt^v Xn^^rovTai Ttjv e^-
ovmav ev rfj avacrTaaei twu veKpoov' AvTrj yap ea-Tiv r] xa-
Xiyyevea-ia, Kaivrj r/? yevecriii ovcra, otc ovpavo? Kaivog kui rj

Orlgen. 121

yn Kaivi], &c. ' This power tbey are to receive at the chap. v.
' resurrection of the dead. For that is a regenera- ,,o.
' tion, being- a new generation [or birth], when a *^ " '^^°''
' new heaven and a new earth are made,' &c. And
he adds, e/ceiV>79 ^e Tt]9 TToXiyyevecriag irpooiixiov ecrri, to
Ka\oviJi.evov Trapu tw YlavXo} XouTpov iraXiyyevea-ia^, &i,C.
' And the way [or preparative, or prerequisite] to that
' regeneration [in the world to come] is that which
' by Paul is called the laver [or washing] of rege-
' neration,' &c. Then follow these words :

Ta^a Se Ka\ Kara jiiev Trjv yeuecriv ovSeis e<TTi KaBapo^
airo pvTTOv, ovo ei fxia r/iuepa eirj rj Cwrj avTOv, oia to Trepi
T^? yevecrecog ixvcrr^jpiov, ecj) >/ to vtto rod Aa/3J<5 ev irev-
rrjKocrrw "yaAyaco XeXeyinevov, eKacrrog iravroov eh yevecriv
eXtjXvOorwu Xeyoi, e'-^ov ovrcog' 'On ev avojuiaig <TVi>eXt](p6iii',
Kai ev dfxapriatg eKKTrrrjcre /me rj [xtjrrjp fxov.

KaTa §e rt]v e/c Xovrpov iraXiyyeveaiav Trag /mev KaOapos
aTTO puTTOv 6 yevvrjOeh avooOev, e^ vSaro? Kal Tlvevjuarog'
Iva roX/j.i]crag e'lTroo, KaOapog Si' earoirrpov Ka\ ev alviyixari.
KaTa oe rr^v aXXr]V TraXiyyevecriav, orav Kadicrt] 6 vlog rov
avOpcoTTOv eir] Opovov oo^t}? avrov, Trag 6 els rr]v ev XpiarM
' TraXiyyevecriav eKeivrjv (pOaira? KaOapciorarog ecrriv airo
pvrrov irpoarwTTOV irpog TrpocrioTrov, kui avrog oia Xovrpov
iraXiyyeveaiag (pOavcav eif eKeiv>]v rtjv TraXiyyevecriav .

' There is perhaps in our generation [or first

* birth] none clean from pollution though his life be
' but of one day ; because of the mystery of our ge-
' neration [or birth], in respect of which every one

* of all that are born, may say that which was said by
' David in the fiftieth psalm ; which was this, / i()as
' shapen in iniquity^ and in sin did my mother con-
' ceive me.

' But in the regeneration [or new birth] by the
' laver [or bajitism] every one that is born again of

122 Origen.

CHAP.v. ' water and the Spirit, is clean from pollution ;
no. ' clean (as I may venture to say) as by a glass
'^'° ' darkly.

' And in that other regeneration, when the Son of
' man shall sit on the throne of his glory, every one
' that attains to that regeneration in Christ, is clean
' from pollution in the highest degree. Face to face.
' And it is by the washing of regeneration that he
' comes to that other regeneration.'

If any reader compare this passage, or the other,
which I cited before out of the book Contra Celsum,
with those quotations of St. Hierome's and Rufinus's
translation ; the likeness of the notions, of the style,
of the chain of thought and method of arguing in
each, will incline him to take them all to be of the
same author, besides the proofs I gave before.

I think it is not less than forty times that Origen
in his remaining Greek works does cite that text of
Job xiv. which in the Septuagiut translation is as he
recites it, No7ie is free from pollution, though his
life he hut of one day. Which is also cited there in
both the translations of Hierome and Rufinus ; and
in many other places of their translations.

And as it is said in the translations, ' This na-
' tural pollution of sin must be done away by water
' and the Spirit ;' so it is said to the same purpose
here, that that pollution which infects every one
from his first generation, so as that an infant, one
day old, is not free from it, is cleansed in a good de-
gree by the regeneration of baptism in this world ;
and perfectly at that great regeneration or resti-
tution of all things which shall be in the world to
come.

And (what I would chiefly remark) that this

Origen. 123

wasliing of regeneration [the baptismal regenera- chap. v.
tion in this world] is the Trpooliaiop, the beginning, or no.
way to, or preparative, or prerequisite, of that in the^^^' '^'°'^
other world. And that it is by this, that any one
(pOdvei does come to, or arrive at, that.

There are in all writers, and in all books, some
sayings or rules, in which, though they are ex-
pressed in general and comprehensive terms, yet in-
fants are not meant to be included. But that can-
not be supposed here, because he mentions their case
particularly; and the discourse begins with speak-
ing of their state from their birth, and from the
time that they are but one day old. And when he
says, that for all that are born the Trpooifjuov, whereby
they may come at the future great regeneration, is
baptism in this life ; though he do not here, as in
the other places, express that their baptism must be
in infancy ; yet the nature of his argument supposes
it. For if it be necessary for all who do pass from
the original polluted state to that state of perfect
purity, that they have this intermediate cleansing;
Origen knew that nigh half of the persons born into
the world must have it in infancy, if at all ; because
they never come to adult age.

This notion of three several births, or generations,
to every Christian, is common among ecclesiastical
writers. I shall have occasion to cite a })assage of
Gregory Nazianzen speaking in the same manner.
The first, his natural birth, the entrance into a pol-
luted state. The second, his baptism, a new birth^or
entrance into a cleansed state, a state of salvation.
The third, his resurrection, his last and great new
birth, an entrance into a glorified state. They call the
third, as well as the second, a regeneration. And it is

124 Origen.

CHAP.v. so in the highest sense of the word. Therefore when
7i^! I say, that when they use the word, they always

(A.D.2I0.) jj^g^jj^ or connote baptism ; I hope every reader per-
ceives my meaning to be, that when they use that
word in relation to the spiritual concerns of any
person in this life, they do always refer to his bap-
tism. For T own that the regeneration that is to be
in the other life, is quite another thing.

XII. There is one circumstance that makes Ori-
gen a more competent witness to give evidence, whe-
ther the baptizing of infants had been in use time out
of mind or not, than most other authors that we have
left to us of that age ; because he was himself of a
family that had been Christian for a long time. Ter-
tullian and all the rest that we have mentioned, ex-
cept Irenaeus, must have been themselves baptized
in adult age ; because they were of heathen parents,
and were the first of their family that turned Christ-
ians : but Origen's father was a martyr for Christ
in the persecution under Severus, the year after the
apostles 102. And EusebiusS' assures us, that his
forefathers had been Christians for several genera-
tions ; TW re 'yup ^Qpiyevei Ta ri;? Kara ^picrrov SiSa-
(TKoXias €K irpoyovoov ecrw^ero. ' The Christian doctrine
' was conveyed to him from his forefathers.' Or, as
Rufinus^ translates it, ab avis atque atavis, 'from his
' grandfathers and great-grandfathers.'

That which gave occasion to Eusebius to inquire
into his pedigree, was the slander of Porphyrius :
for he endeavouring to shew that the Christian reli-
gion had nothing in it of learning or science, and
had none but illiterate followers ; and not being able
to deny or conceal the great repute of Origen for

s Eccl. Hist. lib. vi. c. 19. t' Lib. vi. c. 14.

Origen. 125

his skill in human literature, had feigned that he t'HAP. v.
was at first a heathen, and having learned their mo.
philosophy, and then turning Christian, had endea- ^
voured to transfer and apply it to trim up the
Christian fables. In confutation of this lie, Eusebius,
as I said, sets forth his Christian descent.

Now since Origen was born anno 185, that is,
the year after the apostles, 85, (for he was seventeen
years old when his father suffered,) his grandfather,
or at least his great-grandfather, must have lived
in the apostles' time. And as he could not be
ignorant whether he was himself baptized in infancy,
so he had no further than his own family to go for
inquiry how it was practised in the times of the
apostles.

Besides that, he was, as I said, a very learned
man, and could not be ignorant of the use of the
churches ; in most of which he had also travelled ;
for as he was born and bred at Alexandria, so it
appears out of Eusebius^, that he had lived in
Greece, and at Rome, and in Cappadocia, and Arabia,
and spent the main part of his life in Syria and
Palestine.

CHAP. VI.

Quotations out of St. Cyprian.

Cypriani Epist. 64. (Pamelii et Benedict, editt. 59.)

ad Fidum.

§. I. ST. CYPRIAN was bishop of Carthage. ^ ^ ^5°
And it was the custom in that, as in all other great
and metropolitical cities, for the neighbouring bishops

h H. E. lib. vi.

y

(A.D.2SO.)

126 Cyprian.

CHAP. VI. to meet there at certain times to consult of and

i^o. determine any emergent affairs of the church.
(A.D.2S0.) ^^ ^jj|g time, anno Dom. 253, there were QQ of

them in council. And one Fidus, a country bishop,
had sent a letter with two cases, in which he desired
their resolution ; which they give in this epistle to
him.

One being about one Victor a presbyter, that after
a crime committed, had, by the rashness of a certain
bishop, been admitted too soon to absolution, is
nothing to our concern.

The other question being, whether an infant,
before it was eight days old, might be baptized, if
need required : I shall recite so much of the letter
as concerns that.

* Cyprianus et cceteri CoUegce^ qui in Concilio af-

'' fuerunt^ numero ^Q. Fido fratri salutem.
* Legimus litteras tuas, frater carissime, quibus

* significasti de Victore quondam j)resbytero,&c. . . .
' Quantum vero ad causam infantium pertinet, quos

* dixisti, intra secundum vel tertium diem, quo nati
' sunt, constitutes baptizari non oportere : et con-
' siderandam esse legem circumcisionis antiquae ; ut

* intra octavum diem, eum, qui natus est, baptizan-

* dum et sanctificandum non putares, longe aliud in

* concilio nostro omnibus visum est. In hoc enim,
' quod tu putabas esse faciendum, nemo consensit :
' sed universi potius judicavimus nulli homini nato
' misericordiam Dei et gratiam denegandam. Nam

* cum Dominus in evangelio suo dicat, Filius liomi-

* nis non venit animas hominum perdere, sed salvare ;
' quantum in nobis est, si fieri potest, nulla anima
' perdenda est. Quid enim ei deest, qui semel in

* utero Dei manibus formatus est? Nobis enim

Cyprian. 1S7

atque ociilis nostris secundum dieruni sseculariumcHAP.vi.
cursum accipere qui nati sunt, incrementum viden- ,50.
tur. Ceterum quaecunque a Deo Hunt, Dei factoris ^'^'^' ^5°)
majestate et opere perfecta sunt. Esse denique
apud omnes, sive infantes, sive majores natu, unam
divini muneris aequalitatein, declarat nobis divinae
scripturse fides. Helisacus super infantem [Suna-
mitidis] viduae filium qui mortuus jaoebat, ita se
Deum deprecans superstravit, ut capiti caput et
faciei facies applicaretur, et superfusi Helisa^i
membra singulis parvuli membris, et pedes pedibus
jungerentur. Quae res si secundum nativitatis
nostrae et corporis inaequalitatem cogitetur, adulto
et provecto infans non posset a^quari, nee coliaerere
et sufficere possent parva membra majoribus. Sed
illic sequalitas divina et spiritalis exprimitur, quod
pares atque aequales sint omnes homines, quando a
Deo semel facti sunt, et possit setas nostra in in-
crementis corporis secundum saiculum, non secun-
dum Deum habere discrimen. Nisi si et gratia
ipsa, quae baptizatis datur, pro aetate accipientiura*
vel minor, vel major tribuitur ; cum spiritus sanc-
tus non de mensura, sed de pietate atque indul-
gentia paterna aequalis omnibus prsebeatur. Nam
Deus ut personam non accipit, sic nee aetatem :
cum se omnibus ad coelestis gratiae consecutionem
aequalitate librata prsebeat patrem. Nam et quod
vestigium infantis, in primis partus sui diebus con-
stituti, mundum non esse dixisti, quod unusquisque
nostrum adhuc horreat exosculari : nee hoc puta-
mus ad ccelestem gratiam dandam impedimento
esse oportere. Scriptum est enim, omnia munda
sunt mundis : nee aliquis nostrum id debet hor-
rere, quod Deus dignatus est facere. Nam etsi

128

Cyprian.

CHAP.VI.

150.

(A.D.2SO.)

adhuc infans a partu novus est, non ita est tamen,
lit quisquam ilium, in gratia danda atque in pace
facienda, horrere debeat osculari : quando in osculo
infantis unusquisque nostrum pro sua religione
ipsas adhuc recentes Dei man us debeat cogitare;
quas in homine modo formato et recens nato quo-
dammodo exosculamur, quando id quod Deus facit
amplectimur. Nam quod in Judaica circumcisione
carnali octavus dies observabatur, sacramentum est
in umbra atque in imagine ante prsemissum, sed
veniente Christo veritate completum: nam quia oc-
tavus dies, i. e. post sabbatum primus, dies futurus
erat, quo Dominus resurgeret, et nos vivificaret, et
circumcisionem nobis spiritalem daret : hie dies
octavus i. e. post sabbatum primus et Dominicus
praecessit in imagine ; quae imago cessavit superve-
niente postmodum veritate, et data nobis spiritali
circumcisione. Propter quod neminem putamus a
gratia consequenda impediendum esse ea lege quae
jam statuta est, nee spiritalem circumcisionem im-
pediri carnali circumcisione debere : sed omnem
omnino hominem admittendum esse ad gratiam
Christi : quando et Petrus in Actis Apostolorum
loquatur et dicat, Dominus mihi dia?it neminem Jio-
minwn communem dicendum et immundmn. Cete-
rum si homines impedire aliquid ad consecutionem
gratiae posset ; magis adultos et provectos et ma-
jores natu possent impedire peccata graviora. Porro
autem si etiam gravissimis delictoribus, et in Deum
multum ante peccantibus, cum postea crediderint,
remissa peccatorum datur, et a baptismo atque a
gratia nemo prohibetur : quanto magis prohiberi
non debet infans, qui recens natus nihil peccavit,
nisi quod, secundum Adam carnaliter natus, conta-

Cyprian. 129

gium mortis antique prima nativitate contraxit ?chap.vi.
qui ad remissam peccatoriim accipieiulam hoc ipso ~
facilius accedit, quod illi remittuntur non propria, (^-^-^so)
sed aliena peccata. Et idcirco, frater carissime,
li3BC fuit in concilio nostra sententia, a baptismo
atque a gratia Dei, qui omnibus misericors et be-
nignus et pius est, neminem per nos debere prohi-
beri. Quod cum circa uni versos observandum sit
atque retinendum ; turn magis circa infantes ipsos
et recens natos observandum putamus, qui hoc ipso
de ope nostra ac de divina misericordia phis me-
rentur, quod in primo statim nativitatis sua? ortu
plorantes ac flentes, nihil ahud faciunt quam depre-
cantur. Optamus te, frater carissime, semper bene
valere.'

Cyprian and the rest of the bishops ivho ivere pre-
' sent at the council, siooty-siw in number ^ to Fidtis
' our brother, greeting.
' We read your letter, most dear brother, in which

' you write of one Victor a priest, &c But as

' to the case of infants : whereas you judge that they
' must not be baptized within two or three days

* after thev are born ; and that the rule of circum-
' cision is to be observed, so that none should be
' baptized and sanctified before the eighth day after
' he is born : we were all in our assembly of the
' contrary opinion. For as for what you thought

* fittinsf to be done, there was not one that was of
' your mind, but all of us on the contrary, judged
' that the grace and mercy of God is to be denied to
' no person that is born. For whereas our Lord in
' his gospel says, The Son of Man came not to de-
' stroy men's soids [or lives] but to save them : as far
' as lies in us, no soul, if possible, is to be lost.

WALL, VOL. I. K

1 30 Cyprian.

CHAP. VI. * For what is there deficient in him who has been
^_ ' once formed in the womb by the hands of God ?

(A.D.2S0.) i They appear to us and in our eyes to attain per-
' fection [or increase] in the course of the days of
' the world ; but all things that are made by God
' are perfect by the work and power of God their
' maker. The scripture gives us to understand the
' equality of the divine gift on all, whether infants
' or grown persons. Elisha, in his prayer to God,
' stretched himself on the infant son of the Shuna-
' mite woman that lay dead, in such manner that

* his head, and face, and limbs, and feet were ap-
' plied to the head, face, limbs, and feet of the child;
' which, if it be understood according to the quality
' of our body and nature, the infant could not hold
' measure with the grown man, nor its little limbs
' fit and reach to his great ones. But in that place
' a spiritual equality, and such as is in the esteem of
' God, is intimated to us ; by which persons that
' are once made by God are alike and equal ; and
' our growth of body by age makes a difference in
' the sense of the world, but not of God. Unless
' you will think that the grace itself, which is given

* to baptized persons, is greater or less, according to

* the age of those that receive it ; w4iereas the Holy

* Spirit is given not by different measures, but with
' fatherly affection and kindness equal to all. For
' God, as he accepts no one's person, so not his age ;
' but with an exact equality shews himself a father
' to all for their obtaining the heavenly grace.

' And whereas you say, that an infant in the first
' days after its birth is unclean, so that any of us
' abhors to kiss it. We think not this neither to be
' any reason to hinder the giving to it the heavenly

Cyprian. 131

' grace. For it is written, to the clean all fhinf/s^^''^^-^^-
^ are clean: nor ondit any of us to abhor that 150-
' which God has vouchsafed to make. Though an

* infant come fresh from the womb, no one ought to
' abhor to kiss it at the giving of the grace and the
' owning of the peace [or brotherhood,] when as in
' kissing the infant, every one of us ought, out of
' devotion, to think of the fresh handywork of God :
' for we do in some sense kiss his hands in the per-
' son newly formed and but new born, when we em-
' brace that which is of his making.

' That the eighth day was observed in the Jewish

* circumcision, was a type going before in a shadow

* and resemblance; but on Christ's coming was ful-

* filled in the substance. For because the eighth
' day, that is, the next to the sabbath-day, was to
' be the day on which the Lord was to rise from the
' dead and quicken us, and give us the spiritual cir-

* cumcision ; this eighth day, that is, the next day
' to the sabbath, or Lord's day, Avas signified in the

* type before ; which type ceased when the sub-
' stance came, and the spiritual circumcision was
' given to us.

' So that we judge that no person is to be hin-
' dered from obtaining the grace, by the law that is
' now appointed ; and that the spiritual circumcision
' ought not to be restrained by the circumcision that
' was according to the flesh : but that all are to be ad-
' mitted to the grace of Christ ; since Peter, speaking
• ' in the Acts of the Apostles, says, The Lord has shetvn
' me that no person is to be called common or unclean.
' If any thing could be an obstacle to persons
' against their obtaining the grace, the adult and
' grown and elder men would be rather hindered

K 2

132

Cyprian.

CHAP.Vl.

150.
(A.D.2SO.)

by their more grievous sins. If then the greatest
offenders, and they that have grievously sinned
against God before, have when they afterward
come to believe, forgiveness of their sins ; and no
person is kept off from baptism and the grace :
how much less reason is there to refuse an infant,
who, being newly born, has no sin, save that being
descended from Adam according to the flesh, he
has from his very birth contracted the contagion
of the death anciently threatened : who comes for
this reason more easily to receive forgiveness of
sins, because they are not his own but others'
sins that are forgiven him.

'This, therefore, dear brother, was our opinion
in the assembly ; that it is not for us to hinder
any person from baptism and the grace of God,
who is merciful and kind and affectionate to
all. Which rule, as it holds for all, so we think
it more especially to be observed in reference to
infants and persons newly born : to whom our
help and the divine mercy is rather to be granted,
because by their weeping and wailing at their first
entrance into the world, they do intimate nothing
so much as that they implore compassion.
' Dear brother, we wish you always good health.'
It is not denied by any but that this is a plain
proof of infants' baptism being taken for granted at
that time : since both Fidus, who puts the question,
and the council that resolve it, do shew by their
words their sense to be that they are to be baptized in
infancy; only Fidus thought not before the eighth day.
Mr. Tombes, who makes some exceptions against
the foregoing testimonies, as not being plain decla-
rations of the author s mind, or not certainly genuine.

Cyprian. 133

(but yet no other exceptions than what I have men- chap. vi.
tioned,) grants this to be plain, and to ' say enough, ^T^^
' and more than enough, except it had spoke more^^'^"^^°"^

* to the purpose, and Avould have it pass for the

* spring head of infant baptism'.'

II. But there is one antipa^dobaptist writer, a
man of more bokhiess in his assertions than tlie rest,
that woukl represent this as a forged or supposititious
piece. ' We would rather believe,' says he, ' that
' these things were foisted into his writings by that
' villainous cursed generation, that so horribly abused

* the writings of most of the ancients^.'

But as Mr. Tombes was more wary and learned
than to object any such thing, so there could not
have been any thing more unluckily pleaded. For
so it happens, that in all antiquity there is not any
one piece that can more certainly be proved to be
genuine than this : because it is so often quoted by
St. Hierome and St. Austin, that lived a while after ;
not in any question of infant baptism, but of original
sin, which the Pelagians denied, though they, as
I shall shew hereafter, granted and practised infant
baptism. I shall have occasion in the following
chapters to cite some of the passages of the foresaid
fathers where they mention this epistle of St. Cyprian,
and at present shall refer the reader to such places
of St. Austin, where he transcribes large passages
verbatim out of it, so as to recite it by parcels
almost all.

In his Ep. 28. ad Hieronym. he, speaking of
some that taught that the body only, and not the
soul, must suffer for original sin, says among other

' Exaraen, p. lo, 1 1.

^ H. Danvers, Treatise of Baptism, part ii. c. 3. 8vo. 1674,

134 Cyprian.

CHAP. VI. things this: ' Blessed Cyprian, not making any new

~^ ' decree, but expressing the firm faith of the church,

(A.D.250.J 4 jji refuting those that thought a child must not be

* baptized before the eighth day, said (not that no
' flesh, but) that no soul must be lost.'

And lib. 4. contra dims Epist. Pelagianorum, cap. 8,
he recites three large passages out of it.

And lib. 3. De Peccatorum mentis et remissione,
c, 5, having mentioned this epistle, he tells jMarcel-
linus, the nobleman, to whom he writes, * You may,
' if you please, read the epistle itself of the said
' martyr about the baptizing of infants : for there is

* no doubt but it is to be had at Carthage. However,
' I have thought fit to transcribe some part of it, as
' much as is necessary for our present question,'
[which was about original sin.] So he begins where
I began ; ' but as to the case of infants : whereas
' you judge they must not be baptized within two or
' three days,' &c. and goes on to repeat two large
paragraphs verbatim out of it.

Also having occasion to 'preach at Carthage
against Pelagianism, he, towards the end of his ser-
mon, recites to the people some jDart of this e])istle,
telling them, that ' they are the words of Cyprian,
' an ancient bishop of that see.' ' Holy Cyprian,'
says he, ' was asked whether an infant might be

* baptized before the eighth day, because in the old

* law it was not lawful to circumcise but on the
' eighth day. The question was of the day of bap-
' tizing, for of original sin there was no question :
' and therefore from a thing of wdiich there was no
' question, the question that was started was resolved.
^ St. Cyprian said, among other things, " So that

^ Serm. 14. de V'erbis Apost.

Cyprian. 135

* we judge that no person is to be liindered from chap.vi.

* obtaining the grace, &c. [proceeding to those words] ,^o.

' because they are not his own but others' sins that^^^"^^°'^

* are forgiven him," See how he, making no doubt
' of this matter [viz. of original sin] solves that of

* whicli there was doubt ; he took this from the

* foundation of the church to fasten a stone that
' was loose.'

St. Hierorae also quotes a good part of it verbatim,
1. iii. Dialof). adv. Pelag.

III. Since then it is plain that it was at that time,
and in those places where St. Cyprian had lived com-
monly known for his, and frequent in the hands of
learned men ; there is the less need of considering
those objections which are brought as probable
against its being genuine.

The aforesaid author says, ' We meet with no
' such council, neither can it appear where it was
' held.'

But this is to make himself more ignorant than
he is, as if he did not know that the date of this is
before those times, in which the acts of the councils
used to be registered and collected into volumes : so
that this had been lost, if it had not been preserved
among the epistles of this father. And besides,
that they never used to put into the volumes of
councils the acts of those ordinary assemblies in
which the neighbouring bishops met every half year
at the princi])al city, (whereof this was one, viz. St.
Cyprian's neighbouring colleagues assembled at Car-
thage,) but only those in which some extraordinary
matter was handled.

IV. Yet this is proper to observe here, that
whereas Grotius would prove that ' infant baptism

136 Cyprian.

CHAP. VI. 'was not universally held to be necessary, because
150- ' in the councils one finds no earlier mention of it
" * * ' ' than in the council of Carthage"',' meaning that in
the year 418. We see here that though that were
true, (which I shall by and by shew to be false",) that
there were no earlier mention of it in those councils
that are in the ordinary collections ; yet there is
mention of it in this, that was earlier than any of
them ; and though met on ordinary occasions, more
numerous than several of them.

V. It is objected, likewise, that whereas St. Austin
somewhere lays down this as a rule, that ' what the
' whole church through all the world does practise,
' and yet it has not been instituted in councils, but
* has been always in use, is with very good reason
' supposed to have been settled by authority of the
' apostles*^,' and applies that rule to infant baptism ;
he consequently takes it not to have been instituted
by any council ; and therefore that he contradicts
himself when he believes there was such a council
as this letter mentions.

But there needs nothing but for a man to open
his eyes to see that this council does not institute
the baptism of infants, or enact that they should be
baptized ; but takes that for granted, or as a thing
known and supposed by both parties, that they are
to be baptized : and determines only that question,
whether they may be baptized before the eighth
day. Which very thing St. Austin notes in the
words I just now cited, Ep. 28. ' Cyprian not making
' any new decree,' &c.

VI. Another exception that is made has, I think,

m Annot. in Matt. 19. n Ch. xvi.

0 De Baptismo contra Donatistas, lib. iv. c. 23.

Cyprian. 1 37

some truth in it, viz. That some of the reasons used cuap.vi.
in this council, and expressed in this letter, do appear ~[^,
something frivolous and shallow. But I do not see "^^•^^°'^
how it is at all to the purpose.

1. Because these reasons are not designed to
})rove infant bajitism, but to take off the objections
concerning the eighth day.

2. If they had been used by these bishops as
grounds of infant baptism ; yet since our inquiry is
what the church then practised, and not how able
St. Cyprian and they were to argue ; their evidence
is the same, how weak soever their reasonings are.
But,

3. This also may be said in apology for their
abilities ; that to a frivolous and foolish question or
objection, it is almost impossible to give any answer
that will not seem frivolous to those that consider
not the occasion of it. On this account Irenaeus
and many of the fathers suffer in our judgment ;
they are forced to write a great deal in confutation
of such idle and enthusiastical stuff as seems to us
not to deserve three words : but it was necessary then
to disentangle the souls of ignorant Christians. So
any book written now in answer to the reasonings
of the Quakers, &c., will in the next age seem to be
the work of a man that had little to ^lo. This Fidus
thought that the natural uncleanness of an infant
in the first days after his birth was a reason against
baptizing it then ; which, as Rigaltius observes, was
a relick of heathenish superstition. He also seems
to have made some question whether so young an
infant be a perfect human creature ; as if eight
days made any great difference in that matter.

138 Cyprian.

CHAP.vi. The answers to such arguments will seem of little

io.

weight. All that he objected of sense was the
(A.D.250.) j.^jg q£ circumcision on the eighth day. To which
St. Cyprian answers, as other fathers do, that the
circumstance of the day was typical, and so not
now obliging.

VTI. If we look back from this time to the
space that had passed from the apostles' time, which
was but 150 years; we must conclude that it was
easy then to know the practice of Christians in the
apostles' days. For some of these sixty-six bishops
must be thought to be at this time 70 or 80 years
old themselves, which reaches to half the space :
and at that time when they w^ere infants, there
must have been several alive that were born within
the apostles' age. And such could not be ignorant
whether infants were baptized in that age, when
they themselves were some of those infants.

It is plain likewise that there was no dispute or
diiference of opinion (as there must have been
among so many, if any innovation had been made.)
For it is here said, ' there was not one of Fidus'
' mind,' that infant baptism must be delayed till
the eighth day. Much less then was there any of
opinion that it was not to be used at all.

' In a doctrinal point,' as Mr. Baxter well ob-
serves, ' a mistake is easier, or in a bare narration
' of some one fact : but in a matter of fact of so
* public notice, and which so many thousands were
' partakers in, as baptism was, how could they be
' ignorant ?'

Suppose it were a question now among us, whether
persons were baptized at age only, or in infancy also.

Cyprian. 139

70 or 80 years before we were born : were it not easy chap.vi.
to know the truth, what by tradition, and what by ~
records ? (A.d.2so.)

VIII. I shall conclude what I have to note on
this testimony with observing these things :

1. That it was the custom of those times and
places to give the new-baptized person, whether
infant or adult, the kiss of peace, or as it is called
by St. Peter P and St. Pauli, the holy kiss, or the
hiss of charity, in token of their owning him for a
Christian brother : for Fidus makes that a part of his
objection, that that would be indecent or loathsome in
the case of a new-born infant, before it be a week old.

IX. 2. That these bishops held, that to suffer
the infant to die unbaptized was to endanger its
salvation. This appears in their reasonings.

X. 3. The third is a various reading or spelling of
one word in this epistle, from whence some disputes
have arisen. Mr. Daille, in a book written on purpose
to publish the Ncsm and errors which he could find
in the fathers' works ^ reckons St. Cyprian one of the
first of those from whose words one may prove there
was a custom of giving the holy communion to
infants. And he proves it first and chiefly from
this epistle, in which, as it is here written, there is
never a word about it. But where we read in the
first clause of it, haptizandum et sanctificandam,
' should be baptized and sanctified,' (which latter
word is commonly used as another M'ord for bap-
tism,) he quotes it, haptizandum et sacrijicandum,
by which he understands, ' should be baptized aiUl

1^ I Cor. xvi. 2o. q I Pet. v. 14.

I" De U.su Patrum, 1. ii. c. 4. [4to. Geneva, 1656. There is an
English version, printed in 165 i.]

140 Cyprian.

CHAP.vi. « partake of the eiicharist.' Some editions, it seems,
150. have it so ; but, I suppose, very few : and those
■^^°'^ mistaken ones. For Dr. Hammond ^ Marshall*, and
the Magdeburgenses", and Mr. Walker, and all that
I have seen, do quote it sanctificandum, as it is also
in the last edition, viz. Oxon, 1682^, in which are
the various lections of several manuscripts that had
been collated : but no variety in reading of this
word. And the matter is out of doubt ; since
St. Austin, transcribing that part of the epistle y,
writes it sanctificandum. And indeed sacrificandum
in that sense is not Latin.

From this use of the word sanctification for
baptism, and sanctified or made holy for baptized^
(which I shall shew^ hereafter to have been very
common and usual,) the fathers do give light to the
explication of that text of St. Paul 1 Cor. vii. 14;
as I shall more fully shew at a litter place^.

4. We see also here confirmed, what I said ^ before,
that they reckoned baptism to be to us in the room
of circumcision. For it was upon that account, that
Fidus thought it must keep the times of the old
circumcision : and the bishops of the council, though
denying that, do call it ' the spiritual [or Christian]
' circumcision.'

s Six Queries, Inf. Bapt. §36.

* [A Defence of Infant Baptism, in answer to two treatises
and an appendix lately published by Mr.Jo. Tombes ; by Steven
Marshall, B.D. 4to. 1646, p. 39]

•1 [The Centuriators, or authors of the ' Centurise Magdebur-
' genses,' foho.]

" [So likewise in the Benedictine edition, Pai'is, 1726.]

y Lib. iv. contra duas Epist. Pelagianorum, c. 8.

^ Ch. xi. sect. q. ^ Ch. ii. sect. 2.

Cyprian. 141

Another passage out of St. Cyprian. chap.vi.

Libro de Lapsis, circa Medium, (pag. 183. edit. ~

Benedict. 1726.) (A.D.250.)

XI. There had been at Carthage a great persecu-
tion of the Christians, in which many had fallen,
and had denied their religion, and had joined in the
idolatrous sacrifices : some of which afterward, when
the persecution was over, went about to crowd
themselves into the church, without giving first any
sufiicient proofs of their repentance for so horrid a
crime, or expecting the consent of the church for
their readmission. St. Cyprian thought it neces-
sary for these men to be first made sensible of the
guilt they had contracted : for which purpose he
writes this book ; and has, among others, this pas-
sage, in which he mentions their infants ; and
though there be no express mention of their bap-
tism, yet you will see it is in other words plainly
described.

' Nonne, quando ad Cajiitolium sponte ventum est,
' quando ultro ad obsequium diri facinoris accessum
' est, labavit gressus, caligavit aspectus, tremuerunt

* viscera, brachia conciderunt ? Nonne sensus ob-
' stupuit, lingua hsesit, sermo defecit? Stare illic
' potuit Dei servus, et loqui et renunciare Christo,
' qui jam diabolo renunciaverat et seculo ? Nonne

• ara ilia, quo moriturus accessit, rogus illi fuit ?
' Nonne diaboli altare, quod foetore tetro fumare ac
' redolere conspexerat, velut funus et bustum vitai
' suae, horrere ac fugere debebat ? quid hostiam te-
' cum, miser, quid victimam immolaturus imponis?
' ipse ad aram hostia, victima ipse venisti. Immo-
' lasti illic salutem tuam ; spem tuam, fidem tuam
' funestis illis ignibus concremasti. Ac multis pro-

142 Cyprian.

CHAP.vi. ' prius interitus satis noii fuit : hortamentis mutuis
~_ ' in exitium populus impulsus est : mors invicem

(A.D.25o.)« lethali poculo propinata est. Ac ne quid deesset
' ad criminis cumiilimi, infantes qiioque parentum
' manibus vel impositi vel attracti, amiserunt parvuli
' quod in primo statim nativitatis exordio fuerant
' consecuti. \ Nonne illi, cum judicii dies venerit,
' dicent ; nos nihil mali fecimus, nee derelicto cibo
' et poculo Domini ad profana contagia sponte pro-
' peravimus : perdidit nos aliena perfidia, parentes
' sensimus parricidas. Illi nobis ecclesiam matrem,
' illi patrem Deum negaverunt : ut dum parvi et
' improvidi et tanti facinoris ignari per alios ad
' consortium criminum jungimur, aliena fraude ca-
' peremur?'

' When you came to the Capitol, [the idol temple,]
' when you went with a ready compliance to the
' committing of that horrible crime, did not your
' legs tremble, your sight wax dim, your bowels
' turn, and your arms flag ? Did not your mind
' grow amazed, your tongue falter, and your speech
' fail you? Could one that was God's servant stand
' there and speak out, and renounce Christ, who had
' before renounced the devil and the world? Was
' not the altar of incense a funeral pile to him, since
' he came thither to take his [spiritual] death ?
' Had he not reason to abhor and fly from the altar
' of sacrifice to the devil ; which he saw smoke and
' stink with a nasty smell, as from the funeral fire
' which siofnified the forfeiture of his life ? What
' need hadst thou, poor wretch, to bring thy offer-
' ing or sacrifice thither with thee ? Thou camest
' thyself a sacrifice and a burnt-offering to the altar.
* Thou didst there sacrifice thy salvation : thou didst

Cyprian. 143

burn u}) all thy hope and faith in those deadly chap. vi.
fires. ~^

' There were also a great many that thought it (-A-i^.^so.)
not enough to procure their own damnation. The
multitude encouraged one another to their destruc-
tion: they drank death to one another, and pledged
each other in that poisonous cup.

' And that nothing might be wanting to the
measure of their wickedness, their little infants
also being led or brought in their parents' arms,
lost that which they had obtained presently after
they Avere born. Will not they at the day of judg-
ment say, " We did nothing of this, neither did we,
forsaking the meat and cup of our Lord, run of
our own accord to the partaking of those profane
defilements. It was the apostasy of others that
ruined us ; we had our parents for our murderers.
It was they that renounced for us the church from
being our mother, and God from being our father.
When we, being young and inconsiderate, and not
sensible of the greatness of the crime, M'ere made
partakers of the wickedness, we were entrapped by
the treachery of others." '

XII. When he says, ' the infants lost [or forfeit-
ed] that [gift or grace] which they had obtained
presently after they were born;' it is plain that
he means their baptism, or the benefits thereof.
St. Austin had occasion to recite these w^ords of
St. Cyprian, and to give his comment on them. The
occasion was this ; one Boniface had put to him
this question ; ' whether parents do their children
' that are baptized any hurt, when they carry them
' to the heathen sacrifices to be cured of any illness?
' and, if they thereby do them no hurt, then how it

1 4)4 Cyprian.

CHAP.vi. ' comes to pass that the faith of the parents stands
"^^ ' them in stead Avhen they are baptized ; and yet

(A.D.250.) i i\^q\y apostasy afterward should not be able to hurt
' them V

St. Austin^* answers, that 'the force of that sa-
' crament is such, that he that is once regenerated
' by it cannot afterwards be entangled in the guilt
' of another person's sin, to which he does not con-
' sent.' He gives the reason of the difference to this
purpose ; that the guilt of original sin descends
from the parent to the child, because the child is
not as yet a separate living person, anima sepa-
ratim vivens, from his parent. But when a child
is become i?i se ipso alter ah eo qui genuit, ' in
' himself a separate person from him that begot
' him,' he is not guilty of his parent's sin done
without his consent. He derived his guilt, because
he was one with him and in him from whom he de-
rived, at the time when it was derived to him : but
one does not derive from another, when each has his
own proper life ; so as it may be said, the soul that
sinneth it shall die. That the faith and godly will
of the parent in bringing his child to baptism is
available, because the same spirit that sanctifies and
regenerates the child, moves the parent to offer him
to baptism. ' The regenerating spirit,' says he, * is
' one and the same in the parents that bring him,
' and in the infant that is brought and regenerated.

' And the guilt is not so communicated by an-

' other person's will, as the grace is communicated
' by the unity [or identity] of the spirit.'

' Yet (as he observes afterward) the parents or
' other guardians that endeavour thus to entangle

b Ep. 23. ad Bonifacium.

Cyprian. 145

• their children or other infants in this sacrilege ofcHAP.vi.
' the Devil, are deservedly called spiritual murderers.

1 10.

' For they do not, it is true, effect any murder upon ^"^ ^^30.)
' them ; but yet as far as it lies in them they are
- murderers : and we do with reason say to them,
' Do not murder your infants. For the apostle says,

* Quench not [or extinguish not] the Spirit: not
' that he can be extinguished, but yet they are fitly
' called extinguishers of him as much as in them
' lies, that would have him extinguished.'

Then it is that he takes notice of this passage
of St. Cyprian, and says, ' In this sense may that be

* rightly understood which St. Cyprian wrote in his

* Epistle concerning the lapsi, when reproving those
' that had in the time of persecution sacrificed to
' idols, he says, " And that nothing might be want-
' ing to the measure of their wickedness, their little

* infants also being led or brought in their parents'
' arms, lost that which they had obtained, presently
' after they were born, &c." They lost it, he means,

* as far as concerns the wickedness of those by whom
' they were brought to lose it, in the will and pur-
' pose of those that committed so foul a wickedness
' upon them. For if they had lost it indeed as to
' themselves, they would have continued as persons
' to be condemned by the sentence of God without
' any excuse : which if St. Cyprian had thought to
' be so, he would not presently have subjoined their

* excuse, saying, " Will not they at the day of judg-
' ment say ?" ' &c.

XIII. There is one place more in St. Cyprian,
wdiere he speaks of all persons in general ; yet be-
cause he names not infants particularly, I shall but
just mention it. It is

WALL, VOL. I. L

146 Cyprian.

CHAP. VI. Libro iii. Testimoniorum ad Quirimiin, c. 25.

150. This is a commonplace-book of the heads of

(A.D.250.) Qjjpjg^j^j^ doctrine, collected by this father, and pro-
per texts of scripture added for the proof of each of
them.

The doctrine or proposition for this chapter is
this:

' Ad regnum Dei, nisi baptizatus et renatus quis
' fuerit, pervenire non posse.' ' If any one be not
' baptized and regenerate, he cannot come to the
' kingdom of God.'

The texts of scripture are, among other, these :

' In Evangelio cata Joannem : Nisi quis renatus
' fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu, non potest introire in
' regnum Dei. Quod enim natum est de carne, caro
' est ; et quod natum est de Spiritu, spiritus est.*
In the Gos])el according to St. John : ' Except any
' one be regenerate of water and of the Spirit, he
' cannot enter into the kingdom of God. For that
' which is born of the flesh, is flesh : and that which
' is born of the Spirit, is spirit.'

XIV. We have in our English language a way
of speaking, whereby instead of the word person
in a sentence, we generally use the word man,
though the sense be such as requires to be under-
stood of any human creature ; man, woman, or
child. And so in the text of St. John here cited,
John iii. 5, though the original be eav i^h tJ?, &.c.
and all Latin books and writers translate it, as
Cyprian here does, Nisi quis, &c., which signifies,
Ea'cept one [or except any one, or except a person]
be born, &c. Yet the English translators have ren-
dered it. Except a man be born, &c. And some
English antipiTedobaptists (learned ones you will

Cyprian. 147

say) have taken the advantage of the word mmi^nw.w.
to prove that it is of a grown person in exclusion ~
of children, that our Saviour speaks. But the more (-^i^-^so.)
wary of them, finding that this argument will from
the original turn strongly against them, are willing
to compound, and leave this text quite out of the
dispute, and say that our Saviour does not there
speak of baptism at all.

There is not any one Christian writer of any an-
tiquity in any language, but what understands it of
baptism. And if it be not so understood, it is diffi-
cult to give an account how a person is born of
water, any more than born of wood.

I shall have occasion to speak more particularly ''
of the sense of the ancients concerning this text.
In the mean time, we see here plainly that St. Cy-
prian understands it of baptism : and also we see by
reading the foregoing epistle to Fidus, that he and
his fellow bishops understood the case of infants
particularly to be included in it.

There is another passage in St. Cyprian, from
which is plainly inferred the baptism of infants, be-
cause it shews that in his church the custom was to
give the communion to them at the age of four or
five years. But since it mentions not their baptism
expressly, I shall reserve it to the chapter*^ where I
speak of the custom that was in some churches of
their communicating.

« Part ii. ch. vi. sect. i. ' Part ii. ch. ix. sect. 15, 16, 17.

L 2

1 48 Council of Eliheris.

CHAP. VII.

A Quotation out of the Council of Eliheris.
Condi. Eliberitanum, [anno 305,] Can. 22.

^vn^ ^. I. 'Si quis de catholica ecclesia ad hseresim

' transitnm fecerit, riirsusque [ad ecclesiam] recur-

(A.D.305.) * rerit : placuit, huic poenitentiam non esse denegan-

* dam, eo quod cognoverit peccatum suum : qui etiam

* decern annis agat poenitentiam ; cui post decern
' annos prsestari communio debet. Si vero infantes
' fuerint transducti ; quod non suo vitio peccaverint,

* incunctanter recipi debent.'

' If any one go over from the catholic church to
' any heresy [or sect] and do return again to the
' church : it is resolved that penance be not denied
' to such an one ; because he acknowledges his fault.
' Let him be in a state of penance for ten years, and
' after ten years he ought to be admitted to com-
' munion. But if they were infants when they were

* carried over ; inasmuch as it was not by their own
' fault that they sinned, they ought to be admitted

* presently.*

Here is indeed no express mention of these in-
fants having been baptized in the catholic church
before they were carried over to the sect. But in-
asnmch as they are said to be transducti, ' carried
' over' from the catholic church ; it is, I think,
plainly implied. For the phrase of all antiquity is
not to call any one of the church, till he be bap-
tized. Be he infant or adult that is designed to be a
Christian, till he be baptized they call him catechu-
menus : and a catechumen is not yet of the church.

Council of Elibcris. 1 49

We perceive by St. Austin in many places'-, that it chap.
was a common thing for the neighbours or any

visitant to ask concerning a Christian's infant child,^^ J,°^-q, ^
is he fidelis or catcchumcnus f i. e. is he yet bap-
tized or not ? So that an infant or adult ])erson was
not reckoned /(/6'//5 or of the church till his baptism.
And therefore to speak of infants conveyed over
from the catholic church to any sect, is to suppose
them first baptized in the catholic church, and
afterward by their parents or others carried to the
congregations of the sectaries, and educated in that
way. The council decrees that such upon their
return to the catholic church shall be received
without any penance.

Concerning the time of this council, I shall not
enter into any of the nice inquiries. Almost all
chronologers place it as I here do, viz. anno Doni.
305. Baluzius will have it to be ten or fifteen years
later. A main exception against moving the date of
it any lower is, that a great many of the canons of
it do enact what penance is necessary in the several
cases of such as through fear do deny the Christian
religion, or com])ly to sacrifice to the idol gods.
This is a sign that persecution reigned at that time,
at least in Spain : but every body knows that a
little after this time persecution for the Christian
religion ceased in all the world.

II. That which will make a reader, that is not
acquainted with antiquity, wonder is, that these
ancient fathers do inflict so severe a penance on those
that had run into any sect. They ordain that such
must be kept in a state of penance (i. e. of humilia-
tion and asking ])ardon of God and the church) for
e Serm. 14. de Verbis Apost. et alibi.

150 Council of Neoccesarea .

CHAP, ten years' time before they be admitted to full
communion : except they were infants when they

VII.

(A.D^os ) w®^® carried over.

The commonness of a sin does in most men
wonderfully abate the sense of the guilt of it.
Nowadays if men have run into schism, and do after-
wards think fit to return to the church ; they are so
far from being sensible of any guilt that they have
incurred, that they think their very return does lay
a great obligation on the church. In short, many
Christians that take the word of God, not as it lies,
but as their prejudices have represented, do think
that adultery indeed is a sin, and drunkenness is a
sin, but that schism is none.

But all the ancient Christians do express the
same sentiment of the guilt of schism as St. Paul
does, who^ reckons those that make divisions, sedi-
tions, and heresies in the church among the most
capital offenders, which shall not inherit the king-
dom of God : such as murderers, adulterers, &c., and
commands that they be excommunicated, or avoided s
by all good Christians. Nor has God ever passed
any act of indulgence or toleration in abatement of
that law.

CHAP. VIII.

A Quotation out of the Council of Neoccesarea.
[anno 314.]

§. I. Though this council mentions nothing at all
about infants or their baptism; yet Grotius^ seems
to himself to have found a proof out of it that
many in that age judged that they are not to be

f Gal. V. 19, 20. g Rom. xvi. 17. ^ Annot. in Matt. xix. 14.

Council of Neocasarea . 151

baptized. Bp. Taylor' from him, and from them chap.

others, prosecute the argument. _

So much is plain, that some about that time and , . J't* <
place had put this question ; whether a woman with
child, that had a mind to become a Christian and
be baptized, might conveniently receive baptism
during her going with child, or must stay till she
was delivered. And it is agreed likewise that the
reason of the doubt was, because when she was im-
mersed into the water, the child in her womb did
seem to some to be baptized with her : and conse-
quently they were apt to argue that that child must
not be bai)tized, or would not need to be baptized,
afterward for itself. This any one will conclude
from the words of the council, which are these :
ConciUi Neoccemriensis^ canon 6.

IlejOi Kuo(popovcrt]i, OTi Set (pcoTi^ea-Oai ottotc /SoJAerat'
Ovoev yap eu tovtco Koivtovel rj riKTOvcra tm TiKTOfxepca'
oia TO eKaarrov iSlav Ttjv irpoalpecriv Trjv cttJ t^ 6/j.o\oyla
oeLKVvaQai.

* A woman with child may be baptized when she
' pleases. For the mother in this matter communicates

* nothing to the child : because in the profession

* every one's own [or peculiar] resolution is declared
' [or because every one's resolution at the profession
' is declared to be peculiar to himself.']

II. The argument of the antipgedobaptists from
this passage is, that both those that raised the doubt,
and the council that resolved it, must have been of
opinion that it is unlawful to baptize an infant.

For, say they, those men that scrupled the baptizing
of a woman with child, scrupled it for this reason,
because they thought that in so doing they baptized

' Liberty of Prophesying.

152 Council of Neoccesarea,.

CHAP, the child too; which to do had been no absurdity

siipjiosing the baptism of an infant to be lawful : it

(A.D.3'4.; ""^ould have been only the doing of both under one.

And also the fathei*s of the council, say they, do
seem to grant that the baptizing of the child would
be unlawful : for they give that reason why they
allow the baptizing of the woman, ' because her
' baptism communicates nothing to the child.'

And besides, the fathers (as these men construe
their words) do determine that in the baptismal pro-
fession every person must declare his own choice or
resolution, which it is impossible for the infant in
the womb, or any other infant to do.

III. The psedobaptists say, that this is a wide
mistake of the meanino- of those that raised the
doubt, and of the council in resolving it. For that
it was no more than this :

They that scrupled the baptizing of such a woman,
scrupled it for this reason ; because it would be
a disputable case whether the child in her womb
were to be accounted as baptized by its mother's
baptism or not : and so when that child was born,
they should be in great perplexity whether they
must baptize it or not. For if they did, there
would be danger that it would be baptized twice :
and if they did not, it was questionable whether it
had any baptism at all. And that therefore it was
better the woman should stay till she were delivered,
and then she might be baptized for herself and the
child for itself.

But the bishops in council (considering, as it is
likely, the danger of the woman's death in the
meanwhile) determined otherwise ; that she might
be baptized if she would ; and that there was no

Council of Xeocccsarea. 153

ground for the aforesaid scruple or perplexity about ^"j^^'

the child's baptism, for that it was a plain case that

the child is not to be accounted as baptized by itS(A.ij.3i4.j
mother's baptism ; for that such a woman's baptism
reaches no further than herself, and is not commu-
nicated to the child in her womb ; and give this
reason ; because ' the profession that any one makes
' at ba])tism, declares l^lav Trpoalpecriv, a resolution
' [or desire to be baptized] that is peculiar to them-
' selves :' and so the woman in this case does not
desire or demand the baptism at that time for her
child, but for herself only.

IV. If the reader will please to turn back and
road the words once a^ain with anv attention, he
will see that thev are, as to the main of the deter-
mination, applicable to either of these senses. If
the bishops had thought baptizing of infants un-
lawful, they would have determined this case niuch
as they do, but it is no kind of proof that they did
think so: because if they meant only to take away
the perplexity about baptizing the child, when born,
they must also determine it as they do.

But the learned reader will likewise observe that
there is something in the propriety of phrase in the
last clause that does incline it to this latter sense ;
and that is the notation of the word 1S109 which
properly signifies any thing * peculiar to one's self;'
and the repetition of the article rrjv before the words

eTTi Ttj ofxoXoyia.

If the bisho])S had meant to determine that the
child could not be supposed to be baptized with its
mother for this reason, because in baptismal profes-
sion everv one must declare his own choice ; and so
an infant could not be ba])tized : they would have

154 Council of Neocwsarea.

CHAP, expressed that latter clause thus, ^^a to eKaarov Selv

eauTOu rriv Trpoaipeaiv ev t^ ofxoXoyla SeiKuvvai, ' because

214. i every one must make his own choice at the profes-

(A.D. 314.) _ "^ ft \ r f / 1 / r

' sion.' But when they say, ota to eKaa-Tov ISlau t^j/

rrpoaipea-iv Trjv ev TJj ofxoXoyla. Se'iKvvcrQai, they do (as

any critic will observe) express this sense ; ' because
' the choice which is made at the [baptismal] pro-
' fession, is declared by every one peculiar to himself.'
And so it is only a reason of what they had said last;
' that the mother communicates nothing to the
' child :' and not any reason against the baptizing of
an infant.

V. Before I go farther, I esteem it very material
to observe by the by this emphasis of the word '[§109,
for apprehending the force of a text of St. Paul
against the Polygamists. These men presume to
say, that there is no prohibition in the New Testa-
ment of the plurality of wives to one man. St. Paul,
1 Cor. vii. 1, 2, persuades people, if they can be so
content, to an absolute continence ; but if they
cannot, he allows marriage : but with this limitation,
eKacTo^ Ti]v eavTOU yvuaiKa e^erft), Kai eKaaTt] tov \oiov
avSpa €-)(eTw. The true translation of which words
is, ' Let every man have his own wife, and let every
' woman have a husband peculiar to her.'

For as, when Aristotle says, 'iSiop tovto to?9 avQpw-
TToig' it were a very imperfect rendering to translate
it, ' men have this of their own f which ought to be,
' This is proper or peculiar to men.' And, where
he says, 6 Se (3dTpa-)^09 iSlav e-^ei Trjv yXuxraav' to say,
' Frogs make their own noise,' would not reach the
sense : which is, that ' Frogs make a noise peculiar
* to themselves.' — So it is an imperfect translation
of the foresaid words of the apostle, which our

Council of Neocwsarea. 155

English gives. Let every ivoman have her own husband. ^??A'
The word signifies, one peculiar to her.

214.

VI. But to return to our business: Grotius, among(A.D.3'i4.)
the arguments with which he endeavours to uphold

the cause of the antipnedobaptists, produces two com-
mentators on this canon, Balsam on and Zonaras, who
(as he would represent their meaning) interpret it as
if the council had understood infant-baptism to be
unlawful. Grotius' words are these, ' How much
' soever the commentators draw it to another sense ;
' it is plain that the doubt concerning the baptizing
' women great with child, was for that reason, be-
' cause the child might seem to be baptized together
with its mother ; and a child was not wont to be
' baptized but upon its own will and profession'.'
And so Balsamon explains it, Compend. Canon,
tit. 4. 'That cannot be enlightened [or baptized]
' because it is not yet come into the light, nor has
' any choice of the divine baptism.' And also Zo-
naras, ' The child that is now in the womb has need
' of baptism then when it shall be able to choose.'

Any one that reads this M'ould conclude that
Balsamon and Zonaras at least (if not the Neocaisa-
rean fathers) were antipaedobaptists : if he be one
that does not understand that there are most full
and evident records of the time in which these two
men lived, (which was the twelfth century,) and
that there was then no such thing as antipa^do-
baptism in the Greek church, in which Balsamon
was patriarch of Antioch.

VII. Rivet ^ Marshall, &c., do accuse Grotius of

> Annot. in IMatt. xix. 14.

^ [See ' Hugonis Grotii Annotata in Consultationem G. Cas-
' sandri, cum animadversionibus Andreae Riveti :' this Treatise

156 Council of Neoccesarea.

CHAP, partiality and foul dealing in general in his pleading
the cause of the antipsedobaptists, and particularly

D ^ "^ ^^^^ place. And though the opinion of Balsamon
and Zonaras be not of that moment as to make it
worth the while to repeat their words, (since they
had at that distance no better opportunity of know-
ing the mind of the council than we now have,) yet
T will set them down something at large, that the
reader may see if he can acquit that great man of
the crime of prevarication.

Balsamon's comment on that canon is this: 'Some
' had said, " that women which come over from the

* heathens to the church great with child ought not
' to be baptized, but to stay till they were delivered;
' least when the mother is baptized, the child in her
' womb do seem to be baptized too, as being alto-
' gether united to her : and so when it is born it
' will either be left unbaptized, or if it be baptized
' it may be accounted to be twice baptized." The
' fathers therefore, not allowing this contradiction,
' appointed that such women may be baptized with-

* out any scruple when they please: for that the
' woman has nothing common with the child in her
' womb in the concern of baptism : especially, say
' they, when as to every one in baptism his own
' promising is necessary. But the embryo [ea-repri-
' iJ.evov <5/a0ea-ea)9] having not the qualification [or dis-
' i)osition, or affection] cannot make the profession
' at baptism. And that clause, " when they please,"
' was added to the canon because of some that say,
' " Before the embryo be formed in a human crea-

is contained in the third volume of the ' Opera Theologica' of
Rivetus, published at Rotterdam in 1651-60, p. 925 — 976. The
particular passage here alluded to by Dr. Wall occurs at p. 941.]

Council of NeoccBsarea. 157

• ture, the woman may be baptized without scruple, chap

* but not conveniently afterward ; because the child ^^^^

' in her womb then is in the same case as infants ^14.

(A D.314.)

* newly born, which cannot make profession." The
' fathers therefore said, that it is at the woman's
' pleasure to be baptized when she will ; because in

* what state the embryo is none can tell, nor be
' sponsor for it : but infants do promise by their

* sponsors, and being actually baptized have the
' heavenly illumination granted to them.'

And m his glosses upon Photius' Nomocanon,
tit. 4. c. 10. he says, 'There was a question made,

* whether a woman with child might be baptized :
' for some said, " Because the child in the womb is
' united to the mother as a jiart of her, and cannot
' be enlightened [or baptized] with the mother, be-

* cause it is not yet come into the light, nor has any
' choice of the profession of the divine baptism ;
' therefore the mother ought not to be baptized, but

* to stay till the child be born : lest one part of her
' be enlightened, and the other remain uuenlight-

* ened. And if the child be baptized with the mo-
' ther's baptism, then, if it be baptized after it is

* born, it will prove to be twice baptized, which is
' absurd." Therefore the synod of Neocsesarea re-
' solve the doubt in their sixth canon,' &c.

Zonaras' words are these in his comment on the
said canon : ' It determines that women with child
' may be baptized when they ])lease. And whereas
' some affirmed, " that the foetus is baptized together
' with the mother, and that therefore the infant

* when born must not be baptized, least it should
' have a double bai)tism :" therefore were those
' words added, " for the mother in this matter com-

158 Council of Neoccesarea.

CHAP. ' municates nothing to the child," i. e. for the mo-
^"^' ' ther only and not the child is made partaker of
D -^j ' holy baptism. Because, says he, for the profes-
' sion of being joined to Christ the choice of every
' one is required. And by it is shewn whether he
' come to holy baptism with a willing mind. And
' because in the foetus that is enclosed in the mo-
' ther's womb there is no choice, it is not to be ac-
' counted to have received baptism ; and therefore
' it has need of baptism again when it shall be able
' to choose.'

These two commentators do indeed understand
the last clause of the canon in that sense which I
shewed even now not to be the true sense, nor ac-
cording to the rules of critics. But yet it was not
fair in Grotius to represent them as being them-
selves, or supposing the council to be, against in-
fant baptism : since as it appears that they suppose
every one's choice to be necessary at baptism ; so it
likewise appears that an infant's choice and promise
made by its sponsors or godfathers is the choice and
promise they speak of. Besides that he quoting
scraps of sentences, produces as Balsamon's own
words that which Balsamon had brought in as
pleaded by others ; and also something altered, as
the reader will see by comparing.

VIII. The issue of the dispute is ; the council say
in this matter, what any one, whether psedobaptist
or antipsedobaptist, would say ; and therefore the
proof that they were of one or of the other opinion
must be taken from some other evidence : for these
words make neither for the one nor the other. And
since we are now come so low as within sixty years
of the time of St. Austin, Pelagius, &c., and they, as

Council of Neoccesarea . 159

I shall shew^ presently, do declare that they never chap.
read or heard of any Christians that were against

infant-baptism ; it were a strange thing to suppose ^'4-
that there should have been a council so late as
under the reign of Coustantine (as this council was)
and they never to have read or heard of it. No man
can think but they had heard of this council, which
was but a little before the time of their birth. It is
plain therefore that they took the meaning of it not to
have been against infant-baptism.

St. Austin sometimes speaks of this case of a
woman baptized while great with child : and he
does not only determine it as these bishops do, but
he speaks of it as a clear case ; perhaps because he
knew it had been determined in this council. He
takes occasion to mention it, lib. vi. Contra Jtdia-
num, c. 5, where he is shewing the weakness of that
argument of the Pelagians, who said, that if original
sin be the cause why infants are baptized, then the
child that was born of Christian and baptized pa-
rents would not need to be baptized, as being born
of those that were cleansed of that sin, and of a
mother whose body was the temple of the Holy
Spirit. He says among other things, this :

* That the mother's body should be the temple of
' God is the benefit of grace not of nature : which
' grace is conveyed not by birth, but by regenera-
' tion. For if that which is conceived in the mo-
' ther's body did belong to it, so as to be accounted
' a part of it, then an infant whose mother was,
'upon some danger of death, baptized while she
' was great with him, would not need to be bap-

1 Ch. xix. §. 17, and 29, 30. &c. ad 40.

1 60 Council of Neocwsarea .

CHAP. ' tized. But now when such an infant is baptized,

VIII

L_ ' he will not be accounted twice baptized. Therefore

rA ^t\. ^ ' when he was in the w^omb of his mother, he did
' not appertain to it : and yet he was formed in a
' temple of God, but so as not to be himself the
' temple of God.' And he has the same instance
over again, c. 6.

IX. Some learned men have given their conjec-
tures of the occasion of this doubt, viz. what should
make some people of this country take up an opinion,
that if a woman with child were baptized, her child
when born would have no need of baptism : and
they give a very probable account of it^ Several
Jews were dispersed in these parts : and the rabbles
of the Jews had this rule concerning the baptism of
proselytes ; ' If a woman great with child become a
* proselyte, and be baptized ; her child needs not
' baptism w^hen it is born :' as I shewed in the in-
troduction.

CHAP. IX.

A Quotation out of Optatus Milemtanus.

(A D°6o ^' ^' THIS bishop living in Africa had occasion
to write several books against the schism of the
Donatists. Some part of the controversy between
them and the catholics was about baptism : but not
about infant-baptism, as a certain writer of small
reading has mistaken the matter. It was whether
baptism given by an ill minister were valid, or must
be renewed ? and whether the catholics were so cor-
rupt a church, as that all baptized by them, whether

1 Hammond's Six Queries, Inft. Bapt. §. log. Lightfoot's Hor.
Hebr. Matt, iii.

Optatus. 161

In infancy or at age, must be baptized afresh by chap. ix.
some such pure men as the Donatists were? ^oo.

Otherwise the doctrine and practice of baptism ^'^•^••^^°-^^
was the same with both the parties.

This appears plainly by what this author says in
Avay of persuading- them to break off their schism :
' The ecclesiastical management is one and the same
' with us and you. Though men's minds are at
' variance, the sacraments are at none. And we
' may say, we believe alike, and are sealed with one
' and the same seal :' no otherwise baptized than
you, ' nor otherwise ordained than you are. We read
' the scripture alike : we pray to the same God.
' The Lord's Prayer is the same with us and you'"/
&c. The same thing is affirmed by St. Austin".
He owns their baptism, ordination, &c., to be rightly
performed : he blames nothing in them but their
separation. And by Cresconius the Donatist, who
has these words to the catholics ; ' There is between
* us and you one religion, the same sacraments,
' nothing in the Christian ceremonies different. It
' is a schism that is between us, not a heresy".'

II. But that which I mean to quote, and is all that
he has occasion to say about infant-baptism, is this :
Lib. quinto de Schismate Donatistarum, prope Jinem.

[cap. 10. p. 89.]

He had been there comparing a Christian's putting
on Christ in baptism, to the putting on of a garment,
and had called Christ so put on, ' tunicam natantem
' in aquis,' ' a garment swimming in the \vater.' And
then says,

•n Lib. iii. de Schismate Donatist. prope finem.

n Epist. ad Theodorum Donatist.

o Apud Augustinum lib. ii. contra Cresconium, c. 3,

WALL, VOL. 1. M

162 Optatws.

CHAP.ix. * Sed ne quis dicat, temere a me Filium Dei

'^. * vestem esse dictum ; legat apostolum dicentem ;

(A.D.360.) ( QnQiquQi i^ nomine Christi baptizati estis, Christ^im

* indidstis. O tunica semper una, et innumerabilisP,

* quae decenter vestiat et omnes setates et formas :
' nee in infantibus rugatur, nee in juvenibus tenditur,
' nee in fseminis immutatur.'

' But lest any one should say, I speak irreverently,

* in calling Christ a garmeiit : let him read what the

* apostle says, As many of you as have been baptized
' in the name of Christ, have put on Christ. Oh what

* a garment is this, that is ahvays one and never
' renewed, that decently fits all ages and all shapes !
' It is neither too big for infants, nor too little for

* men, and without any alteration fits women.' He
goes on to shew how it may be also compared to the
wedding garment, &c. This needs no note.

CHAP. X.

A Quotation out of St. Gregory Nazianzen, concerning
St. BasWs Baptism in his Infancy.

§. I. THIS quotation might have been placed
thirty or forty years sooner, (at which time St. Basil
must have been born,) because it recites a matter of
fact done then. But I set it at this year, because
this author that mentions it, began at this time to
be a man of note in the church, (a presbyter and
writer of books, &c.) though he preached the sermon
that I shall cite about twenty years after.

Some that have gone about to draw up a catalogue
of persons not baptized in infancy, though born of

P [N.B. Du Pin's edition reads ' immutabilis :' but I have left
the text as Dr. Wall gave and translated it.

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 163

Christian parents, have reckoned St. Basil among chap. x.
them : but the evidence they bring is out of spu- ^^^^
rious and forged authors, as I shall shew in its ('^•^••'^°-^
placed. And in the mean time I shall produce the
authority of a piece that all acknowledge to be
genuine, which, I think, shews that he was baptized
in infancy.

St. Gregory Nazianzen was contemporary with
St. Basil, and so well acquainted with him, as that
it is impossible any one should have been more : and
though he seems to have been something the older
man, yet he lived to preach a sermon in commenda-
tion of him, in the nature of a funeral sermon, though
it was some time after his death.

In that sermon he recites several passages of his
parentage, birth, life, and death : and among them,
the passage, which I take to relate to his bajitism, is
IDenned in such a rhetorical and figurative periphrasis,
that taking it by itself, one is not sure whether he
means baptism by it or something else. But since
the first reading of it, I have observed in another
discourse of his, the very same description applied
plainly and purposely to baptism : which, together
with the probability that it carries in itself, con-
vinces me (and I suppose will the reader, when he
compares them) that it is so to be applied in that
sermon concerning St. Basil.

I shall first give the words by which he describes
baptism, in his

Oratio in Sanctum Baptisma ; Or. 40. ^. 2.^

Lplcrarriv yevvrjciv >]ixlv oi<)ev 6 \6yo9i '^^^' ^"^ croy/jLaroou,
Tr]i/ CK jSaTTTtcrfxaTo^, kcu tj?!' e^ avauTacreoo'i. Tovruiv Se,
ri fx€v vvKTepivrj re eari, Kai Sov\}j, Ka\ e/niraOi]^. 'H Se

q Part ii. di. 3. §. 5. i' Prope ab initio.

M 2

164 Si. Gregory Nazimizen.

CHAP.X. rj/xepivr], Koi eXeudepa, Kol XvriKri TraOwv, nrav to citto

260. yevicreooi KaXv/UL/na irepirefivovcra, ku] irpog Tf]v avoo ^wtjv

(A.U.300.J eTramyovcra' rj Se (polSepoorepa, Ka\ a-vvToixwrepa, irav

TO TrXacr/xa avvayovcra ev ^pa-^ei, tw irXdcrTrj irapa-

(Trrja-6iJ.evov.

* Religion teaches us that there are three sorts of

* generation or formation : that of our bodies ; that

* of baptism ; and that of the resurrection. The first
' of these is of the night, and is servile, and tainted
' with lust. The second is of the day, and is free
' and powerful against lust, and takes away all
' that veil [or darkness] contracted in our birth
' [or generation], and renews us to the supernal
' life. The last is more dreadful and sudden, bring-
' ing together in a moment all the creation, to be
' set before their Creator.'

And a little after, among other titles that he

gives to baptism, he calls it TrXdcr/ULaTO? e-KavopQwcriv,

' the amendment [or rectifying] of our formation.'

All that I produce this here for, is to observe the
phrase or description that he gives to baptism. He
calls our natural generation, nocturnal, or of the
night ; but the baptismal generation, diurnal, or of
the day. And Nicetas there observes, that the name
is taken from those words of David, Psal. cxxxix. 16,
where the translation of the Septuagint (which was
in use with them) reads (much different from our
English), eiri TO ^i^Xlov arov Travreg ypacpijaoi'Tai'

^^lepai; TrXaa-Orja-ovTai. ' They shall all be written in

* thy book : they shall be formed by day.'

II. Now see what he says of St. Basil, Funehr.
Orat. in laudem Basilii ; Orat. 20. [ed. Benedict.
43. f 12.]

He had spoken of his progenitors, many of whom

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 165

were martyrs for Christ, and of tlie piety of his chap, x
father Basil, who, it seems, was a man in holy "^^
orders: and of his mother Emmelia: and making ^'^•^■•^^°"
an end of that prefatory discourse, he says,

^epe TO. KaT avTOv OeooprjCTwixev. Ta ixev or} TrpcoTa
Trjs ^XiKia? viro Tw ixeyuXcp Trarp), ov koivov Traideurrju
apertjs 6 Tlovro? Tt]viKavra irpov^aWeTO, cnrapyavovTai
Ka\ SiaTrXaTTerai irXacriv Trjv uplcxTriv Te kul KaOapcoxa-
rt]V, i^v rjixepivrjv 6 OeZo? Aa(3io koXws ovo/J-a^ei, ku] rJy?
vvKTcpivij^ avTiOerov.

' Now let us contemplate the affairs that relate to
' him himself. In the beginning then of his age he
' was by his excellent father, who was at that time a

* public teacher of virtue in the country of Pontus,
' swaddled, as I may call it, and formed with that
' best and most pure formation, which divine David
' rightly names " of the day," and which is opposed
' to that of the night.'

Bilius in his note on these words says, ' he means

* the formation of baptism, or rather of manners :
' which David calls " of the day," saying they shall
' be formed by day : for so it is to be read. Which
' excellent formation is opposite to that of the night,
' which is by copulation, and is sordid, and a work

* of darkness.'

But I believe Bilius had not animadverted (what
I here observe) that it is the very same phrase Avhich
he uses in the other sermon, for baptism. I also at
the first reading thought it uncertain which he
meant, baptism, or good education in manners : but
the likeness of a phrase so singular seems to deter-
mine it. They of that time seem to have understood
that verse of the psalm, as speaking before of the
Christian baptism.

166 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP. X. This formation appears to have been given in
260. infancy, both by the words to. Trpwra r^? ^X/zc/a?,

(A.D.36o.)f jjj ^|jg beginning of his age;' and also by the em-
phasis of the word cnrapyapovrai, which signifies the
binding or first fashioning of the body of an infant
in swaddling clothes; and also by the orderly method
in which he proceeds : for he mentions in the next
paragraph to this his childhood, in which he was
educated at home, and ' by the instructions that are
' first in order and proper for a child, fitted for the
' perfection he was to arrive at afterward,' (there-
fore the foregoing paragraph must have referred to
his infancy.) Then he proceeds to tell, that when
he was a boy big enough, he was sent to school to
Csesarea, tlien to Bvzantium, and then to the uni-
versity of Athens : where it was that Gregory, who
knew him before (at Csesarea I suppose) entered, as
he says, into that strict league of friendship with
him which lasted during their joint lives : and in
which they seemed, as he expresses it, to have
« both but one soul informing two bodies.' After
this he relates how he went into orders, and came,
in process of time, to be bishop of Csesarea, and
so famous a man as he was.

III. From this methodical enumerating all the
material passages and actions of his life, arises an-
other proof that he must have been baptized in
infancy ; and that the passage which I mentioned
must be meant of that : because in all the passages
of his life afterward he never mentions any thing
of his baptism, which it had been impossible to
omit if he had received it after any considerable
time of his life had passed.

Also I do not see what else he can mean than

St. Gregory Nazianzm. 167

St. Basil's baptism in infancy, by another expression chap. x.
which he has in the same oration. He is comparing Z^
Basil to each of the patriarchs and holy men of the^'^'^'^^"*^
Old Testament, Abraham, Moses,' &c., and he shews
how he had something in his temper, and in the
passages of his life, like to something in every one of
theirs. Among the rest he compares him to Samuel,
and says, [J. 73.]

^afxov}]\ ev TOig eTriKaXovfxeuoi? to ovofxa avrou, Koi.
Oew (5oTO? TTjOO yevecreco?, kui yuera Trjv yevvrjaiv evOu^
iepo<;f Ku). ■^Icov jSacrcXeas Ka\ lepea^ Sea roO Keparo9.
OuTO? (5e, OVK e/c (Specpov? Qew KaOiepcojuei/o^ utto ju^rpa^,
Ku] fxera. Ttj? SnrXotSog eTriSeSofxevog rcc (S^fxaTi, koi
^Xeiroiv Ta eirovpavia, Koi jK.picrT09 J\.vp[ov ijv Koi )(^pi(TTt]9
Twv TeXeiovjueucov e/c irveviJ.uTO<s \

' Samuel among them that call upon his name,
' was both given [or promised] before he was born,
' and presently after his birth was consecrated, and
' he became an anointer of kings and priests, out of
' a horn. And was not this man (Basil) consecrated
' to God in his infancy from the Avomb, and carried
• to the steps [or font] in a coat ? Did he not become
' a seer of heavenly things, and an anointed of the
' Lord, and an anointer of such as were initiated by
' the Spirit V

The word ^tjij-a properly signifies steps. It is
ordinarily taken for a pulpit, to which one goes up
by steps : and it may signify a font or haytisteryi
to which they did go down by steps. But the coat
in which he says Basil was offered to God, (alluding
to the child's coat wdiich was made for Samuel by
his mother,) cannot well be supposed to have been
any thing but the albs used at baptism. And this,
he says, was in his infancy.

168 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP. X. The instance of Samuel dedicated in infancy, is
'^^ one which this father does at other places make use

(A.p.360.) Q^ jPqj. ^ comparison or example of a Christian's child
baptized in infancy : as will be seen in the next
chapter ; where speaking to some tender mothers
• that were afraid, it seems, of putting their infants
into the water at baptism, he says, ' Thou art afraid
'as a faint-hearted mother,' &c, ^But Hannah,
' before Samuel was born, devoted him to God : and
' when he was born, presently consecrated him, and
' brought him up in a priestly coat.' The very thing
that he says here of St. Basil's parents.

CHAP. XL

Other Quotations out of St. Gregory Nazianzen., concerning
the Doctrine of Infant- Baptism.
\. I. THIS father was not himself baptized in
infancy: and if it be true that he was born after
the time that his father was a Christian and in
holy orders, (of which the antipsedobaptists do give
probable evidence,) he had the most reason of any
one in those times to be prejudiced against the
doctrine of the necessity of infant-baptism ; which
he could not urge himself, nor hear urged by others,
without some reproach thereby cast on the conduct
of his father, for whom he always expressed a great
reverence ; though other writers give him but a
mean character, and shew that the son's prudence**
and skill was found necessary to retrieve the father's
credit and the esteem of the people, and to preserve
him from being overwitted by the Arians, or frighted
by their power.

s Greg. Presbyter, in Vita Naz,

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 169

So much is certain, that of all the instances ciiap.xi.
brought by the antipscdobaptists of men who being "^^
baptized Christians themselves, yet did not baptize (^i^-s^o.)
their children in infancy, there is a better appearance
of proof in this man's father's case than in any other.
Of which instances I must treat more largely in a
chapter* on purpose ; and at present give account of
Avhat this author himself speaks of the doctrine of
infant-baptism.

II. All that I have to produce is taken out of his
sermon that I mentioned before ; viz. his
Or alio de Baptismo, Or. 40.

In which he both persuades those of his hearers,
who had not yet so throughly embraced Christianity
as to be baptized into it, that they would without
delay be partakers of it, and also speaks something
concerning the necessity of it to infants.

Of this oration I will give a short abstract, setting
down the original of such passages only, as do, some
way, affect the question in hand.

After some commendations of baptism, he pro-
ceeds [§. 4.] to mention the names or titles by which
it is called, which are these ; ' The gift, the grace,
' baptism or washing, the anointing, the laver of
* regeneration, the amending of our make,' or forma-
tion, ' the seal :' and explains the reason of these
several appellations.

Then having spoken of man's natural and original
corruption, he says, ' God has not left his creature
' without a remedy ; but as he first made us, so he
' renews us by this divine formation :' »/ roh /mev ap-
■vofJLevoi'f ea-T] crcppayh, Toh Se re\eiOT€poi<i t»V rjXiKlav
Kui yupKTiua, Kul T^9 7re(ToJ(T»;9 eiKouog ota r/yr KaKiav

t Part'ii. ch. 3.

170 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. exar/O|O0ft)o-<?. ' which as it is a seal for such persons as
260. ' newly enter into life ; so to those that are adult it

(A.D.560.) ; jg ^ grace, and the restoring of the image which
' they had lost.' [§. 7-]

Then he says, the force and effect of baptism is,
' A covenant with God of a new and holy life :' and
arg'ues from thence how careful we ouo'ht to be to
keep it entire, ' and that,' says he, ovk oua-}]? Sevrepaf
avayevu/jcrecog, ' because there is no regeneration to be
' had afterward,' Yet he grants there is repentance
afterward : but that leaves a scar, and requires a
long time, and many tears ; which we know not
whether God will give us a space for. (They, as I
observed before, gave the name of regeneration to
no other but the baptismal renewing.) [§. 8.]

Then he warns them of the tentations that they
must expect after their baptism, and how they must
oppose and overcome them. [J. 10.]

III. Against the delay of baptism, he minds them
of the danger of missing it by sudden death : and
how much more creditable and comfortable it is to
receive it voluntarily in the time of health and
strength, than in time of necessity on a sickbed,
' when the tongue falters, and can hardly utter the
' words of the holy initiation ; and the washing is
' more like the washing of a corpse than religious
' baptism.' That a generous mind will desire not
only the forgiveness of sins, but also the reward
promised to virtuous actions, for which there must
some time be allowed between baptism and death.
[Ml, 12.]

That there are three sorts of persons very different,
though all of them may be saved ; ' the slave,
' the mercenary, and the son.' The first minds no

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 171

more than the esca})ing of punishment : the second chap.xi.
regards nothing but the pay : the son's mind is full '^^
of duty and love to his father. That all other good 'y^-^-i^°-)
things we desire to enjoy as soon as may be : and
so ^ve ought to do this freedom from sin. [^. 13.]

That the Devil would indeed entice us to give
him the present, and God the remainder ; him the
flower of our age, and God the dregs. But that
we must consider the many hazards we are subject
to : ' the chance of war, an earthquake, the sea, a
' wild beast, a disease, a crumb of bread, a surfeit,
' a precipice, a horse, a medicine, a tyrant,' &c.

U' 14.]

Then he answers the pretences which the half
Christians of those times made for their delay. As,
" I am afraid T shall not keep the grace of baptism
' unstained, and so will not take my cleansing yet,

' as having none to take afterward. Oh crafty

' imposture,' says he, ' of the evil spirit ! He is in-
' deed darkness, yet he counterfeits light. When
' he does not prevail by open war, he lays his snares.
' When he cannot bring thee to despise baptism, he
' would cheat thee of it by overmuch caution,' &c.
' He sets on all ages, and must be resisted in all.'
[§. 16.] ' Art thou a youth ? fight against pleasures
' and passions with this auxiliary strength : list thy-
' self in God's army,' &c. — ' Art thou old ? let thy
' grey hairs hasten thee : strengthen thy old age

' with baptism,' &C. N^TrioV eVr/ aoi ; fxh Xa^erw

Kuipov r] KUKia' e/c /3pe(pov^ dyiaaOtiTco, e^ oi/v^wv Kadie-
pdoOrjrw TTw IJuev/iiaTi. 2i/ SeSoiKug ttjv trippaycoa oia to
Ttjg (pvcreoog ucrOevef ', o)? fxiKpo'yv^O'} t'j fx/iTijp /cat oXiyo-
TTioTO^. >'] "Avva §€, Km Trplv r] yevvr]6>]vai tov Sa^aou^X,
KuQvTrecryero red Oew, Kai yevvriQevra lepov ev9us iroieiy

172 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.Xl. fca) Trj lepuTiKrj (rroXrj (TVvaveQpe^ev, ov to nvOpcoTrivov
260. (po^tjOeicTU, rw Se Oew Tria-reva-acra. [(^. 17.]

(A.D.J60.) i j|jjg{- i^i^Q^ an infant-child? let not wickedness
' have the advantage of time : let him be sanctified
' from his infancy : let him be dedicated from his
' cradle to [or by] the spirit. Thou, as a faint-
' hearted mother and of little faith, art afraid of

* giving him the seal because of the weakness of
' nature. Hannah, before Samuel was born, devoted
' him to God, and as soon as he was born, consecrated
' him, and brought him up from the first in a
' priestly garment, not fearing for human infirmities,
< but trusting in God, Thou hast no need of amulets

or charms ; together with which the Devil slides

* into the minds of shallow persons, drawing to him-
' self the veneration that is due to God. A09 avrw
' Trjv TpiuSa, TO jueya Ka] KaXou (pvXaKTi^ptou. Give to him
' the Trinity, that great and excellent preservative.'

He proceeds to stir up all persons in all estates
and employments to receive baptism : only he would
advise those that had places in court, to resign, and
fly from Sodom, if conveniently they could, when
they were baptized : (it is to be noted that Valens,
a wicked and Arian emperor, reigned at that time.)
If they could not conveniently, yet to be baptized ;
and preserve the jnirity thereof as well as they
could in so ill a station : that God in judging of
our lives makes allowance for the circumstances
that we are in : ' that for a man that is fettered to
' get forward a little, is as great praise as for an-
' other to run : for one that travels in a dirty road
' to be but a little bespattered, is more remarkable
' than for another to be clean.' [^. 19-]

V. He next sets upon those men that put off their

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 173

baptism to death or old age, for the k)ve of their (hap.xi.

sinful pleasures which they were unwilling as yet 260.

to part with: who said, 'Where is the advantage '^•^•^^°"^

' of taking baptism so soon, and thereby cutting

' one's self off from all the worldly pleasures and

' delights? Whereas one may enjoy these pleasures

' in the mean while, and then be baptized at last.

' For they that went the earliest to labour in the

' vineyard sped no better than they that came in

' the latest.'

He answers ; ' You have saved me a great deal of
' trouble by your making this plea: for you have at
' last with much ado discovered the very secret of
' this delay. And though I dislike your wicked
' purpose ; yet I commend you for one thing, that
' you own it without disguise.

' Come on then, and give the sense of this parable:
' and be not ignorantly scandalized [or drawn into
' sin] by this place of scripture.

' First, this is not meant of baptism, but of those
' who come, some sooner, some later, to the faith,
' [or the knowledge of Christian religion,] and enter
' the vineyard, the church : for every one must labour
' from that day and hour on wdiich he comes to the
' faith,' &c.

' Besides, supposing by entering the vineyard
' baptism be meant, the parable shews that those
' that do at all enter the vineyard and labour, shall
' have a reward. But you are in danger to miss of
' doinor that. If you were sure that notwithstandinof
' this wicked contrivance to avoid labouring, you
' should at last obtain baptism ; you might be par-
' doned in this sordid cunning : but since there is
' danger, that while you take this advantage, you

174

St. Gregory Nazianzen

CHAP.XI.

260.
(A.D.360.)

will quite miss of the vineyard, &c., take my
counsel, lay aside these subtleties, and come with
an honest mind to baptism ; lest you be taken out
of this life before you attain your purpose, and be
found to have devised these fallacies to your own
destruction.' [_^. 20, 21.]

But you will say, ' Is not God merciful enough
to take in such a case the desire of baj)tism for
baptism V

VI. ' You would have us believe a monstrous
thing, if you think that God, because he is merci-
ful, will count him enlightened that is not ; and
take him into the kingdom of heaven that wishes
for it, but does not perform the things that make
the way to it. I will tell you what is my opinion
of this matter ; in which, I believe, considering
men will agree with me.' [§. 22.]

' As there are several sorts of those who do ob-
tain the gift of baptism : Some were before ex-
tremely wicked,' &c. ' Others/ &c. ' So it

is likewise in those who miss of bajitism. For
some of them live like beasts and regard not bap-
tism,' &c. ' Some have a value for baptism, but
delay the receiving of it, either out of negligence,
or Si a7rX}](TTiav out of greediness longer to enjoy

their lusts : O/ Se ovSe ela-h ev §wa/u€i rod Se^acrOai, rj
oia vtjTTiOTtjTa Tv^ov, '>'] TLva TcXeoi}^ ciKOvcriov irepiTreTeiau,
^q ^? ovSe /3ouXo/«ei/oi9 avroig virap-^ei Tv^eiv tou ^a-
picrimaTog. But some others have it not in their own
power to receive it, either because of their infancy
perhaps, or by reason of some accident utterly in-
voluntary ; so that though they desire it, they have
no opportunity to obtain the gift. As therefore we
found much difference among those [that do obtain

St. Gregory/ Nazianzen. 175

baptism], so there is among these [that missCHAP.xi.

of it.] 2r,o.

'They that wholly scorn it, are worse than the^^'^'^^°'^
negligent or those that crave longer time. But
these are worse than those who fail of the gift,
e^ ayvola^ koi TvpauviSo?, by ignorance or constraint :
Tvpavvi<; yap om aWo ri 5/ aKov(TLO<; ^laimapTta, for con-
straint is no other thing than to miss against one's
will.

' And I think of the first sort, that they shall be
punished, as for their other wickedness, so for
their slighting of baptism. And that the second
shall be punished, but in a less degree, because
they are guilty of their own missing it, but rather
through folly than malice. Tou? Se ixrire ^o^aaQija-ecr-
Oai iJ.r]Te KoXaarO^crecrOai -Trapa rod SiKalov KpiTOv, w?
aa-cppayiaTovg fxev, airovi^povg Se, aWa iraOovra^ /maXXov
rrju ^tjiutav t] Spaa-dvra^ : but that the last sort will
neither be glorified nor punished by the just Judge ;
as being without the seal, but not through their own
wickedness ; and as having suffered the loss rather
than occasioned it.

' For he that is not worthy of punishment, is not
therefore presently worthy of honour ; as he that
is not worthy of honour, does not therefore de-
serve punishment.

' And I think thus also ; If you would condemn
for murder a man that has not murdered, merely
because he had a mind so to do ; then let him go
with you for a baptized person, who had a mind to
it, but had it not. But if that be absurd, I db not
see how this can be reasonable.

' Or if you please, take it thus : If to obtain the
effect of baptism you think it suflficient that you

176 'S*:^. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi.' desired baptism, and thereupon claim the glory of

~^^ ' heaven ; let the desire of that glory suffice you in-

(A.D.36o.)£ gtead of the glory itself: for what matter is it if

' you go without it, so long as you have the desire

- ^ of it/ [J. 23.]

He next blames those that pretended they would
stay till Epiphany or Easter or Whitsuntide, and
then be baptized. ' What will come of this V says
he, ' the end of your life will come on a sudden, in a
' day and hour that you think not of,' &;c. [^. 24.]

Those that would stay for the presence of their
friends and relations, or till they had got ready an
offering for the church, or a present for the baptizer,
or a handsome white garment, or provision for a
treat, he chides in these words ; ' These things I
' warrant you are mighty necessary, and the grace
' of baptism will be never the less for want of these.
' In things of great consequence do not stand upon

* trifling matters. This sacrament is of higher con-

* cern,' &c. ' For an offering, give yourself. Put
' on Christ. Treat me with your commendable life.
' God values nothing but those things which the
' poor have to give as well as the rich,' &c. [^. 25.]

It is in like manner that he reproves such as
stood on height and punctilios, that would have a
bishop, or a metropolitan, or the bishop of Jeru-
salem, or (if it were a priest) one that led an un-
married life, for their baptizer : or that scorned to
be baptized together with a poor man, or counted
the length of the service too tedious.

He tells them the most acceptable posture or
preparation to receive it, is a heart inflamed with
the desire of it ; that God takes that for a kindness,
if we be earnestly desirous of his kindnesses : he

St. Gregorif Nazianzen. 177

takes more pleasure in giving tlian others in fo-^'hapxi.
ceiving, &c. [§. 26, 27-] 260.

VTI. He conclufles that paragraph with saying/ '^'^ °^
' We must therefore make it our utmost care that
' we do not miss of the common grace :' and then
follow these words, "Ecrrco rauTa, <pf](r}, -wep] rwv eiri-
iCrjTOvvTwv TO jSaTTTicriua' t\ o' dp e'lTroi? irepi toov €TI
vrjirlcov, Ka] jm^re t>]9 ^tjfxiag eiraicrOavoixevcov, fxi^Te T^f
YUjOiTO? ; r] Kal TavTa (ScnrTicroiuiev ', iravvye, eiirep rt?
eweiyoi kivSvuo^. l^peicra-ov yap avaicrdtjToo? dyiaaOtjvai, tj
aTreXOeiv dcr(ppayi(TTa Kai areXecrra' Kai tovtov Xoyog ljij.iv
rj dKTat]iJ.epo<i TrepiTO/iir], tvitikt} t/? ovcra (T(ppayi^, Km aXo-
yi(TTOi<i e-ri Trpoarayofxev}]' (09 oe Kai ^ twv (pXiMv ■^Icri^,
Sia Tcou dvaicrOtjTwv (pvXdTTOvcra Ta TrpcoTOTOKa. Vlep]
i^e TMV nWcov Si^cofxi yvco/urji/, Tr]v TpieTiav dvaiJ.elvavTa'},
)] fxiKpov evTO? TOVTOV, rj virep tovto, t]viKa Kai uKOvarai
Ti juvcTTiKov Ka\ aTTOKpiveaOai civvaTOV, ei Ka} fxri crvvievTa
reXeo)? aXX' ovv TviroiiiJ.eva, outo)? dyia(^€iu Ka\ yj/v^dg Ka].
oriejiiaTa tw /ixeyaXo) ixvarTtjpiui tJ/? TeXeuocrecof. ' Some

' may say, suppose this to hold in the case of those
' that can desire baptism : What say you to those
' that are as yet infants, and are not in capacity to
' be sensible either of the grace or the miss of it?
' Shall we baptize them too ? Yes, by all means, if
' any danger make it requisite. For it is better that
' they be sanctified without their own sense of it,
' than that they should die unsealed and uninitiated.
'And a (ground of this to us is circumcision, which
' was given on the eighth day, and was a typical
' seal [or baptism] and was practised on those that
' had no use of reason : as also the anointing of the
' doorposts, which preserved the first-born by things
* that have no sense. As for others, I give my opinion
' tliat they sliould stay three years or thereabouts,

WALL. VOT,. I. X

178 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. « when they are capable to hear and answer some of

^60 * the holy words : and though they do not perfectly

(A.D.360O i understand them, yet they form them : and that

' you then sanctify them m soul and body with the

* great sacrament of initiation. For though they are
' not liable to give account of their life before
' their reason be come to maturity, (they having this
' advantage by their age, that they are not forced

* to account for the faults they have committed in
' ignorance,)' reTei-^Lo-Qai Se rw XouTpcS Travr]. Xoyu)
Xvarnekea-repov, oia ra? et^ai<pi't](f crvfJ.TrnrTOiKTas ^niiv
irpocT^oXag tcov Kii'ovva)v,Ka'i ^oriQeia^ ia)(ypoT€pa?, 'yet by
' reason of those sudden and unexpected assaults of

* dangers that are by no endeavour to be prevented,
' it is by all means advisable that they be secured

* by the laver [of baptism].' [^. 28.]

Then he answers the objection or pretence which
some made from our Saviour's being thirty years
old before he was baptized ; shewing the disparity
in a great many jmrticulars : one is this, that there
was no danger in his delaying, who needed no pur-
gation ; and besides had the time of his death as well
as of liis birth at his own disposal. ' But to you,'
says he, ' there is a great deal of danger, if you
' should depart this life, having been begotten in
' corruption, and not being clothed with incorruption
' and immortality.' [§. 29-]

VITI. The rest of the sermon is spent, partly in
teaching them how to prepare themselves, viz. by
fasting, watching, prayer, almsdeeds, restitution of
goods illgotten in the time of their heathenism, (for,
he says, though in baptism they are jiardoned all
past sins, yet he that keeps in his hands, after
baptism, any thing that is in justice due to another,
continues in the sin ; to keep it is a present sin,

^S^i^. Gregory Nazianzen. 179

though the act of stealing it be a past one,) andcHAP.xi

partly, in charging on their consciences the neces- 260.

sity of keeping their baj)tismal vow, when they have^'^'^-^^""^

made it : in shewing the wretched estate from which

they are delivered, the happy one into which they

are going to be entered, and the dreadful one into

which they will fall if they revolt: [§. 30—40.]

and partly, in explaining the creed and faith into

which they are baptized ; where he especially insists

on the belief of the holy Trinity (for these were

times in which the Arian heresy was rife) : of which

having spoken largely, and answered the charge of

tritheism cast on the catholics, and other objections

of the Arians, he declares he will baptize none of

them that do not own this faith. ' And if you do

' still halt,' says he, ' and do not own the divinity

' full and perfect ; seek for somebody else to baptize

' [or dip] you, or rather drown [or destroy] you :

* for I have no mind to divide the Deity, and at the

' time of your new birth to bring death on you :

' so that you will have neither baptism, nor the

' hope of the grace, your salvation being quickly

' shipwrecked. For if you deny divinity to any of

' these three, you overthrow the whole [Trinity],

' and make your baptism of no force [or benefit]

' to you.' [§. 41 — 44.]

He concludes with giving the meaning of some
ceremonies then used at baptism : particularly of the
lamps they lighted and held in their hands, denoting
those of the wise virgins that were prejiared to meet
their Lord : of which ])arable he makes a goodly
application to them. [^. 46.]

IX. Among the things that we are to observe
from this oration, this ought to be owo :

N 2

180 St. Gregory/ Naziojnzen.

CHAP.xi. 1. The strange mistake that Grotius made when
^6^^ he went" about to disprove the ancient practice of

(A.D.360.) ij^fa^j^^ baptism from this very sermon, in which
there is nothing more or otherwise said of that
matter than I have recited. He takes a few words
out of this discourse, and even out of one of the
passages here'' recited, where Gregory speaks of
some, d'l oO^e ^1(t\v eu ovvafxei tov oe^acrOai, Sia vrjiriorrfTa
Tv^ov, r'] TLva TeXecog aKovaiov TrepnreTeiav, ' who have
' not the receiving of baptism in their own power,
' either for their infancy perhaps, or by reason of
' some accident utterly involuntary,' of whom it is
said a little after, that they lose the kingdom of
heaven by so dying unbaptized, but yet escape pu-
nishment, because it was not their fault. He takes
out of these words, the words Sia v>]7n6Trjra by
themselves, and makes this use of them ; that Gregory
mentioning some ' that are not ba])tized' Sia vtjTnoTtjra
' by reason of their infancy,' imports that infants
were not wont to be baptized. Whereas it imports
only, that an infant, if he have nobody to heljj him
to it, is incapable of having baptism.

X. 2. It appears most evidently by the tenor
of this sermon, that Nazianzen held concerning
baptism these tenets :

1. That all who died unbaptized, by their own
fault or negligence, were condemned.

2. He thought that infants dying unbaptized,
and adult persons who missed of baptism by some
unavoidable impediment, and not by their own fault,
were in a kind of middle state between happiness
and torment. But that baptized infants were par-
takers of the kingdom of heaven.

^1 Annot. in Matt. xix. 14. ^ Supra, §. 6.

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 181

3. Where there is no danger of an infant's death, chap.xi.
he has a j)articular opinion (which he accordingly 260.
expresses^) thus, SlSwfxi yvcofxrju, (I give my opinion,)^ '"'
that his baptism should be delayed till he is three
years old : which would please neither the poedo-
baptist nor antipsedobaptist.

He seems to have taken up this ojiinion in some
degree of compliance with his father's practice,
who probably had kept him unbaptized so long
purposely, and then seeing no danger of death,
delayed it farther from time to time.

This man and Tertullian are the only two that
speak of delaying it at all : one, till the age of reason ;
the other, till three years. Both one and the other
are to be understood, where there is no danger of
death in the mean while : which is plainly expressed^
here, and in Tertullian is collected from his other
speeches.

XI. 3. He uses three or four times in this oration
(as he does also frequently in his other works) the
word dyLaa-QTjvuL ' to be sanctified,' [or made holy,]
for baptism. And so did St. Cyprian in his words
before cited", and other places : and so do the ancients
generally. INIr. Walker^ has taken the pains to pro-
duce quotations out of almost all the ancient writers
to shew that this was a common phrase with them,
to say, an infant or other person sanctified, when
they mean baptized : and I do, for brevity's sake,
refer the reader to his book. The scripture also
uses it so, 1 Cor. vi. 11. Eph. v. 26.

Which makes that explication of 1 Cor. vii. 14.
' Now are your children holy,' which is given by

y Supra, §.7. ^ §-7. ^ Ch. vi. §. i. b Modest

Plea for Infant Baptism, ch. 29.

182 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. Tertullian, St. Austin, St. Hierome, Paulinus, Pela-
260. giusc, and other ancients ; and since by Dr. Ham-

(A.D.360.) j^Qjj^d^ Mr. Walker^ &c. much the more probable,
whereby they make the words ayia ' holy,' and
riyiaa-Tai ' has been sanctified,' to refer to baptism.

And their explication is also the more probable,
because there has no other sense of those words
been yet given by expositors but what is liable to
much contest : but especially that sense, which some
antipaedobaptists have endeavoured to affix to them,
(of legitimacy in opposition to bastardy) seems the
most forced and far-fetched of all. The words are,

'^ylaarTai yap 6 avrjp 6 cnriarTOf; ev rrj yvvaiKi, Kai
^yiacTTai rj yvvr} rj aTTicTTO? ev T(f avSpl' eirei apa Ta
TCKva v/ULCov aKaOaprd ecm, vvi> Se ayia eaTiv. The
grammatical translation of which words is, ' for the
unbelieving husband [or an unbelieving husband]
has been sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving
wife [or an unbelieving wife] has been sanctified by
the husband. Else your children would be unclean :
but now they are holy [or saints].' Our trans-
lators altered the tense and put it ' is sanctified'
instead of ' has been sanctified,' because they thought,
it seems, the sense required it : but without any such
alteration, the paraphrase given by many learned
men is to this purpose :

For it has ordinarily come to pass, that an un-
believing husband has been brought to tbe faith
and so to baptism, by his wife : and likewise an
unbelieving wife by her husband. If it were not so ;
and if the wickedness or infidelity of the unbelieving
party did usually prevail, the children of such would
be generally kept unbaptized, and so be unclean. But

' See ch. xix. §.19. '• Six Queries. ^ Modest Plea.

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 183

now we see, by the grace of God, a contrary effect, chap.xi.
for tliey are generally baptized, and so become holy, 260.
or sanctified. ' '^

If the reader will turn back to ch. 4. ^. 12. and also
compare the quotations I shall i)roduce in ch. 15. §. 2.
and ch. 18. J. 4. and ch. 19- f 19- of this book, he
will see that St. Austin's and Pelagius' comment on
those words of the apostle is exactly to this purpose :
and that Tertullian differs from them only in this,
that he expounds the holiness that such children
have by the prerogative of their birth, by these
words, sanditati designati, ' designed for holiness,'
because he reckons and proves from scripture, that
they cannot be actually holy till they are actually
baptized : and that St. Hierome and Paulinus speak
to the same effect.

The word ayioi in the New Testament is trans-
lated sometimes saints., sometimes holy persons ;
and was in the same use with them as the word
Christians is with us.

There are two things, beside what I have men-
tioned, that do make this sense the more natural to
that place. One is, that it appears by the apostle s
other words in the context, that this was his scope
of arguing. For what hiowest thou, O wife, says he,
whether thou shalt save thy husband f i. e. by bringing
him over to the faith : Or how knowest thou, 0 man,
ivhether thou shalt save thy wife? This is a very
different aim from what he would have, if he meant
only that an unbelieving wife is sanctified to a
believer for the use of the bed. as unclean meats
are to a faithful eater.

Another is, that the custom of the Jewish lan-
guage had ma<le it ordinary before the apostles' time

184 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. to use the word to mnctify for baptizing or washing.
260. Where God commands Moses at the giving of the

(A.D.360.) j^^^ Exod. xix. 10, Sanctify them to-day and to-
morrow ; all the learned Jews understand it, that
he bid him baptize, i. e. wash them. And they
prove from this place that Israel entered into cove-
nant by baptism as well as circumcision. IMost of
the orders to the priests and Levites to sanctify
themselves, are explained by washing themselves.
Where it is said, Lev. vi. 27, Whatsoever shall touch
the flesh of the sin offeriyig shall be holy^ the original
word is, shall be sanctified : that is, (as the following
verses shew,) shall be washed. In 2 Sam. xi. 4. it
is said, Bathsheba was purified (in the original was
sayictified) from her uncleanness : and this was done
by washing. The divers washings among the Jews,
mentioned Heb. ix. 10, (where it is in the original,
divers baptisms,) are frequently styled by the Jews
in their writings, sanctifications : as the priest's
washing his hands and feet ten times on the day
of atonement, is called by them the ten sanctifi-
cations. This is so fully cleared by Ainsworth,
Lightfoot, Hammond, &c., that there need no more
be said of it.

St. Austin in his Questions on Leviticus has this
inquiry; how it is meant that Moses should sanctify
the high priest, Lev. xxi. 8, when God says, ver. 15,
/ the Lord do sanctify him ^ f In answer to which
he distinguishes between the visible sanctification
and the invisible : and after some discourse that
the invisible is the chief, but yet that the other is
not to be neglected, says, ' Hence Cornelius, and
' they that were with him, when they appeared to

' Qusest. 84.

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 185

' be already sanctified invisibly by the Holy Ohostt'HAP.xr,
' coming on them, were for all that baptized : nor 260.
' was the visible sanctification counted needless be- ^^'^^ °-'
' cause the invisible was before.'

St. Paul inscribes his E])istles sent to the Christ-
ians of any place, thus, roh ayloi^ ' to the holy per-
' sons ;' or thus, roh ^yiaa-fxevoi^ ' to such as have been
' sanctified' at such or such a place. And so the in-
scription of his letter to the Corinthian Christians
in these words. Unto the church of God ivhich is
at Corinth, rjyiacriJ.evoi^ ev ^piarw ^Irjcrov, /cAj/rof? dyioii'
to the?n that are sanctified [or have been sanctified]
in Christ Jesus^ called to be saints^: it is but a
larger periphrasis of what one would have said ;
to all that are Christians there. And St. Chry-
sostom^ in his comment on these very words puts
the question, t) Se ea-nv 6 dyiacrixo^', ' What is the
' sanctification he speaks of?' and answers readily,
TO \ovTpov, 6 KaOapia-jULog, ' the laver,' their baptism,
' their cleansing,'

The ancient church likewise that compiled the
Apostles' Creed, when they would declare it as an
article of Christian religion, that all Christians ought
to hold communion with one another, express that
article thus, ' The communion' ro>v dylwv ' of saints.'

Therefore when St. Paul in this place uses the
very same word, and says, else your children
ivould he unclean ; hut now theij arc ayia, (which
word is rendered in English sometimes saints, some-
times holij,) it is not at all alien to his ordinary use
of the word to understand it, else vour children

^= I Cor. i. 2.

h [Homil. i. in Epist. i. ad Corinthios, §. 1. Tom. x. edit.
Montfaucon.]

186 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. would be kept unbaptized, unsanctified, unchristian,
260. unholy, or unclean : but now they are generally

^^•■'^•2^°") sanctified by baptism, and become holy or Christ-
ians. If we had lived in the times of the ancients,
when the word sanctified was used in common
speech for baptized, this would have seemed a
natural interpretation.

This exposition, as it avoids on one side the in-
con veniency of that given by the antipsedobaptists,
which takes the word hol^/ and ^mclemi in a sense
in which they are never used in scripture : so it is
likewise free from the exceptions which lie against
that which limits the baj)tism of children so abso-
lutely to that condition of their being born of be-
lieving parents ; that it leads the baptizer into
many perplexing scruples, whose children he may
baptize, and whose not. As the late bishop of
Worcester' has largely shewn.

4. What St. Gregory here says in the last place,
that he will baptize no Arian, nor any that disown
the Godhead of Christ, and the Trinity, is according
to the general sense of the catholics of that, and of
the foregoing times. They would not hold com-
munion with the Arians, and consequently would
not by baptism enter such as members into their
church. The greatest persecutions that the catho-
lics at any time suffered, were on this account. For
the Arian emperors seldom went so far as to force
the bishops to renounce the catholic faith and turn
Arians : but they would banish them, unless they
would receive the Arians to communion, or join
with them. It was upon this account that Atha-

' Bishop Stillingfleet, in his Unreasonableness of Separation,
part iii. §.36.

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 187

iiasius (who flourished from the beginning to almost ciiap.xf.
the end of the Arian controversy) did so often suffer 260.
exile; because he would not admit Arius or his '^■^•^^^"^
followers to communion, when it was desired by
Constantine (who sought herein the quietness of
his own government) and the other emperors that
were themselves Arians.

These ancients reckoned that Christians might
and ought to hold communion notwithstanding dif-
ference of opinions in lesser matters : but that this
was a fundamental one, as relating to that which is
the direct object of our worship.

The Arians for this reason made a great many
attempts to express their faith in such ambiguous
terms as mio-ht seem to ao^ree with the catholic
sense. It is a wonder to see in Socrates'^ and other ^S9-
church historians, how many creeds were set forth
for this purpose as schemes of agreement between
the two parties. Some of these served in some
churches to patch up for a while an unsound union ;
which was broken to pieces again as soon as each
party expressed their meaning in other words. And
it was found at last bv a long trial that there was
no firm agreement to be had but by owning the
terms of the Nicene Creed. Mr. le Clerc observes
somewhere, that the major part of the councils in
those times, and of the creeds drawn up in them,
were on the Arian side. Nobody need envy them
this advantage : for we are not for a number of
creeds. The catholics adhered to the Nicene, and
were for having no more than that : it was the
Arian party, which not agreeing among themselves,
multiplied several draughts of faith. The Nicene

k Hist. lib. ii.

188 Si. Gregory Nazianzen.

cHAP.xi. Creed was at last found to be the only test to dis-
7 tinofuish a catholic from an Arian.

■200. o

(A.D.360.) XII. This I observe on account of some modern
Arians, or rather they are to be called Photinians;
for they have much more dishonourable opinions of
our Saviour Christ than the Arians had, and are
more in the sentiments of Photinus, v^^ho was in the
Arian times condemned^ both by the catholics and
the Arians.

There are of them both among the paedobaptists
and the antipsedobaptists : whether the antipaedo-
baptists, that believe in the Trinity, do baptize and
receive into communion any such, or not, I am not
sure. It is not likely that they who do separate
from one another for far lesser differences, will dis-
pense with so great an one about the divinity of
Christ.

But those antitrinitarians, that are paedobaptists,
in England, have of late, on a sudden, declared them-
selves to be at unity with the catholic church : yet
the account which they give of their conversion to
a good opinion of the catholic faith, is the oddest
one that was ever a;iven in so serious a matter. One
does not know whether they are in earnest, or whe-
ther they mock in speaking of that awful mystery.
About the year 1697 they published a paper'" which
they called ' The Agreement of the Unitarians with
' the Catholic Church :' drawn up by themselves,

I Socrat. lib. ii. cap. 29.

'" [The Agreement of the Unitarians with the CathoHc Church.
Being also a full Answer to the Infamations of Mr. Edwards ;
and the needless Exceptions of my Lords the Bishops of Chi-
chester, Worcester, and Sarum, and of Monsieur de Luzancy.
4to. (no place) 1698. In two parts^ pp. 64.]

St.Qregoty Nazianzen. 189

and whether approved by any other I know not. chap.xi.
In a book" pnblished next year, which gives an '^^
account of tlie life of Thomas Firmin, and of his (AD-s^o.)
reHgion, they recite the said agreement, and dis-
course something more on the subject-matter of it.
In the account of his religion, after having observed
that the people had once thought that the difference
between the Unitarians and the catholic church was
' real, great, and even unreconcilable,' they add ;
' But the English Unitarians (or Socinians) being-
men of ingenuous and free minds and i)rinciples,
and therefore always ready to entertain farther
light ; after eight or nine years late contest in
print with the principal divines of this nation, they
have been so dexterous and hap|)y, that instead of
farther embroiling the points in question, which is
the usual effect of the pajier war, they seem to
have accommodated whatsoever differences depend-
ing between the church and them".'
And a little after : ' Other sects, by the favour of
princes, or the quality of the times, have obtained
an exemption from mulcts and penalties of the

laws, &c. If Socinianism had any where enjoyed

those halcyon days, its sudden irresistible progress
would have been — as lightning, that rufilieth out
of the east and shineth even to the ivest. Alas !
on equal ground, and with equal circumstances,
the combat between unintelligible mystery and
clear reason ; between seeming contradictions,

" [' The Life of Mr. Thomas Firmiii, late Citizen of London ;
with a Sermon on the Occasion of his Death. Together with
an Account of his Religion, and of the present State of the
Unitarian Controversy.' 8vo. London, 1698.]

o Page 5.

190 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi' absurdities, and impossibilities; and a rational,
"^ ' obvious, accountable faith, would soon have been

(A.D.360.)' ended. But it is better ended : the Divine Provi-
' dence and goodness, in mercy to both parties, has
' granted a peace instead of a victory. It has pleased
' God to favour the suffering side with an unex-
' pected light : he has shewn them (what may seem
' incredible) that their opposers think as they [the
' Unitarians] speak, that their diiference is not in
' the ideas or notions, but only in the terms or

* words. To manifest this, Mr. Firmin caused the
' following scheme of agreement,' &c.

And to this purpose in the other treatise of the
said book, viz. in the Life of Mr. Firmin, they say,

' The Unitarians never intended to oppose any
' other trinity, but a trinity of infinite minds or
' spirits. Grant to them that God is one infinite
' spirit or mind, not two or three, they demand no
' more. They a])plied themselves therefore to in-
' quire, which of these trinities, a trinity of spirits,
' or of properties, is the doctrine of the catholic
' church. They could not miss of a ready satisfac-

* tion : all systems, catechisms, books of controversy,
' councils, writers that have been esteemed catholic,

' have defined God to be one infinite, all-perfect

' Spirit : and the divine Persons to be nothing else
' but the divine Essence or Godhead, with the three
' relative properties, unbegotten, and begotten, and
' proceeding?.'

It is a wonder then that these men could never
perceive this before. Had they never looked into
any system, catechism, council, &c., before the year
1697? they say themselves, that as soon as they set

1' Page 1 8.

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 191

themselves to inquire, they could not miss of a ready ciiap.xi.
satisfaction. ^^T

But since they do now make a proposal of coming (A.D.360.)
into the communion of the church, it is not so ma-
terial to inquire what was the occasion of their
quarrel, as it is to know whether their return to
the church be cordial ; and whether they are as yet
of such a faith, as that, according to this rule of
St. Gregory, they ought to be admitted to baptism
(those of them that are not yet baptized) or to the
communion.

XIII. I. And if they would be received as cor-
dially joining with the catholics ; why do they still
speak of the divinity of Christ in so ambiguous
terms as becomes not such as have lain under
censure of false doctrine in that ])oint? They repeat
out of their scheme ; ' We say our Lord Christ is
' God and man. He is man, in respect of his rea-
' sonable soul and human body ; God, in respect of
' God in him : or more scholastically, in respect of
' the hypostatical or personal union, of the humanity
' of Christ with the divinity. By which the catholic
' church means, and we mean, the divinity was
' not only occasionally assisting to, but was and is
' always in Christ, illuminating, conducting, and
' actuating him 1.'

And again, ' Nor do we reckon of the Lord Christ
' as but a creature ; I have said before, he is God
' and man. The Divinity did so inhabit in the
' humanity of Christ, doth so exert in it the most
' glorious effects of Omnipotence and Omniscience,
' that if others have been called God because they

q Account of Firmin's Religion, p. 18.

192 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. ' re'presented God, Christ is to be so called because
260. ' he exhibits God"",'

( • •.? o) ^]j ^i^jg^ except what they say of the personal
union, is lame still. For another man, as for example
Moses, or any prophet that had the Spirit of God
in him, illuminating, conducting, and enabling him
to work miracles, &c., might be said to exhibit
God in this sense ; only not in so high a degree, or
not always. ^

What they subscribe to of the hypostatical or
personal union would indeed be firm, and for ever
stop their way against returning to Socinianism, if
they had expressed it scholastically as they pretend
to do. T mean, if thev had said this union to be of
the humanity of Christ with the Xoyo^ or second of
the three Persons. But when they say, * with the
' Divinity,' they either do not understand the imjiort
of that phrase, of hypostatical or personal union ;

* or else they purposely confound the notion. They

do not mean sure, that the humanity of Christ
is personally united to, or makes one person with,
the Father.
160. The very doctrine for which both Paulus Samo-
244- satenus and Photinus were condemned by the church,
was that thev made Christ to be God only by the
inhabitation of God in him : as bishop Stillingfleef^
had fully proved to them. And yet, if you mind
these men's phrases, they own no more : and even
the hypostatical union they explain to mean no
more, and do without any modesty say, that the
church means no more bv it.

XIV. The truth is, the Socinians have very lately
made a great and monstrous change in their doc-

'■ Page 30. s Vindication of the Trinity, c 4.

St. Gregori/ Nazianzen. 193

trine: and yet hold their main article still; thatciiAPXi.
Christ has, properly speaking, no nature but the ^60!
human. And these English Unitarians do by their (^-^^fio.)
way of explaining themselves give ground to suspect
that they are still in that sentiment. They were
wont formerly to degrade that X0709 of which St.
John speaks, as much as they could ; making it to
be nothing but the human nature of Jesus Christ,
or something belonging to the human nature. They
did use to expound thus ; In the beginning was the
word: i. e. In the beginning of the gosjiel, Jesus
Christ and his preaching was. And the word was
with God : i. e. He and his preaching were ap-
pointed in the council of God. And the word was
God : i. e. He was God's deputy to men. All things
irere made by him : i. e. All matters of the gospel
dispensation were done by him, &c.

But now of late they put a notion on the term
Xo^of, which carries the utmost degree of contrariety
to their former interpretation. They make the
\6yo^ to be not at all distinct from God the Father,
neither in nature nor in person : but to be his
attribute of wisdom, reason, &c. Thus a certain
writer over the water, whose works they greedily
translate into English*:

In the beginning ivas the word: i. e. In the
beginning was reason.

And the ivord was with God: i. e. And that
reason was with God.

Ayid the word was God : i. e. And God was that
reason.

t [See a Supplement to Dr. Hammond's Paraphrase and Anno-
tations on the New Testament : by Monsieur Le Clerc, 4to.
London, 1690. p. 157, &c.]

WALL, VOL. I. O

194 St. Gregory Nazianzen. .

CHAP. XI. The same was in the beginning with God : i. e.
^^^ There was, I say, reason in God before the world
(A.D.360.) ^as created.

Are not these great apophthegms for St. John to
say?

And in the following verses, wherever we read
he or him, they translate it. All things were made
by it : and witjiout it was not any thing &c. And
then ver. 14, And the word was made flesh : i. e.
And this reason, by the man in whom it was, was
made conspicuous.

And where the author to the Hebrews having
expressly named God's son, whom he hath appointed
heir of all things, adds these words ; by whom also
he made the worlds: because here is no possible
turning him into it, the paraphrase is ; ' that is,
' having heretofore by that X0709, or reason, or
' eternal wisdom which resided in Jesus, and was
' most nearly united to him, created all things.' If
by ' most nearly united' be meant so united as to
become one person, it is catholic. But the terms of
residing in him, and of being made conspicuous by
him, express a more lax sort of union than what
the words of scripture do every where set forth.
And at such a rate of interpreting it might be said
of any mere man, in whom the Spirit of God does
reside, that the world was made by him : because
he has in him that Spirit by which it was made.
But the scripture is far from saying so of any mere
man ; and of our Lord Jesus Christ it never speaks
otherwise than so : By him were all things created :
and, He is before all things^. Of whom as concerning
the flesh Christ came^ who is over all^, &c. With the

« Col. i. 16, 17. " Rom. ix. 5.

Si. Gregory Nazianzen. 195

(jlory which I had with thee before the world wasy. chap.xi.
I came forth from the Father. Before Abraham was, .60.
/^;w^ [orwas] &c. It is not said, the Spirit or^^-"-36°-)
wisdom which is in me, came forth from the Father,
or had glory with thee : but / came forth, / had
glory, &c. And as far as the personal word / or He
can denote the same person, it is here and every
where else denoted.

The Paulianists and Photinians would say, as
these men do, that Christ is God and man : but if
they were asked whether he was God first, or man
first, they would say, he was man first, and after-
wards God, by God's dwelling in him. And these
men seem to mean no other. But the catholic
church believes that he was God first, and afterward
became man. As St. John tells first what he was
orio'inallv : and then how he was made flesh.

Cerinthus, who was St. John's chief adversary,
and against whom he had a particular eye, when he
wrote his Gospel (as both Irenoeus^ and St. Hierome''
do witness) taught that Jesus was the son of Joseph
and Mary in like manner as all other men : and
that he was eminent for justice, prudence, and
wisdom above all others : and that after his baptism
Christ came down upon him from the Supreme
power in the shape of a dove, &c. This was Cerin-
thus' doctrine, as Irenaeus*^ repeats it, who lived so
nigh those times that he may well be thought to be
born in the time of Cerinthus. And this is the
same for substance with the latter of those two

y John xvii. 5. ^ John xvi. 28. •' Lib. 3. c. 11.

^ De Script. Eccl. v. Joannes, [or, de Scriptoribus illustribus,
(as this treatise is more frequently called) cap. 9. — Op. tora. ii.
p. 830, edit. Vallars.] c Lib. i. c. 25.

O 2

196 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. sorts of Socinianism that I mentioned ; only it was
^6a by him blunderingly expressed : that which they

(A.D.360.) g^yjg X0709 he calls Christ, and he does not allow
him to be born of a virgin. They must be dexterous
and happy men indeed, that can reconcile St. John's
Gospel to that very sense against which it was
purposely written.

This Cerinthus and Ebion, both whose doctrine
concerning our Lord was (as Irenseus in the next
chapter' testifies) the same, were the first Socinians
in the world, except those mentioned John vi. 42,
who said, Is not this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose
father and mother we know ? How is it then that he
saith, I came down from heaven f

XV. 2. But besides : what hopes can we have of
any firm union with these men, who at the same
time that they desire to be received into commu-
nion with the catholic church, do set forth the faith
thereof in as ill colours as possibly they can ; caUing
it ' unintelligible mystery,' and their own, ' clear

* reason ?' That which we hold they describe as
' seeming impossibilities, absurdities, and contradic-

* tions :' theirs is a * rational, obvious, and account-
' able faith.' And they express themselves as men
that were cocksure, that if that act of parliament,
which they call ' a bill in name and pretext against
' immorality and blasphemy, in truth and real de-
' sign against the Unitarians*",' were taken out of
the way, we should all presently turn Socinians.
(It is to be noted that this act came out much about
the same time that they were favoured with that
unexpected light.)

They ought not to be so hasty : there is another

^ liib. i. cap. 26. e [Life of T. Fiiinin, p. 26.]

St. Gregory Nazianzm. 197

book in the way, and that is the scriptures. If they chap.xi.
were abolished, and other records of the church 260.
with them, we freely grant that we should not na-^^"^"^ °'^
turally have any notion of a Trinity, of Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit in one Godhead ; nor should we
ever have thought of being baptized in such a name,
nor have known of the Word which was God, being
made flesh. These mysteries we grant would have
been unintelligible.

But then there would have been another incon-
veniency in that way of knowing God which they
propose, viz. in entertaining only such notions of
him as we can form by natural reason and clear
ideas. For some few persons of more refined intel-
lectuals would conceive him to be a spiritual Being
far above the properties and passions of body and
matter. Others, that could form no notion of a
spirit, would say, this is unintelligible mystery : we
must have a God that has a body, or else we shall
think him to be nothing. These latter would be
subdivided : for some would believe that he is made
of a very fine, subtle, and ethereal matter, quite dif-
ferent from that which may be seen, or has any
limbs, &c. But others, and these the far greatest
part of mankind, would contend that a God that is
supposed to see, and hear, and judge, without any
ears or eyes, is an absurdity, impossibility, contra-
diction, a thing of which we can form no clear
idea : so they would have a God with eyes and ears
as good as any painter could make.

The experience of all ages of the world shews
that what I say is no fancy, but matter of fact.
This way therefore would not do, except they would
join to it the policy of the papists, who do preserve

198 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. the true notion of God, as he is set forth in scrip-
260. ture, for the use of the learned and such as they

^ ■ '^ °'^ allow to read the scripture ; but keep at the same
time wooden gods for the use of the mob.

God Almighty give us all the modesty and humi-
lity to think that his way of existing may well be
such as we cannot comprehend, any more than a
worm can comprehend what reason or speech or a
soul is : and quietly to acquiesce in that account
which he has been pleased to give of his own na-
ture, and of what we are to believe concerning him :
and to take it according to the plain meaning of
those whom he has inspired to write it : and to
judge ourselves, as we are indeed, far incapable of
explaining the manner of it ; and much more inca-
pable of any ability of trying and examining the
truth of it by our natural ideas of the things them-
selves. This last is impudent in those who do own
the divine inspiration of the writers.

XVI. The great progress which they boast they
should make, has no example for their encourage-
ment in former ao^es of the church. Cerinthus and
Ebion had some followers ; but that was before the
canon of scripture, and particularly St. .John's Gos-
pel, was completed and divulged ; and it was mostly
in wild countries, as Arabia deserta*^, &c. After the
writings of the apostles were divulged, several single
80. persons, Artemon, Theodotus, Paulus of Samosata,
' &c., attempted to set up such a sect, but never pro-
24S-selyted any region or city: and Photinus, though a

275»

very eloquent man, and setting up in the Arian times,

was presently condemned by all parties : so that

Epiphanius, who wrote but thirty years after that

f Epiphan. in Heer. Ebionitarum.

^S*^. Gregory Nazianzen. 199

he began to vent his heresy, and before PhotinusCHAP.xi.
himself was dead, as it seems, tells him, that ' his ^^o.
' heresy of all others was the easiest to be confuted,
' not only by skilful men, but by any that had any

* tolerable understanding of the sense of scripture C
And a little after : ' The heresy of this impostor is
' dwindled away, having lasted but a very little
' while.' And Theodoret says, that ' in his time it
' was quite forgot ;' and so, he says, were ' all the
' other heresies that had denied Christ's divinity,
' Cerinthians, Ebionites, Sabellians, &c., so that the
' very names of those sects were to many unknown '\'
And whereas one Bonosus*, about, or a little after
the time of Photinus, went about to vent the same
doctrine in Dacia, he was so far from having any
number of followers, that he himself or his name is
hardly known in history ; and Theodoret seems
never to have heard of him.

Mahomet the impostor, arising in the foresaid
Arabia, (of which place Epiphanius says, ' It was
' the chief nest of the Ebionites and Nazarenes, as

* I have,' says he, ' often already observed^,') was
the only man that after these times ventured to
broach the doctrine against Christ's divinity : and
he indeed with his successors have converted a great
part of the world ' with a sudden irresistible pro-
' gress :' but then they have accordingly laid aside
the name of Christians, and disowned the scriptures,
as being plainly against them in this matter, though
they do believe Christ to have been a great Pro-
phet.

g Hser. 71. h Hseret. Fab. lib. ii. cap. ult.

' Mercator, Dissert, contra Anathematismos Nestorii. 522.
^ Haer. 40.

200 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP. XI. Since that, in Poland, and such places bordering
260. on the Mahometans, this opinion has been enter-
"^ ° tained by some few as a middle sort of religion be-
tween the Christian and Mahometan. And now of
late it is come into Holland, and from thence into
England, serving for the use of such as being stag-
gered in their faith by the arguments of the deists,
which are rife in those countries, yet will not go so
far with them as to renounce Jesus Christ and the
scriptures; but take a middle way, holding with
the catholics that he is a true prophet, and the
Messiah promised, and that he died and rose again,
and will be our Judge ; but with the deists denying
his divinity, and holding that he had no being be-
fore he was born or conceived in human flesh. They
with the catholics say that the scriptures are (ori-
ginally and as they came out of the apostles' hands)
God's word, and not feigned by men ; but with the
deists, that what they say of Christ's divinity has
been interpolated, or must be explained so as to fit
with our natural conceptions, which, they say, can-
not admit the notion of a Son of God that is pro-
perly one in essence with the Father, nor of such a
Son of God taking on him the human nature, when
the Father does not. To believe such strange things
on the credit of revelation, is, they say, to give great
advantage to the deists who deny it all.

This opinion, I say, never had any considerable
number of followers in the world. The Arian, I
grant, had ; but that does not nigh so plainly con-
tradict the scriptures.

XVII. Now to return to that which gave the
occasion of this digression : The catholics, as we see
here by Gregory Nazianzen, would not baptize or

JSt. Gregory Nazianzen. 201

receive to their church an Arian, nor any one thatcHAP.xi.
did not profess belief in the holy Trinity and the ~^_
divinity of Christ. The catholic church is of the(^"-^^°>
same mind still. These men do make an overture,
and a declaration of their purpose of joining them-
selves to the church, and they do many of them put
it in practice. If they are truly reconciled to the
catholic faith, nothing were more desirable : but for
that there is need of a better test, and it is a ques-
tion whether the church ought to receive them with-
out better satisfaction than this scheme of agree-
ment. They own the Apostles' Creed indeed, which
our church makes use of in baptism : but by dis-
owning the Nicene, they shew that they do not own
the other in the same sense that the church does,
but repeat the same words in a very equivocal
meaning. When we say, ' I believe in Jesus Christ

* his only Son,' &c., we do by the phrase of believing
in him, mean believing in him as in God properly
so called : and so we understand likewise the form
of baptism in his name, together with the Father
and Holy Spirit. And so did the ancients : this
Gregory, speaking of the Holy Spirit, and how we
are baptized in his name, ' If he be a creature,' says
he, ' how do we believe in him ? For it is one thing
' to believe in any one, and another to believe some-
' thing concernincj him. For the one is peculiar to

* God : the other common to any thing*.' If these
men mean quite another thing in both these, I can-
not see how we and they have one faith or one
baptism ; nor indeed how we worship the same
God : for the God whom we worship is Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit.

1 Orat. de Spiritu Sancto.

202 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. A difference in understanding the meaning of some
7t^. articles of lesser moment, viz. of Christ's descent

(A.D.360.) .j^^^ \iq[\^ is not of the same nature, nor does make
an instance for this purpose. If any man differ in
opinion from the received tenets of the church in
smaller matters, and therefore cannot join in some
particular collect, office, prayer, or clause of a prayer,
wherein something relating to those tenets is ex-
pressed, we ^rant, what these men plead, that St.
Pauls rule, If in any thing ye he otherwise minded,
God shall reveal even this unto you. Nevertheless
whereto we have attained, let us walk by the same
rule^, &c., teaches that such a man should continue
in communion, and conform to all that he can, and
omit the saying Amen to that which he judges a
mistake. Bp. Stillingfleet° has fully proved this to
be the meaning of that place against the dissenting
ministers, who were not willing that the separation
should sink so. And we can well enough allow of
Mr. le Clerc's explication of Rom. xiv. 1. ' Him that
' is weak in the faith, receive you without examin-
' ing his doubtful opinions,' and that the church
ought to receive such an one. But all this is in
differences about such matters as St. Paul there in-
stances, in meats, drinks, or other things not of the
foundation. But the doctrine concerning the person
of Jesus Christ, and the satisfaction for our sins by
him made, is, if any thing be, of the foundation.

I think the church of England has at this time
the worst luck in this respect that any church ever
had. There are numerous bodies of her people who
hold all the same faith with her, that do against her

«i Phil. iii. 15, 16.

" Unreasonableness of Separation, p. ii. §. 19.

St. Gregory/ Nazianzen. 203

will make schisms from her communion on occasion chap.xi.

oo.

of differences in opinion, which are no just ground ^rx
for sejiaration, which party soever bo supposed to (^-^^-s^o-)
be in the rifiht. These she calls and invites to com-
munion in prayers and sacraments, in which they
might join even on su])posal that they could not
part with their particular opinions : and they, either
out of peevishness, or else being over-persuaded by
their leaders, who find their account in continuing
separate bodies whereof they may be heads, do re-
fuse to join even in those things wherein they agree
in opinion with us. On the other side, these men
who give but a poor account of their agreement
with us in fundamentals, declare of their own accord
(whether it be to shelter themselves from penal-
ties, or not, I know not) that they will however join
with us.

The least that can be said is, that it behoves
every curate, who has good ground to believe con-
cerning any of those that resort to his communion,
that they are enemies to the doctrine of the divinity
of our Saviour (and there are up and down more of
them than one would think), to take advice of the
bishop how far such are to be admitted to commu-
nion.

XVIII. I mentioned the satisfaction of our Sa-
viour for our sins. It is known how derogatory an
explication the Socinians have given of that. They
have sometimes so spoke, as if the main or only de-
sign of his death were to give us a good example of
suffering patiently ; fearing that if too much value
were put on his blood as a sufficient ransom for the ♦
sins of the world, it must be yielded to be the blood
of one that was God in a proper sense as well as

204) St. Gregory Nazianzen.

cHAP.xi. man. But whereas the New Testament does almost
"^^ in every chapter speak of the redemption, propi-

(A.D.360.) tiation, sacrifice, price, ransom, purchase, paid or
wrought by him, and does lay the stress of our sal-
vation upon our faith in his blood^ as well as in his
doctrine : they do (after having explained away as
much of this article as possibly they can) yield that
he did satisfy for us a little, or redeem us a little.
I have heard one of them in company, and in a
braving way, explain it thus ; ^ It is as if a man
' owed me a thousand pounds, and not being able to
' pay, a friend of his, who had some interest in me,
' should intercede with me to forgive him the debt;

* and to move me the more, should offer to pay
' twelvepence in the pound for him, and I in con-
' descension to this friend should accept it for pay-
' ment in full.'

This is to count the blood of the covenant where-
with we are sanctified^ a much more mean and or-
dinary thing than the scripture does every where
represent it. And that which brought this passage
of a discourse in company to my memory, was the
words which these men use'i to shew the soundness
of their faith in that matter ; ' We believe that the
' Lord Christ by what he did, and what he suffered,
' was,' by the gracious acceptance of God, ' a true

* and perfect propitiation for sinners that repent.'
This is what any catholic or any Socinian either,
may say, and yet have a very different faith about
this article.

The other errors with which they are charged,

" Rom. iii. 24, 25. . P Heb. x. 29.

q [Account of Firmin's Religion, p. 19.]

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 205

and do not by that agreement revoke, are great ; chap.xi.
but not to be named the same day with these. "^

XIX. As for the assemblies which they talk oi {^■^■2,(^0.)
holding ' for divine worship distinct from the as-

' semblies of any other denominations of Christians :
' but these to be not by the way of schism or sepa-

* ration from the church, but only as fraternities in

* the church, who should take a more special care of
' that article,' [viz. of the unity of the Godhead,]
there would be by God's grace no need of them.
The catholic church does, and ever did, and ever
will hold and publish that doctrine in the first
place and above all others. The Athanasian Creed,
against which they make their chief exceptions, de-
clares this in words as absolute as any they can de-
sire to be devised ; that though the Father be God,
Lord, Almighty, &c., and the Son and Holy Spirit
likewise; yet there are not three Gods, Lords, Al-
mighties, &c., but one God, one Lord, one Almighty :
and would by parity of reason have said; so the
Father is Spirit, the Son Spirit, and the Holy Ghost
Spirit : yet not three Spirits, but one Spirit.

XX. They confess themselves that all systems,
catechisms, councils, have defined this. But they
add, ' especially since the Lateran council,' &;c.,
thereby leaving open a door for that slander of a
friend •■ of theirs to take place, who goes about to
make the world believe that anciently, in the times
of the Nicene council, and for some time afterward,
the Christians held the faith of the Trinity so as to
make three Gods in it.

This slander of an outlandish author, our Soci-

r Mr. Le Clerc, Supplement to Hammond ; item Critical
Epistles, &c.

206 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

CHAP.xi. nians do greedily embrace and confidently aver:
^^^^ which has, as to most of the particulars by which

(A.D.360.) ^]^gy would prove it, been fully answered by bishop
Stillinirfleet^: and I have occasionallv, in another
place* said something to some of the rest on which
they insist, and to that open affront given by the
said slanderer to all the churches that use the Ni-
cene Creed, which he says they must either expunge
out of their confessions and liturgies, or else re-
nounce the article of one God, pretending that the
faith held forth in that creed is Tri theism. But it
comes in my way there by the by only.

All that I mention it here for, is to shew what an
antipathy this sort of men have to that creed, and
how they accordingly endeavour to blacken it :
which is, as I shew in another place's the most an-
cient copy of a Christian creed that is now extant in
the world, and the most universally subscribed to by
all Christians, and has been now for so many ages
accounted the onlv firm test and barrier of the ca-
tholic church against such as deny the divinity of
our Lord Christ : being of opinion, that we can
have no sound communion with those that renounce
it : and that it is a vain and ill advised thing to
hope in these late ages of the church to pitch or
agree on any fitter symbol or test of a catholic
Christian. It should be the more unexceptionable
with them, because it has not the words, Triniti/,
perso7i, &c., against which their objections chiefly
lie. And yet those of them among us that do put
in practice the foresaid project of communicating
with the church, do, as far as I understand, gene-

s Vindication of the Trinity, ch. 6.

t Part ii, ch. 5. §. 8. " Part ii. ch. 9. § 9, 10, i r, &c.

St. Gregory Nazianzen. 207

rally renounce it, and instead of it they give here aciiAP.xi.
profession of their faith, in words subject to great ^^^
ambiguity. (A.D.360.)

The great bishop Stillingfleef^ having occasion to
speak of that canon >' of the first council of Aries,
wherein they decree, That if any that come over
from a sort of heresy there specified, did offer them-
selves to communicate with the catholics, ' they

* should be examined by the priests, whether they
' had a right faith of the Trinity,' &c. And if so,
they were to be admitted with imposition of hands.
' But if being examined, they do not confess this
' Trinity, then they must be baptized anew.' He asks
this question, ' What Trinity do they mean ? of
' mere names or cyphers, or of one God and two

* creatures joined in the same form of words, as our

* Unitarians understand it?'

And to the same purpose St. Cyprian, arguing
that such as had received baptism from some he-
retics that had monstrous opinions about the Deity,
ouffht not to be admitted to communion without a
new baptism, says thus : 'If by that baptism of
' theirs the man have obtained remission of sins,
' then is he sanctified and become a temple of God.
' Now I ask of what God ? If they say of God the
' Creator, that could not be, since he did not believe
' in him. If of Christ ; one that denies Christ to

* be God cannot be a temple of him. If of the Holy
' Spirit ; whereas these three are one, how can the
' Holy Spirit be ])leased with him who is against
' either the Father or the Son^ ?'

We may by the by take notice, that it appears by

" Vindication of the Trinity, ch. 9. V Can. 8.

2 Epist. 73. ad Jubaianum.

208 St. Gregory Nazianzen.

cHAP.xi.this and by another plainer place of St. Cyprian %
"^^ that that text of St. John, These three are one^,

(A.D.360.) either was read then (which was long before the
time of Ariiis) with the same context that it is
now, or at least was understood in the same sense.

If these ancient Christians would not admit such
men, though recanting their opinions, without a
new baptism ; I mean, if they had been baptized
into any other faith than the true faith of the Tri-
nity ; much less would they have entertained com-
munion with them holding still their opinions.

It is St. Gregory's mentioning in this oration of
baptism a thing that is so appliable to the case of
the church at present, that has drawn me so far
from my subject.

CHAP. XII.

Quotations out of St. Basil.

§. I. ST. BASIL also has an oration or sermon
to the catechumens, or new converted Christians, to
persuade them to baptism without such delays as
many used : but it has not any express mention of
the case of infants as to baptism : yet it has some
things that are cited pro and contra to that pur-
pose. It may not be amiss to give a short abstract
of it, reciting, as I did in the other, the original
words of such places only as do by some consequence
relate to this question.

Oratio Exhortatoria ad Baptismum.^ [^. 1.]

He begins with observing, that Solomon, mention-
ing a time for every thing, says. There is a time to

^ Lib. de Unitate Ecclesise. "* ^ i John v. 7.

c [Tom. ii. p. 113. edit. Benedictin. Paris, 1721.]

St. Basil. 209

be born, and a time to die, placing the birth first : chap.
but that he being to speak of the spiritual birth,

must speak of our spiritual death first. Which ,^ ^^^^^^ .
having done, and shewn the lost condition we are
in by nature, and that baptism is the recovery from
it, he proceeds :

II. KatjOO? /j.ev ovv aXAot? aWos eTrtr/JoefO?' '1S109
vTTvov, Ka\ '1S109 iypijyopcreco?' '10109 TroXe/mou, /cat '1S109
eipTjvtjg. KaijOO? ^e jSaTrTiO-juaTO^ aVa? o rwv avQpwTroov

^10?. ' There is therefore a several season proper

* for several things ; a time peculiar for sleep, and

* one peculiar for watching; a time for war, and a

* time for peace. But any time of one's life is
' proper for baptism.' And afterward, ' Be it day
' or night, be it but an hour or a minute, yet the
' most proper time is Easter : for that is the so-

* lemnity of the resurrection ; and baptism is to us
' a ground of our resurrection.'

III. Then having insisted on the advantage of
Christ's baptism above that of St. John's, and how
all are invited to it ; he addresses thus to them :

'O/ci/er? Ka\ ^ovXevt] kq] ScajmeWeig ; e/c vrinrlov tov \6yov
Karrj-^oviuevoif ovTrco crvveOov tvj akriBeia ; iravTOTe fiav-
Oaucov, ovSeTTW V/XOeg irpog Tt]v eTriyi/ooaiv ; TreipacrTr]^ Sia
l3iov, KaraarKOTTO's fie-^i y/jpo^g ', ttotc yei'ija-ij ■^(^pirrriavos ;
■JTore yvwpLcroiJLev (re cb? ^/u-erepov ; &C. ' Do you demur

' and loiter, and put it off? When you have been

* from a child catechised in the word, are you not
' yet acquainted with the truth ? Having been

* always learning it, are you not yet come to the

* knowledge of it ? A seeker all your life long, a
' considerer till you are old, when will you be made

* a Christian ? When shall we see you become one
' of us ? Last year you were for staying till this year :

WALL, VOL. I. P

210 St. Basil

CHAP. * and now you have a mind to stay till next. Take

* heed that by promising yourself a longer life, you

D °6o N * do not quite miss of your hope. You do not know
' what change to-morrow may bring,' &c.

IV. When I first copied out this passage to put it
into this collection, I thought it to be the strongest
evidence against the general practice of infant-
baptism in those times of any that is to be found
in all antiquity, (though it has not, I think, been
taken notice of by any of the antipaedobaptists,)
for it plainly supposes that a considerable part of
St. Basil's auditory at this time were such as had
been from their childhood instructed in the Christian
religion (and consequently in all probability born of
Christian parents), and yet not baptized.

But I have since, in searching after other passages,
had occasion more than enough to observe, that there
were in these times abundance of people that were
well-willers to Christianity, half Christians, who yet
put off their absolute owning of it, or being baptized
into it, for a great many years. These men had,
during that their unsettled mind, several children :
and they could not with any face or conscience
desire of the church baptism for these their infant-
children, unless they would first find in their hearts
to accept it for themselves. And so these children
came to be taught the doctrine of Christianity,
and yet not baptized into it ; because their parents,
though liking of that religion, yet were not at
present fully resolved themselves. But this is no
proof that any Christians, after they were once
baptized themselves, did ever suffer their infant
children to go without baptism.

This place itself is a plain proof that there were

St. Basil. 211

a sfreat many such men as I have mentioned : for c h a

XII

several of the men to whom St. Basil is here preach- 1

ing, and whom he blames for putting oiF baptism ^^^^°-^^^
so long, must be thought to have children ; which
children must be in the case that I speak of. So
that this place affords an answer to the objection
drawn from itself, or from any other that speaks of
children instructed in religion and yet not baptized.

V. He goes on with his sermon, and shews the
advantages of this profession to which he invites
them, and the lightness of the yoke which he
advises them to put on. And proceeds to speak
of the necessity of baptism in these words : [§. 2.]
'O ^lovSaios Tijv TrepiTOfxtjv ovk vtrepTiOerai oia Trjv
ctTTfiX^v, on iraa-a '^v')(h 'i/T'? ov TrepiTfxrjO^rrerai rr,
riixepa Trj oySorj e^oXoOpevOt'jcreTai e/c rov Xaov avTtj^^
(TV Se Tr]v ayeipoTToiriTov 7r€piToiui.i]v ava^aXXi] ev Trj
cLTreKSvcrei r^? crapKO?, ev rw (BaTrrlcriuiari TeXeiovjuivtjv,
avTOv Tov J^vpiov aKovcrai}, "'A.jiirji/, ^A.nirjV, &C. ' A Jew

' does not delay circumcision because of the threat-
' ening that everi/ soul that is not circumcised the
' eighth day shall he cut off from his 'people: and
' dost thou put off the circumcisioti made without
' hands in the putti7ig of the Jlesh, which is performed
' in baptism, when thou hearest our Lord himself
' say, Verily, verily., I say unto you, Eaicept one he
' horn of water and of the spirit, he .shall not
' enter into the kiiigdom of God f If Israel had not
' passed through the sea, they had not got rid of
' Pharaoh : and unless thou pass through the water,
' thou wilt not be delivered from the cruel tyranny
' of the Devil,' &c.

' If your sins are many ; be not frighted because
' of their number : where sin has abounded, there

p 2

21 a St. Basil

CHAP. * grace will much more abound, if you will receive
^ * it. If they are small and not very heinous, why

D °'6o ) * ^^'^ y^^ afraid of the time to come, since you have

* ordered your past life well, even when you were not
' furnished with the Christian law?' [§. 3.]

VI. ' Look ujDon your soul to be placed in a

* balance ; the angels draw you one way, the devils
' the other : to which will you incline ? Which shall
' overcome, carnal pleasure or holiness of life ?

* Do not you remember how in Egypt the de-

* stroyer passed over the houses that were marked,

* when in those that were not so he slew the first-
' born ?

' If a physician could undertake by any art to
' make you young again when you are old, you
' would earnestly long for that day in which your
' florid youth should be restored : and yet now when
' it is told you that your soul, defiled with all manner
' of sin, may be renewed and born again by baptism,
' you slight so great a benefit.' [^. 4. J

' Are you young ? guard your youth with the
' bridle of baptism. Is the flower of your age past ?
' do not endanger the loss of your viaticum ; do not
' miss of your preservative ; do not miss of your
' eleventh hour as if it were your first.

' I know your reason, though you think to conceal
' it. " Stay a little longer," say you, " I will make use

* of the flower of my age in pleasure, &c., and then
' when I have enough of that, I will give it over and
' be baptized." Think you that God does not see

* your purpose, or that he will give his grace to so

« wicked a heart ? If you leave off your sins for

' old age, thanks to your inability. We regard those
' that are sober by choice, not by necessity.

St. Basil. 213

Who has given you a lease of your life ?' &c. c h a p.

XII.

' Do not you see children often snatched from the

' breast, and others die in the flower of their (^^o^° 60.)

' age ?' &c.

* Do you stay for baptism till some fever force
' you to it, when you will neither be able to speak

* the holy words, nor perhaps to hear them, the dis-

* ease being got into your head ?' [^. 5.]

The Devil cries, Give me to-dmj, and give the
morroiu to God. But God says. To-day if you 'will
hear my voice. ' The Devil gives us hope of to-

* morrow ; but when to-morrow is come, as a
' fraudulent divider, he again asks that day for
' himself, and yields the next to-morrow to God.'

[§. 6.]

' The sanctification of baptism you commend in
' words, but in your deeds you follow the things

* that yourslf condemn. Take heed you do not re-

* pent of this purpose when it is too late, and will
' do you no good. Learn wisdom by the example
' of the foolish virgins,' &c.

* Do not you, brother, in like manner put off

* from year to year, from month to month, from day
' to day, till a day seize you that you -^^e not aware
' of, and the opportunity of well-doing fail you to-
' gether with your life,' &c.

' Then you will lament at your very soul, but no-

* body will pity you : you will utter dreadful moans,

* but they will be taken for a delirium. Who will
' give you baptism at such a time ? &c. and perhaps
' it will be night, and nobody present to help you
' or baptize you.

* But you say, "God will then hear me." Yes,'be-

* cause you hear him now. " He will grant me some

214 St. Basil.

CHAP, 'longer time." Good reason, because you make so

^"' * good use of what he does grant you.' [<§. 7-]

260. < Wretch, do not deceive yourself: let nobody se-

' duce you with vain words, sudden destruction will

' come ujDon you, and ruin like a storm,' &c. * The

' dreadful angel will fetch away your soul,' &c.

' What thoughts will you have then ? " Fool that
' I was ! Why did not I put off this heavy load of
* sin then when I might easily ? that I did not wash
' off these foul stains ? &c. Oh woeful purpose of
' mine ! for the short pleasure of sin to suffer eternal
' torments. I might now have been one of those
' that shine in glory. Oh just judgment of God ! I
' was called and would not hear." ' &c.

' These and such like complaints you will make
' then, if you depart hence before you be baptized,'
&c. [§. 8.]

All the rest is such like pathetical exhortation
to break off sin, and enter without delay into the
Christian covenant : and were very proper to be
used to those who nowadays put off repentance to a
death -bed.

VII. St. Basil has also two other^ pieces about
baptism, written at the desire of some that put
questions to him, some concerning baptism, and
some on other subjects (being probably persons that
were preparing themselves to be baptized). But all
the discourse is (as the occasion was) of what is
proper for adult persons to know and consider,
when they come to be baptized : and has nothing
that peculiarly concerns infants.

He puts these persons in mind otl Set irpwrov jmaOf]-

revOtjvai tw YLvpiw, kol Tore Kara^KaOtjvai rov dyiov
d Lib. primus et secundus de baptismo. [Tom. ii. p. 624, &c.]

St. Basil. 215

^a-TTTicr/ixaTog, 'that they must be first instructed, and chap

XJI.

' then admitted to baptism.' [Lib. i. c. 2. L 1.] (These
words taken by themselves, some cite as niaking /^^'°'6o_)
against infant baptism) that they must resolve to
forsake, not some sins, but all. He shews them the
difference of three sorts of baptism, viz. that of
Moses, that of John, and that of Christ. The bap-
tism of Moses made a difference of sins; for all
sins were not forgiven by it. It required sacrifices
to be joined with it. It stood strictly on outward
cleansing. It enjoined an unclean person to con-
tinue separate for some time ; depended upon days
and hours, &c. The baptism of John had none of
these inconveniences : yet he shews how that also is
far surpassed by that of Christ.

VIII. Coming to a more particular explication of
our Saviour's words, John iii. 3, 5. of being born
again, he says, ' I take that word [avooQev, again] to
' signify the rectifying of our former birth, which

* was in the filth of sin : as Job says ; tio j)erson is
' clea7i from sin, though his life be but of one day ;

* [so they read that text of Job^ ;] and as David

* laments and says, / was conceived in iniquity, and
' in sin did my mother bring me forth.' [I. c. 2.

§•7.]

IX. There is a passage in a sermon of St. Basil's
(that which he preached on a fast-day, that was
kept for the great famine and drought) of which I
have not skill enough to judge whether it be a proof
of infants' baptism then used or not. The judgment
of it depends on one's knowing particularly to what
part of the public divine service and prayers people
were wont to be admitted before they were baptized ;

e Job xiv. 4.

216 JSt. Basil.

CHAP, and to what not; for St. Basil speaks here of little

'Y'TT

;_ boys and young children joining in the prayers.

, . ^°- , I know that some have written accurately the his-
(A.D.360.) , -^

tory of the catechumens, and in what parts of the
Liturgy they did partake. But the passage being
short, I can sooner set it down at adventure (that so
they that are skilled in that matter may judge whe-
ther it be to purpose or not) than I can at present
have recourse to those writings.

It is this. He is telling them that their continu-
ance in their sins hindered their prayers from being
heard. But besides, says he, ' What sort of prayer is
' it that we make ? The grown men, all but a few,
' follow their trades, &c. a very few are left to join
* with me in the prayers ; and those lazy and yawning,
' and staring about,' &C. ol Se S>] TralSeg 01 a-fxiKporaroi
ouTOi, 01 Tag ^6\tov9 ev TOig SiSacrKoXetoig cnroOe/mevoi
Ka] crv/uL^ocovreg riim.iv, wg avecriv fxaXKov Koi repyp-iv to
Trpay/ma /neTep-^^ovTai, &C. avaicrOrjTa ^e Koi a/uefiTrTa
^pecprj TTjOo? Trjv €^o/ULo\6yrjiTiv eireiyeTai Ka\ aOpoiCeTai,
ovTe ^ Triv a<popjui.r]v twv Xvitovvtmu, ovt€ tov crvvrjOwg
Trpocrevt^acOai yvuxriv t] Swafxiv eyovTa. crv niol irdpeXOe eh

fxecrov, &c. ' And these little boys that have left their
' books at school, and do make the responses together
' [or sing together] with us, do it as a piece of plea-
' sure, and the work of a play-day,' &c. ' And the
' infants that have no sense, nor any guilt, they also
' are brought thick and in crowds to the public con-
' fession, who neither understand the occasion of the
' grief, nor are capable of praying accordingly.
' Come yourselves to the office, you that have the
' load of sins upon you. It is you that ought to
' prostrate yourselves, to mourn and weep,' &c. eSei

oe Trapehai KaKeivo, fxeTo. crov TravTcog, ov julovov. ' They

St. Basil. 217

[the infants] ought to be present indeed, but to come chap

f '

XII.

' along with you, and not alone by themselves

If the catechumens did not use to be admitted /^^^^x
before their bajitism to those parts of the office, that
consisted in psalmody and making the responses ;
then it is a sign that these little boys had been
baptized. But if they did, it is only my labour
lost in reciting it here. P. S. I am since certified
by a very learned man, that these children must
have been baptized.

X. But a more material evidence than any that
can be found in St. Basil's writings is taken from
his practice : of which there is an authentical record
given by Theodoret and other historians that lived 320.
but a little after St. Basil, in reference to the
baptizing of a child of Valens the emperor. This
emperor, being an Arian, and having been prevailed
on by the Arians to take an oath^ that he would
always maintain that faith, and persecute the con-
trary, viz. that of the catholics, did accordingly,
and raised great persecution against all the catholic
bishops in his dominion, and particularly against
St. Basil, who was bishop of Csesarea in Cappadocia.
But having great afflictions in his family at the same
time, which looked like judgments ; and among the
rest, his only child sick and at the point of death ;
he was wrought on, partly by the guilt of his con-
science, and partly by his wife's entreaty, to abate
of the rigour which he was then using against
St. Basil, who was by all looked on as a pious and
good man. And he also sent for him to come and

f [Homil. dicta tempore famis et siccitatis ; Op. torn. ii. p.
62, &c.— §. 3.]

P Theodoret, Hist. Eccl. lib. iv. c. 12.

218 SL Basil.

CHAP, pray for his child. And then (as Theodoret^ pro-
ceeds to relate the matter), 6 /nijag Bacr/Xeto? Kara-

260. ^ XaScov TO. Baa-ikeia, kui tov tou BacriXew^ vlov "Trap

(A.D.360.) ,,.,.,.' V , ^ , . ^

VTToa-rpe^eLV inrea-)(€TO, ei rod iravayiov (3a7rria-fxaro9 Sia
Twv evae^ovvTCOv a^icoOeir]. kui Tavra eiTrdov et^eXi^XvOev.
'O Se Twv ooKcov Kara rov avorjrov /J-efj-vrjixivois 'JipuiS)^^,
roh crvjixTrapoucriv avrw ck rij? aufx/uopla^ ^Apelov jSair-
ria-ai ro iraiSiov Trpocrera^ev. ' The great Basil COming

* into the palace, and seeing the emperor's son at the
' point of death, midertook that he would recover if

* he had baptism given him by the hands of the

* godly [meaning the catholics] ; and having said
' this he went away. But he [the emperor] remem-
' bering, like foolish Herod, his oath, gave order to
' some that were present of the faction of Arius, to

* baptize the child,' &c.

The issue was, the child died, and Valens for the
present repented both of his oath and cruelty, and
went to St. Basil's church, and made his oblations :
but afterward he revolted to his former temper.

All that is doubtful in this passage is, whether this
child were so young as that his baptism deserves
to be called infant-baptism ; or whether he were of
such age as to be capable to be baptized on his own
profession. Theodoret, we see, calls him TraiSioVf
which properly signifies a little child or infant ;
and is the same word that is used Mark x. 13.
Trpoa-ecpepov iraiSia, They brought young children^ and
Matt. ii. 11. &)pov ro TraiSlov, They found the young
child wrapped in swaddling clothes. Gregory Nazian-
zen* says that he was there present with St. Basil at

^ Hist. Eccl. lib. iv. cap. 19. [p. 174, edit. Valesii, 1673.]
i Orat. in Basilium.

St. Basil. 219

that time: and he compares the emperor's afflicting chap.

XII

himself for his child to David's, for his in the like L_

case, but mentions not the age. Socrates'^ ^^^'^(ADt6o)
him v^TTiov vlov rod OuuXevTo^, ' the infant son of
' Valens.'

But there is among the works of Ephraem Syrus,
published in Latin, a sermon on St. Basil, in which
he mentions this story ; but speaks so of the child,
as if he had some understanding of religion : for
he makes Basil covenant with Valens ; ' If you will
' so deliver him to me, that I may bring him to
' the true faith, and free him from the impiety of
' the Arian doctrine,' &c. And again, ' They [the
' Arians] baptized him with water, but not with
' the Spirit, for they taught him to reject the Son
* of God,' &:c. But the works of this Father which
we have are of such doubtful credit (they must
first have been translated out of Syriac ; for he
understood no other language, and they abound
with very frivolous stories) that a quotation out of
them cannot come in competition with the received
historians.

XI. Valesius^ has gone about to find out by
chronological characters the age of this child when
he died ; not in any inquiry about infant-baptism,
but to set some passages right in chronology. He
makes him to be six years old. The proofs of it
are something forced, and are too nice and far from
our purpose to be repeated here. He judges that
it was he that was consul A. D. 369, with Victor,
(though the name there be Valentinian, and the
historians call this child's name Galates,) and that

^ Hist. lib. iv. c. 26.

1 Annot. in Socrat. lib. iv. cap. 10. item 26.

220 aS'^. Basil.

CHAP. Socrates mistook Valentinian the younger for this

XII

' child : and that it was on him that Themistius made

f A D °'6o *^^^^ consular oration (for the flattery of that time
was to make emperors' infant children consuls, and
speak orations to them), where he says, ' Even while
' you are carried in people's arms, you make war
' together with your father.'

But suppose it were so, he must yet be baptized
with the form of infant-baptism ; for a child of six
years old is capable of no other. And if he were so
old as six years, he must be born before his father
was baptized into the Christian religion himself.
For by this account this child was born to Valens
before the victory over Procopius the usurper, and
so Valesius owns. Now that victory was before the
beginning of Valens' war against the Goths : and it
was in that war that he being minded to go to battle
in person, ' thought not fit to go unprovided of the
' divine grace, but to guard himself with the armour
' of baptism™.' And if the child were born before his
father was baptized, that might be the reason that
he was not baptized quickly after his birth.

CHAP. XIII.

Quotations out of St. Ambrose.
Ambrosius, Comment, lib. i. m Sti. Lucce cap. 1.

[f 37.]

■274- §. I. HE is there commenting on those words,

Luke i. 17, where the angel prophesies of John the

Baptist, He shall go before him in the spirit afid

power of Elias. And after having shewn in several

"' Theodoret. Hist. Eccl. lib. iv. cap, ii, 12.

St. Ambrose. 221

particulars how John in his office did resem- chap.

. XIII

ble Elias, and having mentioned that miracle of

Elias of dividing the river Jordan, he adds these /a.d.3'-4.)
words :

' Sed fortasse hoc supra nos et supra apostolos

* videatur exemplum. Nam et ille sub Elia diviso

* amne fluvialium recursus undarum in originem
' fluminis (sicut dicit scriptura, Jordanes conversus

* est retrorsum) significat salutaris lavacri futura

* mysteria ; per quae in primordia naturae sua}, qui
' baptizati fuerint parvuli a malitia reformantur.'

'But perhaps this may seem to be fulfilled" in

* our time and in the apostles' time. For that re-
' turning of the river waters backward toward the

* spring head, which was caused by Elias when the
' river was divided (as the scripture says, Jordan
' was driven hack), signified the sacrament of the

* laver of salvation, which was afterward to be in-

* stituted ; by which those infants that are bajitized

* are reformed back again from wickedness [or a
' wicked state] to the primitive state of their

* nature.'

He means, they are freed from the guilt of ori-
ginal sin, and in some sense reduced back to the
primitive state, in which man was before that hap-
pened. He plainly speaks here of infants as bap-
tized ' in the apostles' time,' as well as in his own ;
and makes St. John (if his meaning be to speak of
the persons baptized by him), in baptizing infants
for the reformation of their nature back again to

1 [The edition of Ambrosius which Dr. Wall made use of I'ead
expletum for exemplum in this passage : but the Benedictine edit-
ors have corrected the text, on the unanimous authority of their
manuscripts.]

222 St. Ambrose.

CHAP, the primitive purity of it, to resemble Elias in turn-

XIII

ing back the waters to their spring head.

(A D '*' ^ "^^^^ passage of St. Ambrose is quoted by St.
Austin, lib. i. contra Julian, c. 2.

I said in the former editions, that St. Ambrose
does here say in effect, that John Baptist did bap-
tize infants. My reason was, because he had before,
in the parallel between John and Elias, observed,
that as Elias was in the desert, so was John : as
Elias was fed by ravens, so John lived upon coarse
food : as Elias boldly rebuked Ahab, so John did
Herod. And (among other comparisons), ' Ille Jor-

* danem divisit ; hie ad lavacrum salutare convertit.'
' As Elias separated [or drove back] the waters of
' Jordan ; so John brought persons to the baptism

* of salvation.' Which, joined vdth what he says
here, that the new formation of infants in baptism
back to their primitive purity, was typified by Jor-
dan turned back toward the spring head, does, I
think, lead to such an interpretation of his words.
But however (leaving that deduction of the chain of
thought to the judgment of the reader) he does
plainly speak of the baptism of infants used in the
apostles' time. Which is more to the purpose.
Ambrosius lib. ii. de Abrahamo patriarcha, lib. ii.

c. 11. [§. 81, &c.]
II. He is here speaking of that part of the his-
tory of Abraham, where he is commanded to be
circumcised, and to circumcise his infants ; and of
the severity of the penalty on an infant that is not
circumcised : and has these words in relation to cir-
cumcision ; ' For a very good reason does the law
' command the males to be circumcised in the be-
' ginning of infancy, even the bondslave born in the

St. Ambrose. 223

* house : because as circumcision is from infancy, so c h a i'.

* is the disease. No time ought to be void of the

* remedy, because none is void of guilt,' &c. And ^j^^'t^.)
a httle after, ' Neither a proselyte that is old, nor

' an infant born in the house, is excepted ; because

* every age is obnoxious to sin, and therefore every

* age is proper for the sacrament.' He also applies
this to spiritual circumcision and baptism, and says,

* The meaning of the mystery is plain. Those born

* in the house are the Jews, those bought yv'iih mo-
' ney are the Gentiles that believed : for the church

* is bought vrith the price of Christ's blood. There-

* fore both Jew and Gentile, and all that believe,

* must learn to circumcise themselves from sin, that

* they may be saved. Both the home-born and the

* foreigner, the just and the sinful, must be circum-

* cised by the forgiveness of sins, so as not to prac-

* tise sin any more : for no person comes to the
' kingdom of heaven but by the sacrament of bap-

* tism :' and at the end of that paragraph cites these
words of our Saviour, giving his note on them :

' Nisi enim quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et Spiritu
' Sancto, non potest introire in regniim Dei. Utique

* nullum excipit : non infantem, non aliqua prseven-

* tum necessitate. Habeant tamen illam opertam

* poenarum immunitatem, nescio an habeant regni

* honorem.' [^. 84.]

' Fo7' unless any person be born again of ivater

* and of the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the

* kingdom of God. You see he excepts no person,

* not an infant, not one that is hindered by any
' unavoidable accident.

' But suppose that such have that freedom from

* punishment, which is not clear, yet I question

S24 St. Ambrose.

CHAP. * whether they shall have the honour of the king-
. * dom.'

(A i)'^' ) This, as to the need of baptizing infants, is j^lain :
but I know not what to make of the word opertam
in this sentence, unless it be to be rendered as I
have rendered it [' which is not clear,' or, ' of which
* we have no certain knowledge.']

Many writers of the Greek church do speak of a
certain middle state in the life to come, in which
infants that die unbaptized, and also other persons
that miss of baptism, not by their own fault, but by
some accidental hinderance, shall be placed ; which
place or state shall not, as they think, partake, or
not much partake, either of happiness or torment.
Gregory Nazianzen's words to that purpose are in
the passages I cited of his**, and I shall have occa-
sion hereafter P to mention more. But this opinion
of a middle state seems not to have taken any foot-
ing in the Latin church at this time ; though it be
since embraced by the papists, under the name of
limbiis fuerorum.

St. Ambrose, who was conversant in the Greek
writers, and, as St. Hierome'i observes, borrowed
much out of their works, had met with it there ;
and here mentions it, but calls it oj^ertam, a thing not
certainly revealed or known, but hidden and uncer-
tain. His meaning is, that since our Saviour's sen-
tence of the necessity of baptism for entering the
kingdom of God is general, and does not except
infants ; it is very questionable, whether an infant
unbaptized can have the said kingdom. And as for
the middle state between heaven and hell, which

o Ch. 1 1 . §. 6. P Part ii. ch. 6. §. 4.

^ Praefat. in lib. Didymi. [Op. torn. ii. p. 106.]

St. Ambrose. 225

some do suppose, it is to us a thing hidden or un- chap.
known whether there be any such state. One may _I — 1_

observe in this passage, a thing which I have oh-,.^^^' .

served in many sayings of the ancients, that among

the several names which they give to baj)tism, they

often by tliis phrase [the forgiveness of sins] do

mean the sacrament of baptism. The coherence of

the sentence shews it here. ' They must be cir-

' cumcised by the forgiveness of sins ; for no person

' can come to the kingdom of heaven but by the

' sacrament of baptism.' And so it does in a passage

of the epistle of Barnabas which I produce, part ii.

eh. 9. §• 6.

St. Austin, a little after these times, does earn-
estly labour to shew that there is no such state,
though he had once so spoken as if he thought
there might. I shall have occasion to produce his
sayings on*" one side and the other ^. He is the
more earnest at this latter place against the middle
state, because Pelagius had served himself of this
notion to evade the argument which is taken from
the need that infants have of baptism, to prove that
they have original sin. For Pelagius said they have
no sin : and if they die unbaptized, they will not be
punished, but be in that middle state.

The quotations out of the book de Vocatione
Gentium, and Epist. ad Demetriadem^, I have not,
as many do, set down to St. Ambrose, because they
are not his, but Prosper's or pope Leo's : who yet
lived both of them but a little after our period

340.

344-

>■ Ch. XV. sect. 3. §. I, 2. " Ch. xix. §. ip.

t [See the preface of the Benedictine editors, prefixed to the
second volume of St. Ambrose's works.]

WALL, VOL. I. 14

226 St. Ambrose.

'HAP. Every body has read how largely Prosper there dis-
putes against those that would maintain that all the

(A.r)!374.) grace of God depends upon our use of free-will
shewing that they that use that method of explain-
ing the events that happen, can never solve that
difficulty, ' how it comes to pass that so great a
' multitude of infants dying unbaptized [or as he
' styles it, unregenerated] do perish.' On which
argument he has a whole chapter, pretending to
shew that all must be attributed to God's free giving
or refusing his grace.

CHAP. XIV.

Quotations out of St. John Chrysostom.

n°s "^^ ^' ^^* Chrysostom has had more of his works
published than any of the foregoing, because every
thing that he preached or dictated was thought fit
to be published ; not that he had any greater skill
in divinity than ordinary, but because of his golden
tongue, from which he had this name, and which
made the people that used to hear him say, ' They
' had rather the sun should not shine, than that
* John should not preach.' But of the multitude
\ that were published a great many are lost ; and, to
make up the defect, a great many spurious ones
have been set out under his name. The industry
and skill of the latter ages, and particularly of sir
Henry vSavile^, has in a good degree fanned and
distinguished the one from the other.

^ [Sir H. Savile published an edition of Chrysostom's works,
in the original Greek, in 8 volumes foho, at Eton, in 1612.
Another, in Greek and Latin, was pubhshed at Paris, by Fronto

St. Chtysostom. 22?

Therefore I shall omit the quotations about this chap.

XIV

subject, that are fouucl in those books that are

either plainly spurious, or suspected ; though they , ^ 1^%^ \
are probably very ancient, and of men that lived at,
or about the same time. Of the first sort is the
homily concerning Adam and Eve, in which is a
passage mentioning infant-baptism ; but it is plainly
the vi'ork of some later author. Of the second is
the homily on Psalm xiv. in which is a passage of
the same subject, which is quoted in this contro-
versy by many learned men, Cassander, &c., and
even by bishop Stillingfleet^.

As for the passages in his genuine works, he has
not many on this subject : for orators love only such
subjects as may be adorned with flowers of rhetoric,
of which so plain a thing as the baptizing of infants
is not so capable ; and for those which he has, I
am not very confident that I have all that are in
so many voluminous books : but those which I shall
produce do plainly shew his sense, and the practice
of the churches where he lived, which were Antioch
and Constantinople.

Ho?n. 40. in Genesm, Edit. Savil. tom. i. [Montf.

tom. iv.]

He had been speaking of circumcision, and ob-
serves how much more favourable and bountiful
God is to the Christians in the baptism which he
has appointed to them in lieu thereof; and says,

' There was pain and trouble in practice of that,
' and no other advantage accruing from the circum-

Ducseus, in 12 volumes folio, in 1633 — 1636. But the most
complete is that by the Benedictine father IMontfaucon, in 1.3
volumes folio, published at Paris in 1 7 1 8, &c.]
" Unreasonableness of Separation, part iii. ch. 36,

Q 2

228

St. Chrysostmn.

CHAP. ' cision, than this only ; that by this sign they were

_ ' known and distinguished from other nations.' 'H ^e

(A D /so ) '//"^^^V*" 7re|0tTOy«^, rj tov /Sa'TTTicrfiaTO? Xeyco -^api^^ avoo-
ouvov e-vei Trjv laToeiav Kai luvpicov ayaOwv Trpo^evog ylvcTai
rjiMv, Koi T//9 TOV YlvevfJiaTO? rj^ag e/UTrl'TrXrjcri ■^apiTog. KaJ
ovSe wpia-fxevov e^ef Kaipov KaQairep €K€i' ctXX' et^ecrri /cat
ev acopcp ^XiKia, kul ev /mecrr]^ kui ev avrw tw yvp'^*- yevofievov
Tiva TavTt]v Set^acrOai Tt]v a-^eipoTroirjTOv 7repiT0jULi]v' ep ^
ovK ecTTi irovov vTrojueivat, aXX d/uapTrj/uLaTcov (poprla
aTToOecrOai, Kai twv ev Travri y^povco TrXrj/ut./uLeXrjiuaTCOi' ri-jV

<TV'y)(wp}](nv evpeaOai. ' But our circumcision, I mean
the grace of baptism, gives cure without pain, and
' procures to us a thousand benefits, and fills us with
' the grace of the Spirit : and it has no determinate
' time, as that had ; but one that is in the very
' beginning of his age, or one that is in the middle
' of it, or one that is in his old age, may receive this
' circumcision made without hands. In which there
' is no trouble to be undergone, but to throw off the
' load of sins, and receive pardon for all foregoing
' offences.' [§. 4.]

That awpog ]']XiKia signifies here, as I have rendered
it, ' the beginning of age,' or infancy, appears both
by the sense, and also by his use of the same word
in the homily before y, where giving the reasons why
circumcision was appointed the eighth day, he makes
this to be one :

1. Because the cutting of the flesh is more easily
borne ev awpw ^XiKin ' in the beginning of the age,' or
infancy.

2. And his other reason is, ' that they might
' understand by the thing itself that it signified
' nothing to the soul, but was given for a mark of

y Horn, xxxix. in Genesin, [§• 5-]

St. Chrysostom. 229

* distinction ;' and then he there again uses the same c h a p.
word, TO yap aoopov TraiSlou, to firj yivocxxKOv tu yivofxeva.

fxrjSe aia-Brja-iv Tiva e^ov, &c. ' For a new-bom child, ,^ Jj^°gQ .
' that knows not what is done to him, nor has any
' sense, what profit for his soul can he receive

* thereby ?' &c. The word cicopog, which in some au-
thors signifies unseasonable, or out of time, signifies
with him newly bcgun^ or that has had no time
pass over it.

It is a very singular notion in divinity of this
father, to say that circumcision had no spiritual
import, but was only a badge of national distinction.
The scripture, and the fathers too, generally speak
of it as the seal of the riyJiteousness of the faith
that Abraham had^, and the covenant, or seal of
the covenant^ that God made with him and his
seed. And that contains something more than that
they should be known from other nations. It was,
that he would be their God, and they his people^.

Also to argfue, that circumcision could sio'uifv no-
thing to the soul, because it was given ev awpw i)\iklu,
in infancy, at the same place where one is to shew
that baptism (which, as he himself grants, may also
be given ev awpcp t'lXiKia, in infancy) does convey so
many spiritual benefits, betrays some inadvertency
or forgetfulness of what he had said before.

II. But it is more to our present purpose to ob-
serve the other difference that he makes : ' Circum-
' cision was to be given on the eighth day: but
' baptism has no determinate time, but it is lawful
' that one in infancy, or one in middle age, or one

* in old age, do receive it.' Was it not the same in
circumcision ? If circumcision had been omitted in

' Rom. iv. II. a Acts vii. ji. ^ Gen. xvii. 7.

(A.D.380

230 St. Chrysostom.

CH A P.J infancy, or if it were a heathen who came over to

_1 the Jewish rehgion in middle age, or okl age, cir-

n °sn ^ cumcision was given then, rather than not at all.

Or is his meaning this ; that a Jew was obliged
to circumcise his child in infancy, but a Christian
parent may baptize his child in infancy, if he please ;
or he may, if he please, let it alone to be done at
middle, or at old age ? His words, as they stand
here, might be capable of such a sense ; but this is
not reconcilable with what he says in other places
of the necessity of baptism, and the danger in case
a person die without it, which would often happen
to children, if it were so deferred. He often speaks
to this purpose, as Horn. 1. de pcetiitentia^ : Tlpo Se

jSaTTTicT/xaTO? ovK ecrr] iraTpipa \a/3eiVy ovoe oet^aaOai
KXripouojULLav. And again, Oye^el? ^e vlo9 ^airTLcr fxaro^
av KXrjOeirj ^(ft)/)/?. ' There is no receiving or having
* the bequeathed inheritance before one is bap-
' tized ;' and, * none can be called a son till he is
' baptized.' And I have occasion to quote more of
his to this purpose at another place *^. St. Austin
quotes a saying of his to this purpose in his disputes
with Julian^ (if he do not mistake an oration of St.
Basil's for one of St. Chrysostom's ; for the words are
the same which I recited of St. Basil's). St. Austin
is there proving that Chrysostom, as well as the other
catholic doctors, owned original sin ; which Julian
denied, though he owned infant baptism.

* The same holy John, even he as well as the
' martyr Cyprian, teaches that the circumcision of
' the flesh was commanded in way of a type of
' baptism.' Then he recites these words, as from

c [Sect. 4. Op. torn. ii. p. 285.] d Part ii. ch. 6,

« Lib. ii. contra Julianum, cap. ix.

St. Chrysostom. 231

Chrysostom : ' A Jew does not delay circumcision chap.

XIV

' because of the threatening,' &c. ' and dost thou de-

ft

* lay the circumcision made without hands, &c.' as ,^ p°g^ .
they stand recited above *^. Then St. Austin adds,

' You see how this man established in the ecclesias-
' tical doctrine compares circumcision to circumci-
' sion, and threat to threat : that which it is not to
' be circumcised on the eighth day ; that it is not to
' be baptized in Christ : and what it is to be cut off"
'from his people; that it is not to enter into the
' kingdom of heaven. And yet you [Pelagians] say
' that in the baptism of infants there is no putting

* off the flesh, i. e. no circumcision made without

* hands ; when you affirm that they have nothing
' which needs to be put off: for you do not confess
' them to be dead in the uncircumcision of the
'■ flesh^, by which is meant sin^ especially that sin
' which is derived originally : for by reason of this,
' our body is the body of sin^, which the apostle
' says is destroyed by the cross of Christ.^

III. There is another passage in a homily of St.
Chrysostom ad Baptizatos, which is not now extant
in Greek, but is cited by Julian in Latin, and by
St. Austin in Greek, which is full to this purpose of
infant-baptism. The citations are in St. Austin's
lib. i. contra Jidianwn^; where Julian says thus :

* Holy John, bishop of Constantinople, denies that
' there is any original sin in infants ; for in that
' homily which he preached concerning baptized
' persons he says,

' " Blessed be God, who only does wonders, who

f Ch. xii. §. 5. e Col. ii. 13. '^ Roni. vi. 6.

> [Cap. vi. 4. 21. apucl Augustini Opera, torn. x. p. 509. edit.
Benedictin.]

S32 St. Ckrysostom.

CHAP, 'has created and ordered all thine^s : lo ! they do

XIV. . ''

1_ ' enjoy the serenity of freedom, who but even now

(A.D.380.) ' ^^^® ^^^^^ ^^ captivity : they are become citizens
' of the church, who were in the vagabond state of
' aliens ; and they are entered into the lot of the
' righteous, who were under the confusion of sin.
' For they are not only free, but saints ; nor saints
' only, but justified ; and not only justified, but
' sons ; and not only sons, but heirs ; not heirs only,
' but brothers of Christ ; not only his brethren, but

* coheirs ; not coheirs only, but members of him ;
' not members only, but his temple ; and not his
' temple only, but organs of his Spirit. You see
' how many are the benefits of baptism. And yet
' some think that the heavenly grace consists only
' in forgiveness of sins : but I have reckoned up ten
' advantages of it. For this cause we baptize in-
' fants also, though they are not defiled with sin ;

* that there may be superadded to them saintship,

* righteousness, adoj)tion, inheritance, a brotherhood
' with Christ, and to be made members of him."'

IV. This sentence Julian brought to shew that
Chrysostom's sense was, that infants are baptized,
not for forgiveness of sins, from which they are
free, but only that they might have a right to
Christ's kingdom ; which was exactly what Julian
and his party, who denied original sin, would
have.

And indeed it was a shrewd place ; and St. Au-
stin has much ado to reconcile it to any good and
catholic sense : he uses three ways to do it.

1. He shews how improbable it was that John,
living in the catholic church, and being a renowned
bishop in it, should really hold a doctrine so con-

St. Chnjsostom. 233

trary to that which he had shewn by instances to chap.

. xrv.

be the general sense of all catholic doctors.

2. He produces other passages out of his writings, , ^ ^^%o )
which do plainly own the orthodox doctrine of the

guilt of original sin, however incongruously he may
seem to speak in this place.

3. As to the place itself, he shews that Julian
had not translated the words exactly true, but had
given the expression a turn to his own advantage :
for whereas the words are in the Greek, ' though
' they have not any sins,' Julian had made use of a
faulty Latin translation, in which some copies read,
' not defiled with sins,' others, ' with sin,' in the
singular number. Of which last copy St. Austin
says, ' I doubt some of your party have chosen to
' express it in the singular number, that it might
' be taken for that one sin, of which the apostle
' speaks ; judgment came hy one [sin] to condemn-
' ation ; but the free gift is of many qfences unto

^ justifcationK You choose to word it, "not de-

' filed with sin," that that 07ie sin of the first man

* might come into the reader's mind.

' But not to go by suspicions, and supposing this

* to be the mistake of the scribe, or the variety of
' the interpreter, I will set down the Greek words
' themselves which John spoke ; Am rovro koI tu irai-
' <5/a ^aiTTi^oiJLev, kuitoi djuaprijimaTa ovk e-)(ovTa. \\ hicll
' is, " For this reason we baptize infants also, though
' they have not any sins." You see, he did not say
' that infants are not defiled with sin, or sins ; but,
' that they have not any sins. Understand it, of
' their own, and there is no dispute. But you will
' say. Why did he not say, of their own ? Why do

J Rom. V. 1 6.

234 *S'^. Clirysostom ,

CHAP. ' you think, but for this reason, because he, dis-

XIV

' coursing in the catholic church, supposed that he

, K ^°o N ' could be understood in no other sense ; nobody
(A.D.380.) •'

' was puzzled about that matter. You [Pelagians]
' not having then raised any controversy, he spoke
' with less caution.' [^. 22.~\

Perhaps there might have been added to St. Au-
stin's answer this ; that the Greek writers, though
they own this natural corruption, yet do not gene-
rally by the property of their language call it by
the name of sin ; but they express it by the name
natural defilement, pollution, disease, and the like,
that which the Latins call original sin. The word
djULupria, and especially dim-dpTijima, do properly with
them signify an actual sin or transgression. So
320. Theodoret, who lived a little after these times, and
consequently ought to speak with more caution, and
was no favourer of Pelagianism, (for that was a time
when Pelagius and his opinions having been lately
condemned by canons and edicts in all parts of the
world, it was no time for a bishop of the catholic
church to own them,) yet speaks thus ; ' Ba])tism is
' not, (as the silly Messalians say,) a razor only to
' cut off sins that are past, which it does over and
' above. For if it had no other effect but that,
' what need we baptize infants, that have not tasted
' of sin ? The sacrament promises not this only, but
' greater and higher things ; for it is a pledge of
' future blessings, a type of the resurrection, a com-
' munication of Christ's passion*^,' &c.

And this is made more plain by the phrase used
by Isidorus Pelusiota (who as well as Theodoret

■^ Haeretic. Fabular. lib. v. c. de Baptisrao. [cap. 18. torn. iv.
p. 292. edit. Paris. 1642.]

St. Chrvsostom. 235

was a disciple of St. Chiysostom, and both of them chap.

XIV

followers of his doctrine, and imitators, as far as L

they could, of his expression). For he, at the same /^ ^ 380.)
place, speaks of infants as not having any sin, and
yet being defiled with the corruption caused by
Adam's transgression. His words are,

' Whereas your excellency wrote to me, desiring

' to know for what reason tu (Bpicpt] ava/uaprtjTa ovra
' (Sa-TTTl^erai, infants that have no sin are baptized :
' I have thought it needful to give you my answer.
' Some, that speak below the dignity of the subject,
' say it is, that they may wash off that pollution,
' pvTTov, which is transmitted on human nature, by
' the transgression of Adam. I also do believe that
' that is done ; but not that only, (for that were not

* so great a matter,) but that a great many other
' graces far transcending our nature are thereby

* given'.' And so he goes on to reckon up redemp-
tion, regeneration, adoption, &c., much to the same
purpose as St. Chrysostom does.

This shews that in their way of speaking, infants,
though acknowledged to have a pollution of nature
from Adam which needed washing off, yet were
said not to have afxaprlag or a/xapTrjixara, sius. And
even those commendations of baptism, and the ef-
fects of it in infants, that it is redemption, regene-
ration, &c., do suppose an evil state from which they
are redeemed, regenerated, &c., which state is the
same that the Latins call original sin.

But be that how it will ; St. Chrysostom speaks
plainly of the practice of infant-baptism. And our
present inquiry is to know the practice of the

1 Lib. iii. Epist. 195. ad Herminum Comitem. [p. 333, edit.
Paris. 1638.]

236 St. Chrpsostom.

CHAP, churches, and not whether he had a right appre-

XIV tj i i

hension of all the grounds of it. If any in these

^^f)^°gQ^ times used it, and did not well apprehend the
grounds of it, it is the greater sign that they were
satisfied that it had ever been done.
Chrysost. Horn. 23. in Acta Apost. [Tom. ix. ed.

Montf.]
V. He is there bemoaning that evil inclination,
and that aversion to a godly life, that is universally
found in men ; which keeps from receiving of bap-
tism those that are not yet baptized, and perverts
from a godly course of life even those that have re-
ceived it. And on that head says thus ; O/ /j-ev ovv

KaTriYOv/uevoi tovto <nrovoa(^ovTe<; ovoefxiav iroiovvTai eiri-
imeXeiav opOov (3lov' O/ Se ijSt] (pooricrQevTe'S, oi f/.€P eirei
TralSes oj/re? tovto eXa^ou, oi Se ev appuxTTia, kui ave-
veyKOVTeg, eTreiSt] /ui] ely^ov irpoOufxiav Tiva Xjiaai Sia 0eoj/,
ovSe ovTOi (TTTOvStjv TiOevTai' Oi ^e ev vyiela Ao/3oWe9,
oXiyrjU TUVTriv icai avTo\ eirioeLKVvvTai, kui Trpo? to Trapov
SiaTedevTe? dep/mo], fxeTa TavTa kui outoi to trvp ecr^ecrav.

' The catechumens being of this mind, [i. e. having
' this aversion,] take no care of a godly life. And
' those that are baptized, some of them, forasmuch as
' they were children when they received it, and some,
' for that they received it in a fit of sickness, having
' put it off to that time, and having no mind to live

* godly, shew no good inclination. And they that

* received it in their health shew but very little: having
' been for the present zealously affected, afterward
' even they let this fire of zeal go out.' [§. 3. p. 189-]

Here it plainly appears, that part of the people
he speaks to (viz. those that had been born of
Christian baptized parents) had been baptized in in-
fancy: and part of them (viz. those that had turned

St. Chrysostom. 237

Christians in their adult affo) had been bai)tized chap.

XIV.

since : and some of the last sort were not yet

baptized. (A.D.380.)

VI. Another passage of St. Chrysostom does not
mention baptism by name ; but yet it plainly refers
to the custom of making on the infant's forehead
the sign of the cross at his baptism. It is this ;
Horn. 12. in 1 Epist. ad Corinthios ™.

He is there blaming the women for several
superstitious and heathenish rites which they prac-
tised upon their new-born infants ; one was, a
custom that they had of rubbing the forehead
of the child with a sort of dirt, prepared with
some magical tricks, which was to preserve it from
being bewitched. He tells them that such a prac-
tice, instead of guarding and purifying the infant,
makes it abominable : the words are,

'O ^op(36p(p ■^piuiv TTco? ovy\ Koi (ioeXvKTOv iroiei to
TraiSiov ; TTcog yap avTO irpoaayei rah X.^pTi tov lepeuis,
e?7re fxoi ; ttw? a^ioh e-Trl tov fxeTwirov crcppayiSa eiriTe-
Otjvai irapa rijg tov irpecrlSvTepov -^^eipog, evOa tov (Sopf^o-
pov €7r€-^picrag ;

' He that anoints an infant so with that dirt, how
' can he think but that he makes it abominable ?
' How can he bring it to the hands of the priest ?
* Tell me, how can you think it fitting for the
' minister to make the sign on its forehead, where
' you have besmeared it with the dirt V

^ Prope finem. [§. 7. torn. x. p. 108.]

238 St. Hierome.

CHAP. XV.

Quotations out of St. Hierome and St. Austin, he/ore the Rise
of the Pelagian controversy/.

L 1. Out of St. Hierome's Letter to Leta.

CHAP. THERE was never nigh so much occasion given

! to mention th^ baptism of infants in books and

^'g^d!° writings, before Pelagius vented his heresy against
378—410.) i\^Q doctrine of original sin, as there was after that
heresy was started : for as the disputes about that
matter filled all the world, so the arguments which
the catholics drew from the baptism of infants for
original sin, and the Pelagians' answer to them,
made a considerable part of those disputes.

These two fathers lived to see, and to bear a great
part of the said disputes ; but they had each of them
written several books before that controversy began.
The quotations out of their tracts against the Pela-
gians will be best understood if put in a chapter by
themselves, together with some others out of Pelagius
himself, and other managers of the same party,
and ranked according to the order of time in which
they were written ; for they were mostly written by
way of impleading and answering one another. I have
therefore in this chapter selected some passages out
of such writings of theirs as were before the said
controversy, or did not at all relate to it : that the
mixing of them may not disturb the ordei of the
other.

Hiero7iymus, Epist. ad Letam de Institutio7ie Jilice ;
Epist. 7. [Epist. 107- Op. tom. i. p. 671. edit.
Vallarsii.]

He is there admonishing that lady of the charge
that lay on her conscience to take care of the

St. Hierome. 239

education of her child, and that God does require of c h a p.

XV

parents an account of the child's miscarriage, if it ^
happen by their fault ; and says, ^?au'°'

' Eli the priest brought on himself the anger of 378—410.)

* God for the faults of his children. He must not be

* a bishop that has children riotous or unruly. On
' the other side it is written of a woman, that she
' shall be saved in [or by] the procreating of children,
' if they shall continue in faith, and charity, and holi-
' 7iess with modesty'^. If their adult age, when they
' are at their own dispose, be imputed to their parents;
' how much more the time of their infancy and tender
' years, which, as the scripture says, is not able to

* distinguish the right hand from the left, i. e. knows
' not the difference of good and evil ?' Then follows
this objection :

* Et quomodo, inquies, peccata patrum filiis non
' redduntur, nee filiorum parentibus, sed anima quce
' peccaverit, ipsa morietur ?

* Hoc de his dicitur qui possunt sapere, de quibus
' in Evangelio scriptum est ; JEtatem habet, locpiatur
' pro se. Qui autem parvulus est et sapit ut parvulus,

* donee ad annos sapientiae veniat, et Pythagorse litera
' (Y) eum perducat ad bivium ; tam bona ejus quam
' mala parentibus imputantur. Nisi forte aestimas
' Christianorum filios, si baptisma non acceperint,
' ipsos tantum reos esse peccati ; et non etiam scelus
' referri ad eos qui dare noluerint : maxime eo tem-
' pore quo contradicere non poterant qui accepturi
' erant. Sicut e regione [alias, sic in regione vitse*']
' sal us infantium majorum lucrum est.' [§. 5.]

n iTim. ii. 15.

o [Vallarsius' edition does not take notice of this various
reading.]

240 St. Hierome.

CHAP. ' And how then is it true, you will say, that the

XV

' ' sins of the fathers are not imputed to the children,
^'(a"d°' ' ^^*' those of the children to the fathers, but the
378—410.) « gQui that sinneth, it shall die V

' This is said of those that have understanding;

* of such as he was, of whom it is written in the
' gospel. He is of age, let him speak for Jiimself. But

* he that is a child, and thinks as a child, (till such
' time as he comes to years of discretion, and
' Pythagoras' letter (Y) do bring him to the place
' where the road parts into two,) his good deeds, as
' well as his evil deeds, are imputed to his parents.
' Unless vou will think that the children of Chris-
' tians are themselves only under the guilt of the
' sin, if they do not receive baptism : and that the
' wickedness is not imputed to those also who would
' not give it them ; especially at that time when they
' that were to receive it could make no opposition
' against the receiving it. As also on the other side
' [or, as also in the kingdom of life] the salvation
' of infants is the advantage of their parents.'

Thouo'h St. Hierome calls himself an old man in

o

one part of this epistle ; yet it was written a great
while (thirty years at least) before his death, and
consequently twenty years before Pelagius vented
his new opinion. For he speaks here of Eustochium,
who was this lady's husband's sister, as a young
girl ; and yet his epistle to the said Eustochium, de
virginitate servanda"^, was written thirty years before
his epistle to Demetrias on the same subject, as he
himself observes in the latter.

His mentioning how great a sin it would be in
Christian parents to neglect the baptizing of their

P [Epist. xxii. torn. i. p. 87.]

St. Austin. 241

infants, renders that improbable (which yet some chap.

XV

learned men of late have sui)posed to be true) that ^

his own parents (who, as it seems, were Christians) f^vD^ 8i
had neglected the baptizing him in infancy: and
that he was not baptized till he came to Rome. Of
whicli opinion, and the mistake on which it is
grounded, I must say something, as also of some
other such instances, in a chapter on that subjects.
§. 2. Out of St. Austin's book De Sermone Domini

in Monte.
St. Austin was a man of note in the church, and 288.
continued writing of books for forty years and more.
There never was any one man whose pains were so
successful in healing the wounds of the church, caused
by schisms and heresies. His moderate and popular
way of arguing had a great effect. Besides his
writing against the Manichees, of whom he had
been one, and some Arians that were then yet left ;
he had a main hand in reducing the Donatists, and
confuting the Pelagians. These latter began but
twenty years before he died, viz. anno Dom. 410. 3«o-
and he had wrote several books before they ap-
peared. The quotations that I shall produce at pre-
sent are out of those former books. One is that
which I briefly mentioned before'", viz. in his
Lib. i. de Sermone Domini in Monte., c. 27. [cap.

xvi, ^. 45. tom. iii. p. 185. ed. Benedict.]
He being there to explain that part of our Savi-
our's sermon whicli forbids divorce, takes occasion
to cite that advice of St. Paul, 1 Cor. vii. 12. that a
Christian should not put away his wife, though she
as yet continued in heathenism or unbelief: and

q Part ii. ch. 3. r Ch. 4. and 11.

WALL, VOL. I. S

242 >S^. Austin

CHAP, repeats the words that follow in the text, and gives

" his paraphrase upon them thus :
(A D ^88 ) ' Sanctificatus est enim, inquit, vir infidelis in
' uwore [fideli] ; et sanctijicata est mulier infidelis
' in fratre [fideli^].

' Credo jam provenerat ut nonnullre foeminae per
' viros fideles, et viri per uxores fideles in fidem ve-
' nirent : et quamvis non dicens nomina, exemplis
' tamen hortatus est ad eonfiimandum consilium

* suum. Deinde sequitur :

' AUoquin filii vestri immundi essent, 7iunc autem
' sancti sunt.

' Jam enim erant parvuli Christiani, qui sive au-
' there uno ex parentibus, sive utroque consentiente
' sanctificati erant : quod non fieret si uno credente
' dissociaretur conjugium, et non toleraretur infide-
' litas conjugis usque ad opportunitatem credendi'.

' Foi\ says he, an unheliemng husband has been
' sanctified by his believing ivife, and an unbeliev-
' ing wife by her believing husband.

' I suppose it had then happened that several
' wives had been brought to the faith by their be-

* lieving husbands, and husbands by their believing
' wives. And though he does not mention their
' names, yet he makes use of their example to con-
' firm his advice. Then it follows,

' Else were your children unclean ; but 7iow are
they holy.

' For there were then Christian infants that were
' sanctified [or made holy, i. e. that were baptized]

s [The Benedictine editors omit the word Jideli in both cases,
as being wanting in the manuscripts, and also forming no part
of St. Paul's remark.]

* I Cor. vii. 14.

St. Austin. ^43

some by the authority of one of their parents, some chap.
by tlie consent of both : which would not be, if as

* soon as one party believed, the marriage were <iis- /^ p ^gg v

* solved, and the infidelity of the parties were not

* borne with till, there were an opportunity of be-
' lieving.'

Here we see St. Austin's sense of that expression
of St. Paul, which has been of late the subject of so
much debate. He judges St. Paul's meaning to be
this : it is advisable for a Christian husband, whose
wife will not as yet own the faith of Christ, not to
put her away ; because it is j^robable that he may in
time gain her to the true religion : such examples
are by God's grace very frequent. You commoidy
see the unbelieving party sanctified, or brought to
faith and baptism, by the believing one. Were it
not so, that the faith of the one did generally pre-
vail against the infidelity of the other; the children
of such would be generally left in their unclean
state, and be brought up to heathenism : wdiereas
we see now on the contrary, that those of you that
live in a state of marriage with unbelievers, do gene-
rally so far prevail by God's grace, that your chil-
dren are made holy, or sanctified and dedicated to
the true God by baptism.

If this explication do seem remote to us now; it
is because we do not, so frequently as they did, use
the word smictification and sanctified for baptism
and baptized. I believe it is not so little as a hun-
dred times, that St. Austin for one, when he is to
speak of infants or other persons baptized or to be
baj)tizcd, ex])resses it sanctified^ as we see he. does
here. If the reader pleases, he may turn back to
ch. xi. §. 9. where there is more said of that matter.

R 2

244 St. Austin.

CHAP. And by what I shall produce hereafter", it will
^^ appear that most of the ancients understood this text

Sect. 3. Out of St. Austin's books of Freewill.

Auqustinus de Libero Arbitrio, lib. iii. cap. 23.

I. This treatise St. Austin wrote when he was a
young man'^, against the Manichees, who maintain,
that as there is one eternal Principle or God that
made the soul and all good things, so there is an-
other that has created the body, and is the author of
all wickedness, and other evils and calamities ; and
that one of these comes from a necessary principle as
well as the other.

St. Austin shews that God created man with a
freewill : and that all sin comes from the ill use of
that freewill : and that all other evils are punish-
ments for sin : and that every one shall be judged
accordinof as he has either used that freedom of will
to good or abused it to evil : and then adds,

' Some ignorant people make a slanderous objec-
' tion against this doctrine, on account of infants
' dying, and of the bodily pains we often see them
' sufter : for they say, " To what purpose was such
* an one born, since he died before he merited any
' thing ? Or what place shall he have in the future
' judgment, who cannot be among the righteous be-
' cause he never did any good, nor among the wicked,
' since he never sinned?" To which we answer,
' That in the constitution of the universe, and the
' fit connexion of all the creation in its places and
' times, no human person can have been created
' without reason, where not so much as the leaf of a
' tree is superfluously made. But that that is a

Ti Chap. 19. §. 19. ^ Aug. Retractat. lib. i. cap. 9.

St. Austin. 245

superfluous question which they put of the merits of c h a p.
one that never merited any thing : for they need

XV.

' not fear that it shouhl so happen, that there can ,^ ^^^- .

* be a life in a middle state between good and bad,

* and not a sentence of the judge in a middle way
' between reward and punishment.

' Quo loco etiam illud perscrutari homines solent,
{ ' sacramentum baptismi Christi quid parvulis prosit ;
' cum eo acce})to plerumque moriuntur priusquam ex
' eo quidquam cognoscere potuerint. Qua in re satis
'.cc-^ I ' pi^ recteque creditur prodesse parvulo eorum fideni
' a quibus consecrandus offertur. Et hoc ecclesiac
' commendat saluberrima auctoritas, ut ex eo quisque
' sentiat quid sibi prosit fides sua, quando in aliorum

* quoque beneficium, qui propriam nondum habent,

* potest aliena coramodari. Quid enim filio viduae
' profuit fides sua, quam utique mortuus non habe-
' bat ? Cui tamen profuit matris, ut resurgeret.'
y. 67. tom. i. p. 637.]

On which head men are wont to ask this ques-
) tion also : ' What good the sacrament of Christ's
/ ' baptism does to infants ? Whereas, after they
' have received it, they often die before they are
' able to understand any thing of it. As to which
' matter it/ is piously and truly believed, that the
' faith of those by whom the child is offered to be
' consecrated, profits the child. And this the most
' sound authority of the church does commend, that
' hence every one may judge how profitable his own
' faith will be to himself, wdien even another person's
' faith is useful for the advantage of those that
' have as yet none of their own. For how could the
' widow's son^ be holpen by his own faith, whereof

y Luke vii. i 2.

246 St. Austin.

CHAP, 'being dead he could have none? and yet his
1 '. ' mother's faith was useful for his being raised to

(A.D.388.) ' life again.'

328 II. About forty years after the writing of this book
(when Pelagianism had in the mean time arisen
and sunk again), some Semipelagians in France,
who held still that opinion of Pelagius, that infants,
dying unbaptized, shall, though they miss of the
kingdom of heaven, yet live eternally without
punishment, made use of these words of St. Austin
to uphold their tenet ; as if he had therein expressed
himself in favour of the opinion of such a middle
state.

Of this, and of other their objections, one Hilary
gives him notice by letter. ' They plead,' says he,
' that the case of infants is not to be made an
' example for that of grown persons. And even as
' to the case of infants ; they say your holiness so
' spoke of it as if you would have it counted an
' uncertain thing whether there be any punishment
' for them ; and the negative to be more probable.
' And you may remember that in your third book
' concerning freewill your words are such as might
' give them this occasion^.'

But St. Austin in answer^ shews that they mistook
what he spoke hypothetically, and ad Jiominem
against the Manichees, for a positive speech. ' Sup-
' pose,' says he, ' that at that time when I began my
' books of freewill, being then but a layman at
* Rome, or when I made an end of them, being then

''• Epistola libro de Pra?destinatione Sanctorum praefixa, [Op.
torn. X. p. 783.]

a Lib. de Dono Perseverantiee ; cap. 12. [§. 30. Op. torn. x.
p. 836.]

/SV. Justin. 247

* but a presbyter in Africa, I had been unresolved chap.

* of that point, that infants not regenerated are '. —

' under condemnation, and that those that are I'ege- ^^^ jj'^gg ^
' nerated are thereby freed from it : — I hope there is

' no man so unjust or envious as to be against my
' learning better.

* But whereas the truth is, that I ought not

* therefore to be thought to make any question of
' that matter, because I judged it fit to confute those
' against whom I disputed, in such a manner, that
' whether there be any punishment for original sin

* in infants, as the truth is ; or there be not, as
' some mistaken people think : yet still that mix-
' ture of the natures of good and evil, which the
' Manichees fondly maintain, would have no reason
' to be believed. God forbid that I should leave
' the matter of infants so, as to say it is uncertain
' whether those that are regenerated in Christ, if
' they die in infancy, do come to eternal salvation ;
^ and those who are not regenerated do fall into the
' second death. Whereas that which is written, Bt/

* one man sin entered into the worlds and death by
' 5m, and so it passed ttpon all mankind^, can no
' otherwise be understood.'

This answer which he gives to the reflections
which the Semipelagians made upon these his first
writings may serve now for an answer to that which
Grotius has reflected on them in like manner : he
says, ' That St. Austin, before he was heated with
' the Pelagian disputes, never wrote any thing of
' the condemnation of unbaptized infants, not even

* to those lesser pains in the world to come*' :" inti-
mating that he was not of that opinion before. But

t> Rom. V. 12. c Annot. in Matth. xix. 14.

248 St. Justin.

CHAP, supposing that were true, that he did not in his
^^' former writings mention that matter; yet if we
^88. may believe him for his own sense, it was not but

CA D ?88 ^

that he understood the thing to be so at the time
of writinsr this book : but he had not the same
occasion to speak of it that he had afterward.

This he more plainly expresses in a letter*^ to St.
Hierome, written in the heat of the Pelagian con-
troversy ; where, having made mention of this book
and this place, he says, ' for in that book I did
' make answer concerning the baptism of infants,
' non sufficienter, sed quantum illi operi satis vide-
' batur ; not handling it fully, but as far as was
' needful in that work ; that it does profit even
' those that are not sensible of it, and have as yet

* no faith of their own. But I thought it not need-
' ful at that time to say any thing concerning the

* condemnation of those infants that depart this life
' without it : Quia non quod nunc agitur agebatur :

* Because there was none of that dispute raised then,
' which is now.'

But I shall by and by® have occasion to shew
that in other pieces written before the Pelagian
times, he speaks of their condemnation.

Sect. 4. Out of St. Austin's books against the

Donatists.
Angusfinus de Baptismo contra Donatistas^ lib. iv.

cap. 15.

300. f. 1. St. Austin wrote this treatise and many

others, against the Donatists ; a party of Christians

in Africa, who had made a schism from the church

sometime before he was born, on the account of one

'' Epist. 28, [166 in edit. Benedict, torn. ii. p. 583,]
e Sect. 5. §. 6.

St. Austin. 249

Crecilian a bishop; who, as they said, had in times chap.

XV

of persecution, under the heathen emperors, denied "
his religion by giving up the Bible to be burnt ; and , ^ l^^'^^g \
yet afterward was suffered to continue and do the
office of a bishop in the church.

Csecilian denied the matter of fact, and it could
not be plainly proved : but these men were so pe-
remptory and so fierce against him, as not only to
renounce him, but also to renounce the communion
of the church, which suffered him to continue among
them in his office. And it came to such a height,
that in St. Austin's time, their party, which was
very numerous, did so abhor the settled church,
that if any one who had been baptized in the
church came over to them, they told him the bap-
tism which he had received in so imi^ure and de-
filed a church, and from the hands of such wicked
men, was null and void ; and so they baptized him
anew. The church did not so with them ; but if
any that had been baptized by them came over to
the church, he was received as one whose baptism
was valid, though given by schismatics.

St. Austin manages thus : he shews the want of
proof of the accusation, by producing the acts of
court and records by which Ciiecilian had been ac-
quitted. But besides, shews that, suppose it were
true, one is not to forsake a church because of one
or more wicked men that are suffered in it. And
particularly in this treatise sets forth the impiety of
their practice in rebaptizing. He shews that bap-
tism once given in the right form, viz. in the name
of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is valid ; how here-
tical or impure soever the church be in which, or
how wicked soever the man be from whose hands

250 St. Austin.

CHAP, he receives it. [One may here note by the by, that
' this rule of St. Austin does, by the consent of most
(A D ^ 88 ^i^cients, hold good, except in the case of the Paul-
ianists, who seem to have kept the words of the
form, (though St. Austin had been informed other-
wise,) and yet their opinion concerning Christ was
so abhorred by the Christians, that the council of Nice
ordered them to be rebaptized, as I shall shew here-
after^.] He shews that the baptism is Christ's and
not the minister s. And the validity thereof depends
on God's authority, not on the goodness or sincerity
of the person that officiates. And consequently that
those who had been baptized by Csecilian, or any
other wicked bishop, were to be accounted to have
their baptism valid : and the priests ordained by
him were capable of giving baptism to others.

II. He goes on to shew by the example of Simon
Magus, that baptism received with a wicked heart
and purpose, (which is a worse circumstance,) is yet
valid : and that such a man is to repent of his wick-
edness, but not to be baptized again. And if a man
that is baptized in the name of Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit, have at that time some unsound opinion
concerning the Trinity or any person thereof; he
is to reform his opinion, but not to renew his
baptism.

And he proves this by the example of those who
are baptized young, when they have but an uncouth
sense ; or infants, when they have no sense at all, of
the articles of faith in these words :

' Unde multi post baptismum proficientes, et max-
' ime qui infantes, vel pueri baptizati sunt, quanto
' magis intellectus eorum serenatur et illuminatur,

* Part ii. ch. 5. §. 7.

St. Austin. 251

(lum interior homo reiiovatur de die in diem, pri- chap.

XV

ores SLias opiniones quas do Deo habebant, cum "

suis phantasmatibus ludificarentur, irridentes et.^£f''!gg^
detestantes atque confitentes adjiciunt. Nee tamen
ideo non accepisse baptismum existimantur, aut
talem baptismmn accepisse dicuntur, qualis fuit
error ipsorum. Sed in eis et sacrament! integritas
honoratur, et mentis vanitas emendatur.' [^. 22.]

' So that many persons increasing in knowledge
after their baptism, and especially those who
have been baptized either when they were infants,
or when they were youths ; as their understand-
ing is cleared and enlightened, and their inward
man renewed day by day, do themselves deride,
and with abhorrence and confession renounce the
former opinions which they had of God, when they
were imposed on by their own imaginations. And
yet they are not therefore accounted either not to
have received baptism or to have received a bap-
tism of that nature that their error was. But in
their case both the validity of the sacrament is ac-
knowledged, and the vanity of their understanding
rectified.'
III. And a little after, ch. 23, he having had oc-
casion to speak of the penitent thief, who obtained
salvation without baptism, shews that that is no
more an argument against the necessity of ba])tism,
where it may be had, than the example of baptized
infants obtaining salvation without faith is an ar-
gument against the necessity of faith, where the
subject is capable of it. But that it is an argument
that one of these may be without the other ; and so
that heretics, who neither have nor do teach the
right ftiith, yet may give true baptism, (if they give

252

St. Austin.

288.
(A.D.388.)

CHAP, it in the risrht form,) which oug-ht not to be reite-
rated when the party comes to the true faith.

For that was one thing with which the Donatists
upbraided the cathohcs, that they received heretics
that came over to them, without giving them a new
baptism.

He conchides this fourth book with these words :
' Sicut autem in latrone, quia per necessitatem cor-
poraliter defuit [baptismus], perfecta sakis est ; quia
per pietatera spiritaliter adfuit : sic et cum ipsa prae-
sto est, si per necessitatem desit quod latroni adfuit,
perficitur salus. Quod traditum tenet universitas
ecclesise, cum parvuli infantes baptizantur ; qui
certe nondum possunt corde credere adjustitiam,
et ore confiteri ad salutem, quod latro potuit : quin
etiam flendo et vagiendo cum in eis mysterium ce-
lebratur, ipsis mysticis vocibus obstrepunt. Et ta-
men nullus Christianorum dixerit eos inaniter bap-
tizari [cap. xxiii. ^. 30.]

' Et si quisquam in hac re auctoritatem divinam
quaerat : quanquam quod universa tenet ecclesia,
nee conciliis institutum, sed semper retentum est,
non nisi auctoritate apostohca traditum rectissime
creditur : tamen veraciter conjicere possumus, quid
valeat in parvulis baptismi sacramentum, ex cir-
cumcisione carnis, quam prior poj^ulus accepit.
Quam priusquam acciperet, justificatus est Abra-
ham. Sicut Cornelius etiam dono Spiritus Sancti,
priusquam baptizaretur, ditatus est : dicit tamen
apostohis de ipso Abraham ; signum accepit cir-
cumcisionis, signacidum Jidei justitice, qui jam corde
crediderat, et depiitatum illi erat ad justitiam.
Cur ergo ei pra^ceptum est, ut omnem dein-
ceps infantem mascukim octavo die circumcideret.

St. Austin. 253

qui iiondum poterat corde credere, ut ei deputare- chap.

XV

tur ad justitiam ; nisi quia et ipsum per seipsum '

sacramentum multum valebat ? Sicut , , ^^- ,

ergo in Abraham ])riiceessit fidei justitia, et accessit
circumcisio signaculuni jiistitia3 fidei : ita in Cor-
nelio pr£ccessit sanctificatio spiritalis in dono Spiri-
tus Sancti, et accessit sacramentum regenerationis
in lavacro ba])tismi. Et sicut in Isaac, qui octavo
suae nativitatis die circunicisus est, praecessit sig-
naculuni justitiae fidei ; et quoniam patris fidem
imitatus est, secuta est in crescente ipsa justitia
cujus signaculuni in infante prsecesserat : ita et in
baptizatis infantibus praecedit regenerationis sacra-
mentum, et si Christianam tenuerint pietatem se-
quctur etiam in corde conversio, cujus mysterium
praecessit in corpore. Et sicut in illo latrone,
quod ex baptismi sacramento defuerat, complevit
Omnipotentis benignitas, quia non superbia vel con-
teniptu, sed necessitate defuerat : sic in infantibus,
qui baptizati moriuntur, eadem gratia Omnipotentis
implere credenda est, quod non ex impia voluntate,
sed ex aetatis indigentia nee corde credere ad justi-
tiam possunt, nee ore confiteri ad salutem. Ideo
cum alii pro eis respondent, ut impleatur erga eos
celebratio sacramcnti ; valet utique ad eorum con-
secrationem ; quia i])si respondere non possunt.
At si pro eo, qui respondere potest, alius respon-
deat, non itideni valet, [cap. xxiv. ^. 30.]

' Quibus rebus omnibus ostenditur aliud esse sa-
cramentum baptismi, aliud conversionem cordis ;
sed salutem hominis ex utroque compleri : nee si
unum horum defuerit, ideo jiutare debemus cqnse-
quens esse ut et alterum desit ; quia et illud sine
isto potest esse in infante, et hoc sine illo potuit

254

St. Austin.

CHAP.
XV.

288.

(A.D.388,)

esse in latrone : complente Deo, sive in illo, sive in
isto, quod non ex voliintate defuisset : cum vero ex
voluntate alteram horum defuerit, reatu hominem
involvi.

' Et baptismus quidem potest inesse, ubi conver-
sio cordis defuerit : conversio autem cordis potest
quidem inesse non percepto baptismo ; sed con-
tempto non potest : neque enim ullo modo dicenda
est conversio cordis ad Deum, cum Dei sacramen-
tum contemnitur.

' Juste igitur reprehendimus, anathemamus, dete-
stamur, abominamur perversitatem cordis haereti-
corum : sacramentum tamen evangelicum non ideo
non habent, quia per quod utile est non liabent.
Quapropter cum ad fidem et veritatem veniunt, et
agentes poenitentiam remitti sibi peccata deposcunt;
non eos decipimus, neque fallimus, cum correctos a
nobis ac reformatos in eo quod depravati atque
perversi sunt, ad regnum coelorum sic disciplinis
coelestibus erudimus, ut quod in eis integrum est
nullo modo violemus : nee propter hominis vitium,
si quid in homine Dei est, vel nullum vel vitiosum
esse dicamus.' [cap. xxiv. '^. 32.]

' And as the thief, who by necessity went without
baptism, was saved ; because by his piety he had
it spiritually : so where baptism is had, though the
j)arty by necessity go without that [faith] which
the thief had, yet he is saved.

' Which the whole body of the church holds, as
delivered to them, in the case of little infants bap-
tized : who certainly cannot yet believe with the
heart to righteousness, or confess with the mouth
to salvation, as the thief could ; nay, by their cry-
ing and noise while the sacrament is administering.

St. Austin. 255

* they disturb the holy mysteries: and yet no Chris- ^^^^•
' tian man will say they are baptized to no pur-

288.

* pose. (A,D.388.)

' And if any one do ask for divine authority in

* this matter : though that which the whole church
' practises, and which has not been instituted by
' councils, but was ever in use, is very reasonably
' believed to be no other than a thing delivered [or
' ordered] by authority of the apostles : yet we may
' besides take a true estimate, how much the sacra-
' ment of baptism does avail infants, by the circum-
' cision which God's former people received.

' For Abraham was justified before he received
' that ; as Cornelius was indued Avith the Holy
' Spirit before he was baptized : and yet the apostle
' says of Abraham, that he received the sign of cir-
' cumcisiofi, a seal of the righteousness of the faith,
' by which he had in heart believed, a?id it had been
' counted to him for righteousness. Why then was
' he commanded thenceforward to circumcise all his
' male infants on the eighth day, when they could
' not yet believe with the heart, that it might be
' counted to them for righteousness ; but for this
' reason, because the sacrament itself is of itself of

' great import ? Therefore as in Abraham the

' righteousness of faith went before, and circumci-
' sion the seal of the righteousness of faith came
' after ; so in Cornelius the spiritual sanctification
' by the gift of the Holy Spirit went before, and the
' sacrament of regeneration by the laver of baptism
' came after. And as in Isaac, who was circumcised
' the eighth day, the seal of the righteousness of
' faith went before, and (as he was a follower of his
' father's faith) the righteousness itself, the seal

256 St. Austin.

CHAP. * whereof had gone before in his infancy, came

" ' after : so in infants baptized the sacrament of rege-

( A D 388.) ' neration goes before, and (if they put in practice

' the Christian religion) conversion of the heart,

* the mystery whereof went before in their body,
' comes after.

' And as in that thief s case, what was wanting
' of the sacrament of baptism the mercy of the
' Ahiiighty made up ; because it was not out of
' pride or contempt but of necessity that it was
' wanting : so in infants that die after they are bap-
' tized, it is to be beheved that the same grace of
' the Almighty does make up that defect, that by
' reason, not of a wicked will, but of want of age,

* they can neither believe with the heart to right-
•' eousness, nor confess with the mouth unto salva-
' tion. So that when others answer for them, that
' they may have this sacrament given them; it is
' valid for their consecration, because they cannot
' answer for themselves : but if for one that is able
' to answer himself another should answer, it would

' not be valid. By all which it appears, that the

' sacrament of baptism is one thing, and conversion
' of the heart another : but that the salvation of a
' pei'son is completed by both of them. And if one
' of these be wanting, we are not to think that it
' follows, that the other is wanting ; since one may
' be without the other in an infant, and the other
' was without that in the thief : God Almighty mak-
' ing up, both in one and the other case, that which
' was not wilfully wanting.

' But when either of these is wilfully wanting, it
' involves the person in guilt. And baptism indeed
' may be had where conversion of the heart is

St. Austin. 257

' wantiiiff; but conversion of the heart, thouoh it chap.

XV

' may be where baptism is not had, cannot be where "

' it is contemned : for that is by no means to be ,^ ^^'^g .
' called conversion of the heart to God, where the
' sacrament of God is contemned.

' Well may we therefore reprehend, anathema-
' tize, detest and abhor, the perversion of heart that
' is in heretics : but yet we must not say that they
' therefore have not the Gospel sacrament, because
' they have not that which should make it useful to
* them.

' Therefore when they come to the true faith,
' and being penitent do desire that their faults may
' be pardoned ; we do not deceive or cheat them,
' when correcting and reforming in them that
' wherein they were depraved and perverted, we
' do instruct them with holy discipline for the
' kingdom of heaven in such a manner, as that we
' do by no means violate that in them which is
' valid : nor for the fault of the man say that that
' which is of God in the man is either null or faulty.'

IV. I have transcribed this passage the larger,
because Mr. Danvers, who had set up a pretence
that the Donatists found fault with the catholics
for baptizing infants, would prove it from this place.
He had said ' that Austin's third and fourth books
' against the Donatists do demonstrate that they
' denied infants baptism : wherein he manageth
' the argument for infants' baptism against them
' with great zeal, enforcing it by several arguments,
' but especially from apostolical tradition ; and
' cursing with great liitterness they that should
' not embrace it^.' And when his answerers jogged

3 Treatise of Baptism, Part ii. ch. vii. p. 223, edit. 1674.
WALL, VOL. I. s

258 St. Austin.

CHAP, him, and told him, that in the third book there was
' never a word about it ; he said, the fourth book did

/ A ^^^oQ \ however shew it. And yet in the fourth book there
(A.IJ.388.) •'

is nothing but what I here produce. And any one
that can give any tolerable guess at the sense of
what he reads, sees by this and the rest of the
book, that St. Austin does not here argue against
the Donatists, as if they denied infant baptism :
but proves that baptism received from the hands of
heretical or depraved priests is valid, though they
give the baptized person a wrong account of the
faith ; by this reason, that infants' baptism is valid,
though they have as yet no account of the faith at
all. And I have already shewn from Optatus*\ that
the catholics and Donatists had no difference about
the nature of baptism, or way of administering it ;
but only about the purity or orthodoxy of the per-
sons that gave it ; and shall by and by have occasion
to shew particularly that they baptized infants as
well as the catholics'.

But what does he mean by saying that St. Austin
cursed, &c.?

The Donatists reproached the catholics for receiv-
ing to their communion such as had been baptized
among heretics, as Arians, ApoUinarists, &c., without
' giving them, upon their coming to the communion
of the church, a new ba])tism : as if they thereby
owned communion with such heretics, or approved
their doctrine. St. Austin answers as we see, ' We
' do [as well as you] reprehend, anathematize, &c.,
' the perversion of heart, [or false doctrine] of the
' heretics : but we must not therefore say, that they
' have not the sacrament,' &c. This is what this
ii Ch. 9. §.i. i Ch. 16. §. I, 2.

St. Austin. 259

man, who could find antipapdobaptism in every Latin cha p
book that he looked into, calls ' cursing them that ^

' would not embrace infant baptism." ,^ ]^%g )

Mr. Baxter says on this occasion, ' Either this
' man had seen and read these books of Augustine

* mentioned by him, or he had not. If not, doth he
' use God's church, and the souls of poor ignorant
' people with any tenderness ? &c. If he iinderstand

* not Latin, how unfit is he to give us the history of
' these antiquities ! &c. But if he have read them,
' then I can scarce match him again, among all the
' falsifiers that I know in the world. I dare not be
' so uncharitable to him, as to think that ever he

* read them^.' But to leave him, and go on :

Though St. Austin speak of infant baptism in this
place but by the by, his words are, we see, a full
evidence that it was then universally practised, and
had been so beyond the memory of any man or of
any record : that they took it to be a thing that
had not been ' enacted by any council,' but had ' ever
' been in use' from the beginning of Christianity.
And they had then but 300 years to look back to
the times of the apostles, whereas we now have
1600. And the writings and records which are now
lost, were then extant, and easily known.

Moreover, for the sorts or sects of Christians
that were then ; he says that 7iullus Christianorum
' none of all the Christians' (and then certainly not
the Donatists with wdiom he was talking) had any
other opinion than that it was useful or necessary.

This is to be understood with a limitation, which

^ Confutation of the Strange Forgeries of Mr. Henry Danvers,
sect. 2. ch. iv. §. 7. [In his ' More Proofs of Infants' Church
' Memhership,' &c. 8vo. 1675. p. 241.]

S 2

260 St. Austin.

^^^P- I shall shew^ that he expresses elsewhere, provided
they were such as made use of any baptism at all ;

XV

(A.D.^88.) for there were some sects that called themselves
Christians, (but they were hardly allowed that name
by any others,) who utterly refused the use of any
baptism at all. Of whom I shall give some account
at a place™ convenient.

^. 5. Out of St. Austin's Letter to Boniface.

Augustini Epistola ad Bonifacium Ejnscopum ;
Epist. 23. [98 in edit. Benedict.]
308. '^. I. Boniface, a bishop of St. Austin's acquaint-
ance, had wrote to him to desire his explication
of two matters that appeared to him difficult to
resolve. They do both relate to infants' baptism.

One was, ' Whether such parents do their infants
' that are baptized any hurt, who carry them to the
* heathen temples and sacrifices to be cured by those
' impious rites of some infirmity they have. And if
' they thereby do them no hurt, then how it comes
' to pass, that the faith of the parents stands them
' in stead when they are baptized, and yet the apo-
' stasy of their parents does them no hurt.'

The other was, how that can be reconciled to
truth, which the godfather answers in the child's
name at baptism : viz. that ' he does believe ; does
' renounce ; will obey,' &c., when he at present has
no sense at all, and what he will have hereafter
nobody knows.

A part of what St. Austin answers to the first of
these, I have already recited in the chapter of St. Cy-
prian's sayings": because he does in this answer cite
and explain one of the passages of Cyprian, which

1 Part ii. ch. 5. §. i. »^ Part ii. ch. 6. §. i. '■ Ch. 6. §. i 2.

St. Austin. 261

I had there cited. And another part of it in ch. iii. chap.
§. 4 ; because it gives a full proof that the ancients

took the word regeneration for baptism exclusively ,^ jj^^gg,
of all other senses.

The substance of the answer is, that original sin
is at first derived from the parents to the child,
because the child is at first a part of the parents :
that after he is become a separate living person, the
faith of the parents, or others that bring him to
baptism, is available to him, because ' the regene-
*• rating Spirit is one in the grown persons that

* bring the child, and in the child that is brought :
' but when the same grown persons commit that
' wickedness on the child, offering him, and endea-
' vouring to engage him in the sacrilegious bonds of
' devils ; there is not then one soul in both of them,

* that the crime should be communicated. For sin

* is not so communicated by the will of another
' which is distinct, as grace is communicated by the

* Holy Spirit which is one and the same. For the
' same Holy Spirit may be in this and in that per-
' son ; although they mutually know it not one of

* another, and so the grace may be common : but
' the spirit of a human person cannot be in this
' and in that person ; so that one sinning and the

* other not sinning, the guilt should be common.'

Some remaining parts of the answer relating to
some particular things that Boniface had said, do
here follow. ['^. 5. tom. ii. p. 265.\

' Nee illud te moveat, quod quidam non ea fide ad

* baptismum percipiendum parvulos ferunt, ut gratia

* spiritali ad vitam regenerentur a^ternam, sed
' quod eos putant hoc rcmedio temporalem retinere
' vel recipere sanitatem. Non enim propterea illi

2C2

St. Austin.

{ II A p.
XV.

288.

(A.l).388.)

' noil ivgeiierantiir, quia non ab istis liac iiiteiitione
' ortbriiiitur. Celebrantur eiiim per eos necessaria

' miiiisteria, Slc. Spiritus aiitem ille sanctus qui

' habitat in Sanctis, ex quibus una ilia coluinba de-
* argentata eliaritatis igne conflatur, agit quod agit
' etiani per scrvitutem, aliquando non solum sim-
' i)liciter ignorjjintium, Ycrum etiani damnabiliter
' iiulignoruni. Ofteruntur quippe i)arvuli ad perci-
' piendam s|)iritalem gratiain non tarn ab eis quorum
' gestantur manibus, (quamvis et ab ipsis si et
' i])si boni fideles sunt,) quain ab universa societate
' sanctorum atque fidelium. Ab omnibus iiamque
' oHciTi recte intelliguntur quibus ])lacet (piod
' ofteruntur, et quorum saiicta atque individua
' charitate ad comniunicationeni Sancti S^jiritus ad-
' juvantur. Tota hoc ergo mater ecclesia, qua? in
" Sanctis est, facit ; quia tota omiies, tota singulos
' parit. Nam si Cliristiani ])aptisini sacramentum,
' quando ununi atque idi])sum est, etiam apud lurre-
' ticos valet et sufticit ad consecrationem, quamvis
' ad vito) aiternae participationem non sufficiat : quae
' consecratio reum quideni tacit lurreticum extra
' J)oniinigregeni habentem Dominicuni cliaraeterem ;
' corrigendum tameu admonet sana doctrina, non
' iterum similiter consecrandum : quaiito potius in
' catliolica ecclesia etiam per stijnikii ministerium
' frumenta jmrganda jiortantur, ut ad massa? so-
' cietatem mediante area perducantur ?

' Illud auteni nolo te fallat, ut existimes reatus
' vinculum ex Adam tractum, aliter non posse
' dirunq)i, nisi parvuli ad perci})iendam Christi
' giatiam a parentibus ott'erantur. Sic enim scribens
' dicis ; ut sicut parentes fiierunt auctores ad eorum
" poenam, per tidem parentum identidem justificen-

«Si^. Austin. J^G3

* tur : cum vidcas nuiltos non offeri a parentibus, c n a p.

XV,

* sed etiam a quibuslibct cxtraiieis ; siciit a (lominis
' servuli ali((iiau(l() oHbruntnr. l^]t iioniiuiHiuam, , 1^%q \
' mortuis ])arcntibus suis, parvuli ba})tizaiitiir, ab eis

' oblati, qui ill is hujusniodi miscricordiaui prajberc

* potucruut. Aliquaudo etiam, quos crudolitcr
' parcutes exposueruut uutrieudos a quibuslibet,
' uouuuu(juam a saeris virgiuibus coUig-nutur, et ab

* eis olferuutur ad baptisuium, qiuu ccrte proprios

* filios uec habueruut ullos, nee habere disponuut.'
[§. 6.]

II. ' Let not that disturb you, that some people

* do not bring their infants to baptism with that

* faith [or purjiose] that they may by spiritual grace
' be regenerated to eternal life, but because they
' think they do procure or ])rcserve their bodily

* health by this remedy. For the children do not
' therefore fail of being regenerated, because they are
' not brought by the others with this intention. For
' the necessary offices arc performed by them, &c.

* And the Holy Spirit that dwells in the saints,

' out of whom that silver dove that is but one is by

* the fire of charity compacted, does what he does

* sometimes by the means of men not only simjdy

* ignorant, but also damnably unworthy. For in-

* fants are offered for the receiving of the spiritual

* grace, not so much by those in whose hands they
' are brought, (tliough by those too if they be good

* faithful Christians,) as by the whole congregation
' of saints, and faithful men. For they are rightly

* said to be ollered by all those whose desire it is

* that they should be offered, and by whose holy and
' united charity they are assisted towards the com-
' munication of the Holy Si)irit.

264 St. Austin.

CHAP. 'So that the whole church of the saints does this
^ ' office as a mother. For the whole church brings

(A.D^ 388.) ' foi'*^^^ ^^1 h®^' Children, and the whole brings forth
' each particular.

' For if the sacrament of Christian baptism, which
' is one and the same, be available even among
' heretics for the consecration of a person, though it

* be not sufficient for his obtaining of eternal life
' (which consecration involves the heretic in the

* o-uilt of sin for usina- the Lord's mark without the
' compass of the Lord's flock : and yet the orthodox
' doctrine teaches that such a person is to be re-
' formed, but not to be consecrated anew) : — how
' much more in the catholic church may the corn
' that is to be cleaned, be brought in by the means
' of the straw, that by the help of the floor it may
' be gathered to the rest of the heap ?

III. * But I would not have you mistake so as to

* think that the bond of guilt derived from Adam
' cannot be broken, unless the children be offered for
' receiving the grace of Christ by their own parents.
' For so you speak in your letter, " That as the pa-
' rents were authors of their punishment, so they
' may also by the faith of their parents be justified ;"
' whereas you see that a great many are offered,
' not by their parents, but by any other persons ; as
' the infant slaves are sometimes offered by their
' masters. And sometimes when the parents are
' dead, the infants are baptized, being offered by

* any that can affbrd to shew this compassion on
' them. And sometimes infants whom their parents
' have cruelly exposed, to be brought up by those
' that light on them, are now and then taken up by
' the holy virgins, and offered to baptism by them

St. Justin. 265

' who have no children of their own, nor design to chap.
' have any. And in all this there is nothing else ^

' done than what is written in the Gospel, when our ^^J^^^^g
' Lord asked who was neighbour to him that was
' wounded by thieves, and left half dead in the
' road ? and it was answered, He that shewed mere?/
' on him.''

Here we see (beside the resolution of the main
question, both Boniface and St. Austin taking it for
granted that infants are to be baptized) that the or-
dinary use then Mas for the parents to answer for
their children : but yet that this was not counted so
necessary as that a child could not be baptized with-
out that circumstance. Any one that was on any
equitable account owner of the child might bring it
to baptism.

Neither did the baptism depend on the holiness,
or right faith, or intention of those that brought the
child. It was supposed to be done by the order and
at the desire of the church, and particularly of those
that assisted with their prayers at the office.

IV. He next proceeds to speak of the other ques-
tion put by Boniface :

' Difficillimam sane qusestionem tibi proposuisse
' visus es in extreme inquisitionis tua? : ea videlicet
' intentione qua soles vehementercaveremendacium.
' Si constituam, inquis, ante te parvulum, et interro-
' gem utrum cum creverit, futurus sit castus, vel fur
' non sit futurus : sine dubio respondebis ; Nescio.
' Et utrum in eadem parvula aetate constitutus co-
' gitet aliquid boni vel mali ; dices, Nescio. Si ita-
' que de moribus ejus futuris nihil audes certi pro-
' mittere, et de praisenti ejus cogitatione : Quid est
' illud quod quando ad baptismum offeruntur, pro

266 St. Justin.

CHAP. ' eis parentes tanqiiara fidedictores respondent, et
' ' dicunt illos facere quod ilia aetas cogitare non
n^^oo ' potest, aut si potest, occultuni est ? interrogamus
' enim eos, a quibus ofFeruntur, et dicimus ; Credit
' in Deuni ? de ilia setate qua?, utrum sit Deus,
' ignorat : respondent, Credit : et ad cgetera sic
' respondetur singula quaj quseruntur. Unde miror
' parentes in i^tis rebus tarn fidenter pro parvulo
* res]iondere, ut dicant eum tanta bona facere, quae
' ad Loram qua baptizatur, baptizator interrogat :
' tamen eadem liora si subjiciam ; Erit castus qui
' baptizatur ? Aut, Non erit fur ? Nescio utruni audet
' dicere aliquis, Aliquid horum erit, aut, non erit ;
' sicut milii sine dubitatione respondet, quod credat
' in Deum, et quod se convertat ad Deum.

' Deinde scripta tua concludens adjungis et dicis ;
' Ad istas ergo qusestiones peto breviter respondere
' digneris, ita ut non mihi de consuetudine praescri-
' bas, sed rationem reddas. [§. 7]

' His Uteris tuis lectis et relectis, et quantum tem-
' poris angustise sinebant consideratis, recordatus
' sum Nebridium amicum meum ; qui cum esset re-
' rum obscurarum, ad doctrinam pietatis maxime
' pertinentium, diligentissimus et acerrimus inquisi-
' tor, valde oderat de quaestione magna responsionem
' brevem : et quisquis hoc poposcisset, segerrime
' ferebat ; eumque, si ejus persona pateretur, vultu
' indignabundus et voce coliibebat ; indignum depu-
' tans qui talia quncreret, cum de re tanta, quam
' multa dici jDossent deberentque, nesciret. Sed ego
' tibi non similiter, ut solebat ille, succenseo. Es
' enim episco])us multis curis occupatus, ut ego :
' unde nee tibi facile vacat prolixum aliquid legere^
' nee mihi scribere. Nam ille tunc adolescens, qui

Sf. Austin. 267

talia brcviter iiolebat audire, et de multis in nostra chap.

XV.

sermocinatione qiia^rebat, ab otioso qnnsrebat otio-

sus. Tu vcro cogitans nunc qnis et a quo ista^^^p gg^
flagites, breviter de re tanta respondere me jubes.
Ecce facio ([uantum possum : Dominus adjuvet, ut
quod postulas possim. [§. 8.]

* Nempe saepe ita loquiniur, ut pasclia ]iropin-
quante dicamus, crastinam vel perendinam Domini
passionem ; cum ille ante tarn multos annos ])assus
sit, nee omnino nisi semel ilia passio facta sit.
Nempe ipso die Dominico dicimus ; Ilodie Dominus
resurrexit : cum ex quo resurrexit tot anni trans-
ierint. Cur nemo tam ineptus est, ut nos ita
loquentes arguat esse mentitos, nisi quia istos dies
secundum illorum, quibus haec gesta sunt, simili-
tudinem nuncupamus? Ut dicatur ipse dies, qui
non est ipse, sed revolutione temporis similis ejus :
et dicatur illo die fieri ])ropter sacramenti celebra-
tionem, quod non illo die, sed jam olim factum est.
Nonne semel immolatus est Clivistus in seipso? et
tamen in sacramento, non solum per omnes paschae
solemn itates, sed omni die populis immolatur ; nee
utique mentitur, qui interrogatus eum respondent
immolari. Si enim sacramenta quandam similitu-
dinem earum rerum, quarum sacramenta sunt, non
haberent, omnino sacramenta non essent. Ex hac
autem similitudine plerumque etiam ipsarum rerum
nomina accipiunt.

' Sicut ergo secundum quendam moduni sacra-
mcntum c(>ri)oris Christi corpus Christi est, sacra-
mentum sanguinis Christi sanguis Christi est ; ita
sacramentum fidei fides est. Nihil est autem aliud
credere, quam fidem habere. Ac per hoc cum
respondetur parvulus credere, qui fidei nondum

268

St. Austin.

CHAP.
XV.

288.
(A.I).388.)

habet affectum ; respondetur fidem habere propter
fidei sacramentum, et convertere se ad Deum
pro])ter conversioiiis saeraiiientiim ; quia et ipsa re-
sponsio ad celebrationem pertinet sacramenti. Sicut
de ipso baptismo apostolus ; Cousepulti, inquit, su-
mtis Christo per baptismum in mortem. Non ait,
Sepulturam significavimus : sed prorsus ait : Con-
septdti sumu^. Sacramentum ergo tantse rei non
nisi ejusdem rei vocabulo nuncupavit. [§. 9.]

' Itaque parvulum, et si nondum fides ilia, quae in
credentium voluntate consistit, jam tamen ipsius
fidei sacramentum fidelem tacit. Nam sicut credere
respondetur, ita etiani fidelis vocatur, non rem
ipsam mente annuendo, sed ipsius rei sacramentum
percipiendo. Cum autem homo sapere coeperit,
non illud sacramentum repetet, sed intelliget :
ejusque veritati consona etiam voluntate coapta-
bitur. Hoc quamdiu non potest, valebit sacramen-
tum ad ejus tutelam adversus contrarias potestates :
et tantum valebit, ut si ante rationis usum ex hac
vita emigraverit, per ipsum sacramentum, commen-
dante ecclesise charitate, ab ilia condemnatione, quce
per imum liominem intravit in mimdum, Christiano
adjutorio liberetur. Hoc qui non credit, et fieri
non posse arbitratur, profecto infidelis est, etsi
habeat fidei sacramentum : longeque melior est ille
parvulus, qui etiamsi fidem nondum habeat in cogi-
tatione, non ei tamen obicem contrariae cogitationis
opponit ; unde sacramentum ejus salubriter percipit.

' Respondi, sicut existimo, qusestionibus tuis, quan-
tum attinet ad minus capaces et contentiosos non
satis, quantum autem ad pacatos et intelligentes
plus forte quam sat est. Nee tibi ad excusationem
meam objeci firmissimam consuetudinem, sed salu-

St. Austin. 269

berrimse consuetiuliiiis reddidi quani potui ratio- chap.
iicm.' [§. 10.] ^^-

' You reckon you have jn-oposod a very hard ques-,, \^\c,^.
tion in the latter part of your letter, according to
that tenijier of yours by which you are wont to be
exceeding cautious of any thing that looks like a
lie. You say thus :

' Suppose I set before you an infant, and ask you
whether, when he grows uj>, he will be a chaste
man, or, whether he will be no thief? your answer
doubtless will be, I cannot tell. And, whether he
in that infant age have any good or evil thought :
you will say, I know not. Since therefore you
dare not say any thing either concerning his fu-
ture behaviour, or his present thoughts ; what is
the meaning that when they are brought to baj)-
tism, their parents, as sponsors for them, make
answer and say, that they do that which that age
can have no thoughts of; or if they have, nobody
knows what they are ? For we ask those by whom
they are brought, and say. Does he believe in God?
concerning that age which has no knowledge whe-
ther there be a God or not : they answer. He does
believe. And so in like manner answer is made
to all the rest. So that I wonder how the parents
do in those matters answer so confidently for the
child that he does this or that good thing, which
the baptizer demands at the time of his baptism :
and yet, if at the same time I ask. Will this bap-
tized person prove chaste, or, not prove a thief? I
question whether any one dare so answer, he will,
or will not, be such or such a one ; as they answer
without any hesitation that he does believe in God:
he does turn to God.

270 St. Justin.

CHAP. * And then you conclude your letter with these

XV.

' words :

(A.D.388.) ' "I entreat jou to give me a short answer to these
' questions, in such a manner as that you do not
' urge to me the prescription of the customariness of
' the thing, but give me the reason of it.'

' When I had read your letter over and over, and
' had considered it as far as my short time would
' allow ; it made me call to mind my friend Nebri-

* dius, wdio being a very diligent and sagacious in-

* quirer into matters that were obscure, especially

* such as concern religion, could not endure a short

* answer to a Aveighty question, and took it very ill
' if any one desired such a thing ; and would with
' an angry voice and look reprimand him, if he were
' a person that might be so used, as counting him
' unfit to ask such questions ; who did not consider
' how much might and ought to be said on so great
' a matter.

' But, I do not pretend to be angry with you in
' such manner as he was wont to be ; for you are a
' bishop that have a great many cares upon you, as
' well as I : so that neither have you the leisure to
' read a long discourse, nor I to write one. For he
' being then a young man that would not be an-
' swered in brief to such things, but spent a great
' deal of talk with me, inquired as one at leisure
' from one that was so too. But you, considering
' now your own circumstances that ask, and mine that

* am asked, bid me answer briefly about so great a
' matter. And that I here do as well as I can : I pray
' God to assist me, that I may be able to satisfy your
' demand.

' You know we often express ourselves so, as that

*S'^. Austin. 271

' when Good Friday is nigh, v/e say, To-morrow or chap.
next day is onr Lord's passion : though it be a '

great many years ago that he suffered, and his , ^ ^^^'j^^ .
passion was never performed but once. So on the
Lord's day we say, This day our Lord arose, though
since he arose it be so many years. Why is there
nobody so silly as to say we lie when we speak so,
but for this reason, because we give names to those
days, from the representation they make us of those
on which the things were indeed done : so as that
is called the very day, which is not the very day,
but answers to it in the revolution of time : and
that which is not done on that day, but was done
a long time ago, is spoken of as done on that day,
because the sacrament of it is then celebrated.
Was not Christ in his own person offered up (or
sacrificed) once for all? And yet in the sacrament
he is offered in the church (or in, or to, or among
the people) not only every Easter, but every day ;
nor does he lie, who being asked, says, he is of-
fered. For sacraments would not be sacraments,
if they had not a resemblance of those things
whereof they are the sacraments : and from this
resemblance they commonly have the names of the
things themselves.

' As therefore the sacrament of Christ's body is
after a certain fashion Christ's body : — and the sa-
crament of Christ's blood is Christ's blood : — so
the sacrament of faith is faith, and to believe is
nothing else but to have faith. And so, when an
infant that has not yet the faculty of faith is said
to believe ; he is said to have faith, because of the
sacrament of faith ; and to turn to God, because of
the sacrament of conversion : because that answer

272 St. Austhi.

CHAP, i belongs to the celebration of the sacrament. So
XV- *

' the apostle on this same subject of baptism says,

-Co

(A.D.38S.)' W^^ ^'*^ buried together with Christ by baptism
' unto death° : he does not say, We signify a burial,
' but he uses the word itself, We are buried. So
' that he calls the sacrament of so great a thing by
' the name of the thing itself.

' And so an, infant, though he be not yet consti-
' tuted a fidel (a faithful Christian) by that faith
' which consists in the will of believers ; yet he is
' bv the sacrament of that faith : for as he is said to
' believe, so he is called a fidel, not from his having
* the thing itself in his mind, but from his receiving
' the sacrament of it.

'And when a ])erson begins to have a sense of
' things, he does not repeat that sacrament, but un-
' derstands the force of it, and by consent of will
' squares himself to the true meaning of it. And till
' he can do this, the sacrament will avail to his pre-
' servation against all contrary powers : and so far
' it will avail, that if he depart this life before the
' use of reason, he will by this Christian remedy of
' the sacrament itself (the charity of the church re-
' commending him) be made free from that con-
' demnation, which by one man entered into the
' worlds

' He that does not believe this, and thinks it can-
' not be done, is indeed an infidel, though he have
' the sacrament of faith. And that infant is much
' better, who though he have not faith in his mind,
' yet puts no bar of a contrary mind against it, and
' so receives the sacrament to his soul's health.

' I have given such an answer to your questions

o Rom. vi. 4. P Ch. v. 18.

St. Justin. 273

* as T suppose is, to ignorant or contentious ])eople chap.
' not enough, and to understanding .ind quiet people

* perhaps more than enough. Neither have T, tO/^.a^S)
' spare my ])ains, urged to you the custom's being so
' firmly grounded : but I have, as well as T could,
' explained to you the reason of that wholesome
' custom.'

How skilful or judicious the reader will judge
this explication of the reason of the custom to be, T
know not. Nor is it much material ; since we are
not now inquiring how acute St. Austin was, but
what it was that he and the rest knew to be true in
point of fact. And hereby we perceive plainly these
matters following.

V. 1. That that was the practice for the godfa-
thers (who were, as I said, usually the parents) to
make these answers in the child's name. The use
of godfathers ap]:>eared before ^ from the words of
Tertullian ; but here it is set forth more particu-
larly : and St. Austin says that these answers do be-
long to [or are a necessary appertenance of] the sa-
crament : and he had said in the former ])art of the
letter, (which I omitted because of the length,) that
they are nerha saci'amentoriun, sine qtiilms par-
vidus consecrari 7ion potest ; ' words of the sacra-
' ment, without which an infant cannot be baptized.'
Whether he would not have excepted the case of ne-
cessity in danger of sudden death (as the church of
England does) if there had been occasion of speaking
of that, I know not : but it is plain he would have
been against those that either decry this practice, or
count it a thing of no moment. The church ,of
Christ has always taken care that the blessings of

q Chap. 4. §. 9.

WALL, VOL. I. T

274 St. Austin.

CHAP. God proTnised in this sacrament may be understood as

' conveyed conditionally or by way of covenant ; wbich

(A D^388 ) these questions and answers do most lively express.
VI. 2. We see that they then held as certain,
• that children which are baptized, dying before
' they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved :'
for St. Austin here says in these last words that ' he
' that does not believe this is an infidel :' which he
would not say, if it had been counted at all doubtful.
The same thing might have been observed from
what he says above, sect. 3. §. 2, ' God forbid that I
' should make any question whether infants regene-
' rated and dying in infancy do come to eternal sal-
' vation.'

III. If those learned Benedictines, who have ma-
naged the last edition of this fathers works'" to
set his books and epistles in their chronological order,
have placed this epistle right ; then we see here an-
other proof of the mistake of Grotius ^, who main-
tains as I said *, that St. Austin, before he was heated
with the Pelagian controversy, did never assert the
condemnation of infants dying unbaptized, no not
to those lesser or milder sufferings in the world to
come. For they place this epistle (which is in their
edition the ninety-eighth) anno Dom. 408 ; which
was before Pelagius vented his heresy : and yet here
St. Austin, in saying, ' They will, if they die before
' the use of reason, be freed by this Christian remedy
' of the sacrament from that condemnation which by
' one man entered into the world,' plainly supposes
that they would otherwise have been liable to it.

' [In eleven volumes folio, published at Paris, 1679 — 1700,
and reprinted at Antwerp, with an appendix, in 1700 — 1703.]
" Annot. in JMatt. xix. 14. t Sect. 3. §. 2.

St. Aiistin. 275

VIT. 4. There are two other things observable ^ '' ^ '*•
from his words here, which are well worth the

28S
iiotino-, though they do not relate to our subject, (a.d. 388.)

One is, that he speaks so as that vve may be sure he
had no notion of trausubstantiation. For to say,
that ' sacraments have a likeness [or resemblance]
' of those things whereof they are the sacraments ;
' and from this resemblance they commonly have
' the names of the things themselves ;' and to exem-
plify this by saying, ' The sacrament of Christ's
' body is Christ's body, and the sacrament of his
' blood is his blood after a certain manner' [or
fashion] ; and to speak of this as a thing so under-
stood by all, is proof enough that he neither be-
lieved, nor had conceived or heard of any such doc-
trine as makes the body and blood of Christ to be
there in a proper sense.

VIII. 5. Another is, that it was then the common
custom for Christians in some churches, and pro-
bably in that where he lived, to receive the commu-
nion of Christ's body every day. For so he says,
' Christ in himself [or in his own person] was of-
' fered [or sacrificed] but once : but yet in the sacra-
' ment [or in a sacramental way] he is offered up
' every day.' It is certain this was the custom then
of the Christians at Rome : and that in many of the
eastern churches, and some of the western, the
custom was not to receive so often. For St. Hierome
and St. Austin have each of them written letters on
this subject in answer to some that had desired their
opinion in relation to this difference ; as Aug.
Epist. 118. [ed. Benedict. 54.] ad Jannarium :
Hieronym. Epist. 28, [edit. Benedict. 52. Vallars.
71.] (id Lucinum Bceticum : See also Aug. de

T 2

276 St. Austin.

CHAP. Sermone Domini iti Monte, lib. ii. cap. 7. §. 26, 27.

XV.

and Gennad. de Eccl. Dogm. cap. 63 ". Their opinion
(A.D.388.) i^» tliat in that and all such like 'matters that are not
' determined by scri])tnre, nor by the authority of
' the universal church, one should follow the usage
' of that church in which one lives.' And St. Au-
stin there says, that he had by long experience found
this rule (which had been given him by St. Ambrose)
to be of unspeakable use for the quieting men's
minds, and for the peace of the church.

This they say of receiving every day : but no
person then would have spoken with such indiffer-
ency of the custom of any people (if there had then
been any such) that used to receive so seldom as
many among the protestants nowadays do. For
Gennadius, loc. citat., says, ' Those that communi-
' cate every day T do neither commend nor blame:
' but I would advise and persuade people to commu-
' nicate every Lord's day ; provided they have a
' purpose of forsaking sin. — But this I speak of
' those who have not any capital or mortal crimes
' lying on their consciences,' &c. Those he advises
to do penance first.

IX. 6. He does both in this letter, and also in the
passage last before rehearsed, and in many other
places, so speak as plainly to shew that he did not
think nor pretend that infants that are baptized have
in any proper sense faith or repentance, or conver-
sion of the heart, &c. How much soever he is here
pressed with the difficulty of explaining the reason
why the godfather answers in the child's name, ' he
' does believe :' he does not for all that fly to the

" [Gennadius Massiliensis : Liber de Ecclesiasticis Dogmati-
bus, 4". Hamburgi, 1614.]

St. Austin. 277

justifying of so great a paradox, as to say that the chap.
child does indeed in a proper sense understand, ^

believe, or disbelieve any thing. He sheMS the , , p^^-
words are true in a sacramental sense, but does not
maintain they are so in a proper one. Nay, he
plainly yields they are not : he grants that infants
' cannot as yet either believe with the heart, or
' confess with the mouth.'

And when at other places^ he argues that infants,
after they are baptized, are no longer to be counted
either among the infidels or catechumeni, but among
the fideles or credentes ; yet still he means and ex-
plains himself, as he does here, ' That they are con-
' stituted fideles, not by that faith which consists in

* the will of believers, but by the sacrament of that
' faith.'

He does indeed hold that the Holy Spirit does do
offices for the infant, and is in the infant : you see
here his words, ' the regenerating spirit is one in

* those that bring the child, and in the child that is

* brought.' And in that part of the epistle which I
left out because of the length, he says, ' Aqua exhi-
' bens forinsecus sacramentum gratise, et spiritus
' operans intrinsecus benehcium gratiae, solvens vin-
' culura culpte,' &c. \_§. 2.] ' The water affording
' outwardly the sacrament of the grace, and the spirit
' operating inwardly the benefit of the grace, loosing
' the bond of guilt,' &c., do regenerate. But he sup-
poses the infants to be merely passive, and not to know,
understand, or cooperate any thing themselves.

In his ej)istle to Dardanus, he says, 'It is a

" De Peccatorum Mentis, lib. i. cap. 25,33,8ic. [Tom.x. p i.
ed. liened.l

278 St. Austin.

CHAP. ' wonderful thing- to consider how God dwells in

XV

'__ ' some that know him not, and in some that do

/. 3f\„^ * know him he does not dwell. For thev who, when

(A.D.388.) _ _ '

' they know God, glorify him not as God, nor are
' thankful, do not belong to his temple ; and infants
' sanctified by the sacrament of Christ, regenerated
' by the Holy Spirit, do belong to his temple ; who,
' though they be regenerated, cannot yet by reason
' of their age know^ God.' And afterward, * we affirm
' therefore that the Holy Spirit dwells in baptized
' infants though they know it not ; for after the
' same manner they know him not, though he be in
' them, as they know not their own soul : the reason
' whereof which they cannot yet make use of, is in
' them as a spark raked up, which will kindle as
* they grow in years>'.' [§. 17.]

Some modern divines, especially of the Lutherans,
have gone further, and do^ maintain that infants have
faith, and do believe after a certain manner ; but not
in the same way or manner that adult people do,
whose faith comes by hearing, thought, meditation,
understanding, &c., for they grant that infants have
none of those : and what sort of faith is it that they
have cannot, as they confess, be explained.

But a late philosophical divine of the church of
Rome has outdone all. He has^ acquainted us with

y Epist. 57. [Ed. Benedict. 187.]

^ Cheuinitii Examen Concilii Tridentini, pt. ii. de baptismo, §.x.
canon. 13. p. 334. edit. Francaf. 1707.

a Malbranch, Treatise concerning the Search after Truth,
translated by T. Taylor, fol. London, 1700. Illustrations on ch.vii.
of the I St part of the second book. [Vol. i. p. 56. ii. p. 126, &c.
The original French appeared in the year 1674. and a Latin
version in 1685.]

St. Austin. 279

the mechanism by which oriorinal sin is formed chap.

. . . . XV.

in the brain of an infant before he is born, and

also how at baptism it is rectified; it is worth /^d^ ,88.)
knowinof.

It is thus : the mother has a sinful inclination
and love to the world, pleasure, &c. There are
tracks or traces in her brain running- all this way.
The child in her womb has by sympathy the same
traces bred in his brain ; so he has, before he is
born, corrupt inclinations and is a sinner. The
difficulty is, how this is rectified at baptism.

For this, he supposes the child to have at the
time of baptism one strong actual motion of love to
God ; and says, ' One single instant is sufficient for
* the exercise of that act of love. And concupiscence
' is as it were mortified that moment.' And the
strangest thing that he says is, ' It should not be
' thought strange, that I suppose it possible for
' children to love God with a love of choice at the
' time of their baptism. For since,' &c.

I think this learned author does somewhere'' ob-
serve in his book, that ' men of learning are most
' subject to error .' and, ' that those who are most
' hot ill the search of truth are the men that lead us
' into infinite errors.' He gives several reasons for
this, why such men do sometimes fall into greater
mistakes than vulgar people. One more may per-
haps be added to them ; vulgar people, having no
assistance from learning or philosophy, have nothing
but common sense to trust to ; so they generally
keep close to that : they seldom allow themselves to
maintain any opinion that is very remote from it.
It was not these men that adventured first to teach

b Book ii. pt. 2. ch. 4.

280 St. Austin.

CHAP, the world, that that is in a proper sense the body of

a man, which we see, when we have it in our hands,

(A.D.388.} ^^ ^6 a piece of bread. On the contrary, they can
hardly believe it, though the learned have taught
them so. Neither was it for one of them to have
found with all their search this truth, that an infant
at the time of baptism loves God with a love of
choice. They will hardly believe it of any infant
at any time : much less when they see the child fast
asleep at the time of baptism, or (as St. Austin
observes'^ they often are) in a fit of crying and fret-
fulness all the while ; which, as he remarks, would
be very sinful, if they had any understanding.

The aforesaid author says indeed, ' We ought not
' positively to affirm this, that children are justified
' by formal acts of their will.' And he had reason ;
for the Council of Trent suppose the contrary, when
they say, ' If any one shall say that baptized infants,
' because they have not the act of believing, are not
' to be accounted Ji'deies, &;c., let him be anathema''.'
I suppose that church have at last learned not to
hang any more millstones on the neck of their
religion.

He says also, ' They that have treated of the effect
* of baptism in the ages past, have omitted the ex-
' plaining the regeneration of infants by the actual
' motions of their heart ; not that they were induced
' by strong reasons to judge it impossible ; for their
' works do not shew they have ever so much as
' examined it.' But St. Austin thought the evidence
of sense to be a strong reason, when he says in
the foresaid epistle to Dardanus ; ' If we should go

"■ Epist. 57. [ed. Benedict. 187. j
d Sess. 7. Can. de baptismo, 13.

St. Austin. 281

* about to prove by discourso, that infants, which as chap.
' yet have no knowledge of human things, have '

* knowledge of divine things, I am afraid we should ^^-^^

* seem to offer an affront to our senses ; when, let
' us say what we will, the evidence of the truth

* overpowers all the force of our talk*'.' He was
not so hardy as either in this or the other sacra-
ment, or in any other point to tack any thing to our
faith that is contrary to our sense. And he goes on
there to observe that infants, even then when they
begin to talk, have so little sense or understanding,
that if they should always keep to that pitch, they
would be idiots.

Most of the paedobaptists go no further than St.
Austin does ; they hold that God, by his Spirit,
does at the time of baptism, seal and apply to the
infant that is there dedicated to him, the promises
of the covenant of which he is capable, viz. adoption,
pardon of sin, translation from the state of nature
to that of grace, &c. On which account the infant
is said to be regenerated of [or by] the Spirit. Not
that God does by any miracle at that time illuminate
or convert the mind of the child. And for original
sin, or the corruption of nature, they hold that God
by his covenant does abolish the guilt of it, receives
the child to his mercy in Christ, and consigns to him
by promise such grace as shall afterward, by the use
of means, if he live, be sufficient to keep it under,
but not wholly to extirpate it in this life. It is left
as the subject of trial and of a continual Christian
warfare. And this is the opinion of St. Austin' and
of the ancients in general.

The Pelagians on the other side set their brains

^ Epist. 57. [187,] ^ Contra Juliauum, lib. vi. c. 5,6, 7.

282 St. Justin.

CHAP, to work to find some actual sin in an infant. It was

XV

" to their purpose : for since they took on them to

,^^^^- .deny original sin, and were pressed with that argu-
ment most of all, that the reason why infants are
baptized, is for forgiveness of sin, they, for an eva-
sion, would sometimes say, that their peevishness
and fretful crying as soon as they are born, is a sinS,
and they may be baptized for the forgiveness of that
or such like sins. St. Austin explodes that rather
more than the other ; as being a thing that nobody
would ever say but to serve an hypothesis : that ' if
' they would calmly think of it, they would change
' their opinion ; and if they will not,' says he, ' we
* shall not have so ill an opinion of human sense, as
' to fear that any body will be persuaded by them.'
He takes nothing to be plainer than this, that a child
before the use of reason can have neither actual sin
nor actual faith.

Sect. 6. Out of St. Austin's books De Genesi

ad litej-am.
De Genesi ad liter am, lib. 10.
St. Austin began and made a good progress in
these books on Genesis long before Pelagius began
to stir : but other work intervening, he did not finish
and publish them till some time after. I do not
observe any thing in them that seems to have any
respect to the dispute with him. In this tenth book
he handles the point of the origin of the human
soul ; whether every person's soul be by immediate
creation, or whether, as the body of a man is de-
rived from the body of his parents, so his soul also
be derived from their soul. He recites the argu-
ments on both sides.

S August, de Peccatorum Mentis, lib. i. [cap. 35. §. 65.]

St. Jmtin. 283

He observes'' that the derivation of original sin chap.
from our first j)arents upon all their ])osterity is '

made by many an argument for the ))ro[)agation of(AD^'83\
souls as well as bodies. They instanced in infants,
concerning whom they argued thus : If we say they
be derived from Adam, in respect of their bodies
only, and not in respect of their souls, we must
have a care that we do not either make God to be
the author of sin, (if he put the soul into a body in
which it must needs sin,) or else suffer it to be be-
lieved that there may be some soul, beside our Sa-
viour Christ's, which has no need of the Christian
grace to free it from sin. Which last is, say they,
' so contrary to the belief of the church, that pa-
' rents run with their infants and little ones, to pro-
' cure the grace of holy baptism. In whom if that
' bond of sin be loosed, which is of the body only,
' and not that which is of the soul too, it may well

* be asked what hurt it would do them, if at that

* age they should die without baptism ; for if this
' sacrament be for the good of their body, and not
' of their soul too, they might be baptized after they

* were dead. But when as we see that the church
' universally observes this, to run with them while
' they are alive, and to help them while they are
' alive, lest when they are dead there be nothing to
' be done that can do them any good ; we see not

* what else can be made of it, but that every infant
' is of Adam both as to his body and as to his soul.'

[§.19.]

And afterward '\ this argument is carried on thus :
' What has the soul of an infant deserved, that it

h Cap. 1 1. [Op. torn. iii. p. 262. ed. Benedict.] > Cap. 13.

^h4 St. Austin.

CHAP. ' should be mined in case it go out of the body
^^ • ' without the sacrament of Christian baptism, if it
2^8. ' has neither committed any sin of its own, nor be

(A. D ^88 )

' from that soul which first sinned in Adam.' [_§. 22.]
The answer to that is'^ attempted to this purpose.
God puts the soul into an ill disposed body, that
by ruling and keeping under the concupiscence
thereof by the help of God's grace, it may procure
the advantage of being, together with the body,
changed into a better state at the resurrection than
ever it could have had otherwise, viz. of living for
ever with Christ. And to comply with the steps
which the body makes by its gradual growth, the
soul is at first possessed with a torpor, or incapacity
of acting rationally ; which does not do it much
hurt, because it wears off by degrees as the body
grows to perfection and the soul recovers from it,
and arrives by God's help at a good degree of spi-
ritual life. ' Now before the time that it can live
' according to the spirit, it has need of the sacrament
' of the Mediator, &c. For the punishment of ori-
' ginal sin is taken away even in infancy by his
' sacrament ; and without his help even a grown man
' will not keep under the concu|)iscence of the flesh,

' &c. And the infant must be baptized while

' he is alive : otherwise it will prove a prejudice to
' his soul that it was linked with sinful flesh ; for
' the soul of an infant having participated with
' that, cannot be addicted to the things of the spirit :
' for that affection does weigh it down even after it
' is parted from the body, unless while it is in the
' body it be expiated by the one sacrifice of the true
' priest.' [^. 24, 25.]

■^ Cap. 14.

St. Justin. 285

Reply. ' But bow,' says one, 'if the parents take chap.
* no care to have this done, either through infidelity ^^'

* or nesflio-ence^ ?' , '^^^•

. (A.I). 388.)

Ansiver. 'Tliat may be said as well of grown
' persons ; for they may die suddenly, or they may

* fall sick in a place where nobody will help them to

* baptism.'

Reply. ' But they have sins of their own that

* need forgiveness ; and if they be not forgiven, a

* man cannot truly say they are punished unde-

* servedly for the things they have by their own

* will committed in their lifetime. But why shall

* that soul be deprived of eternal life (in case nobody

* helji the infant to baptism) to which the contagion
' it has received from sinful flesh cannnot be imputed,
' if it be not propagated from the first sinful soul?
' For it was placed in the body, not by any sin, but
' by nature that ordered it so, and by God that

* placed it there. And if we say that the want of
' baptism will do it no hurt, then what good does it

* do to one that is helped to it, if there be no hurt to

* one that is not helped ?' [^. 26.]

' Here,' says St. Austin, ' I confess that I never
' heard or read what they can answer for their side,
' who endeavour to maintain by scripture (as being
' for their opinion, or as not being against it) that
' new souls, and not such as are derived from the
' parents, are put into bodies.' [^. 27.]

Yet he attempts in the following chapters another
answer or two for those that held that opinion of
the new creation of souls, (for himself, it is plain
that he inclined most to the opinion of the propa-
gation of them ; only he was so modest as not to

1 Cap. 15.

286 .9;;. Austin.

CHAP, determine any thing ;) but they are long, and, as he
'. — shews, insufficient.

(A.D%8.) ' ^"® ^^> *^^* ^^^ ^^^^ "°^' ^" ^^^ providence,
' suffer any infant to die unbaptized, but such as he
' foresaw would have been wicked and impenitent, if
' they had lived. He shews how absurd it is to
' think that God condemns persons for sins which
' they never did, or thought of; only he foresees
' they would have done them if they had lived.'

II. At last he comes to this end of his discourse
on that subject. Having recited many arguments
and answers on each side, he says "', ' Having treated
' of this as largely as I could for the time, I should
' judge the force of the reasons and of the authori-
' ties to be equal, or almost equal on both sides ; were
' it not that the opinion of those that think the souls

* to be derived from the parents has the advantage
' on the account of the baptism of infants ; on which

* point what answer can be given them, I do not at

* present conceive. If God shall hereafter teach me
' any thing, and shall grant me an opportunity to

* write it, I shall not grudge it to those that are

* studious of such things. But I now declare be-

* forehand that the proof concerning infants must

* not be disregarded, so as that if the truth be on the
' other side, that should be passed over without an-

* swering. " Aut enim de hac re nihil quaerendum est,
' ut sufficiat fidei nostras scire nos quo pie vivendo
' venturi sumus, etsi nesciamus unde venerimus :
' Aut si non impudenter testuat anima rationalis

* etiam hoc nosse de seipsa ; absit pervicacia con-

* tendendi, assit diligentia requirendi, humilitas

* petendi, perseverantia pulsandi : Ut si nobis hoc

Jn Cap 23.

St. Justin. 287

expedire novit qui melius quam nos quid nobis chap,
* expediat utique uovit, det etiam hoc qui dat bona

XV.

* data filiis suis : Consuetudo tamen matris ecclesirc.^ P^^ggx

* in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam sperncnda est,

* neque ullo modo superflua deputanda, nee omnino

* credenda nisi apostolica esset " traditio." [^. 39-]

* For either nothing at all is to be inquired of this

* matter [the origin of the soul], and it must suffice
' our faith that we know whither we shall go, if we

* live well, without knowing whence we are sprung :
' or if it be no immodest ambition for a reasonable
' soul to desire to know this also concerning herself;
' putting away all obstinacy of contending, we must

* use diligence in inquiring, humility in asking, per-

* severance in knocking ; that if he, who knows

* better than we what is fit for us, do judge this ex-

* pedient, he would grant this also, as he grants
' ffood ofifts to his children. But the custom of our
' mother the church in baptizing infants must not

* be disregarded, nor be accounted needless, nor be-
' lieved to be other than a tradition [or order] of
' the apostles.'

The late bishop of Worcester " has restored the
true reading of this place out of three ancient ma-
nuscripts at Oxford : for in those last words, ' apo-
' stolica esse traditio,' the word esse was in the printed
editions esset, which addition of one letter had won-
derfully perverted the sense : for as it stood so, it
was to be translated ' is not to be disregarded, nor to

n [The Benedictine Editors read esset ,- but see below Dr.
Wall's remarks on the point.]

"' Bishop Stillingfleet ; in a Rational Account of the Grounds
of Protestant Religion, being a vindication of archbishop Laud's
Conference, pt. i. ch. iv. §. lo. fol. London, 1665.

5^88 St. Austin.

CHAP, 'be accountecl iieerlless, nor to be believed at all, if

XV

' ' it were not a tradition of the apostles.' Which
,^ ^^^gg s makes St. Austin go forward and backward, and
forward again in the same breath. But this amend-
ment makes it a coherent sentence, agreeable to the
scope of the place, and conformable to what St.
Austin says in several other places : for example, it
is the same phrase with that which I recited, sect.
4. ^. 3. of this cha[)ter, ' Non nisi auctoritate apo-

* stolica traditum rectissime creditur,' ' is most rea-

* sonably believed to be no other than a thing deli-

* vered [or ordered] by the authority of the apo-
' sties.' So that though it was not fitting to alter
the reading without the authority of some manu-
scripts, yet as soon as the alteration is proposed,
it presently appears to be the true reading.

The papists made great use of this place as it
stood so printed, to shew that some points of faith
(for they make this difference about the time of
baptism to concern a point of faith) can be proved
only by tradition, and not by scripture, and conse-
quently that the scripture is no complete rule of
faith. Archbishop Laud managing the defence of
the protestant doctrine to the contrary, says p, ' It is

* true Bellarmine presses a main place out of St.

* Austin, and he urges it hard ;' meaning this place.
But it might have been observed, even before the
true reading was discovered, that the words so put
together are nonsense. For if St. Austin had said,
the doctrine of infant baptism were not to be be-
lieved if it were not a tradition of the apostles,
it had been sense indeed, and something to their

P Conference with Fisher the Jesuit, §. 15. no. 5.

St. Austin. 289

purpose, though not true. But to say ' the custom of c h a p.

* the church in baptizing infants were not to be 1_

' believed unless it were a tradition of the apostles,' (a.d^Jss )
is not sense ; because the custom was seen and not
believed. Which is another proof that the print
was erroneous, and that the foresaid amendment is
the true reading.

The antipasdobaptists on the contrary served them-
selves of this place to prove, as by St. Austin's con-
fession, that the practice of infant baptism depended
only on tradition : from whence they concluded that
it was not to be received at all. But whosoever
reads these two passages of St. Austin that I have
been comparing, will see, that he does not by the
words traditiim and traditio, mean a doctrine that
had been taught by word of mouth only, and had no
foundation in the written M'ord. He plainly
expresses the contrary in the former place : for he
speaks to this purpose ; if any one, beside the
practice of the universal church, do require divine
authority in this matter : first, that practice having
not been ordered by any council, but having been
ever in use in the church, it is most reasonable to
believe that it must have been ordered by the
apostles themselves. And, secondly, it may be
proved from scripture also, by the analogy that
baptism bears to circumcision, &c.

And whereas the Latin phrase runs, Non nisi
audoritate apostolica traditum ; that does not signify
that it was established no other way than by a
verbal order ; but that it came not in by any lesser
or later authority than that of the apostles ; not by
any general council, &c.

It is true, his arguing in that place does suppose,

WALL, VOL. I. U

290 St. Austin.

c H A P. that though it conld not have been proved from
^^' scripture, yet if it could be proved to have been
2S8- ordered by the apostles by word in their life-time,
that ought to have satisned any one. And so no
doubt it ought, provided the proof were clear. But
this does not help the argument of the papists, who
would have the consent of the church at present to
be a sufficient proof of a doctrine. For how hard or
how easy soever it was at that time for the church
to know certainly the practice of the apostles, by a
tradition which needed to be traced back but for
three hundred years ; it is utterly impossible now to
trace back a tradition for 1600 years, unless it be
recorded in scripture, or in those ancient writings
nigh the time of the apostles : which, I am sure, the
pope's supremacy and worship of images, &c. are
not ; whatever this that I am writing of be.
Sect. 7. Out of St. Austin's letter to St. Hierome.
Augustini Epist. 28. [in edit. Benedict. 166.]

^. I. This letter was written after the Pelagian
opinions began to be talked of. He mentions them
there : ' For you are,' says he, ' none of those who
' now begin to prate new things, and say, there is no
' guilt derived from Adam, which is by baptism
' forgiven in an infant.' Therefore the quotations
out of it ought not to be placed in this chapter,
were it not that here they may be dispatched more
briefly; as being exactly to the same purpose as
those I last quoted.

St. Austin having, as we see, in his books on
Genesis so treated of the origin of the soul, as to
leave it in suspense how it is that we came by our
souls; and being still thoughtful of that matter,
and coming to know that St. Hierome had wrote

St. Justin. 291

something on this subject in his Epistle to Marcel- chap.

linus, and in a piece of his against Rufinus' Apology ; '. —

M'herein he had spoke in favour of that opinion fA.D.388.)
which makes new souls to be created every day by
God for every new infant, calling that ' the opinion
* of the church ;' and of the other opinion which
supposes the soul to be propagated from the parent,
had said, ' That it was the opinion of Tertullian and
' Apollinaris, and many of the western Christians,
' that as the body is generated of the body, so the
' soul is of the soul, and subsists in a way much
' like to that of brute creatures.' He had a mind
to see how St. Hierome could free that opinion
(which he seemed to embrace) of the new creation
of souls, from the objection that lay against it from
the propagation of original sin from fiither to son.
And therefore he writes to him, though he lived
above a thousand miles off, to desire him to explain
that difficultv.

And for fear of provoking him, (for he was a
hasty man, and St. Austin had felt the sharpness of
his style in an angry fit before,) he writes in a most
humble strain, and with great deference to his
learning and judgment, condescending in his letter
to such a degree, even of submission, as never was
usual, and may seem indecent in a bishop writing
to a presbyter, entreating him to instruct and satisfy
him in such things as he was ignorant of, that he
miglit be able to instruct others.

He first sets down some things which he knoM'
of himself, that St. Hierome might have the less
trouble in satisfying him of the other in which he
was to seek. The things that he took for certain
concerning the nature of man's soul were,

u 2

292 St. Austin.

CHAP. 1. That the soul is immortal, and does not die

XV

'. when it goes out of the body. This he speaks of

(A.R388.) ^s a thing universally known, and agreed.

2. That it is not a part of God. Some philoso-
phers had taught that. But it was rejected by all
Christians, except some Priscillianists, Manichees,
and I know not who.

3. That the soul is immaterial, he says, is a thing
not easily to be proved to some people ; but for his
part he is satisfied that it is. This, I suppose, he
says, that he may not seem to come too near Ter-
tullian, whom St. Hierome had mentioned, and who
had held that not the soul only, but God also has a
body.

4. That the soul is fallen into sin, not by any
fault of God, not by any necessity either from God,
or from its own primitive nature, but by its own
will ; and that it cannot recover itself but by the
grace of Jesus Christ. That there is in all mankind
no soul but wants his redemption.

5. ' That every soul that departs the body, at what
' age soever, without the grace of the Mediator, and
' the sacrament thereof, will be in punishment, and
' will at the last judgment receive its body to punish-
' ment : but if after the human generation, which
* is from Adam, it be regenerated in Christ, and
' belong to his communion ; it will have, after the
' death of the body, rest, and also will receive its
' body again to glory.

* These are,' says he, ' things that I steadfastly
' believe concerning the soul. Now I entreat you,
' hear the things that I want to know ; and do not
' despise me, lest He despise you, who for our sakes
' vouchsafed to be despised.'

St. Austin. 293

' Quajro, ubi contraxerit anima reatum, quo tra- chap.

XV

' hitur in condemnationem, etiam infantis morte __

' prticventi, si ei per sacramentum, quo etiam par-^^p^^ggx
' vuli baptizantur, Christi gratia non subvenerit.'
[Cap. iii. §.6.] 'I ask where the soul contracted
' that guilt, by which it is brought to condeni-
' nation, (even the soul of an infant surprised
' with death,) if the grace of Christ do not relieve
' it by the sacrament whereby infants are bap-
' tized.'

In the process of the letter he takes for granted
that St. Hierome's opinion is, that a soul is new
created for every infant ; and says, ' I am very will-
' ing to be of that opinion too, but I am not as yet

' of it Therefore I entreat you, teach me what I

' shall teach, and hold, and tell me ; if particular

* souls be made for every particular infant born,
' when it is that they do sin in the infant so as to

' need forgiveness, &c. Since we must neither

' say of God, that he either forces the souls to be-

* come sinful, or punishes them being innocent ; nor
' can deny that those souls even of infants which
' depart the body, without Christ's sacrament, do go
' to any other than condemnation: I beseech you
' how can that opinion be defended, which holds
' that the souls do not come all of them from that
' one soul of the first man ; but that as he had one
' made for him, so there is a particular one made
' for each infant.' [Cap. iv. §. 10.]

He then recites some other objections that some
people made against this opinion ; as, that God
rested the seventh day from making any new thing.
And, that God, when he saw an infant begotten in
whoredom, would never create a soul for that, &c.

294

St. Austin.

CHAP. And he says, that he himself could easily answer all
^ those objections ; and adds,

(A D ^'s8 ) ' ^'^^ ^'^^^" ^ ^°"^® *^ *^® P^'"^^^ suffered by in-
fants, I am, I assure you, brought to great straits,
and cannot find any thing at all to answer: I
mean not only those pains, which after this life
do attend that condemnation to which they must
go, if they die without the sacrament of the Christ-
ian grace, but those which in this life we see
with our eyes, and it grieves us to see ; which if I
should go to count, I should sooner want time
than instances. They languish with sickness, they
are tortured with pains, they are afflicted with
hunger and thirst, maimed in their limbs, de-
prived of their senses, tormented with unclean
spirits.' He afterwards asks, ' Whether we are
to think that as the herd of swine was given to
the devils to do their pleasure with them, so God
hath left infants to their will without a just
cause.' [Cap. vi. sect. 16.]
Afterward, in trying every side of this argument,
to see if there be any escaping the force of it, he
speaks of the necessity there was to believe that
infants cannot be saved without Christ, and that
they have not the benefits of Christ consigned to
them, but by baptism : and having mentioned that
saying of the apostle, As in Adam all die, — so in
Christ shall all be quickened, and some other texts,
he says :

' And therefore whosoever shall tell us that any
' one can be quickened in the resurrection of the
' dead except by Christ, is to be abhorred as the
' bane of our common faith. And whosoever shall
' say that infants shall be quickened in Christ,

St. Justin. 295

' which die without j)artaking of his sacrament, chap.

* does both contradict the apostle's preaching, and ^^'

' also fotam condemnat ecclesiam, condemns the , . l^^- ,

(A.D. 388.)

' whole church, in which men do hasten and run
' with their infants to be baptized, doubtless for
' that reason, because they believe that otherwise
' they cannot be quickened in Christ. And he that
' is not quickened in Christ must remain in that
' condemnation of which the apostle speaks. By one
' man's offence judgment came on all to condemna-

* tion. To which condemnation that infants are
' born liable, et omnis credit ecclesia, both all the
' church believes, and you, in your books against

* Jovinian, and in your Exposition on the Prophet
' Jonah, have most orthodoxly proved, as I said be-
' fore ; and I suppose in other places of your works,
' which I have not read, or do not at present re-
' member.'

' Now I would know what is the cause of this

* condemnation. For if new souls be made for
' every infant, I cannot see any sin of the souls at
' that age, and I do not believe that God will condemn

' any which he sees to have no sin.' [Cap. vii. '
§. 21.]

After another paragraph, in which he quotes a
passage out of the letter of St. Cyprian, which I
produced above ^, he says, ' There must be a reason
' given why souls, that are new created in all that
' are born, are condemned ; for that they are con-
' demned if they so die, both the holy scripture and
' the holy church is witness. Therefore this opin-
' ion of the creation of new souls, if it do not

q Ch.6. §. I.

296 St. Austin.

CHAP. ' oppose this most established faith, shall be mine;
' and if it do, do not let it be yours.' [§. 25.]

A D^^88 ) Then he shews the absurdity of those who an-
swer all this by saying, that the soul sinned in some
former state before it came into the body.

He concludes with protesting that he could wish
that that opinion of St. Hierome might be shewn to
be true : he liked it so well in other respects, were
it not for this objection. He mentions his prayers
to God that the doubt in which he was of this
matter might, if it were God's will, be cleared to
him by St. Hierome's means: but owns he must
have patience if God refuse him this request. And
of the several ways of clearing it, says,

' Antequam sciam, qusenam earum potius eligenda
' sit, hoc me non temere sentire profiteer, eam quse
' vera est non adversari robustissimse ac fundatis-
' simse fidei, qua Christi ecclesia nee parvulos ho-
' mines recentissime natos a damnatione credit, nisi
' per gratiam nominis Christi, quam in suis sacra-
' mentis commendavit, posse liberari.' [^. 28.]

' Before I know which of them is to be chosen,
' this I know ; that that of them which is the true,
' does not oppose that most firm and established
' faith, by which the church of Christ believes that
' even the new born little ones of mankind cannot
' be freed from condemnation, but by the grace of
' the name of Christ, which he has commended to us
' in his sacraments.'

St. Hierome in his answer^ to this letter did not
think fit to enter upon a discussion of this question
of the origin of the soul ; but answered in short,

I" Epist, 94.

St. Austin. 297

that it was 'better for each to abound in his own chap.

XV

' sense,' than by their disputes of this matter, to _

give advantage to their common enemies the Pela- .^ ^'^^gg v

gians, wlio said there was no original sin at all.

' We,' says he, ' do indeed argue this matter for in-

' struction's sake ; but our adversaries, and espe-

' cially the heretics, when they see us of different

' opinions, will slander us as if we did it out of

' envy. Let us rather do our endeavour that

' that most pernicious heresy may be extinguished,
* which always pretends repentance, that it may
' have opportunity of teaching in the church, lest if
' it should declare itself openly, it should be expelled
' from thence, and so die.'

And St. Austin, though he reckoned that in the
other way of explaining the origin of the soul,
which was embraced in the western church, viz.
that it, as well as the body, is begotten by the pa-
rents, it was much more easy to account for the
guilt of original sin, yet never was positive. Neither
did he publish this letter, as he says himself% so
long- as St. Hierome lived : ' because if he had written
' any answer, they might be better published toge-
' ther. But when he was dead, I published it,' says
he, ' that he that reads it may take advice, either
' not to make any inquiry at all how the soul is
' given to those that are born ; or else in so very
' obscure a matter to admit of such a solution of the
' question as is not contrary to those plain points
' which the catholic faith owns concerning infants,
' that they will doubtless be condemned if they be
' not regenerated in Christ.'

The opinion of St. Hierome, that the soul is by
8 Retractation, lib. ii. cap. 45. [torn. i. p, 57. edit. Bened.]

298 St. Austin.

CHAP, immediate creation, has since prevailed to be almost

'- — the universal opinion in the west, as well as the

288. ,

(A.D.388.) ®^^^-

2. But the mechanic philosophy that is lately-
come in vogue has set some men upon an attempt to
frame an hypothesis about the nature of the soul,
which I cannot say is of St. Austin's side, because it
carries the matter a great deal further than he
would have it. It makes the soul not to be any
thing really distinct from the body : but only such a
disposition of the parts of the body, as makes it fit
to live, move, remember, think, &c., all which they
think may be done by a system of matter, provided
there be skill enough in the contriver ; and they
refer us to the infinite art of God. So the old defi-
nition of Aristotle is come in request again, that it
is nothing but actus corporis organici.

One may explain their meaning best by a thing
that is more obviously apprehended. The disposi-
tion of the wheels in a clock, such as will make it
go, may, for explication sake, be called the soul of
the clock. And when the wheels are so rusty or
broken that it will no longer go, the soul of it is
gone ; and a skilful artificer that can mend it, and
make it go better than before, gives it a resur-
rection.

But there is in this sense no notion of a soul ex-
isting in a separate condition ; and accordingly these
men believe no such thing.

The antipaedobaptists have been much inclined to
an opinion of man's soul, that it either dies with
the body, and has no existence ; or falls asleep, as
some term it, and has no sense till the resurrection.
It is an opinion that took footing early among them

St. Austin. 299

in Germany. For Calvin, in his work called Ps^- chap.

chojiaiimjchia, written 1534, says*, ' Some people in

' Arabia were the first authors of this opinion ; who (a,J),3*88.)

' said the soul died with the body, and rose again at

' the day of judgment : and afterward John bishop

* of Rome held it ; whom the school [or academy]

' of Paris forced to recant. And after it had been

' laid to sleep for some ages, it was lately revived by

' some of the anabaptist sort.' And in his Instriictio

adversus Anabaptistas^\ written 1544, he says,

' They all commonly hold that souls separate from

' the body do sleep without any sense or under-

' standing till the day of judgment: or, that the

' soul of a man is his life, which ceases when he

' dies, till he be raised again.'

Some of the antipaedobaptists do still hold the
same opinion, but not all.

It is a wonder how they, of all people, came to
fall into this opinion. For since they do many of
them deny original sin ; the other opinion, which
the generality of Christians do now embrace, (viz.
that the soul of each infant is a si^iritual substance,
anew created by God, capable of existing without a
body, but put by him into the body,) is much fitter
for their purpose. For, as St. Austin here shews,
the opinion of original sin derived to us all in our
infancy from Adam our first parent, is much more
easy to conceive on a supposal that we have nothing
in us but what is propagated from the seed of
Adam, than it is upon a supposal that God creates
a soul out of nothing, which can subsist of itself,
and puts it into the body for a time. For how

t In prsefatione. [Calvini Opera, torn. viii. p. 335.]
" Alt. 7. [Opera, torn. viii. p. 355.]

CHAP. 300 St, Austin.

XV.

^88^^ comes that soul to have a guilt, derived to it from
(A.D.388.)^]^g sin of Adam, which has no succession at all
from Adam, but is now lately created by God ? It
is indeed put into a body derived from Adam. But
sin is of the soul rather than of the body. And be-
sides, it was not its own fault or choice that it was
put into a sinful body.

So that the paedobaptists and antipaedobaptists,
holding these opinions thus cross-wise, do make a
controversy which in this particular looks something
like a dispute^ mentioned by St. Chrysostom, that
was managed in his time between a Christian and a
Greek ; but so unskilfully, that he says, ' the Greek
' said what the Christian should have said ; and
' the Christian said what the Greek should have
' said.'

It is however a requisite property of sincerity, to
declare and profess in any point what we think
truest, though the other side do seem to suit better
with our other tenets. The contrary is to serve, not
the truth, but our hypothesis.

I am afraid we must all sit down in our disquisi-
tion concerning the origin of our souls, content with
the comfort, with which St. Austin here supports
himself; that we know, if we live well, whither we
shall go after this state, without knowing how we
came into it. For the explication that the schools
have since added to this matter, with their creando
iiifunditur et infwidendo creatur, has put some new
words into our mouths, but no new sense into our
heads.

I shall here so far trespass upon the proposed

"In I. ad Corinth. Horn. 3. [§. 4. p. 20, Op. torn, x.]

St. Austin. 301

method of quoting the passages, wherein the Pela- chap,
gians were concerned by themselves, as to rehearse ^
here what St. Austin said a great while after on this/^ \j%8)
subject. The Pelagians, in a letter Avhich eighteen
bishops of their party wrote and published by com-
mon consent, picked out several things that seemed
absurd in the doctrine of the catholics ; and among
the rest, this: that they proved the propagation of
sin by the propagation of souls, or held them as
points that would stand or fall together. St. Austin,
in his answer to that part of their letter says^:
' They add here, to cloud or confound the matter,

* an unnecessary question of the origin of souls : to

* the end that by disturbing things that are plain by
' the obscurity of other matters, they may seek an op-
' l)ortunity of lying hid. For they say that we main-
' tain the propagation of sin together with the pro-
' pagation of souls ; which where or when they
' have heard in the speeches, or read in the books, of
' those that defend the catholic faith, I know not.
' For though I do meet with some things written

* by catholics on this subject ; yet that was before
' the defence of the truth was undertaken against
' these men, and not in answer to any thing of
' theirs.

' But this I say, that original sin is so plain by

* the scriptures, and that it is forgiven to infants in
' the laver of regeneration, is so confirmed by the an-
' tiquity and authority of the catholic faith, so noto-
' rious by the practice of the church ; that whatso-

* ever is disputed, inquired, or affirmed of the origin

* of the soul, if it be contrary to this, cannot be
' true.'

y Lib. iii. contra duas Epist. Pelagian, cap. x. §. 26.

302 St. Austin.

CHA P. This was his constant tenet, that though he inclined

XV.

to one side of the question, concerning the origin of
(A.D.388.)^^^® soul, yet he would not have the doctrine of ori-
ginal sin to depend upon that.

III. There is one thing more observable from
these two last passages of St. Austin, viz. that there
was no such thing then used as private baptism of
children in houses, except in cases of the greatest
extremity ; and that even sick children were carried
to the church, if it were possible. For it is of such
that he says, ' men do hasten and run with them to
' be baptized while they are alive, lest when they
' are dead there be nothing to be done,' &c. It was
to the church that they ran, where there were large
fonts or baptisteries, in which infants or grown per-
sons might be put into the water. And it has since
been decreed in a general council in TruUo, Can. 59,
that baptisms shall not be in private chapels, but in
the public church.

This was so generally observed from the time that
churches were built, till of late days, that we read
of many kings' sons, and kings themselves, con-
verted to the Christian faith, that received their
baptism in the church. Whereas nowadays persons
of much lower rank take the state upon them to ex-
pect it to be brought home to their children, though
they are well. And there they put a great contempt
upon it, by making it a formal ceremony, sub-
servient to their bellycheer, and a drinking feast ;
little regard being given to the holy sacrament, or the
prayers used thereat.

In cases of urgent extremity the ancients did in-
deed baptize any where ; in the house, in the bed,
&c., rather than the party should die without it. I

St. Austin. 303

mean to give by and by^ several proofs of that. But chap.
they never did so but in such cases.

The church of England allows of baptism by a/^^^^g.)
minister in private houses in cases of necessity ; but
gives positive order, that it be not used except in
case of danger of the child's death ; and that such a
child, if it live, be brought to the church, and his
baptism declared there. And some bishops and cu-
rates of the said church do shew a zeal to have this
order, which has of late been much neglected, put
again in due execution. But others of them seem
more indifferent about it. And in most places it is
found a difficult thing to overcome that lazy and ir-
reverent custom, which took such deep footing among
the people in the late disorderly times.

There never was a more capricious change made
by any sort of people in any matter of religion than
the English presbyterians have made in this point.
No longer ago than queen Elizabeth's time, they
made it one of their objections against the English
Common Prayer Book, that it gave any allowance
for this private baptism at all. They pleaded, ' that
' it is not lawful either to preach the word, nor to
' minister the sacraments in private corners : that
' they ought not to be but where the church is ; and
' that the church ought not to assemble (if it be not
' letted by persecution) but in open places : that
' John baptized openly : that Austin, although he
' were of that mind, that children could not be saved
' without baptism, yet in the time of necessity (as it
' is called) he does not allow either of ba])tism in
' private houses, or by women ; but when there was

2 Part ii. ch. 9, §. 2.

304 St. Austin.

CHAP. ' danger, the women hasted to carry the children

' unto the church.'

(A.D.388.) These and more such like pleas, Cartwright used
in his disputation with archbishop Whitgift. ' And
' so you see,' says he, * those whom you charge
' slanderously with conventicles, are fain to glaze

' ' up the windows that you open to secret and pri-

' vate conventicles^.' And having mentioned ' the
' orders that God hath set, that it should be done
' in the congregation, and by the minister of the
' Gospel,' he adds this rigid and presbyterian ex-
pression ; ' And I will further say, That although
' the infants which die without baptism, should
' be assuredly damned, (which is most false,) yet
' ought not the orders which God hath set in his
' church to be broken after this sort. For as the
' salvation of men ought to be dear unto us ; so the
' glory of God, which consisteth in that his orders
' be kept, ought to be much more dear'*.'

Whitgift, on the other side, shews that the book
did not say any thing of baptism by women or by
laymen ; he pleads for no more than this, ' That
' upon extreme necessity of sickness, peril of death,
' and such like, the curate may be sent for, or some
' other minister that may sooner be come by,' to do
it in the house. But he is not allowed that.

And yet how strangely have these men since ran
into the other extreme ! When they came to have
the ordering of matters in the church, they (though
contrary to the rules of their own Directory ^)

^ See Whitgift' s Defence of the Answer to the Admonition,
[fol. Lond. 1574.] Tract, ii. ch. i. div. 8.
^ [Id, ibid. Tract, ix. ch. 3, 4, 5.]
c The ' Directory for the pubhque worship of God throughout

St. Austin. 305

gratified the humour of the people in this matter far c h a v.

XV

more than ever the churcli of England liad done. ^

If their religion had been parliamentary, as the , ^ ^^-^^
papists slander all our religion to be ; they could
not have taken a more violent swing from one side
to the other.

At present they and their people make this house-
baptism the most ordinary way of administering
that sacrament, be the child sick or well : and in
London and other places, where any of them are,
a clergyman of the church of England cannot, if he
would, bring his people to the observation of the
foresaid order of the church ; because if any hu-
moursome man or woman of his parish have a mind
to have their child, though in never so good health,
baptized in the house, and he deny them ; the next
thing is, they in a pet send for one of these men,
who are always ready to do it.

There are no orders of the church that do come
in process of time to be more grossly and univer-
sally abused, than those that begin first to be dis-
pensed with for the state and character of the per-
sons concerned in them. This was first granted as
a privilege of kings, or kings' sons, as appears by
the decretals '^ of Clement the fifth ; and by the

' the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland, together
' with an ordinance of parliament, for the taking away of the
' book of Common Prayer,' a work published by authority, in
the year 1644, gives the following orders respecting baptism :
' Nor is it to be administered in private places, or privately, but
' in the place of public worship, and in the face of the' con-
' gregation, where the people may most conveniently see and
' hear.' p. 39, edit. 4to. 1644.]

d [See Decretal. Clementin. lib. iii. tit. 15. de Baptismo. The
words of the text are, ' nisi regum vel principum liberi extite-

WALL, VOL. I. X

306 Councils of Carthage.

CHAP, council of Coloffiie, where it is ordained that none

XV

' but they should be baptized at home. Afterward
fA D ^88 ) ^^ came, I suppose, to be allowed to noblemen, and

•3i°so to other rich men. And as everybody affects
the name and state of gentility; they think them-
selves hardly dealt with, if they be accounted in
this matter inferior to such or such of their neigh-
bours.

This, and many other instances of like nature
that might be given, should teach the clergy to take
care how they make any beginning of breaking
that rule of scripture given by St. James ^ against
any respect of persons to be shewn in church mat-
ters ; for if you once begin, there is no stop to be
made afterward. Therefore the synod of Aix de-

1485 termined, ' That no curate or other priest should,
' under pain of excommunication, go to any house,
' not even of a nobleman, to administer baptism,
' except in case of necessity ; and that no case should
' be taken to be of necessity, but when the child's
* life is in danger ^.*

CHAP. XVI.

Quotations out of some Councils of Carthage., before the
Pelagian Controversy.

297. ^. 1. THE most ancient councils of Carthage, as

^ • •397-J ^gjj j^g q|- q\\^qy churches, are not recorded in the

' rint,' where follows a long and most puerile gloss upon the
word princeps, shewing that it might mean God, an angel, the
pope, a lord mayor, a bee, a bird, or the devil.']

^ Chap ii. I, 2, 3.

' Laurentii BocheUi Decreta Ecclesiae Gallicanse [fol. Paris,
1609 : again, ibid. 162 1. Lib. ii. tit. 3. de Baptismo, cap. 77.]

Councils of Carthage. 307

volumes of councils. The custom of reo-isterino: tlie c n a p.

. XVI.

acts of councils, and brinj^ino- them into volumes, ^

beo'an later. One of the first of all the councils of , . i?l' -^

o (A.U.397.)

Carthage, and (except one or two) of the most
ancient in all Christendom, since the times of the
apostles, of which we have any remains, was that of
sixty-six bishops under St. Cyprian in the year after
the apostles 150 ; which resolved the question whe-
ther infant-baptism might be administered on the
first or second day after the birth, or must be de-
ferred till the eiohth. But the account of that is
given before at large in chap. vi. Those that I
mean to recite here are of such as are set down in
the common volumes, and were about the latter end
of the fourth century.

And of these Dr. Cave ^ and others have observed,
that there is great obscurity and difficulty in as-
signing the very year on which they were held ;
and some confusion by reason of the carelessness or
mistakes of the collectors, who have sometimes in-
serted into one council some of the canons that
have been made in another. I shall not in these
nice matters pretend to be wiser than other men.
But the first canon that I shall quote, carries in
itself a plain and undoubted indication of the year
in which it was enacted.

It is the forty-eighth canon of that council of
Carthage wdiich is generally called the third. About
the time when this council was held, the schism of
the Donatists began to break apace; and those who
had been brought u}) in it came over in. great

S Historia Literaria, part ii. p. 132. [Tom. i. p. 369, edit.
Oxon, I 740.]

X 2

308 Councils of Carthage.

CHAP, numbers to the communion of the church. This

X VT

party of men, as I shewed before^, differed no-

(AD^:- i^^^^^^o from the catholics in any point either of doc-
trine or of ceremonies, or of sacraments ; but only
they accounted that party in Africa which was
called the catholic church, impure by reason of some
ill men that were among them, or by reason that
some of the ministers thereof derived their ordina-
tion from bishops that had, as was said, been guilty
of apostasy in the former times of persecution : and
all that came over to them from the catholics they
had been wont to bajitize anew, as coming out of
an impure church.

Now the bishops of this council debated among
themselves how far it was expedient to admit any
that returned from this schism to the church, into
holy orders. And as for those who having been
once baptized in the catholic church, did, after they
came to years, revolt to the Donatists, and were
baptized by them ; they agreed that such, upon
their return to the church, might be admitted to
lay-communion, but never to bear any office in the
church. But the case of those that had been born
among the Donatists, and had been in their infancy
baptized by them, and after they came to years of
discretion disliked the schism and came over to the
church, seemed very different.

Concerning these they could not come to any re-
solution at the jjresent : and therefore they agreed
that the advice of two of the most noted neiohbour-
ing churches should be asked in that matter ; and
they made a canon in these words :

h Ch.

IX.

Councils of Carthage, 309

Concilii Carthaxj. tertii Can. 48. [torn. ii. i). 1072, chap.
1 177, edit. Labbe, torn. iii. p. 892. edit. Mansi.]

' De Uonatistis, placuit ut consulamus fratres et (A.D.397.)

* consacerdotes nostros Siriciiim et Simpliciaimm, de
' solis iiifaiitibus qui baptizaiitur penes eosdem, ne
' [leg. an] quod suo non fecerunt judicio, cum ad

* ecclesiani Dei salubri proposito fuerint conversi,

* parentum illos error impediat, ne provehantur sacri
' altaris niinistri.'

' In reference to the Donatists, it is resolved that

* we do ask the advice of our bretheii and fellow

* bishops Siricius and Simplicianus, concerning those

* only who are in infancy baptized among them ;

* whether in that which they have not done by their
' own judgment, the error of their parents shall
' hinder them, that when they by a wholesome pur-
' pose shall be converted to the church of God, they

* may not be promoted to be ministers of the holy

* altar.'

The collection that is called Concilium Africanum,
has this same canon, capitulo 14. Siricius was at
this time bishop of Rome, and Simplicianus of
Milan. So that, as I said, this canon gives us from
itself a clear proof of the year when it was made, 297.
viz. anno Dom. 397- for Simplicianus was not made
bishop of JNIilan, till the beginning of this year,
when he came into the room of St. Ambrose, who
died then: and in the beginning of the next year
Siricius bishop of Rome died.

II. The answer of these two bishops seems to have
been in favour of those concerning whom' their
opinion w^as asked ; for four years after, the council 301.
of Carthage determines the point absolutely, that
such persons may, if there be occasirn, be promoted

310

Councils of Carthage.

CHAP.
XVI.

297,
(A.D.397.:

to the ministry. The canon, leaving out the digres-
sions, is this :
Coded' Canonum EcclesicB Afi-icancE, Can. 57. [see

Concil. edit. Binii, torn. i. p. 636. — edit. Reg.

Paris, torn. iv. p. 528. et itemm, p. 598. — torn. ii.

p. 1084. ed. Labb.]

Aurelius bishop of Carthage speaks in the council,
and says,

' Superiori concilio statntum esse mecum recog-
noscit unanimitas vestra, ut hi qui apud Donatistas
parvuli baptizati sunt, nondum scire valentes er-
roris eoruni interitum, et posteaquani ad setatem
rationis capacem pervenerunt, agnita veritate, &c.

recepti sunt ; sine dubio ad officium

clericatus tales esse applicandos, et maxima m
tanta rerum necessitate, nullus est qui nou con-
cedat.

' Quanquam nonnulli ejusdem sectse clerici, cum
plebibus atque honoribus suis ad nos transire desi-

derent, &c. Sed hoc majori fratrum supradic-

torum considerationi dimittendum censeo.^ Tan-

tum de his qui infantes baptizati sunt satagimus,
ut nostrse, si placet, in iisdem ordinandis consen-
tiant voluntati,' &c.

' You remember that in a former council it was
resolved, that they who were, in their infancy, be-
fore they were able to understand the mischief of
that error, baptized among the Donatists, and when
they came to age of understanding, acknowledging

the truth, &c. they were received by us.

All will grant that such may undoubtedly be pro-
moted to church offices, especially in times of so
great need.

' Some that have been teachers in that sect would

Councils of Carthage. 311

* come over with their cons^reo^ations, if they mi^ht chap.

o o 7 XVI.

* have the same jilaces among us, &c. But this I

' leave to a further consideration of our brethren, (A. b. 400.)
' he. Only that they will consent to our deter-

* mination, that such as were baptized by them in
' infancy, may be admitted to orders.'

This shews plainly that the Donatists as well as
Catholics baptized in infancy : only those that had
been baptized by the church party, whether in in-
fancy, or at full age, they would not receive into
their sect without giving them a new baptism ;
because they judged baptism given in an impure
church was void, though it were given in the right
form, and to a subject never so capable : for which
the church charged them with the crime of ana-
baptism, or rebaptization. And they were about
this time reduced, and came over to the church.

III. There are added in the old copies of the said
third council of Carthage, anno Dom. 397, some
canons, of which it is said, ' it is not certain whether
' they belong properly to the first, or second, or
' third council.' One of them' is for abating to
poor people the fees that were usually paid to the
minister at the baptizing of a child. But it being
accounted by the most learned critics to be of a later
date, and to have been crowded in here by Mercator,
I shall omit the recital of it.

IV. The next of the councils of Carthage, in
which we find any mention of infant-baptism, is
that which is vulgarly called the fifth, and Mas cele-
brated three years after, viz. anno Dom. 400.' In

> Labbei Concil. [see this canon, in torn. iii. p. 511. Collect.
Reg. Paris. — torn. iii. p. 892. edit. Mansi.] Item, Carranza summa
Concil. Concil. Carthag. Tertium ; Item Gratian. q. \.

312 Councils of Carthage.

CHAP, which there is a canon that makes provision for
'_ the case of such as had been carried away captive in

, » §f°' N their infancy, into the country of the barbarians,

(A.D.400.) *' •'

and when they were ransomed, there was none of
their friends left alive that could certainly tell
whether they had been baptized before their carry-
ing away or not. Such persons, or their surviving
friends for them, were in great perplexity and doubt
whether it were fit that they should be baptized
after their ransom. For if they were baptized be-
fore their captivity, then this would be to baptize
them twice ; which was looked on by all Christians,
except the Marcionites, to be a great profanation
of the sacrament. And if they were not baptized
before ; then not to do it now, were to let them die
without any baptism at all. The words of the canon
are these :

Concilii Carthaqiniemis Qumti, Canon 6.^

' Placuit de infantibus, quoties non inveniuntur
' certissimi testes, qui eos baptizatos esse sine dubi-
' tatione testentur, neque ipsi sunt per aetatem idonei
' de traditis sibi sacramentis respondere ; absque
' ullo scrupulo hos esse baptizandos : ne ista trepi-
' datio eos faciat sacramentorum purgatione privari.
' Hinc enim legati Maurorum fratres nostri consu-
' luerunt,' &c.

' It is resolved concerning infants of whose having
' been baptized there are no positive witnesses that
' can give certain evidence, and they themselves are
' not caj^able to give any account of that sacrament
' having been administered to them, by reason of
' their age ; that such be without any scruple bap-

•" [See Binii edit. torn. i. p. 637. Collect, reg. Paris, torn. iv.
p. 536, et 609. — edit. Mansi. torn. iii. pp. 926 et 969.]

Councils of Carthage. 313

' tized : lest that scruple do cause them to go with- chap.
' out the cleansiiiff of the sacrament. For our bre- _1

' thren that come from the Mauritaiiians have asked , . ^°°- ,

(A.D.400.)

' our advice on this question, who do ransom many
* such from the barbarians,' &c.

I set this council at anno 400, that is, the year
after the apostles 300. And so do all late writers
that speak of it sot it then, or within a year or two
of that time. Which I note, because Binius and
some other old copies give it a date that may seem
at first sight very absurd and inconsistent, worded
thus, ' Circa tempera Anastasii Papae post consula-
' tum C^sarii et Attici, sexto kalendas Junii liabi-
' tum, sera. 438.' ' Held about the time of pope
' Anastasius, after the consulship of Ca^sarius and
' Atticus, six days before the kalends of June, in the
' year 438.' But the consulship of Ca^sarius and
Atticus was in the year 397- And Anastasius
came into the see anno 398, and lived but four
years. And Aurelius, whose name is among the bi-
shops that subscribed this council, could not live to
438. But all this is reconciled by taking that sera
438 not for the year of Christ, but for the year of
that a3ra which the Spaniards call (pra Angusti^
reckoned from the time of the senate's confirming
the acts of the triumvirate, which was (as Petavius,
Rat. Temp. pt. ii. cap. 3. shews) just thirty-eight
years before the Christian a^ra. So that this, in-
stead of disturbing, does confirm the date of anno
Dom. 400.

So that Baronius, Spondanus, Dr. Cave, &c., place
it anno 398. Justellus and cardinal Perron, anno
401. Schelstratius, this year 400. All in the time
of Anastasius. And another thing which confirms

314 Councils of Carthage.

CHAP, its being on one of these years, is the matter of the
—1 — '— last canon of it : and yet the different understanding-
(A.D°4oo.) ^^ some words of that canon causes the difference in
placing it of a year or two. The canon is this ; ' Re-
* solved, that a petition be made to the most renown-
' ed emperors, that all relics of idolatry, not only in
' images, but in all places, whether groves or trees,
' be altogether destroyed.'

Now all agree, that on the year 399 was the
most general overthrow of the heathen temples, in
all the empire, but especially at Carthage, and in all
Africa. St. Austin gives^ the account of it, whicti is
very remarkable.

The heathens had had a tradition very rife among
them, that the Christian religion should last but
365 years, to be reckoned from the beginning of it.
They depended upon an oracle for this. The oracle
had said, that Peter the apostle being a skilful ma-
gician, had, by killing and cutting in pieces a child
of a year old, and burying the limbs of it with cer-
tain magical rites, raised so strong a charm for the
success of the Christian religion, that it must now
last for so many years as the child was days old :
but when that time was expired they should see it
]5resently come to an end. And one may perceive by
St. Austin's words, that the heathens at that time
expected the extirpation of Christianity as confi-
dently as the papists do now the extirpation of the
northern heresy.

St. Austin allows them the latest time they could
suppose for the beginning of Christian religion, viz.
the Pentecost that was next after Christ's death. He

^ De Civitate Dei, lib. xviii. cap. 53, 54.

Coimcils of Carthage. 315

shews that SQ5 years, reckoned from that Pentecost, c ii a p
do end in the consulship of Honorius and Euty- ^^^'

chianus, which is in our way of reckonino^, the year,, 3oo-

' J n J (A.D.400.

398. ' Now,' says he, ' the next year to that being
' the consulship of Honorius and Manlius Theodorus,
' when, according to that oracle of devils, or figment
' of men, there should have been no such thing as
' Christian religion in the vi^orld, what was done in
' other countries I had not occasion to inquire ; but
' this I know, that in Carthage, the most noted and
' eminent city of all Africa, Gaudentius and Jovius,
' the emperor Honorius' lieutenants, did, on the 19th
' of March, pull down the temples of the false gods,
' and break in pieces their idols. From which time
' to this present, being almost thirty years, who
' does not see how much the worship of Christ's
' name has increased ? Especially since many of
' those are become Christians, who were before kept
' back from the faith, by that prophecy, which, now
' the time is past, they perceive to have been a
' foolish and idle one.'

Baronius thinks that this order of Honorius, for
razing the heathen temples, was given by him in
compliance with that petition made by this council
of Carthage ; and if so, the razing being anno 399,
the council must have been the year before. But
others think that the style of the petition supposes
the temples and such public places of idolatry at
Carthage to be destroyed already ; and that the bi-
shops desire the emperor to complete that good work,
by extirpating all the remains of idolatry practised
with images placed in groves, trees, &c.

This latter seems the more probable by the words
of the petition. So the council may be supposed to

31 6 Council of Hippo.

CHAP, be the year after the emperor's first order, viz.

XVI

^ mmo Christi 400 ; but however it appears to have

, . A°°" N been about this time.

(A.D.400.)

V. There had been, as it seems in some council at
Hippo before that time, a resolution to the same

290- purpose, viz. that those who had no certain proof of
their baptism in infancy, should be, for certainty,
baptized now. For there is in Labbe's Collection",
and in the Magdeburgenses" at the year 397, set
down a copy of a synodical letter dated CcBsario
et Attico Coss. wherein they complain, 'that those
' things which had been long ago enacted in the
" council of Hippo had not been so duly put in ex-
' ecution as they ought.' They enjoin better execu-
tion of them for the future, and to that purpose
give a breviate of them, being forty-one in number:
the fortieth of which is given thus, ' De his qui in
' nuUo testimonio se baptizatos noverunt, ut bapti-
' zentur.' ' For those that are not sure by any evi-
' dence that they have been baptized, that they be
' now baptized.'

340. VI. It was not long after these times that Leo
the first, bishop of Rome, had occasion to consider
of the same case in a synod at Rome ; and he has left
an epistle on that subject : which, though it be some-
thing later than the period of time which I have pro-
posed to search, Leo being made bishop of that see
in the year of Christ 440, yet it being so particu-
larly relating to this matter, I shall here transcribe
so much of it as is to this purpose. It is directed to

*! [Collect. Reg. Paris, torn. iii. p. 513. Labb. ii. p. 1179.
Mansi, iii. p. 893.]

o Cent. iv. cap. 9. de Synodis, p. 866.

Leo the First. 817

Neon, bishop of Ravenna, and is the 37th i^ amono^ chap.

" XVI.

his epistles.

' We have been given to understand by the rela- (^ /^^
' tion of some brethren, that several captives, who
' were carried into captivity at that age which has
' no firm knowledge of any thing, do, now they are
' restored to their liberty and their home, desire the
' remedy of baptism. But by reason of tlie igno-
' ranee of their infancy, they cannot rememljer whe-
' ther or no they have received the sacrament of
* that mystery before. And that by reason of this
' uncertain state of remembrance, their souls are
' brought into danger; for that under pretence of
' caution the grace is denied them, Qu(b ideo non
' impenditur quia putatur impema, being therefore
' not given them, because it is supposed that they
' have had it alreadv.

' When therefore the scrupulousness of some bre-
' thren did, not without cause, make a doubt of
' administering to such persons the sacrament of our
' Lord's mystery ; we did, as I said, at a synod ical
' meeting take this sort of case into our considera-
' tion, and set ourselves to discuss the point with a
' careful diligence, according to the opinion of every
' one : that by the judgment of many considering
' the matter together, M'e might more certainly fix
' on the truth. And that which by God's guidance
' came into my mind, the numerous consent of the
' brethren confirmed.

' We ought then, above all things, to beware that
' while we shew a sort of caution, we do not fall

n [Viz. in Labbe and the older collections: the 135th in
Qnesnel's edition of Leo's works, 1675 ; or the i66th in Mansi's
edition of the Councils, torn. vi. p. 387.]

.^40.

440.

318 Leo the First.

CHAP. « into a failure of reffenerating: their souls. For who
XVI. . .

* would be so addicted to his suspicions, as to define

V • -440.) i ^ thing to be true, which without any full proof,
' he by an uncertain opinion surmises to be so ?

* therefore when as neither he that desires the rege-
' neration does remember that he was ever baptized,
' nor any onfe else can testify of his consecration [or,
' sanctifi cation], there is no reason to think there is
' any sin in doing this, when neither he that is con-
' secrated, nor he that consecrates him, acts any
' thing against his knowledge [or, conscience].

' I know indeed that it is an inexcusable fault,

* when, according to the fashion of the heretics,
' which is condemned by the holy fathers, any one
' is compelled to reiterate his baptism, which is once
' for all given to those that are to be regenerated :
' the apostolic doctrine being against such a prac-
' tice, and teaching us that there is but one Godhead
' in the Trinity, one confession in the faith, and one
' sacrament of baptism. But there is nothing like
' that to be feared in this case ; for that cannot be
' brought within compass of the crime of reitera-

* tion, of which we are not sure that it has been
' done once.

' And therefore when any such case comes before
' you, first examine the matter narrowly ; and con-
' tinue your search for a great while (unless the
' party seems to be nigh his end), whether there be
' nobody at all to be found that can help out the
' ignorance of such a person that knows not his own
' condition. And if it appear, that he that wants
' the sacrament is kept off only by a vain surmise,

* let him come without fear to the obtaining of the

* grace, of which he does not find any evidence that

Leo the First. 319

• he has had it before. And let us not be afraid to c ii a p.

XVI

' open the gate of salvation to him who cannot be

' proved as yet to have entered into it. ,^ ^°- ^ .

' But if it can be proved that any such person

* has been baptized, though by the heretics ; let
' the sacrament of regeneration be by no means
' reiterated on him : but let that only which was
' wanting there, be now added ; that he have the
' imposition of hands by the bishop, for the ob-
' taining the grace of the Holy Spirit.

' These things, dear brother, I was willing should

* come to the knowledge of you all ; lest, while you
' allow too much to your scruples, the mercy of God
' be denied to those that desire to be saved.

* Dated the ninth before the kalends of November,
' in the consulship of JMarcianP the emperor.'

The same question being put to him by Rusticus,
bishop of Narbon, he resolves it to the same effect *J;
and so does Gregory the Great, in the next age"";
and so does the council in Trullo, Can. 84. anno^^°

691.

The heretics that Leo talks of, as reiterating
baptism, were either the Marcionites, who gave to
some people a second or third baptism, though they
owned the first to have been true baptism ; or else
the Donatists, who thinking no baptism to be true,
that was not given by such holy and pure men as
themselves, gave a new baptism to all that came
from any other party to theirs.

P [Or Majorianus : see the notes of Quesnel, and of Mansi on
the place.]

q Ep. 92. cap. 16. [Ep. 2. edit. Quesnel : 167. edit. Concil.
Mansi.]

"■ Lib. xii. Ep. 31.

320 Councils of CartJiage.

CHAP. The church of Enoland is very careful, as not to

XVI .

;_ let any one g-o without baptism, so also not to bap-

rAD° ^tize again those that have been baptized already.
And therefore when any person is brought to bap-
tism, concerning whom they cannot be sure whether
he is already baptized or not, they order him to be
baptized with these conditional words preceding the
form of baptism, ' If thou art not already baptized,
' N. I baptize thee in the name,' &c.
1059. It ^^^^ been usual to do so for many hundred
years before*. But Luther found great fault with
this custom ; and Vossius dislikes it, but gives no
other reason against it than that there is no example
of such conditional baptism in scripture, nor in the
records of the first ages. Which in a case that so
seldom happens, is no wonder ; for in the church of
England, where it is appointed in a certain case,
yet that case being rare, very few have ever had
occasion to practise it. But it is certain that all
that do baptize in such a case, do understand that
condition, though they do not express it ; for they
do it on a supposal that the party is not baptized
already.

The next council of Carthage that I know of,
that had any occasion to mention infant-baptism,
sii.M^as that anno 411, or the beginning of 412, where
Cselestius was challenged for denying original sin, and
thought to escape the brand of heresy by declaring,
that whatever he thought of sin in infants, yet he
owned their baptism. This council is not in the
volumes, but St. Austin has preserved some of the

^ Vide Vossium de Baptismo, Disp. 15. Art. ii. et lib. vi.
capit. Caroli Magni.

Decretal Epistles. 321

acts of it, by quoting them in his writings*; and I ^'^^^j^-
had occasion to recite out of him what is material

to this purpose, in a chajiter*^ before. (a.i)!440.)

And the next to that was that anno 416. A syno-3'''
dical letter whereof I shall recite hereafter''.

CHAP. XVII.

Out of the Decretal Epistles of Siricius and Innocentius,

Bishops of Mome.

§. 1. THERE never was a greater cheat and 284-^
abuse put upon the church and the learned world,
than that piece of forgery of the most ancient De-
cretal Epistles. The papists themselves are now
ashamed to hear them mentioned, except some few,
whose want of all shame makes amends for their
want of learning.

The history of them in short is this : the ancient
bishops of Rome were frequently consulted by the
country bishops, and the bishops of the neighbour-
ing churches, in cases of conscience, faith, or disci-
pline. They wrote letters in answer to such ques-
tions as were jiut to them. Toward the latter end
of the fourth century there began a custom of regis-
tering and preserving these letters in the archives of
that church. This was in the following times found
to be of great use ; for these letters served the suc-
ceeding bishops for precedents, when their judgment
was desired in the like cases.

t [See all which is remaining, in IMansi's edition of the coun-
cils, torn. iv. p. 290.]

« Ch. V. §. 8. " Ch. xix. §. 28.

WALL, VOL. I. Y

322 Decretal Epistles.

^^J\7' After many ages it came into the mind of some
of that church, to think how great pity it was

28*1

(A.D. 384.) that that custom of registering those letters had not
begun sooner, for there were none extant in the re-
gisters that were earlier than about the time I men-
tioned.

The way that they took to make up that defi-
ciency was such, as that the mention thereof must
make a Christian blush, whenever the credit of his
religion is attacked by a heathen. Some among
them, that had no regard to true or false, put in
practice that foul artifice that is used by faithless
and fabulous historians ; who, when they would set
forth the antiquities of their nation, and find no re-
cords nor race of kings so ancient as they could
wish, do make out of their own brain histories of
times, names of kings, accounts of wars and succes-
sions, as far back as they please to feign. Of which
we see instances in the fabulous histories of the Ro-
mans, Britons, Scots, Egyptians, Chinese, &c. This
is scandalous and hateful enough in secular histories ;
but in the concerns of religion, is the highest pitch
of impiety and mischief.

Finding that their bishops of the first ages had
none of these decretal epistles upon record, as many
of the following ones had, they made some for them,
and put them out under their names. And as there
was a very corrupt state of that church at the time
when these acts were forged, the authors of them
failed not to make the ancient popes say all that
they had a mind they should have said. So that
you shall there frequently find some bishop of Rome
of the primitive times, who was in reality an hum-
ble, poor, and persecuted bishop, strutting and va-

Decretal Epistles. 323

pouring about the supremacy of his see, and enact- chap.
ing many things that were really never heard in his

*""®- (A.D.3'84.)

When any thing is discovered and made plain*

we are apt to wonder that it was not discovered
sooner. It was a time of great ignorance and bar-
barity, Avhen these forged epistles were put upon
the world. And in the beginning of the reforma-
tion, the protestants were much puzzled with them.
They saw plain enough that the corrupt doctrines
and practices then received had no foundation in
the scrijiture, nor in the writings of the ancient
Christians for several ages ; but they knew not
what to say to these epistles, many of which were
dated in and nigh the times of the apostles, and yet
had in them rank popery. Those first bishops of
all, Clement, Anaclet, Evarest, Alexander, Xystus,
and the holy martyr Telesphorus, &c., did there all
speak the language of Gregory the Vllth.

It is true that here and there one of the best
learned and most free men among the papists them-
selves had before that time declared their objections
against some of these epistles. For example, car-
dinal Cusanus, after he had shewn by plain proofs
that the charter of Constantino's donation was a
forgery, adds, ' As perhajis are some other of the 1334-
' large writings attributed to St. Clement and Ana-
' clet. For the letters themselves, examined by the
' circumstances of the times of those men, do be-
' wray themselves^.' But these exceptions of one
or two men availed nothing against the general
vote ; they were universally received, the canonists

y Nicolaus de Cusa Cardinalis, de Concordantia Catholica,
lib. iii. c. 2. [p. 782. edit. Basil. 1565.]

Y 2

324 Decretal Epistles.

CHAP, made constant use of them, and the canon law of

L. that time was in great measure made out of them.

IA.^%A \ Wickliffe ventured to say that they were apocryphal,
[or spurious,] and that the clergy were fools to
study them. Which is reckoned for the thirty-
eighth of the forty-five heresies, for which he was
condemned by the council of Constance.

'417- Luther exclaimed against them after his way, and
caused them and the whole body of the decretals to
be publicly burnt ; but he had not learning enough
to trace and descry the forgery of them. But bi-

1456. shop Jewel, being to answer his adversary Harding,
who had pressed him with authorities out of them,
made use of his skill in ecclesiastical history to dis-
close plain proofs of forgery in several of them.
And the critics since, both those of the Romish and
reformed church, have, by a particular examination,
put it out of doubt that all of them, beyond the
times I spoke of, are spurious.

They are never mentioned by any writer of any
antiquity ; they are written, not in the style that
was in use in the time of the Roman empire, but in
that of the barbarous age. The dates of almost all
of them are inconsistent with history. The igno-
rant forger has made most of them speak of men
and things, customs and forms, that were not in
being at that time. Beside, that each epistle has
in itself some particular proof of its being forged.

II. Now that which the critics and learned
men are agreed on is, that the epistles of pope
Siricius, who was made bishop anno 384, are the
first of all the decretal epistles that are genuine,
i. e. that were really written by the men whose
names they bear. It is true that there are epistles

Decretal Epistles. 325

extant, one of Clement, out of which I ffave a quo- chap.

XVII

tation, ch. i. §. 1. and some of Cornelius, and one or !_

two more, which are undoubted, and are mentioned.. ^\ .

' (A.D.384.)

and vakied by all the ancients : but the forger of
the decretals took no notice of them ; either because
they were nothing for his turn, or perhaps he was
so ignorant as not to know of them. Those which
he has made, are of more use to the design of the
court of Rome, but otherwise of no worth.

But indeed the church of Rome affords in all but
a very few writers of any antiquity. And if she
be the mother, she was in those times outdone by
many of her daughters for number of learned men.
Since Clement and Hennas, who lived in the apo-
stles' time, and St. Hierome, who had his education
in that church, there has been none that I have
had occasion to mention in this tract till this Siri-
cius.

III. He has several epistles extant, that are genu-
ine, and are mentioned by writers so ancient and so
learned as not to be imposed on by the foreraen-
tioned forgery. And the marks of popish worship
that are so frequent in the elder forged epistles, are
all vanished again in those of Siricius and Innocent,
and of several popes that succeeded them. That
which I have occasion to quote is the first of them,
which is written to Himerius, bishop of Arragon in
Spain.

He gives him several directions about ecclesias-
tical matters, and finds fault with many things that
by his information he understood to be managed
disorderly in that church. It is divided into fifteen
chaj)ters, or paragraphs ; whereof the second is
this :

326 Siricius.

CHAP. Siricii Episcopi Decretalis Epistola prima. Ca-

1_ pitulo secimdo ^.

('AD^84l ' Sequitur de diversis baptizandorum temporibus,
' prout unicuique libitum fuerit, improbabilis et
' emendanda confusio ; quae a nostris consacerdoti-
' bus (quod commoti dicimus) non ratione auctorita-
' tis alicujus, sed sola temeritate prsesumitur : ut
' passim ac libere natalitiis Cbristi, sen apparitionis,
' nee non et apostolorum seu martyrum festivita-
' tibus, innumerse (ut asseris) plebes baptismi myste-
' rium consequantur. Cum hoc sibi privilegium et
' apud nos et apud omnes ecclesias dominicum spe-
' cialiter cum Pentecoste sua pascha defendat : qui-
' bus solis per annum diebus ad fidem confluentibus
' generalia baptismatis tradi convenit sacramenta.
' His duntaxat electis, qui ante quadraginta vel eo
' amplius dies nomen dederint, et exorcismis quoti-
' dianisque orationibus atque jejuniis fuerint expiati,
' quatenus apostolica ilia impleatur praeceptio, ut
' ea?purgato fermento veferi nova mcipiat esse con-
' spersio.

' Sicut sacram ergo Pasclialem reverentiam in
* nullo dicimus esse minuendam, ita infantibus qui
' necdum loqui poterunt per aetatem, vel his quibus
' in qualibet necessitate opus fuerit sacri unda bap-
' tismatis, omni volumus celeritate succurri : ne ad
' nostrarum perniciem tendat animarum si negate
' desiderantibus fonte salutari, exiens unusquisque
' de seculo et regnum perdat et vitam.

' Quicunque etiam discrimen naufragii, hostilitatis
' incursum, obsidionis ambiguum, vel cujuslibet cor-

^ [Apud Labbei Concilia, torn. ii. p. 1017. — edit. Mansi, torn,
iii. p. 656.]

Siricms. 327

poralis regritudinis desperationem incidcrint, et c ii a p.
sibi imico credulitatis auxilio poposcerhit subve- ^^"'
niri, eodem quo poscunt momento temporis expe- ?^4-
tita? regenerationis praemia conseqiiantur.'

' There is also a blameable disorder which ought
to be amended, in baptizing at various times
as every one fancies ; which our fellow bishops
among you do venture to practise, as I am some-
what vexed to hear, not by the rule of any
authority, but by mere rashness. So that great
numbers of people do, as you say, receive their
baptism, some at Christmas, some at the Epiphany^
and some on the holy days of the apostles and
martyrs. Whereas not only in our church, but in
all churches, our Lord's passover, [viz. Easter,]
together with its Pentecost, does peculiarly chal-
lenge this privilege to itself. On which days of
the year alone, it is fitting that the common sacra-
ments of bajitism should be given to those that
come to the faith. And that those only should be
admitted who had given in their names forty days
or more before, and have been cleansed by exor-
cisms, [or renunciations of the devil and wicked-
ness,] and daily prayers and fastings, to the end
that that precej)t of the apostle may be fulfilled, of
purcjing out the old leaven, that there may he a
new lump.

* As therefore I afRrm that the respect due to the
feast of Easter ought by no means to be dimin-
ished ; so my meaning is, that as for infants, who
by reason of their age, are not yet able to speak,
and others that are in any case of necessity, they
ought to be relieved with all speed possible ; lest
it turn to the perdition of our own souls, if we

328 Siricius.

CHAP. ' deny the water of salvation to any one that stands

XVII. '' ,

' in need, and they departing this life, do lose their

(A.D!t84.) ' kingflom and their life.

* Whoever also shall be in danger of shipwreck,
' or of the assaults of enemies, or of a siege, or shall
' be likely to die of any bodily sickness, and shall
' desire to be \ assisted with that which is the only
' armour of our faith, [or religion,] that they have
* the gift of regeneration which they desire, the same
' moment that they desire it.'

I have set down this the more at large, because
we see by it, that at the same time when they in-
sist upon those preparations, and personal qualifica-
tions of the adult, they do except the case of infants.
It is common for some antipaedobaptist writers to
quote such passages as the forepart of this, taken by
itself, would be, as testimonies that such authors
allowed no baptism of infants, because they require
those preparatory exercises of all that are to be bap-
tized. This I have seen done a hundred times,
when the same author that is quoted does some-
times in the same treatise, (as here,) and sometimes
in other parts of his works, shew that infants are
to be baptized, as being in a case that is exempt
from the general rule that requires faith, prayer,
repentance, and other personal preparation. It is
no wonder that they do thus with other books,
when they can hardly forbear doing it with the
Catechism of the church of England, which requires
repentance and faith of persons to be baptized ; but
shews by the next words, that the case of infants is
an exempt case. This practice though not always
so palpable, yet is in effect always as unfair, as that
with which Wills charges Danvers, viz. for quoting

Siricius. 329

the canon of a certain council, as enactinor, that chap.

. XVII.

none should receive baptism, without rehearsing

* the Creed, or Lord's Prayer,' and stopping there ; , A.D.384.
when the next words are ' Except those, who by

' reason of age, cannot yet speaks'

That which Siricius here says, that it was the
custom of the church of Rome, and of all other
churches, to give baptism only at Easter and Whit-
suntide, excepting infants, sick people, and other such
extraordinary cases, may be proved from a great
many other authors. I shall mention no more but
Tertullian, for his antiquity. He says, 'The most

* solemn time for baptism is Easter, at which time

* the passion of our Lord, into which we are bap-

' tized, was performed : After that, the Pente-

' cost affords a large time for ordering the lavers.

' But yet every day is the Lord's. Any hour,

' any time whatever is capable to be made use of
' for baptism. Though there be some difference as
' to the solemnity, there is none as to the grace

* given''.'

IV. I said that this epistle appears to be genuine,
and not forged, among the others of the foregoing
popes, by the mention that is made of it, by authors
so ancient and so learned, as not to be imposed on
by that forgery. This very passage of it is quoted
by Hincmarus Rhemensis*^ anno 835, and by the

"" Appeal to Baptists against H. D. ch. i. [at p. 161 of ' Vin-
' dicise Vindiciarum, or a vindication of a late treatise en-
' titled, " Infant Baptism asserted," in answer to Mr. Danyers'
' Reply : also an appeal to the Baptists (so called) against Mr.
' Danvers,' &c. by Obed. Wills, M. A. i 2mo. London, 1675.]

^ De baptismo, cap. 19.

c Opusculo 55. Capitulorum, cap. 31. [Opuscula et Epistolse

330 Siricius.

CHAP, council of Tribiir ''j anno 895. And, I suppose, other

XVIT. .

parts of it may have been quoted by earlier writers,

(A D ts ) which I have not had occasion to observe. The pre-
735. tended Isidore, out of whose shop the forged collec-
tion of epistles is supposed first to have come, lived
about these times, and seems to have been contem-
porary with Hincmarus, but something the elder :
but as all forged works do require some time after
their first hatching, to be known, or at least to gain
any authority : there is no likelihood that so learned
men (as Hincmarus especially was) should quote
any thing upon a dependance on so fresh an impos-
ture. Especially when neither he nor the council
do quote it as from Isidore, but as an epistle gene-
rally known in the world. And besides, the learned
critics, Quesnellus, Du Pin, &c., that do question
one of Siricius' epistles, as being to be suspected of
forgery for reasons they give, do make no question
of this.
795. By the said quotations of Hincmarus and Con-
cilium Triburiense, it also appears, that the custom
of limiting the baptism of adult persons to Easter,
and the times aforesaid, continued in the church till
their time : and it did continue something longer.
But of later times we hear no more of it. I suppose
because the baptisms of adult persons grew to be
very few; the heathen nations being now become
Christian ; and hardly any but infants being bap-
tized, which were not contained in that rule. For
it was but about 300 vears after this time 890, that

Hincmari Remensis Archiepiscopi, 40. Lutetise, 161 5, reprinted
in the Bibliotheca Patrum, 1618. torn. ix. and in the Nova Bib-
liotheca, sive Supplementum, fol. 1639. torn, ii.]
d Can. 12.

Siricius. 331

Petrus Cluniaceiisis writing ao-ainst some that at chap.

*' ° . XVII.

tliat time, anno Dom. 1130, set up a doctrine that

baptism given to an infiint is no baptism, opposed (a.d^384.)
to them this among other things ; that ' if it were
* so, then, uhereas all Europe has had never a per-
' son now for 300, or hardly any for 500 years, 1030.
' baptized otherwise than in infancy, it has had
' never a Christian in it.' The place I quote more
lar^felv hereafter^.

V. This order of the ancient church, that no adult
person, except in case of necessity, should be bap-
tized but at these set and appointed times, was made
for a very good and weighty reason, viz. because
there was not so much care likely to be taken of his
instruction and examination if he were baptized at
some other time of the year alone by himself, as
there was if he were baptized at Easter, when the
other catechumeni were baptized. Because for some
weeks before Easter, the ministers of the church
made it their business to catechise, examine, and
prejmre the candidates for baptism. They were to
give in their names forty days before ; and they
were to be able to repeat the Creed, &c., and to give
account of their faith twenty days before, (some-
thing more or less, according to the canons of the
several churches,) and the people came together to
hear these examinations and professions ; and care
was taken that they did spend the time in prayers,
fastings, and such other holy exercises as would fit
them for so great a change of their state. And,
because there were at Easter a great number of
them, and the spiritual good of the church did in

c Part ii. ch. vii. §. 5.

332 Siricim.

CHAP, great measure depend upon their doing well ; it was

counted an occasion weighty enough to require that

(A.D ^8 ) *^® whole church should at that time pray and fast
with them and for them, as I quoted out of Justin
Martyr. ' They are directed to pray, and ask of God
* with fasting, the forgiveness of their former sins,
' and we also pray and fast together with them^'

And this, I believe, was none of the least occasions
of keeping the fast of Lent before Easter.

And we see also to this day some remains of the
catechising used then ; for though the church of
England do now appoint catechising all the year
long, yet most of the curates therein omit it all the
year, except the time of Lent ; but at that time
that office is by old custom kept on foot. It was to
prepare the candidates for baptism at Easter, that
the Lent catechising was used.

Also in the Liturgy of the same church, and in
that of the church of Rome, the collect for the third
Sunday after Easter remains in that form which
seems to have been composed at first with a parti-
cular respect to the new baptized persons. ' Al-
' mighty God, who shewest to them that be in error
' the light of thy truth, to the intent that they may
' return into the way of righteousness ; grant unto
' all them that are admitted into the fellowship of
' Christ's religion, that they may eschew those
' things that are contrary to their profession, and
' follow all such things as are agreeable to the same,
' through our Lord Jesus Christ.' This is a good
prayer at all times, and for all persons ; but I be-
lieve the first composing it for that Sunday was in

f Chap. ii. §. 2.

Innocentius the First. 333

regard to the neophytes. The collects for Easter, chap.
and the two Sundays following, referring to the re-

surrection, the next was for them. (A.IX384.)

VI, The ninth chapter or canon of the same
epistle of Siricius, is, to blame the people of Spain
for choosing into the ministry some such as had
been but lately converted to the Christian religion ;
and he gives them this direction :

' Quicunque igitur se ecclesise vovit [1. vovet] ob-

* sequiis, a sua infantia ante pubertatis annos bap-
' tizari et lectorum debet ministerio sociari.'

' He that devotes himself to the service of the

* church, ought to be baptized [i. e. ought to be
' one that was baptized] in his infancy, before ripe-

* ness of age, and employed in the office of the

* readers.'

This rule was a little after repeated to the people
of Spain, by Innocentius, in words just to the same
]iurpose, only a little plainer, which I shall recite
presently.

VII. After Siricius, Anastasius sat but about
three or four years, and was succeeded by Inno-
centius the first. He must have been a man of note
in the church before the year 400, for it was in the
year 402 that he was made bishop of Rome. He
also has some decretal epistles (besides those to the
council of Carthage, which I shall cite hereafter)
that mention infant-baptism, and are by all acknow-
ledged to be genuine.

His first is written to Decentius, bishop of Eugu-
bium, giving him his resolution in several things,
wherein he had demanded it ; whereof the third is,
that though the presbyters might baptize infants,
yet only bishops might give them the chrism, or

334

Innocentius the First.

(A.b.400.)

CHAP, anointing on the forehead, which was in those times
^^^^' given after baptism: it is as follows :

EpistolcB Decretalis Innocentii ad Decentium,

Canon 3.s

' De consignandis vero infantibus, manifestum est
non ab alio quam ab episcojDo fieri licere. Nam
presbyteri, licet sint sacerdotes, pontificatus tamen
apicem non habent. Ha^c autem pontificibus solis
deberi, ut vel consignent, vel Paracletum Spiritum
tradant, non solum consuetudo ecclesiastica de-
monstrat, verum et ilia lectio Actuum Apostolorum
quae asserit Petrum et Joannem esse directos, qui
jam baptizatis traderent Spiritum Sanctum. Nam
presbyteris, seu extra episcopum, seu pra^sente
episcopo cum baptizant, chrismate bajitizatos un-
gere licet, sed quod ab episcopo fuerit consecratum ;
non tamen frontem ex eodem oleo signare, quod
solis debetur episcopis,' &c.

' As for the anointing of infants on the forehead
with the chrism, it is plain that that ought to be
done by none but the bishop. For presbyters,
though they be as priests, yet they have not the
preeminence of the chief priests. And that it is
lawful for the chief priests only, either to anoint
on the forehead, or give the Holy Spirit, appears
not only by the custom of the church, but also
by that place in the Acts of the Apostles, which
tells us^S that Peter and John were sent to give
the Holy Spirit to such as were already baptized.
For w^hen presbyters do give baptism, either in the
])resence of the bishop, or out of his presence, they

& [Apud Concilia, edit. Labb. torn. ii. p. 1246. — edit. Mansi,
torn. iii. p. 1029.]
h Acts viii.14.

Linocentius the First. 335

' may anoint tlio baptized person with chrism, pro- chap.

' vided it be such as has been consecrated by the ~ '—

' bishop ; but they must not anoint the forehead (A.D.400 )
' with the same ; for that is peculiar to the bi-
' shops,' &c.

Though this place do not mention the baptism of
these infants, yet it plainly supposes it. The chrism
was never given to any till they were baptized.

The rule that he sets here, that none but the
bishop must give the chrism on the forehead, was
the ordinary and general rule of that church ; but
yet dispensed with in the case of want of bishops,
or their default of doing their office, as I shew here-
after'.

VIII. The other passage of Innocentius, which is
to the same effect with that which I recited from
Siricius, is in his twenty-fourth epistle, which was
written to a svnod then met at Toledo : whereof
the fifth chapter is a rule given for the qualifica-
tions of such as were to be admitted to the ministry-
He had determined in the foregoing canons, that no
lawyer, soldier, or officer of the temporal court,
should be received to holy orders ; and then gives
the qualifications following.
Epistolcs Innocentii prwii ad Synodum Toletanam,

Can. quint us^.

' Quales vero eligendi sunt in ordine clericorum,
' evidens forma declarat, i. e. qui ab ineunte setate
' baptizati fuerint, et lectorum officio sociati, vel si
' majores sunt, cum fuerint Dei gratiam consecuti,
' statim se ecclcsiasticis ordinibus mancipaverint.'-

> Part ii. ch. ix. §. 8.

^ [Apud Concilia, edit. Labb. torn. ii. p. 1278. — edit. Mansi, iii.
p. 1065.]

336 Innocentius the First.

CHAP. ' And as to the qualifications of such as are to be

< chosen into the ministry, there is a certain rule,

(A D ° ) ' ^^^* ^^^^ *^®^ ^® such, as have been baptized from

* their infancy, and have been educated in the office

* of readers : or, if they were older before they ob-
' tained the grace of God, then that they be such as
' did presently upon it addict themselves to offices
' of the church.'

It has been often enough said already, that there
were in those times, besides those that were bap-
tized in infancy, several that turned from hea-
thenism to Christianity at their ripe age. Such the
canon would not have to be put into holy orders ;
but only such as were baptized in infancy : unless
those so converted have, from their first coming to
the faith, addicted themselves to the service of the
church, in the lower offices : to prevent the incon-
venience mentioned by St. Paul, in preferring no-
vices*, or neophytes, i. e. persons but lately baptized
or made Christians.

CHAP. XVIII.

Out of Paulinus bishop of Nola, and another Paulinus,
deacon of the church of Milan.

293. V I- PAULINUS, bishop of Nola, had been a

fA.D.30^ 1 .

■ heathen man : during which time he had addict-
ed his mind to poetry and oratory. After he be-
came a Christian, he made use of those faculties on
religious subjects™. And Sulpitius Severus, who

' I Tim. iii. 6.

^ [The works of Paulinus were published separately, in 1622,
1662, and 1688, &c. and are reprinted in the ' Bibliotheca Pa-
' trum Maxima,' edit. Lugdun. 1677. torn, vi.]

Paulinus. 337

had built a church, desired him to compose some c h a p.
proper godly senteuces to be written in several J L

places of the church, and particularly at the font, , , w'-^* ,
i _ ' i J ^ '(A.D.393.)

or place of baptizing. Paulinus sends him a letter
in answer, containing several such sentences : it is,
Epist. 32. Qucs est duodedma ej? Us qucB sunt ad

Sever U7n.
And in one of them, composed in verse for the
font, there is this distich,

' Inde parens sacro ducit de fonte sacerdos
' Infantes niveos corpore, corde, liabitu ".

' The priest fi'om the holy font does infants bring,
' In body, in soul, in garments white and clean.''

As he refers to the cleanness of the body, by
washing in the font, and of the soul, on account of
the forgiveness of sins granted in that holy sacra-
ment ; so what he speaks of the whiteness of their
garments, is according to the custom then used all
over the church, of clothing the new baptized per-
sons, whether infants or grown people, in albes, or
white garments.

II. If there were not testimonies enough of the
custom of baptizing infants in this age, this alone
would not be sufficient to prove it. For there being
nothing but the word infants singly mentioned,
without any other circumstances setting forth their
age ; and there being a custom about these times
of calling, by a metaphorical speech, all the new
baptized persons, infants, whether they were young
or old ; it is a question whether Paulinus did by
that word intend to restrain the sense to infants

" [Bibl. Patr. torn. vi. p. 192.]
WALL, VOL. 1. z

338 Paulinus.

CHAP, in affe, or whether he meant only to describe the

XVIII

J L procession of the priest leading from the font a

fA D ^ ) number of new baptized persons in general, in their
albes.

That there was such a custom of calling new bap-
tized persons by the name of infants, about this
time, appears by several instances. Gaudentius, who
was bishop of Brescia about this time, has an oration,
or sermon, in which he thus bespeaks the novices, or
new baptized persons : ' You are put in mind by the
' name of infants, by which you are called, that you
' are by your baptism regenerated and born anew ;
' and therefore if any of you that are married ",'
&;c. Also St. Austin p has a sermon or discourse
entitled, Ad infantes, ' to the infants,' i. e. to a con-
gregation of persons then newly baptized. And I
confess it seems to me that that passage of St. Am-
brose ^, De mysterio Paschce, c. 5. which Mr. Bing-
ham, vol. iv. p. 24 *■, takes to be spoken of proper
infants, is rather to be referred hither. He is there
speaking of the holy Christian rites used at the
feast of Easter, particularly the baptismal solemni-

° Orat. 8. ad Neophytos, [de Lectione Evangelii ; apud Bibl.
Patr. torn. v. p. 954. edit. Lugd.]

P [Not only one, but five sermons of this father, preached on
Easter-day, occur in his works, addressed either ' ad infantes,' or
' ad populum et ad infantes, seu eo die baptizatos :' viz. sermons
124 to 128 ; vol. V. p. 968, &c. edit. Benedict.]

'1 [This treatise, under the title of ' Sermo xxxv. de Mysterio
• Paschee II.' is placed among the pieces falsely attributed to St.
Ambrose, in the Appendix to the Benedictine edition of his
works, p. 438.]

!■ [Bingham, Origines Ecclesiasticae, or Antiquities of the
Christian Church : 8vo. 1708. &c. fol. 1726. 8vo. 1821-7. The
passage referred to occurs in book xi. ch. 4. sect. 14.]

Paulinm. 339

ties ; and says, * Hinc vitalis lavacri sacric ecclesice chap.

' editi puerperio infantes, parvulorum simplicitate J L

' renati, balatu innocentis perstrepnnt conscientiae. , ^ ^93-
' Hinc casti ])atres, pndicae etiani niatres, novellam
' per fidem stirpem prosequuntnr innumeram.' ' Here
* the infants brought forth of the womb of the vital
' laver of the holy church, being regenerated in the
' simplicity of babes, do sing from the bottom of a
' sinless conscience. Here chaste fathers and mo-
' thers do follow great numbers of their children
' new born by faith.' He means, I think, the god-
fathers following the new baptized persons, whom
they had brought to baptism ; and who walked
from the font in procession in their albes.

This does not at all invalidate the testimonies
which have been given for infant-baptism. For in
all that I have quoted, except this and one or two
more, there is, beside the word infant, some cir-
cumstance that does shew the speech to be about
infants in age. It rather confirms the thing, and
is itself a testimony : for one reason of the name
was, that the number of Christians being now much
increased, and the baptism of Christian infants being
more frequent than of elder persons new converted,
these latter had the name of infants in allusion to
the former.

III. Paulinus de ohitu Celsi pueri. On the
death of Celsus a child.

This Celsus was a child very dear to his parents,
that died at seven years old, or when he was newly
entered into his eighth, as appears by some passages
of the discourse.

His parents were so overmuch concerned at his
death, that Paulinus found it necessary to write to

z 2

J

340 Paulinus.

CHAP, them a consolatory advice. It is written in verse,

XVIII

and after the first distich follow these two :

29.=!.
(A.D.393.) 4 Quem Dominus tanto cumulavit munere Christus,

' Ut rudis ille annis, et novus iret aquis :
' Atque bis infantem, spatio aevi, et fonte lavacri,
' Congeminata Deo gratia perveheret ^.''

' So great a favour Christ did to him show,

' That he escaping all the snares below,

' Should hence so young, and fresh from baptism gc

' Two graces do his infant soul commend,

' So little sullied, and so lately cleatt'd."*

This quotation is not fully to the purpose either
of the psedobaptists or antipaedobaptists : for the
one will inquire why this child's baptism was de-
layed so long as till he was almost seven years old ;
and the other, why he was baptized so soon. And
there is not any such account of the condition of his
parents, as to satisfy either of them. They might
perhaps be, as Paulinus himself was, lately convert-
ed ; or it might be deferred by negligence and pro-
crastination. St. Austin somewhere, but I have for-
got where, speaks of fourteen years as the soonest
that people were ordinarily baptized on their own
profession: yet at another place, where his adver-
sary would prove that unbaptized children might
go to heaven, by the instance of Dinocrates, a boy
born of heathen parents, and dying at seven years
old, whose soul was said in a certain story-book, to
have been seen in heaven in a vision, by his sister
in her prayers ; he says, ' It is not impossible but
' that at that age he might have been baptized at
' his own choice,' which place I have occasion to
recite hereafter *.

« [Apud Bibl. Patr. vi. p. 267.] * Ch. xx. §. 3.

Paulinus and St. Hierome. 341

It is plain enough by what has been said, that chap.
the ordinary time of ])aptizinf>- infants "w^as within a ^^''*'

little time after their birth. And the anti])ae(loba])- 293.

(A.D.393.)
tists, I suppose, do not think a child of seven years

old, any fitter than a mere infant.

The custom that I mentioned, of calling new bap-
tized persons by the name of infants, is alluded to
here : for Paulinus calls this child, dis infantem,
in two respects an infant, viz. spatio tsvi et fonte
lavacri, an infant in age, and an infant, as newly
baptized.

Paulinus has some letters and tracts attributed to 395-
him, that are spurious : but this is recited among
his works, by Gennadius, in these words : ' Paulinus
' bishop of Nola in Campania wrote many things
in way of short poems ; and a consolatory tract to
' Celsus, in form of an epitaph, on the death of his
' Christian and baptized infant, full of Christian
' hope^' &c.

Paulmi Epistola ad Hieronymum de diiabus
QucBstionibus, apud Hieronym. Ep. 153^.

IV. Paulinus in this letter desired St. Hierome's
opinion of the meaning of two sayings which the
Scripture uses.

One was, what is said, Exod. ix. 12. He asks
' Why [or in what sense] Pharaoh's heart was
' hardened by God V And also, how that which the
apostle says, is to be understood. It is not of him
that willeth, nor of him that rimneth, but of God that
sheweth mercy^ ; which seems to take away freewill.

» Catalog. Virorum illustrium. [cap. 48. p. 165, edit. Colon.
1580.]

" [In edit. Vallarsii, ep. 85. Op. torn. i. p. 529]
y Rom. ix. 16.

\

342 Paulinus and St. Hierome.

CHAP. The other was concerning that text, 1 Cor. vii.

^^"^- 14. Else were your children unclean, hut now are

293- they holy. On which Paulinus asks this question,

^^^' ' Quomodo sancti sint qui de fidelibus, id est, de

' baptizatis nascuntur ; cum sine dono gratise postea

' acceptae et custoditse salvi esse non possint ?'

' How those children that are born of fidel, that
' is, of baptized parents, are holy; wheneas, without
' the gift of the grace [of baptism], afterward [viz.
' after their birth] received and preserved, they can-
' not be saved V

He seems at this place to have taken the obvious
sense of St. Paul's words to be, that the infants of
Christian parents are holy from their birth ; and
desires to know what holiness this is that St. Paul
ascribes to them from their birth ; since though the
parents be baptized Christians, yet unless the chil-
dren also be themselves baptized, they cannot be
saved.

This is the most material of the evidences we
have from him on this subject : for if it be con-
cluded, as he does here conclude, that infants can-
not be saved without baptism ; it will undoubtedly
follow in any one's sense, that they ought to be bap-
tized without delay.

V. This letter of Paulinus is not extant, that I
know of, and perhaps was never published. But
St. Hierome, in his answer to it, which is his Epist.
153. [85.] ad Pauliniim, recites out of it what I
have here set down.

He makes his answer very short, and that for two
reasons which he gives : One was, that by every ship
that sailed for the west, he had so many letters of
this nature to send, that he could not bestow pains

Paulinus and St. Hierome. 343

on any one, but was forced to write whatever came chap.
extempore into his mind. The other was, tliat to J L

so ffreat a critic as Panliniis, he did not dare write / , t^*^-^' ^
a long letter, in which the more faults would be
found.

It sheM's us by the way, how diligent people were
at that time in seeking- to have the true sense of
scripture ; and of how great repute St. Hierome's
learning was; when Paulinus, and so many others,
sent letters a thousand miles to him to desire his
opinion.

St. Hierome refers him, for an answer to his first
question, to Origen's book Trep\ apyfiv, which he had
then newly translated into Latin, and whereof he
might have a copy in Pammachius' hands, to whom
he had dedicated and sent it. And for the second,
his answer is this :

' Of your second question Tertullian has dis-
' coursed in his books de Monogamia, [leg. de Ani-
' ma,~\ holding that the children of Christians are
' styled holy, as being candidates [or, expectants] of
' the faith, and not polluted with any idolatrous
' filth or trumpery.

' Also you may mind that we read of the vessels
' of the tabernacle being called holy, and many other
* utensils of the ceremonies ; whereas nothing can
' be properly holy, but what has sense, and fears
' God. It is therefore a phrase of scripture some-
' times to call those holy that are clean and purified,
' or expiated from uncleanness, as Bathsheba is said
' to be sanctified [or, made holy] from her unclean
' ness.

' I entreat you not to impute to me either trifling,

344 Paulinus and St. Hierome.

CHAP, 'or wrong interpretation : for God is witness to my

L ' conscience, that the hurry I have mentioned to

fAD^^ v'you, has hindered me from so much as setting
' on, or attempting the interpretation of the place.
' And you know nothing is done to any purpose in
' a hurry.' \

St. Hierome had some reason to make an apology
for so slight and perfunctory an explication. Yet
as it is, it shews that he, as well as Paulinus, thought
that such children could not be called holy in any
such sense as should entitle them to salvation, unless
they were baptized. If he had thought they could,
the ready way to take off Paulinus' doubt, had been
to answer so : the doubt being this ; how they are
holy from their birth, since without baptism they
cannot be saved ? But he answers,

1. By referring him to Tertullian's account of
this place in his book de Anwia, which I recited
before % where he paraphrases the text in this sense,
' They are holy, that is, they are designed for holi-
' ness ; for as for any other meaning, our Lord has
' determined, that without baptism none shall enter
' into the kingdom of God^, which is as much as to
' say, none shall be holy.'

2. By giving some instances where the word hoi?/
is applied to some things that are not capable of sal-
vation, or of moral good or evil.

Calvin, and many that have followed him, have
boldly ventured on that explication which Paulinus
durst not embrace, nor St. Hierome advise, and
which Tertullian disapproves. They have deter-
mined, that a believer's child is holy, i. e. is born to

z Ch. iv. §.6. a John iii. 5.

Paulinus and St. Hierome. 345

salvation, (or as a certain late commentator ^ sup- chap.

XVIII.

posed to be Mr. Locke, lias absurdly paraphrased that

place, ' born a member of the Christian church,') r^.D-'lov)
whether it be baptized or not : that baptism is to
be given it indeed, but only as a seal of that holiness,
which it has by covenant before it be baptized.
And to this jiurpose they expound that text, John
iii. 5, of any thing rather than of baptism. And
many of them have determined that the authority
of baptizing infants is grounded only on that birth-
privilege which they have before ; and that no other
infants than such as are so holy by their birth, may,
or ought to be baptized. Which doctrine involves
the baptizer in endless scruples, which infants he
may baptize, and which not : as bishop Stillingfleet
has largely shewn in the book to which I referred
before^.

He that has read the foregoing chapters, is by
this time satisfied, that all the ancients understood
our Saviour's Avords, John iii. 5, of baptism : or will
be, by what I shall produce*^. And that they never
refused to baptize a child on account of the parents'
wickedness, or even heathenism or infidelity, if the
child were offered to baptism by such as were the
then owners of the child **.

Much less do the explications given by the an-
cients, of the holiness here spoken of, fit or square
to that jejune one given by some antipaedobaptists,

t» [In ' A paraphrase and notes on the Epistles of St. Paul to
' the Galatians, Corinthians, Romans, and Ephesians, with an
' essay for the understanding of St. Paul's Epistles,' &c. — Lou-
don, 1705, 1707, 1709, I742,&c.]

c Ch. xi. §. 1 1. <1 See part ii. ch. vi. §. i .

c See part ii. ch. vi §. 10.

346 PauUnus.

CHAP, that St. Paul should mean no more but that the
children of believers, though one of the parents do

(A.D.'sQi.) continue in unbelief, are legitimate, and not bas-
tards ; which looks as made merely to serve a
turn.

On the contrary, the general vein of ancient

interpretation is, to understand by this holiness,

baptismal holiness, either as given, or designed to

be given : as has appeared partly by this quotation,

and by some others given before ^, and will more

fully hereafter, where I mean to confer together all

the ancient expositions of this text that I know of &.

Paulinus in vitaAmbrosii. [^-48. edit. Benedict.

Append, tom. ii. p. xiii.]

297. VI. The other Paulinus was a deacon of the

(A.D. 397.) gi-^m-pj^ Qf Milan, that ministered to St. Ambrose in
his lifetime'^, and after he was dead, wrote the
history of his life, which is commonly printed with
his works. Erasmus takes this piece for a forgery*
of later years, because many of the passages he re-
lates, look so like the fabulous stories of the monks :
and I am almost of his opinion, partly for his rea-
son, and partly for another which I mention here-
after^. It must either be so, or else tliis Paulinus
must have been a very vain and credulous man.
Neither would I set down the passage here follow-
ing, which seems as fabulous and idle as anv of
them, were it not that most of the critics and learned

•" Ch.iv. §. 12. Ch. xi. §. II. Ch. xii. §. 2.
g Ch. xix. §.19.

^ [The Benedictine editors observe, that in many manuscripts.
he is styled S^i. Ambrosii notanus.~\
' Censura operibus Ambrosii prsefixa.
^ Part ii. ch. iii. §. 9.

Pauliims. 347

men have an opinion of the authenticahiess of the chap.
tract, and do commonly quote it. J '_

He relates a great many different occasions, oi^ (^^ d '^ 7 'j
which St. Ambrose's ghost or shape appeared to
several persons, after he was dead : and, among the
rest, how he having departed this life on Easter
eve, his body was carried and laid in the great 297.
church.

' Ibique eadem fuit nocte qua vigilavimus in pas-
' cha. Quem plurimi infantes baptizati, quum a
' fonte venirent, viderunt : ita ut aliqui sedentem in
' cathedra tribunali dicerent ; alii vero ambulantem
' suis parentibus digito ostenderent. Sed illi viden-
' tes videre non poterant, quia mundatos oculos non
' habebant.'

* And there it was that night which we spend in
' watching at Easter [this was the night before
' Easter-day, on which in the primitive times the

• whole body of the people did always sit up all
' night in the church at their prayers]. And a
' great many of the infants that M^ere then baj)tized
' saw him as they came back from the font : some

* of them saying, there he sits in the bishop's chair :
' others of them shewed him to their parents, point-
' ing with their hands, that he was going there up
' the steps [walking] : but the parents looking could
' not see him, because they had not their eyes
' cleansed [or enlightened].'

There you have the story, such as it is ; grounded
probably on the superstitious conceits of women and
boys : but yet it shews that there were children
among those that were baptized on that day. He
calls them infants, but some of them could not be
absolute infants, for he mentions their speaking:

848 Pelagian Controversy/.

CHAP, they seem to have been little boys carried in their
xvrii
L parents' arms, or led in their hands.

(A D*'^' ) These infants, according to this story, being by
their baptism just then received, clear from all sin,
had their eyes enlightened to see this miracle : but
their parents, having been since their baptism stained
with many sins, were not capable of it. They called
baptism, both in the scripture-times, as appears from
Heb. vi. 4, and also in these times, (pcoTiafMos, the
illumination, or enlightening of a person.

CHAP. XIX.

Out of St. Hierome and St. Austin, after the rise of the
Pelagian Controversy ; as also out of Pelagius, Cwlestius,
Innocent the First, Zosimu^, Julianus, Theoclorus Mopsu-
estensis, S^c. And out of the Councils of Carthage, Diospolis,
Milevis, ^c.

310. ^. 1. A NEW heresy, happening in the church at

"^'°'Hhis time, gave more occasion to speak of infant-
baptism than ever had been before. Not that any
of the parties disapproved it ; but one of them held
that there is no original sin in infants, and that
brought in much discourse about their baptism.

Pelagius, a monk, living at Rome, was the author
of this heresy ; at least, the first promoter of it in
the west. And one Cselestius another monk, was
his chief abetter ; and afterward, Julianus a bishop,
and Anianus a deacon. It was not started till the
year of Christ 410. But most of the managers on
each side were men of note before the year 400.

The men that I named were the only writers of

Pelagian Controversy. 349

the Pelasrian side : but a considerable number of the chap.

. • • XIX

people was brought over to incline to their opinions. ^
They argued, that the doctrine of original sin and J^'°-^^
natural corruption, by which persons are supposed
to be born under a necessity of sinning, did cast a
reflection on the honour and justice of God, who
gives us our being : and this argument was plausible
among the vulgar.

Consequently to this, they said that baptism of
infants was not for any sin they had, but to gain
them admittance into the kingdom of heaven. For
they said that children, though they were not baj)-
tized, should have an eternal and happy life ; not in
the kingdom of heaven indeed, because our Saviour,
John iii. 5, had determined the contrary : but some-
where, they knew not where.

This, with the rest of their opinions, is briefly set
forth by St. Austin, lib. de Hceresihus, cap. 88,
[Op. tom. viii. p. 25.]

II. For better apprehending the sense of the
quotations which we shall produce, a short history
of the steps and progress of this sect would be use-
ful : which is also the more necessary, because a late
author has wrote the history of it very partially for
those heretics. Pretending to give^ an abstract of
what bishop Ussher'" had collected of this history,
he has picked out of it for the most part only such
circumstances and such sayings of Pelagius, as taken

1 M. Le Clerc, in Bibliotheque Universelle, tom. viii. p .174^-237.
I2«. Amst. 1688.

™ Britannic. Ecclesiaruni Antiquitates ; quibus inserta est
pestiferee adversus Dei gratiam a Pelagio Britanno inductae hae-
reseos Historia. [First printed at Dublin, 40. 1639; and, en-
larged and corrected by the author, fol. London, 1687 ]

350 Pelagian Controversy .

CHAP, by themselves, sound most favourably for him; and

XIX

'_ such of St. Austin and St. Hierome as are most

. . |/°- . liable to exception.
(A.D.410.) ^ ^

It is great pity that among all the learned and
true histories of Pelagianism, only that should have
the luck to be translated into English. But the
world knows now by whose means that, and the
Lives of some Fathers", written by the same author,
and in the same vein, have been tacked together,
and put into the hands of our vulgar readers.

It seems that, though it be a great fault to write
the lives of the catholic Fathers encomiastically, yet
it is none to write the lives of the old heretics so.
And one that in reading the books of the ancient
Christians, passes by the best, and picks out for a
specimen of their works, what may be censured in
them, is a good author ; though he that passes by

" [The work alluded to in the text is, ' The lives of Clemens
' Alexandrinus, Eusebius, Gregory Nazianzen, and Prudentius ;

* containing an impartial account of their lives and vs^ritings, to-
' gether with several curious observations upon both. Also, a short
' history of Pelagianism. Written originally in French by M. Le
' Clerc, and now translated into English.' London, 1696. 80. — In
the advertisement the translator repeats Le Clerc's comjilaint,
that hitherto panegyrics alone had been written on the Fathers,
and that impartial accounts of them and their doctrines were still
wanting and verv necessary : he adds, ' it was also thought fit to

* print the history of Pelagianism, though very short, together
' with these lives : because several gentlemen may be desirous
' to have in their own tongue an impartial account of that con-
' troversy which formerly made so great a noise in the Christian
' world.'

The originals, from which this version is made, occur in Le
Clerc's ' Bibliotheque Universelle,' torn. x. &c. in the shape of
dissertations and reviews of editions of the works of those
Fathers.]

Felan'ian Controversy. 351

their ncBvi, and takes most notice of what is most chap.

material, does so great a mischief*^. Or else it is, 1_

that the booksellers of Amsterdam will sfive more,. ^'°* v

o (A.D.410.)

money for the copy of a book of the first than of the
latter sort, not regarding which does most good or
hurt to the cause of Christianity ; but which men
will have the most curiosity to see and to buy. As
it is said of Bleau, that he procured a Socinian book
which he had printed, to be burnt by the hangman,
that the edition mifjht sell the better p.

This author notes 'i, that we have no account of
Caelestius' doctrine but from his adversaries : thousfh
St. Austin quotes largely the acts of the council
where he spoke, and his own books. And, that pos-
sibly the sayings objected to him in the council were
but consequences drawn from what he had said :
though his book and the chapters of it be quoted in
the council. And concludes that St. Austin and Pe-
lagius did not understand one another's terms and
meaning : and that in many parts of tliis dispute,
they were like two men of different languages, that
should scold as loud as they could, without under-
standing what each other said : and reciting the
emperor's edict against the Pelagians, says, ' suspi-
' cious persons will think this edict, expressed in so
' pathetic terms, comes from the pen of some eccle-

o [These observations are levelled against M. Le Clerc's as-
sertions, in the preface to his life of Clemens Alexandrinus.]

P See ' La Religion des HoUandois, [representee en plusieurs
' lettres 6crites par un Officier de Tarmee du Roy, ;i ua pa'steur
' et professeur de th^ologie de Berne.' 160. A Cologne, 1673,
p. 83.

William Bleau was a celebrated and excellent printer, esta-
blished at Amsterdam.]

q P. 182. ed, 1688.

352 Pelagian Controversy .

CHAP. « siastical zealot.* One may know whom he means.
And endeavouring to shew that St. Austin and St.

'to
310

(A.D.410.) Hierome, the chief opposers of the Pelagian doc-
trine, do contradict one another about a main point
of it, viz. the possibility of keeping the command-
ments; he, by a gross mistake, quotes'" Pelagius'
words against Hierome, as if they were St. Austin's,
(as I shall by and by shew, having occasion to re-
cite^ those words,) at which rate he may well prove
that St. Austin contradicts St. Hierome.

I call this mistake gross, because bishop Ussher,
in the treatise which the man is here epitomizing,
shews that the 191st Sermon de Tempore, among
the works of St. Austin*, (from whence these words
are taken,) is not his, but is long ago known to be
Pelagius' confession of faith to pope Innocent. And,
which makes it the more unpardonable, he himself
had a little before" followed Ussher in observing
that that piece, which among the works of St. Hie-
rome ", is called SijmhoU E.vplanatio ad Damasum,
is really Pelagius' said confession : and if he had
looked into this 191st Sermon de Tempore, which
he here quotes, he would have seen that and the
said Symholi Explanatio to be both one. And bi-
shop Ussher, where he observes the one, observes
the other. The man that is capable of such palpable
mistakes in the main matters which he is arguing,
ought, for shame, give over criticising with so cen-

'■ Page 219. s ^. 29. Notes on Pelagius' Creed, note ".

t [In the Benedictine edition it is transferred, among other
spurious pieces, to the Appendix of torn. v. p. 388. Serm. 236.]

" Page 180.

^ [It is printed in torn. xi. p. 146. of the edition pubhshed by
Vallarsius.]

Pelagian Contromrsy. 353

sorious a contempt as be does, on the works of men chap.
of known and solid learning; where the matter that ^

he remarks is for the most part only some triflino^ , , 4J°" ^

r J o (A.D.410.)

nicety.

III. Pelao^ius was a Briton born : the only man of
that ancient church that ever made a fio^ure in the
Roman world. He is supposed to have been called
here in his own country, Morgan: because that
name in the British language signifies the same that
Pelagius does in Latin and Greek, viz. helongincf to
the sea. He lived a good while at Rome, in great
credit and esteem for piety, parts, and learning ; re-
spected and loved by the most accomplished men of
that time, such as St, Austin, Paulinus, Rufinus, &c.
Even they that condemned his opinion owned his
ingenuity. INIost nations that have had any very
learned or ingenious man in the most ancient times*
keep his works as a monument of remembrance.
Pelagius' works were most of them, not all, tinctured
with his heresy ; and the chief of them are lost.
Those that remain, though they are by nigh two
hundred years the ancientest of any extant written
by a native of this land, yet have not had the favour
to be done into English. I have occasion to give by
and by his confession of faith at large, which is so
handsomely drawn up, that it has passed, as was ob-
served before, sometimes for St. Austin's, sometimes
for St. Hierome's.

Some late writers do think he was a Scotsman.
And Garnier the Jesuit has lately set up that opin-
ion, by running into a mistake >' of the sense of a

y [In a tract subjoined to his edition of the theological works
of Marius Mercator, fol. Paris, 1673, reprinted in vol. xii. or the

WALL, VOL. I. A a

354 Pelagian Controversy.

CHAP, place in St Hierome^ which mistake bishop Ussher
1-_ had rectified long before *. All that is in it is this.

(A.D.410.)^^^®^^^^^^ '^'^^^ an Irishman: and they at that time
were called Scoti, and their country Scotia. And
therefore of him indeed St. Hierome says ^ ' he is by

* origin of the Scotch nation :' and again, ' Scotorum

* pultibus praegravatus,' ' having his belly filled, and
' his head bedulled, with Scotch porridge.' And
Dempster ^ the Scot took on him to maintain, that not
only he, but a great many others that in old writings
are called Scoti, were of that Scotland which now
goes by that name : whom bishop Ussher does
handsomely expose for that mistake. And yet it is
followed by Mr. Le Clerc, as to Ca^lestius. But if
that were true, it would not concern Pelagius, whom
St. Hierome does at that place distinguish from
Cselestius, as Pluto from Cerberus.

All ancient writers style him a Briton: and
Demj^ster himself (using the word improperly) calls
him English. And we understand by St. Austin

Appendix to the Benedictine edition of St. Austin, Dissert. I. cap.
iv. p. 66.]

z [Epist. ad Ctesiphontem, 133. — -Op. torn, i. p. 1032.]

^ Brit. Eccles. Antiq. cap. 8. p. 209^ ed. 1639. [P- ^'3' ^^-
1687.]

^ Prooem, in lib. i. et prooem. in lib. iii. Comment, in Jere-
miam. [Op. tom. iv. p. 835, 923.]

'^ [Thomse Demsteri Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Scotorum,
40. Bononise 1627. vid. lib. xv. — In the preface to the valuable
reprint of this work by the Bannatyne Club, 2 vols. 4°. Edinburgh
1829, Dr. Irving the editor pleasantly but truly remarks, ' Sco-
' torum complures, si fides Demstero habenda, multa Uteris man-
' darunt sexcentis ferme annis ante literas in Scotiam invectas.
— And again, ' Tam portentosam sibi bibliothecam adornaverat
' Thomas iUe noster : — quocunque ferunt pedes, scriptores invenit
' ille Scotos.']

Pela^ius. S55

[Ep. 106. ad Paulimwi], that he was commonly chap.

. . XIX

called Pelagius Brito, to distinguish him from an- ___1__
other Pelagius of Tarentum. As for the present,^ •p°"jQX
Scotland, Garnier, and they that take this from him,
ought, if they compare the time in which Pelagius
lived, to remember that at that time that country
was as fruitful of authors, as Lapland or Greenland
is now.

IV. Pelagius had written some learned works, as
Three Books of the Trinity, &c., before ^ he fell into
those new opinions against original sin, and against
the necessity of God's grace for our doing good
works ; which were the two chief of the heterodox
tenets held by him. And when he had in his own
breast entertained them, he at first expressed them
slily in discourse among the people, or wrote them
as the objections of other men ^, (much after the rate
as bishop Taylor of late days wrote his Arguments
for Antipaedobaptism,) as if it were only for disputa-
tion sake. These his discourses were remembered
and more minded afterwards.

So for example, before he declared himself, he
wrote a short exposition on St. Paul's Epistles ; and
in that to the Romans on ch. v. 12. he wrote thus,
as St. Austin quotes his words ^ :

' They that are against the derivation of sin [or
' original sin], endeavour to disprove it thus ; " If
' Adam's sin," say they, " hurts those that do not
' sin themselves, then Christ's righteousness may

d Gennadius de Scriptoribus, cap. 42.

e August, de Peccato orig. cap. 21. [§. 23. Op. torn, x,
p. 262.]

f De Peccator. Meritis, lib. iii. cap. 2, 3. [Op. torn. x. p. 71,
72.]

A a 2

356 Pelagius.

CHAP. ' profit those that do not believe : for," he says, " they
. — ' are as much, nay more, saved by one, than they

(A.D.4100 ' ^^^^ before dead by one."

' And then say they, " If baptism does cleanse
< that old offence, [or, take away original sin,] then
' they that are born of parents both baptized, must
' be without this sin, for the parents could not
' transmit that which they had not."

^" This also," say they, " may be added; if the
' soul be not by propagation, but the flesh only,
' then that only has original sin, and that only de-
' serves punishment. For it is unjust," say they,
'" that a soul created but to-day, and that not out
' of the mass of Adam, should bear the burden of
' another person's sin committed so long ago."

' They say also, " That it ought by no means to
' be granted, that God, who forgives us our own sins,
' should impute to us other people's." '

Then St. Austin adds ; ' You see Pelagius put all
' this into his writings, not in his own name, but in
' the name of others; being so satisfied that this
' was a novelty, which but now began to make a
' noise against the old and settled opinion of the
' church, that he was ashamed or afraid to own it
' himself. And perhaps he is not of that opinion
' himself, that a person is born without sin, to whom
* he confesses baptism (in which remission of sins is
' granted) to be necessary.' And a little after, hav-
ing shewn how contrary this opinion is to scrip-
ture, he says, ' I believe, a man that is so excellent
' a Christian, does not at all hold these and the
' other absurdities that are so perverse and contrary
' to Christian truth.'
312. This St. Austin says in a book written anno

Pelagius. 357

Domini 412, several years after Peladus had wrote chap.

XIX

his Exposition on the Epistles. So that he had not

even then absolutely declared himself, at least ^^' ij^^°\o)
Austin did not know that he had. But afterward,
as St. Austin says in a later book, ' being become
' a heretic, he maintained these same things with a
' most resolute obstinacy^.'

V. Anno Dom. 410, Rome was taken and sacked
by the Goths. Then, or quickly after, Pelagius and
Caelestius, who during their living there had pri-
vately sowed the seeds of this heresy, departed from
thence. They are found to have been both in Africa
in the year 411. Pelagius went quickly from thence
into the east countries*^. Caelestius stayed there, and
attempted to take priest's orders in the church of
Carthage. But some of the clergy of that church,
having heard something of his tenets, insisted that
he should be first examined about them. So at an
assembly or council held there, anno 412, he was 3 12.
challenged by Paulinus, a deacon of that church,
as having maintained several false doctrines, and
among the rest these four :

1. 'That Adam was created mortal, and that whe-
' ther he had sinned or not, he would have died,

2. ' That the sin of Adam hurt himself only, and
' not mankind.

3. ' That infants new born are in the same state
' that Adam was before his fall.

4. ' That a man may be without sin, and keep the
' commandments of God easily, if he will.'

I had occasion to set down the acts of the council,
which contain the accusations and his answers to

g Retractat. lib. 2. c. 33. [Op. torn. i. p. 53.]

li Augustin. de Gestis Pelagii, c. 22. [Op. torn. x. p. 2] (5.]

358 Pelagius.

CHAP, them, above in cli. v. §. 8. If the reader turn back
• thither, he will see the substance of them to be, that
, -I'Q- , he would not own original sin, thousfh he did not
then absolutely deny it : but infant-baptism he con-
fessed to be necessary, and that he had never held
otherwise. ^

He also then put in his plea in writing, (a libellus
St. Austin calls it, or confession of his belief,) in
which he confessed, ' That infants have redemption
' by the baptism of Christ,' (as the bishops in a
3,6. council, that was held there five years after, do
mention in their letter to Innocents) From which
concession St. Austin (who was not at that council)
afterward argued, ' By that word redemption, he
' has stopped up his way [for any farther denial of
' original sin] ; for, from what are they redeemed, but
' from the power of Satan ^ ?' &c.

The issue of the council was, Cselestius was re-
fused, and all that held such opinions condemned.
And he went from Carthage, saying, that he would
refer himself to Innocent, bishop of Rome ; which
he never found it for his purjjose to do.
312. VI. About this time, anno 412, St. Austin wrote
his first treatise against those that held these opin-
ions, (who were afterward called Pelagians; as yet
Pelagius himself, though he had set them on foot,
did not declare himself : and when St. Austin men-
tions him in this book, it is with respect, and hoping
he would not maintain them). They were much

' Epist. Synodic. Concilii Carthag. ad Innocent, apud Au-
gustin. Ep. 90. [epist. 175. Op. torn. ii. p. 617. and in the Ap-
pendix to torn. X. p. 91, among various documents relating to
the Pelagian history.]

k Ep. 89. ad Hilarium. [ep. 157. torn. ii. p. 542.]

Pclagkis. 359

talked of at Carthage, where Pelagius and Caslestius chap.
had been : and Marcellinus, a nobleman living at ^

that city, sent to St. Austin to desire his resolution , . ;V°- ,

•" (A.D.410.)

of the difficulties raised about them. It was in
answer to that desire that he wrote two books, and
a little after a third book, (or epistle,) entitled, ' Of
*• the guilt and forgiveness of sins, and of the bap-
' tism of infants V The scope of them is to prove
the doctrine of original sin to be true, and that
chiefly from the baptism of infants ; and to assert
the necessity of God's grace, and to answer the ob-
jections.

In the first, he discourses of the state of Adam
before and after his fall, shews that his seed do
derive sin from him, not by imitation only, (as these
men explained the Scripture sayings,) but by propa-
gation : that this propagated corruption is in all per-
sons, even in infants that have no actual sin.

He proves this, first by texts of Scripture, then
by other arguments ; and, among the rest, by this,
that infants are by all Christians acknowledged to
stand in need of baptism, which must be in them
for original sin, since they have no other. He
mentions and replies to some answers which the
deniers of original sin gave to this last argument,
which pressed them very hard.

1. Some said, that infants have actual sin: mean-
ing their peevishness, &c., and that they may have
need to be baptized for that'". These men he judges
unworthy of any answer here, as arguing against
plain sense : yet at the end of the book he spends
some time in answering them.

VII. 2. Some said, they are baptized, not for

[Op. torn. X. p. I, &c.] "» Cap. 17.

360 Pelagius.

CHAP. ' forgiveness of sin,' but that they may be made
' heirs of the kingdom of heaven"/ It is to be noted,

, 3'o- the Pelagians held a middle state between heaven

(A.D.410.) o

and hell. ' These men,' says St. Austin, ' if they be
' asked whether infants not baptized, and not made
' heirs of tliQ kingdom, have yet the benefit of
' eternal salvation at the resurrection of the dead,

* laborant vehementer, nee ewitum inveniunt^ are at
' a great plunge, and can find no way out of it.

* Quis enim Christianorum ferat, cum dicitur ad
' aeternam salutem posse quenquam pervenire, si
' non renascatur in Christo, quod per baptismum
' fieri voluit V &c. ' For what Christian man can
' endure to hear it said, that any person may come
' to eternal salvation, that is not regenerated in
' Christ, which he has ordered to be done by ba]>
' tism?' &c.

And whereas these men distinguish between
salvation and the kingdom of heaven, and said,
children might be saved without baptism, though
not come to the kingdom of heaven ; he brings in
that text, Tit. iii. 5, He saved us by the washing
of regeneration, &c. As he does in a following
chapter that of St. Peter, 1 Epist. iii. 21, Baptism
doth save us. He proceeds, ' Who dares to aflfirm
' that infants may be saved without that regenera-
' tion, as if Christ had not died for them ? For
' Christ died for sinners ; and if these, who, it is
' plain, have committed no sin in their own life,
' are not held captive under the original bond of sin
' neither ; how did Christ, who died for sinners, die
' for them ? If they are not diseased with any sick-
' ness of original sin, why are they carried to Christ

1' Cap. 18.

Pelagms. 361

* the Physician, to receive the sacrament of their chap.
' eternal salvation, by the godly fear of their friends ___!_

' that run with them to it ? Why is it not said to , , ^°- ,

•' (A.D.410.)

' them in the church, " Carry back from hence these
' innocent creatures : the whole have no need of a
' physician, but they that are sick : Christ came not

* to call the righteous, but sinners ?" Nunquam
' dictum est, nunquam dicitur, nunquam omnino di-
' cetur in ecclesia Christi tale commentum. So odd
" a thing never was said, never is said, nor ever will

* be said, in the church of Christ.'

Concerning what was then said, or what had
ever been said, St. Austin was a proper judge : but
we find now, that for what would be said in after-
times, he did not guess altogether right ; if he
meant that no Christians would ever say so.

Then he answers the objections of those who
said, if infants were sinners, it were needful for
them to repent ; which since they cannot do, it is a
sign that baptism is not in their case used for for-
giveness of sin. His answer is, ' That in like man-
' ner as they profess faith by the words of those
' that bring them, they do also go for penitents,
' when by the words of the same bearers, they do
' renounce the devil and the world <*.'

Whereas they objected?, if all infants are sinful,
what justice is it that some should happen to have
baptism, and so be forgiven ; and others, no more
sinful than they, should miss it, and so be con-
demned? He desires them to answer first, if all in-
fants are sinless, what justice is it that some should
hapi)en to have baptism, and so be admitted into
the kingdom of heaven : and others, as sinless as

o Cap. 19. P Cap. 21.

3G2 St. Austin and the Pelapians.

CHAP, they should miss it, and so be exchided ? he teaches
xix
^ tliat all such things are to be referred to the uu-

/ . •}^°' ^ searchable wisdom of Cod.

(A.D.410.)

VIII. He refutes '1 those that, knowing- not what
else to say, ventured upon the exploded opinion of
Plato and Origen ; that the souls of infants have
lived before in another state or world, and have
sinned there : and so j)lcaded that possibly it is for
those sins that they are here baptized. He stops
their mouths with that scripture, Rom. ix. 11. 77ie
children l>ciu(] not yet born, having done neither
good nor eri/, &c., and with several other argu-
ments : but that one is enough.

Having- occasionally said'" that infimts, till they
are ba[)tized, do aitidc in darkness ; he recites an
objection of some, that all that are born are enlight-
ened, from that text% 77iat wa^ the true light that
lighteth even/ man [or [)erson] that conieth into the
irorld. ^X\\cYcu\^ol\ he says, * if that be so : it is a

* strano-e thino- that they beinsf enlightened bv the

* onlv Son, who was in the beginning with God,
' God the word, should not be admitted into the
' kingdom of God, nor be heirs of God, nor joint-
' heirs with Christ. For that this is not granted
' them but by bajitisni, even they that are of this

* opinion do confess.'

IX. He cites abundance of jilaces*^ of scripture to
shew that all that Christ came to save, as ]Mediator,
are by the scripture supjiosed to have been in a lost
condition : he came, ho took flesh, he submitted him-
self to the form of a servant, died, &c., that he might
quicken those that Mere dead, save those that were

1 Cap. 22. f Cap. 25. s Jobni. 9. t Cap. 26, 27.

St. Austin and the Pelagians. 363

lost, free those that were in slavery, redeem those chap.

XIX

that were in captivity, enlighten those that were in ^

darkness, rescue those that were under the power of/. ^1°' .

Satan, &c. From whence he says it follows, ' tliat
they do not belong to this dispensation of Christ,
fidfilled by his humiliation, who have no need of
life, salvation, deliverance, redemption, &c. And
consequently baptism is not necessary for those
who have no need of the benefit of forgiveness and
reconciliation by the Mediator. " Porro quia par-
vulos baptizandos esse concedunt, qui contra auc-
toritatem universa) ecclesia), proculdubio per do-
minum et a})Ostolos traditam, venire non possunt,"
&c. Now then, since they grant that infants must
be baptized, as not being- able to oppose the author-
ity of the whole church, which was doubtless de-
livered by our Lord and his apostles ; they must
consequently grant, that they stand in need of the
benefits of the JNIediator : that being offered by the
sacrament and by the charity of the faithful, and
so being incorporated into Christ's body, they may
be reconciled to God : that in him they may be
quickened, saved, delivered, redeemed, enlightened.
From what, but from death, wickedness, guilt,
slavery, and darkness of sins ? Which since they
have committed none in their own life at that age,
there remains [nothing that they can be guilty of
but] original sin.'

X. He disputes largely" against their opinion of a
middle state, proving, ' That there is no salvation

but in the kingdom of God ; nor any middle

place where any one can be, except with the Devil,
who is not with Christ. Hence our lord himself,

« Cap. 28.

364 St. Austin and the Pelagians.

CHAP. < that he iniffht rase out of the minds of mistaken

XIX

'— ' men any opinion of I know not what middle state,

(A.D.410)* which some men go about to attribute to unbap-
' tized infants ; as that they shall, being sinless, be
' in eternal life, but not being baptized, shall not be
' with Christ in his kingdom ; gave this definitive
' sentence to stop their mouths, He that is not with
' 7ne is agaiiist me. Give us therefore an infant :
' if he be with Christ already, what is he baptized
' for ? But if, as the truth is, he be therefore bap-
' tized, that he may be with Christ, then it is sure
' that before he is baptized he is not with Christ.'

Though St. Austin here in the heat of this dis-
pute do once use this expression, of unbaptized
infants being with the Devil, since by the Pelagians'
confession they are not with Christ ; yet he means
but a very moderate degree of condemnation or
misery : not like that of wicked men ; but such as
may be preferable to no being at all. As I shall
shew hereafter ''.

He goes on^ to prove his point from the name or
title given by our Saviour to baptism, John iii. 5,
Ea7cept one be horn again [or regenerated], &c.,
he says ; ' these men, if they were not moved [or
' convinced] by this sentence, would determine that
' infants are not to be baptized at all.' And he argues,
' why born again, but to be renewed ? Renewed
' from what, but from the old nature, a vetustate f
' From what old nature, but that wherein our old
* nature is crucified with him, that the body of sin
' might be destroyed^?'

He confirms the same sense by the following parts

"" Part ii. ch. 6. §. 5. y Cap. 30, 31, &c. z Rom. vi. 6.

St. Austin and the Pelagians. 365

of our Saviour's discourse with Nicodemus*. That chaf.

which is born of the flesh is flesh, i. e. as St. Austin ^___

takes it, is corrupt or sinful. And that ivhich is ,. ^°- .
... ... (A.D.410.)

dorn of the Spirit is spirit, i. e. is renewed or
sanctified.

XI. He takes notice^, that those particular men
at Carthage, of whom Marcellinus had wrote to him,
did grant, ' that in baptism there is forgiveness of
' sins given to infants ; not that they have any ori-
' ginal sin, but they have sinned since they were
' born.' He takes notice how much these differ
from the others, whom he had been hitherto refuting,
and one of whose books he had seen. ' The one,'
says he, ' minding the scriptures, and the authority
' of the whole church, and the form of the sacrament
' itself, see well that baptism in infants is for remis-
' sion of sins ; but cannot see, or will not own, that
' it is original sin. The other, considering human

' nature, see well, as it is easy to do, that that

' age cannot in its own life have contracted any sin ;
' but rather than confess original sin, say there is no
' sin at all in infants.' He bids these two parties
first agree among themselves : for if each grant to
the other that which they urge of truth, they will
both hold the whole truth.

However, he does condescend^ for the sake of
these latter, to shew at large how impossible it is for
a new-born infant, that has no knowledge of good
or evil, to be guilty of actual sin. But it seems a
flat and needless discourse : because, as he there
observes, ' A man is never more troubled to find what

a John iii. 6. ^ Cap. 34. <= Cap. 35.

366 St. Justin against the Pelagians.

CHAP. * to say, than when the thing he would prove is of
* itself plainer than any thing he can say.'

fA D °i ) What we can observe out of these passages of the
first book (besides what has been observed before) is
the tenet of Pelagius and his followers. They denied
original sin. The catholics, among other arguments
against them, urged this ; that infants have sin, is
proved from the need they have of baptism : and
other than original sin they cannot have. The
Pelagians did not pretend to deny the necessity of
infant-baptism : which had been highly for their
purpose to do, if they had thought they could have
justified such a denial. And when St. Austin men-
tions it as a practice of the whole church from the
apostles' time ; they do not deny it, but own it as
we fehall see hereafter : only they said, baptism, in
the case of an infant, is not for ' forgiveness of sin,'
(though they were driven from this hold too after-
ward, as we shall see,) but to procure the child an
' entrance into the kingdom of heaven.' For they held
that an infant, dying unbaptized, shall be raised
again, and live eternally in a certain middle state,
without punishment, as having no sin ; but not en-
joying the kingdom of heaven, as being not baptized
into Christ. But that a baptized infant shall go into
the kingdom of heaven.

XII. As for that plea, that infants have actual
sin, and are baptized for that ; it was the tenet only
of some ignorant persons among them, whom Mar-
cellinus had mentioned. Pelagius and Cselestius did
not stand to that ; but they held for a while stiff in
their refusal to own baptism of infants to be for
forgiveness.

St. Austin against the Pelagians. 367

Caelestius had, as I said before, used the word chap.

redemptio7i as ajiplied to infants by their baptism.

And the same thing St. Austin observes here'^, ' they (A.D.410.)

* grant redemption to be necessary for them, as is

* contained in a very short book of one of them,

* who yet would not plainly express there the for-

* giveness of any sin.' And again **, ' though they

* have not been willing in their writings plainly to

* own forgiveness of sins to be necessary for infants,

* yet they have owned redemption to be needful for

* them.'

XIII. The second book of this work is on another
subject, viz. St. Austin's resolution of this question,
put to him by Marcellinus, * whether there is, or

* ever was, or ever will be, any man without sin,

* beside our Saviour Christ.'

As the Pelagians denied the original corruption
of our nature, so accordingly they magnified the
present freedom and goodness of it : and some at
this time went so far, or as St. Austin here expresses
it^, ' presumed so much on the freedom of man's
' will, as to be of opinion, that we have no need to

* be assisted by God to avoid sin, after he has once

* granted to our nature the power of freewill.' In
confuting this opinion of theirs he has not much oc-
casion to speak of infant-baptism. So I should pass
it by ; but the indignation to see the ancient fathers
so misrepresented as they are by some modern
writers s, (with what intent they do this God knows,)
forces me to give in short the substance of his an-
swer to this question ; that it may appear how
falsely he and St. Hierome are charged to con-

^ Cap. 34. e Lib. ii. cap. 36. ^ Lib. ii. cap. 2.

? [See above, p. 350.]

368 St. Austin against the Pelagians.

CHAP, tradict one another in the substantial part of their

answer,

{A.K°'io.) St. Austin divides this question into four^ :

1. Whether the thing be possible, viz. for a man
to live without sin ?

To this he answers, ' I shall confess it to be pos-
' sible by the grace of God, and the freewill of man :'
explaining himself so, as that God can, if he please,
give such a measure of grace, as that a man should
ever choose and do what is best.

2. Whether this do ever come to pass ?

Answ. '1 do not believe there is any such thing;
' I rather believe the scripture, which says. Enter not
' into judgment with thy servant ; for in thy sight
' shall no man living be justified'^' Here he produces
many texts proving all men to be sinners.

3. If it be possible so to be, and yet never be so ;
what is the reason ?

Answ. * I might answer easily and truly thus ;
' because men will not. But if I am asked why
' they will not ? there is a great deal to be said.
' Yet leaving room for a more diligent inquiry, I
* shall answer to this also in short. Men will not
' do what is good, either because they are not con-
' vinced that it is good, or because it does not please
' themV

4. Whether there be, or ever can be, a man that
has never had any sin?

He answers, no ; because, suppose any man should
by God's grace arrive to that perfection as not to
sin any more ; yet having been conceived in sin,
it will be true of him that he had sins before he
was converted to that newness of life'.

^ Cap. 6. i Cap. 7. ^ Cap. 17. 1 Cap. 20.

^S"^. Amtin against the Pelagians. 369

He proves these his answers largely, and answers chap.
the objections raised from 1 John v. 18. He that is __L_1_

b(yrn of God sinneth not; and from what is said of,, J'®- ,
'' _ (A.D.410.)

Job, and of Zacharias and Elizabeth being blameless,
upright, &c.

And whereas this sort of men did use to catch
and baffle the people with such logical quirks as
these, ' Si nolumus, non peccamus :' ' We do not sin
' whether we will or no :' and, ' possibilia Deus
' mandata dedit, aut impossibiliaV&c. ' The things
' that God has set us to do, are either possible
' things, or impossible. If possible, we may per-

* form them if we will ; if impossible, then we are

* in no fault for not doing impossible things.' From
whence they concluded that it was certainly true,
which they maintained, ' That a man may be with-
' out sin, and keep God's commandments easily, if
' he will.'

St. Austin answers thus, ' They seem to tliem-
' selves witty when they say (as if any of us did
' not know that) that we do not sin whether we

* will or no ; and that God would never command a

* man that which is impossible to human will. But

* they do not see, that to overcome some things

* which are either corruptly desired or corruptly
' feared, there is occasion for the strong, and some-
' times the utmost effort of the will [or resolution]
' which he foresaw we should not perfectly exert

* in all cases, who would have it truly foretold by
' the prophet. In thy sight shall no man living be
' justified."

XIV. I recite this, to shew that the grounds on

1 Hieron. Dialog, contra Pelagianos, lib. i. [sect. 10. et 21 ;
Op. torn. ii. p. 688.]

WALL, VOL. I. B b

370 >S'i^. Justin and St. Hierome.

CHAP, which St. Austin opposed this presumptuous doc-

trine, are not different from those on which St.

.^•|j'°"j^s Hierome did; as the author I spake of before
would make us believe'". For the answer given by
St. Hierome to the same cavils, is this ; he had recited
the objection about possible and impossible : he had
shewed that some men that are commendable for
one quality, are faulty for another; and that none
is perfect in all. Then to the dilemma he answers,
' They are possible things which God has com-
' manded, I own it ; but even for these possible
' things we cannot every one of us have all of

* them ; and this, not by reason of the weakness

* [or inability] of nature, that you may not rail ;
' but because of the weariness of the mind, which

* cannot have all virtues together and keep them

* always. And if you will reproach the Creator for

* that, because he has made you such a creature as

* does flag or grow weary, I will tell you again, it will
' be a smarter reprehension of him if you find fault

* with him that he has not made you a god. But
' you will say, " If I cannot do it, I am in no sin."
' You are in a sin. Why could not you do that
' which another could do ? And again, he, in com-
' pari son of Avhom you are worse, will be a sinner
' himself in comparison of some other, or of you in
' some other quality".'

This is the saying of St. Hierome, which that
writer instances in° as contrary to St. Austin's doc-
trine, but proves it no other way than by shewing
that Pelagius (whom he takes to be St. Austin) rails

™ §. 2. p. 352. n Dial. I. [sect. 23. torn. ii. p. 706.]

o Bibliotheque Univ. tom.viii. p. 219.

St. Atistm and St. Hierome. 371

against it. The answers of the one and of the other chap.
of these fathers are for substance the same, viz. ^

That though it be, logically speaking, true, wliich ,^ ^°\o \

the Pelagians urged, ' that we may do all that we

' can do,' (the denial of it being a contradiction,)

yet there is no man living but at some times he is

slothful or weary, or not so watchful against sin

and passion, as he himself will confess afterward

he might have been. And this comes upon a man

m spite of the firmest resolution he can have settled

beforehand.

The same author in the same treatise represents
the tenets of Pelagius and St. Austin very partially ;
and after such a manner as if St. Austin had pro-
duced no other proof against Pelagius of the need
we all stand in of God's assisting grace in order to
live well, than what was fetched from the doctrine
of absolute and particular predestination. ' The
' difference then,' says hei', * between St. Austin and

* Pelagius in this matter was this, that the first
' believed that since the sin of Adam his posterity

* are so corrupted, that they are born with such
' dispositions to evil, as do necessarily carry them
' to sin ; that if God will bring any one to good,
' he must for every good action give him a grace,

* which shall inevitably make him will that which

* is good. And for the rest, those to whom he does
' not give such a grace are damned. God, by a
' wisdom which we understand not, having a mind

* that mankind should be born under an inevitable
' necessity of sinning, and of being accordingly tor-
' mented with eternal punishments, without deliver-

* ing from this doleful necessity any more than a

P Bibliotli^que Univ. torn. viii. p. 195.

B b 2

372 St. Austin and St. Hierome.

CHAP. ' very small number of persons to whom he gives an

— ' invincible grace.'

(A.D'tio.) Now besides that the opinion of St. Austin con-
cerning predestination is here very invidiously and
disadvantageously represented, and that of Pelagius
is as much smoothed over; what an unfair account
is it of the controversy between them, to make it
turn upon that point ? St. Austin brought many
other proofs and reasons in this dispute, such as are
owned to be valid, not only by those that approve
the opinion he held about predestination, but by
those that dislike it. God forbid all should be
Pelagians that have not the same conceptions that
St. Austin had about that other matter ; Pelagianism
has been accounted an heretical doctrine in all ages
of the church, and in all particular churches ; even
in those in which the doctrine of predestination
has been variously explained. It is one thing thank-
fully to own the assistance of God's Spirit in all the
good purposes and spiritual strength we have ; and
another to determine that God limits this grace and
assistance to a certain number of particular persons,
or gives it in an irresistible degree. Or, to speak
plainly, there is a great difference between the
Arminian and the Pelagian tenets. Concerning the
first, most men are now agreed to bear with one
another in any difference about them : but they that
would obliterate the doctrine of original sin, and of
the necessity of God's grace, we know not whither
they would lead us, nor what part of our religion
they will leave us.

The Arminians or Remonstrants did, at the synod
of Dort, exhibit an account of their tenets in this
matter, wherein they frankly confess God's grace to

St. Austin and Pelagius. 373

be necessary, not only as it illuminates our under- chap.

XIX

standing, but also ' voluntati vires conferat ad non _-__L_

' peccandum,' ' it gives strength to the will to avoid ^^ j^'^j^^x
* sin :' and not only to teach us what we ought to do,
but also, * ut quod faetu opus est, facere diligamus et
' valeamus,' ' that we may be able to do, and may
' love to do, that which we ought :' which was the
thing required of Pelagius to confess, and on the
owning whereof he would have been acquitted.
They do also shew how far they differ fi'ora the
Pelagians (and even from the Semi-pelagians) in all
those other things for which either of the said
jDarties were condemned by the church of that time.
This they do in the declaration of their tenet on
the third and fourth of the five articles^. What then
makes this man (who professes that way) to talk of
Pelagianism as if it were so tacked to Arminianism
that St. Austin could not confute the one without
confuting the other ? And to represent St. Hierome,
who confuted Pelagius without having recourse to
St. Austin's opinion of predestination, as a Semi-
pelagian'"?

XV. Whereas the chief point on which Pelagius
was condemned, was his denial of any such thing
as an internal grace of God's Spirit moving and in-
clining the heart to faith, love, obedience, &c., which
we ought to pray to God for : this historian, citing
Petavius* for it, reckons up six sorts of grace which

q Acta et Scripta Synodalia Dordracena Ministrorum Remon-
strantium, &c. Herderwici, 1620. pt. ii. p. 22, &c.

r Biblioth. Univ. torn. viii. p. 194.

s [De Pelagianorum et Semi-pelagianorum dogmatum historia,
cap. 2. sect. 4. See Petavii Dogmata theologica, fol. Antwerpiae,
1700, torn. iii. p. 305.]

374 St. Austin and Pelagius.

CHAP. Peladiis owned. 1. God's grace in erivino; us a free-
will : and, 2. In giving a sinner pardon for sins

(A D 410 ) P^stj to encourage him : and, 3. In giving his law
and, 4. The grace of baptism, wherein an adult
person that has sinned, obtains remission of sins,
and the inheritance of God's kingdom : an infant
has no remission of sins, as having no sin in his
opinion, but yet is put into a better state, being
made an heir of God's kingdom : and, 5. In giving
the kingdom of heaven as a reward to encourage us.
These five nobody accused him of denying. But
here'^ he is said to have owned another sort of grace,
viz. ' The internal illumination of our spirit,' which
Pelagius expresses in this wise :

' I confess that grace consists not only in the law,
' but in God's assistance : for God assists us by his
' doctrine and his revelation, in opening the eyes of
' our hearts ; in declaring to us the things that shall
' be hereafter, that we may not be fixed to the pre-
' sent things ; in discovering to us the snares of the
' Devil ; in enlightening us by the manifold and un-
' speakable gift of his heavenly grace. Does he that
' speaks thus, think you, deny the grace of God ?
' Does he not confess at once both God's grace and
' man's freewill " V

It is true, St. Austin does quote these and such
other words out of Pelagius' third book of freewill.
But he shews at the same place, that they are used
by him only for a blind, and that his other sayings
in the same book are such as will not suffer these
to be understood in a catholic sense. Both St.
Hierome and St. Austin give this account of him,

t Biblioth. Univ. torn. viii. p. 198.

^ De Gratia Christi, lib. i. c, 7. [Op. torn. s. p. 233.]

St. Austin and Pelag'ms. 375

(which they prove by several instances,) tliat though c ii a p.
he held those singular opinions, and pro])agated

them privately in the minds of his followers, yet he(^f)'°',QX
was very unwilling to be convicted of so doing ; and
therefore used in his ■writings a great deal of C((ui-
vocation. He would say such things as looked like
an owning of internal grace ; but still would take
care to place his words so as that he could, when
occasion required, explain them to mean only that
grace or mercy of God, by which he gives us good
rules, doctrines, revelations, promises, &c. And so
here he limits (as St. Austin observes) all that he
speaks of, to doctrine and revelation ; and he does
not name it internal, as Mr. Le Clerc does.

St. Austin shews him to have used the same arti-
fice through all his four books of ' Freewill ;' wliicli
he wTote on purpose to vindicate his reputation :
and yet even there he never spoke home to the own-
ing of God's grace in the catholic sense, but often to
the denying of it. He says there, in the same book
out of which the foresaid specious words are quoted x,

* We distinguish between these three things, and
' place them each in their due order ; in the first
' place we rank posse, the power of doing any thing ;
' in the second, velle, the will to do it ; in the third,
' esse, the being of the thing. We say the power
' is in our nature ; the will, in arbitrio, in our

* choice ; the being, in the etFect. The first, i. e.
' the power, properly belongs to God, who has given
' it to his creature ; but the other two, i. e. the will
' and the being, are to be referred to the man, be-
' cause they come from the fountain of freewill.'

" Pelagius pro libero Arbitrio, lib. iii. apucl August, de Gratia
Christi, lib. i. cap. 4.

376 St. Austin and Pelagius.

c H A p. And in another placed, he says by way of objection

, to his own assertion :

(A.D.410.) ^ki- ' ^^^ how then shall that of the apostle
^ stand good, It is God that worketh in you both to
^ will and to do^ f

Answ. ' He worketh in us to will that which is
' good, to will that which is holy ; inasmuch as, by

* the greatness of the future glory, and his promise
' of reward, he encourages us, who are given to
' earthly desires, and do love only things before our

* eyes as brute beasts ; inasmuch as he raises our
^ drowsy will by the revelation of his wisdom ; inas^

* much as he advises us to every good thing,' &c.

All this St. Austin shews to be far short of what
was necessary for him to say, if he would clear him-
self, because it makes God to work upon our wills
only outwardly by proposals : and says, ' Let him
' once at last own that grace, by which the greatness
' of the future glory is not only promised to us, but

* believed and hoped for by us ; and by which his
' wisdom is not only revealed to us, but loved by us ;
' and by which non suadetiir solum omne quod bonum
' est, verum et persuadetur, we are not only advised
' to every good thing, but prevailed on to follow
' it.' Then having commented upon that text%
No man can come to me, except the Father who hath
sent me, draw him : he adds, * this sort of grace
' Pelagius ought to own, if he have a mind not only

* to be called, but to be, a Christian.'

But the event proved, that he would never own
that sort of grace ; and that the latent meaning of
all his coloured speeches was no other than what
St. Austin, and his other opponents, took it to be,

y Ibid. cap. 10. z Phil. iii. 12. a John vi.''44.

African Bishops against Pelagius. 377

For when so much offence was taken at him, that chap.

nothing was to be expected but excommunication ; •

€a3lestius and he being then in the East, applied (A.D.410.)
themselves to the church of Rome, to see if the
apology they made for themselves would pass there.
Caelestius came in person, and delivered in a con-
fession of his faith : Pelagius came not, but sent
one, (of which I shall by and by give a copy,) and a
letter with it. There happened to be then a weak
bishop of that church, Zosimus, who was for the
present so far imposed on by their pretences, and
was so incompetent a judge of this question, and of
the other about original sin, (as I shew more par-
ticularly ^ hereafter,) that he took what they said for
orthodox, and blamed their accusers as having slan-
dered them ; though his predecessor Innocent had
declared an ill opinion of them. But the African 317-
bishops, being then in council at Carthage, sent their
synodical epistle to Zosimus, advertising him of the
craft and equivocation used by those men ; and
shewing by instances, wherein his examination of
them was short of what it ought to have been : and
that Caelestius ought particularly to recant the erro-
neous positions in his confession. Upon the com-
ing of this letter, when Caelestius was summoned to
appear <=, ' That by his direct and plain answer either
' his hypocrisy or else his amendment might be
' made manifest, and be no longer ambiguous ; he

* withdrew himself, and would not come to the hear.

• ing.' So far St. Austin's words are : but Mercator

^ §• 33-

c August, contra duas Epistolas": Pelagianorum, lib, ii. c. 3.
[Op. torn. X. p. 433.]

378 African Bishops against Pelagius.

CHAP, gives this further circumstance*^, that he ran away

— — _ from Rome.

(A.D.4'10.) This passage of the history Mr. Le Clerc leaves
out, which none that pretended to write this history
ever left out before ; for it is a plain proof that the
opinion against the grace of God, which the catho-
lics charged the Pelagians with, was their real opin-
ion ; and not wrongfully affixed on them by taking
their words in a worse sense than they meant them,
as he would have it believed.
318. The issue was, the bishops of Africa continued
in their resolution, and the next year sent a peremp-
tory letter to Zosimus, (who had done all he could
to have these men acquitted,) that they did deter-
mine, Co?isiitui?mcs^, Sec. 'That the sentence pro-
' nomiced against Pelagius and Caelestius, by the

* reverend bishop Innocent, from the see of the
' blessed apostle Peter, do stand firm, so long till
' they do by a plain confession own that we are in

* every action assisted by the grace of God through

* our Lord Jesus Christ, not only to understand, but
' also to practise righteousness ; in such wise as that

* without it we are not able to do, to speak, to think,
' or to have any thing of true and sincere piety.'
And Zosimus at last complied with them, and joined
in giving the same sentence : and so, as Prosper tells
us f, did all the world.

'^ [Marii Mercatoris Commonitorium super nomine Pelagii,
Ca^lestii, et Juliani, eorumque hceresi, cap. i. This work is
printed in the collection of Councils, ed. Labbe, ii. p. 1512. ed.
Mansi, iv. p. 291.]

^ Prosper contra Cassianum CoUatorem, cap. lo. [p. 103, ed.
Paris, 1 67 1.]

f Chronic, ad ann. 418,

St. Austin arid Pelagius. 379

They were, as ajipears by St. Austin's words &, c h a p.
' either to do penance,' [viz. recant their lieretical

opinions, whereof this of denying God's grace, and ,^ |^'°'^ .
the other of original sin, were the chief,] ' or, if they
' refused that, to stand condemned' [or excommuni-
cated]. There were also imperial edicts against
them.

XVI. All that we hear of afterwards, that tended 3'9-
towards recantation, was this: Pinianus, and Al-
bina, and JNlelania, being then in the East, where
Pelagius was, wrote to St. Austin, that they ' had

* dealt with him ** to condemn [or recant] under his

* hand all the things that were objected to him ; and
' that [as to God's grace] he hath said in their liear-
' ing, thus, " I do anathematize [or renounce] any
' one that says or thinks that the grace of God, by
' which Christ came into the world to save sinners,
' is not necessary both every hour and moment, and
' also in every action ; and they that take away [or
' deny] this grace, are to have [or may they have]
' eternal punishment." '

But St. Austin in answer ^ shews them, that these
words are capable of the same equivocation he was
wont to use : that probably by ' the grace of God
' by which Christ came to save sinners,' he meant
nothing but the ' pardon of sins,' or, the ' example
' of Christ,' the consideration of which was always
necessary: that he had before in the synod of Dies- 3 > 5-
polls said as much as this comes to : for that being
there accused of holding, ' that the grace of God is

* not given in every action, but does consist in our
' freewill, or in the law and doctrine,' and, ' that

g De Peccato originali, cap. 22.

^ Augustin. de Gratia Christi, cap. 2. » Ibid. cap. 3.

380 St. Austin and Pelagius.

CHAP. ' the grace of God is given according to our deserts;'

'. — and the proof brought against him being this, that

(A.IX410.) Caelestius, who was his disciple, had written such
things : he answered, * Whether these are Cselestius'
' sayings or not, let them look to it that say they
' are his. I never held so, and I do anathematize

* any one that holds so.' And yet that after that,
he had in his books of freewill shewn that he had
really no other sentiments than such as he seemed
then to condemn.

So this did not avail him. He knew well enoug'h
what words to have expressed himself in, so as to
satisfy the church ; but he would not use them.
St. Austin told him ^ that ' inasmuch as the question
' about reconciling man's freewill and God's grace
' is so intricate ; that while one is asserted, the

* other may seem to be denied ; if he would grant
' that God does not only give us a power of doing
' well, but does also assist us in the willing and

* doing of it, (which by the way, is what I shewed

* before that the Remonstrants do, or at least did

* freely own,) the controversy would be at an end.'

But he would never say so. He continued ex-
communicate, and seems to have lived obscurely all
the rest of his time.

After all, it is not material to us, whether he was
guilty, or whether his accusers were mistaken in
his sense ; (it were to be wished he could have been
shewn to have been guiltless,) were it not that some
nowadays, that have a mind to set up the same
opinions to a much worse purpose than ever Pela-
gius did, do go about to retrieve the credit of them
by discrediting the catholic church of that time.

^ Augustin. de Gratia Christi, cap. 47.

St. Austin and Pelagius. 381

That which St. Austin says to Pelagius, on this chap.
account of denying- God's grace, may be applied to

some of them on account (not only of that, but also) (a.|)'°",o.)
of an article of a higher nature, which they are sup-
posed likewise not to believe. ' He has not thought

* fit any where to own that we, when we pray, are

* assisted by God's grace that we may not sin ; and
' if he does notwithstanding in his own mind believe

* this, he must pardon those that suspect otherwise :

* for he himself causes this suspicion, who, when

* he lies under so much obloquy on that account,

* will believe this, and yet will not confess it. What
' great matter w^ere it for him to say this, especially

* where he undertakes to handle and explain that
' point, &c. ? Why should he there defend nature
' only',' &c. ?

XVII. I have recited what I mean to do of the
dispute concerning God's grace altogether, that it
may give no interruption to what remains to be said
of the other, concerning original sin, and the occa-
sions thence taken to speak of infant-baptism.

In the third of those books. Of the Guilt and For-
giveness of Sins, and Baptism of Infants, St. Austin
having in the foregoing chapters recited several in-
terpretations, of which those texts, Rom. v. 12, 13, 14,
&c., are capable, concludes in the fifth chapter, that
whichsoever of them be taken, the words ' can have

* no other sense but such an one by which it has
' come to pass that the whole church has from of
' old constantly held that fidel (or baptized) infants
' do obtain remission of original sin by the baptism
' of Christ.'

Then he recites a large piece of the epistle of

' Augustin. de Natura et Gratia, cap. 59. [Op. x. p. 157.]

382 >S'^ Austin and Pelagius.

CHAP. St. Cyprian to Fidus, which I gave a copy of in ch. vi.
1__ and observes how he there takes the doctrine of

{A.D.410 ) original sin in infants, for a known and undoubted
thing ; and by it proves (what was then by Fidus
questioned) that an infant may and must be bap-
tized before the eighth day, if need require. Then
he adds ^ :

* And now some people, by the bokhiess of I know

* not what disputing humour, go about to represent
' that as uncertain which our ancestors made use of
' as a most certain thing wdiereby to resolve some
' things that seemed uncertain. For, when this be-
' gan first to be disputed, I know not : but this I
' know, that lioly Hierome, whose pains and fame
' for excellent learning in ecclesiastical matters is at

* this day so great, does also make use of this as a

* thing most certain, to resolve some questions in

* his books,' &c. Then having quoted some passages
out of St. Hierome on Jonah, he proceeds, ' If we

* could with convenience come to ask that most
' learned man, how many writers of Christian dis-

* sertations and interpreters of holy scripture in both

* languages could he recount, who from the time
' that Christ's church has been founded, have held

* no otherwise, have received no other doctrine from
' their predecessors, nor left any other to their suc-
' cessors ? For my part (though my reading is much
' less than his) I do not remember that I ever heard

* any other thing from any Christians that received

* the Old and New Testament, Non solum in catJio-
' lica ecclesia, verimi etiam in qualibet liceresi ml

* schismate constitutis : neither from such as were of
' the catholic church, nor from such as belonged

™ Cap. 6. [sect. 12. Op. torn. x. 77.]

JSt. Austin against the Pelagians. 383

to any sect or schism. Non memini me aliud le- chap,

XIX.

gisse, &c. I do not remember that I ever read
otherwise in any writer that I could ever find , . ^]°'^ ^
treating- of these matters, that followed the canoni-
cal scriptures, or did mean or did pretend to do so.
From whence it is that this trouble is started up
upon us, I know not ; but a little while ago, when
I was there at Carthage, I just cursorily heard
some transient discourse of some people that were
talking that infants are not baptized for that rea-
son that they may receive remission of sins, but
that they may be sanctified in Christ. Though I
was something startled at the novelty, yet because
it M'as not seasonable then to enter into anv dis-
course against it, and because they were not per-
sons of any such rank as to be much taken notice
of; it passed over with me as a thing forgotten,
or not minded. And lo, now it is a thing main-
tained against the church with ardent endeavours ;
it is even by writing transmitted to memory ; it is
come to that difficulty that the brethren are fain
to ask our opinions of the matter ; and we find a
necessity of disputing and writing against it.'
This testimony of St. Austin must needs be looked
on as a very considerable evidence. He declares, he
never met with any Christian, either churchman or
sectary ; nor with any writer that owned the scrip-
ture, who taught any other doctrine, but that in-
fants are baptized for pardon of sin. Much less
then had he known or heard of any that denied that
they are to be baptized at all. And they had then,
as I observed before, but 300 years to look back to
the times of the apostles. And St. Austin, though
he speak modestly of himself as to learning, had

384 St. Austin against the Pelagians.

cjHAP. studied the church history so well, that in a few

years after this, he published that his History of all
(A.D.410.) *^® Sects or Opinions that were, or had been in
Christendom ; out of which I quote some things in
another chapter °.

XVIII. To that objection of Pelagius, ' If bap-
' tism do take away original sin, then such children
* as are born of parents both baptized, must be with-
' out that sin;' St. Austin answers to this purpose**,
That an error is often strengthened by putting alien
and intricate questions about the matter, which is
an easy thing in most matters to do. ' Yet,' says he,
' if I had this cause to manage against such men as
' did either deny that infants are to be baptized, or
' did say that it is needless to baptize them, for that
' they being born of fidel [or baptized] persons,
' were necessarily partakers of their parents' privi-
' lege ; then I ought to take more pains in confuting
' this opinion.' Such persons (as he shews at large)
would have need to be put in mind, that as a cir-
cumcised parent begets an uncircumcised son ; and
wheat that has been cleansed from the chaff, does,
if it be sowed, produce wheat with chaff on it : so
a parent that has been spiritually cleansed begets a
son that resembles him, not according to that state
that he is in by spiritual regeneration, but according
to the state he was in by carnal generation.

* But now,' says heP, 'since we have to do with
' such as do confess that the children of baptized
' persons are to be baptized ; how much better is it
' to say thus to them. You that do affirm that of
' parents cleansed from the stain of sin, such children
' should be born as are without sin, how is it that

"^ Ch. 21. o Augustin. de Gratia Christi, cap. 8. v Cap. 9.

St. Justin against the Pelagians. 385

* you do not mind that at the same rate you might chap.

XIX.

' say that of Christian parents there shoukl be born
•Christian children? And then, why do you deter-. ^ ^'°j^ .

* mine that they are to be baptized V

XIX. And having afterward*! on this occasion
mentioned that text, 1 Cor. vii. 14, Now are your
children Jioly, &c., he refers to the exposition of it
which Pelagius had given, and the like to which
he himself had given in a former treatise'" which I
recited before ^ and says, that it must be understood
so, or else in anotlier sense which he there gives,
(relating to the forbearance of the use of the mar-
riage-bed during the woman's uncleanness,) or else
in some other sense of which we may not be certain.
And then adds,

* Illud tamen sine dubitatione tenendum est, quae-
' cunque ilia sanctificatio sit, non valere ad Chris-

* tianos faciendos, atque ad dimittenda peccata, nisi
' Christiana et ecclesiastica institutione sacramentis
' efficiantur fideles. Nam nee,' &c.

' But that is to be held without any doubt, that

* whatever that holiness [or sanctification] be ; it is
' not available to the making of them Christians, or
' to the pardon of sins, unless they be made fidels
' by the institution [or order] of Christ and the
' church, and by the sacraments. For neither are
' unbelieving husbands or wives, how holy and just
' partners soever they have, cleansed from the ini-
' quity which keeps them from the kingdom of God,
' and brings them to damnation ; nor are infants, of

q Cap. 12.

' De Sermone Domini in Monte, [lib. i. cap. i6. sect. 45, Op.
torn. iii. part. 2. p. 185.]
s Ch. XV. sect. 2.

WALL, VOL. I. C C

386 The Ancient Expositions.

CHAP. ' how holy and just parents soever they come, par-
' doned the guilt of original sin ; unless they (i. e.

(A.D.410.) ' the one and the other) be baptized in Christ.'

One may here in short confer together the several
comments of the ancients on this text; The unbe-
lieving husband is sanctified [or, an unbelieving
husband has been sanctified] by his wife^ &c., else
were your children unclean ; but now they are holy.
They do, most of them, and those the most ancient,
make that holiness of the children relate to their
baptism, as given, or to be given, before they are
actually holy.
296. 1. St. Austin in a former book*, interprets, 'has
' been sanctified, i. e. has been brought to the

* faith.' And, ' Now are your children holy, i. e.
' Now are they baptized.' And he there gives the
grounds of that interpretation, as may be seen by
turning back to the place where I recited it". And
here he says again, it must be interpreted so, or
else certainly in some such sense as does not make
them holy so as to inherit the kingdom, unless they
be baptized.

299- 2. He also here recites the explication that Pela-
gius had given of this text, and says, ' Pelagius,
' when he wrote on this epistle, expounded it thus :
' " Exempla jam praecesserant, et virorum quos ux-

* ores, et foeminarum quas mariti, lucrifecerant
' Christo, et parvulorum ad quos faciendos Chris-
' tianos voluntas Christiana etiam unius parentis
' evicerat^." There were by this time examples,
' both of men whom their wives, and of women

* De Sermone Domini in Monte, lib. i. cap. 27.

" Ch. XV. sect. 2.

V []De Peccat. Meritis &c. lib. iii. cap. 12.]

of that Text, 1 Cor. vH. 14. 387

♦ whom their husbands, had gained over to Christ ; c n a p.

* and of infants, concerning whom the Christian de- __1__

' sire even of one of their parents had prevailed that .^ ^°\q \
' they shoukl be made Christians.'

He manifestly paraphrases these words [* now are

* they holy'] thus, * now are they made Christians.'
And, the unbelieving party has been sanctified, i. e.
has been gained over to Christ.

The very same explication is, as they say, still
extant at this text, in those Commentaries on St.
Paul's Epistles, that go under the name of St. Hie-
rome, but are Pelagius', only interpolated ''.

3. Tertullian, speaking of the privilege that in-ioo.
fants have by being of Christian parents, or of one
parent such, says, ' now are they holy, i. e. designed

' for holiness ; for otherwise, the apostle knew what
' our Lord had determined. Except one he born of
' water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the

* kingdom of God, that is, he shall not be holy.'
See the place at large, chap. iv. '^. 6.

4. Origen also having an eye to this text in his
Comment, in Matth. p. 332, ed. Rothom. 1668 y,
shews how he understood ^yiaa-Tai here. ^AvSpog koI

yvvaiKOs afji<poT€p(ou aTricmov, ore fxev a avt]p, irpoTepov
Triarevtrai tw ■^povw, a-do^ei Ttju yvvaiKa' ore Se rj yvvr]
apt^aixevrj, vcrTcpov irOTe TrelOei tov avSpa. ' AVhen a

' man and his wife are both unbelievers ; sometimes
' the man believing first in time, saves his wife : and
' sometimes the wife believing first, does a while after
' persuade her husband.'

He that so paraphrases the man sanctified, i. e.

^ [See these in vol. xi. p. 8io, &c. of St, Jerome's works, by
Vallarsius.]

y [Comment, torn. xiii. §.28. edit. Benedict.

c c 2

388 The Ancient Expositions

CHAP, converted to the Christian religion, coukl not well

XIX

^ understand the sanctity [or holiness] of the children

f-vD^ioi otherwise than their being baptized into it.

293. 5. Paulinus writes to St. Hierome this question,

* How are they holy, whenas without the gift of

* the grace [viz. baptism] given them afterward
' [after their birth] and preserved, they cannot be

* saved ^?'

6. St. Hierome for answer refers him to the fore-
mentioned resolution of Tertullian, but withal men-
tions some other interpretations about legal clean-
ness or uncleanness.

And the same father, in his epistle to Laeta% a
Christian woman, daughter of Albinus a heathen,
priest of Jupiter, having mentioned this text, says,
it had been verified in her family ; for that she who
had been born ' de imparl matrimonio,' ' of an un-
' equal marriage,' i. e. her father a heathen, but her
mother being a Christian, ' the sweetness of the
' fruit had recompensed for the bitterness of the

* root ; and an ill shrub had sweat forth precious
' balsam, &c. We have borne [or waited] to good
' purpose. A holy and Christian family does sanc-

* tify one unbeliever. He [Albinus himself] is now

* a candidate of the faith, since he is encompassed

* with a multitude of his children and grandchild-
' ren that believe. I fancy that Jupiter himself
' might have believed, if he had had such kindred.'
Since he makes this to be a fulfilling of this text,
and the sanctifying of an unbeliever to be the con-
verting, or probability of converting him ; it is plain
he understood it as those foregoing. All these bring

2 See chap, xviii

a Epist. 7. [57, in ed. Benedict. — 107. ed. Vallars.]

of that Text. 1 Cor. vii. 14. 389

the baptism of infants into the explication of their ^"4^^-
holiness.

St. Chrysostom says*^ a great deal of clean and(^^i)'.°ro.)
unclean, without coming to any particular explica-298.
tion of what he means by it. He says, ' that the
' woman might not fear being made unclean by the
' copulation, the apostle tells her, the unhelieving

* husband is sanctified by the wife,' he. And then
having shewn why, though adultery is a reasonable
cause of separation, yet idolatry or heathenism is
not, he adds, ' then there is given a proof of this :

* for on supposition that thou being unclean didst

* bring forth a child, and that child being not from

* thee alone, the child would be unclean, or but half

* clean ; and therefore he adds, else were your chil-

* dren unclean, but now they are holy, i. e. not un-
' clean. But he uses the word holy, by an over-
' reaching expression, that he might further dispel
' all fear of any such suspicion, viz. of uncleanness.'

This is something obscure : but he seems to make
no more out of this text than the antipsedobaptists
do. Yet it is plain that he could not mean that by
this cleanness the children would obtain salvation
without baptism ; because he so often and so plainly
affirms the contrary, as I have shewed in chap. xiv.

8. He that made the Commentaries ascribed to
St. Ambrose, talks yet more slightly : he says*^, ' if

* the believing party stay \ATith the other, the sign of
' the cross will be used in the house ; and that is a

* sanctification of it : and that, if the believing party
' go away, and lie with others, it would be adultery ;

^ In loc []Homil. xix. in i Cor. §. 2. — Op. torn. x. p. 262.]'
c In loc. [Append, ad Op. Ambrosii, torn. ii. p. 134']

890 The Ancient Expositions^ S^e.

CHAP. « and the children so begotten would be unclean, be-

XIX

< cause they would be bastards.' He makes St. Paul's

(A.D.410.) arguing to come to no more than this ; let the be-
lieving woman stay and sanctify the house and her
unbelieving husband with the sign of the cross ; for
if she go from him, and lie with others, the children
so begotten would be bastards. Who doubts it ?

I know not at what year to place this author ; for
these commentaries are pieced out of several authors,
some elder, some later. This I believe was a later
one,
323. 9. Theodoret explains*^, ' the unbelieving party is
' sanctified, that is, there is hope of their salvation.
' But, suppose either the man or the woman do per-
' sist in unbelief; yet the seed shall be saved.'
These last words he explains as Calvin has since
done.

10. He that wrote the Qucestio7ies ad Antiochum,
that are among the works of Athanasius, explains
hol^ by ' shall be saved.' But he limits it expressly
to such as are baptized. I give his words among
the spurious pieces, chap, xxiii. ^. 3.

These are all the interpretations of this text, that
I know of, given by the ancients.

St. Austin in this book'' answers one more ob-
jection of Pelagius, which is this ; if the soul be not
derived from the parents, but the body only; how
comes the soul to be involved in the guilt of original
sin ?

He answers, 1. that Pelagius had spoke like a
circumspect man, when he put that with an if: for
that it is an obscure matter, and not to be resolved

d In loc. £Op. torn. iii. p. 151. ed. Paris. 1642.]
« De Peccatorum Meritis, lib. iii. cap. 10.

8t. Hierome against the Pelagians. 391

from scripture, whether the soul be derived, or be chap.

XIX

immediately created. Aud, 2. he bids him answer

this question first, ' If the soul be not derived, what ^^ ■jj'°*jq s

* justice is it that a soul newly created, and void of

* all guilt, wholly free from all contagion of sin,

* should in infants suffer several passions and tor-

* turings of the body, and, which is more dreadful,

* the outrage of evil spirits V He advises, that since
we see this by experience to be so, and yet cannot
answer for the reason or justice of it, we should in
all such questions remember that we are but men.

Having made so large an abstract of what St.
Austin says of this matter in these three books,
which were his first work against the Pelagians ; I
may have liberty to pass by a great many sayings
In his following books against them. For it were
endless to recite all the passages which we meet
with in them speaking of infant-baptism, and proving
from it original sin. I shall therefore mention only
here and there one, and that only in English, for
brevity.

XX. The next year, anno 413, St. Hierome wrote 313-
his epistle to Ctesiphon ^, against that opinion of the
Pelagians, which denies the need we have of God's
grace ; wherein he mentions not Pelagius by name,
but means him when he says, * speak out that which
' you hold : declare publicly what you talk in pri-

' vate to your disciples. This is the only he-

' resy that is ashamed to speak openly what it

* teaches privately. The forwardness of the dis-
' ciples publishes that which the masters keep in.
' What they hear in the chambers they proclaim on
' the housetop.' He instances in some passages of

f Epist. 120. [133. edit. Vallars.]

392 St. Hierome against the Pelagians.

CHAP, a book published by one of the disciples : which was

probably Cselestius ; for Pelagius being of more re-

{A.p °io ) fi'^®^ politics, generally forbore to appear himself,
and put this Irishman foremost. They called the
book Syllogisms ; but St. Hierome says it ought
to be called Soloecisms. It had in it such sayings as
these :

' It is in vain that God has given me the power
' of freewill, if I cannot put it in practice without

* his continual help.'

* I do either use the power once given me, so as

* that freewill is preserved : or else, if I stand in need
' of another's help, the freedom of will is destroyed
' in me.'

' If I have a mind to bend my finger, stir my
' hand, sit, stand, walk, run, spit, blow my nose,
' ease myself, make water : what ! shall the help of
' God be always necessary for me ?'

This St. Hierome calls blasphemy and sacrilege ;
and says,

' What venom of heretics does not this surpass?

* They maintain that by reason of the freedom of
' their will they have no further need of God.'

He has nothing here of original sin, and so not
of infants. He promised a larger work, in which
he would refute all their errors ; which he performed
314. two years after.

The next year St. Austin wrote a large and ela-
borate letter in answer to one he had received out of
Sicily from Hilarius. It is to be noted that Cse-
lestius, after his being condemned in Africa, or else
in going from Rome to Africa, had made his abode
for some time in Sicily ; and had, as it seems, sowed
the seeds of his heresy there. For Hilarius desired

St. Austin. 893

St. Austin's judgment concerning some new doc- chap.
trine, ' which,' says he, ' some Christians at Syracuse

* do publish s.' . 3'o.

' (A.D.410.)

1. ' That a man may be without sin, and keep

' God's commandments easily, if he will.

2. ' That an unbaptized infant surprised with

* death cannot perish deservedly, because he is born

* without sin.

3. ' That a rich man, if he keep his wealth, and

* do not sell all that he has, cannot enter into the

* kingdom of God. And that it will not avail him

* that he uses his riches well [or according to the
' commandments].

4. ' That one must not swear at all.

5. ' Whether the church, of which it is written,

* not having spot or wrinkle, be that in which we

* now live, or that which we hope for. For some

* think it is this church which consists of present

* persons,' &c.

To the second of these St. Austin answers ^

' Whereas they say, " An unbaptized infant can-

* not perish because he is born without sin." The
' apostle does not say so : and I suppose it is better

* to believe the apostle than them. For that teacher

* of the Gentiles, in whom Christ speaks, says, B?/
' one man sin entered into the ivorld, &c. For judg-

* ment was hy one {offence) to condemnation ; but the
'free gift is of many offences unto jiistificatiofi'^.

* Therefore if they can find any infant that is not
' sprung from the concupiscence of that one man ; of

& Inter Epistolas Augustini, Ep. 88. [156, ed. Benedict, torn, ii.
p. 542.]

h Epist. 89. [157. ed. Benedict.] » Rom. v. X2, &c.

394

Si. Austin.

CHAP.
XIX.

310.
(A.D,4io.)

such an one let them say, that he is not liable to that
condemnation, nor needs by the grace of Christ to
be delivered from it.'

' What means, Bi/ one offence to condemnation,
but, by that one offence in which Adam offended ?
And what means, Of many offences to justification ;
but that the grace of Christ does take off not only
that offence with which infants, sprung from that one
man, are held bound ; but also the many offences
which, when they are grown men, they add to it
by wicked practices? But still that one, to which
the carnal offspring that derives from that first
man is liable, is, he says, enough for their con-
demnation. Therefore the baptism of infants is
no more than what is necessary : that they, who by
their generation are subject to that condemnation,
may by regeneration be freed from it. And as
there is not a person in the world who is carnally
generated but from Adam ; so neither is any
spiritually regenerated but by Christ. The carnal
generation is liable to that one offence, and the
condemnation thereof: but the spiritual regenera-
tion takes away not only that one for which infants
are baptized ; but also those many which men by
wicked living have added to that in which they are
generated.

' And therefore he goes on, and says, If hy one
matibS offence death reigned hy one; much more
they which receive the abundance of grace &c. shall
reign &c. Therefore as hy the offence of one
judgment came upon all men to condemnation ;
even so hy the righteousness of 07ie the free gift
came upon all men unto justification of life. For
as by one man's disobedience many were made

St. Austin. 395

* sinners, so hy the obedience of 07ie shall many he chap.

* made righteous. [Cap. iii. §.11.] —

* What will they say to this ? Or what is possible .^ ^°\o \

* for them to say, unless they will plead that the

* apostle is mistaken ? that chosen vessel, the teacher

* of the Gentiles, that trumpet of Christ, proclaims,

* Judgment came by one to condemnation : and these
' proclaim on the contrary ; and say, that infants,

* who, as they confess, derive from that one man

* of whom he speaks, do not go into condemnation,

* though they be not baptized.'

' Judgment, says he, came by one to condemnation.

* By one, what does he mean, but by one offence?

* Since it follows, But the grace is of many qfences
' to justiji cation.^

Then he answers to that plea of theirs, by which
they said that St. Paul by otie offe7ice meant both
the sin of Adam, and also all the sins which men
by imitating that do commit.

He shews, that if St. Paul had meant so, he
would have said in like manner of the grace of
Christ, that that was of one offence to justification :
but he distinguishes, and says, condemnation came
by one offence; but the grace of Christ justifies
from many offences. [^. 20.]

Afterwards he says, ' If as they pretend, the apo_

* stle had said these things on this account, that we

* should understand sinners to belong to that first

* man, not that we derive sin by being born of him,

* but by imitating him : he would rather have
' named the Devil ; for he sinned first, and from him

* mankind do not derive their pedigree, but only
' they imitate him. And if it were on account of

* imitation that the apostle named the first man,

396 ^^i^. Austin.

CHAP. * because he was the first sinner anions men, and

XIX

' for that reason all sinful men were said to belong

f A IJ°" N ' to him : why did he not name Abel as the second
(A.D.410.) i -^

' man, who was the first righteous among men ?
* But he names Adam, and on the other part

* names none but Christ. Because as the one, a
' man, did by his sin defile his posterity ; so the
' other, God and man, did by his righteousness save
' his inheritance : the one by transferring [or con-
' veying] the defilement of the flesh, which the
' Devil though wicked, could not ; the other by

* giving the grace of his Spirit, which Abel, though

* righteous, could not.' [^. 21.]

He at last observes to Hilarius, that Caelestius
had been condemned for this doctrine at Carthage
two years before : and tells him that he himself had
published some books, and had preached oftentimes
against it, and had recovered several. That there
were still some at Carthage that held that opinion ;
but privately : that in many places there were more
of them than one would expect. ' And where they

* are not refuted, they seduce others to their sect ;
' and are grown so numerous, that I know not what

* it will come to. But we wish rather that they
' should be healed in the unity of the church, than
' that they should be cut off from the body of it

* as incurable members ; provided necessity do not

* compel it. For there is some fear lest more limbs

* do putrify, whilst the putrified ones are spared,' &c.
[f 22.]

XXI. The third and fourth positions of the Pela-
gians, about a rich man, and about swearing, are
such as may possibly raise the reader's curiosity to
know what was said to those questions in these times.

St. Austin. 397

To the third St. Austin observes, that Abraham, chap.

XIX.

Isaac, and Jacob were rich, and continued so ; and "
yet have a place in the kingdom. That the rich man (ad°"io)
in the parable did not go into torment because he
died rich ; but because he was luxurious, and un-
merciful to Lazarus : that Lazarus, when he died,
was carried into the bosom of a rich man, &c.
l§. 23.]

And whereas the Pelagians pretended that the
selling of all is necessary under the New Testament,
though not under the Old ; he observes that our
Saviour, who set the rich young man this condition
of being perfect ; sell that thou hast, &c., yet did not
set this as the condition of entering; into life : but
that other, keep the commandments^. That the
apostle, teaching rich men how to lay hold on
eternal life^, bids them do good, distribute, commu-
nicate, &c., but does not require them to sell all.
y. 24—26.]

But to the argument which they raised from
these words of our Saviour, A rich man shall hardly
enter into the kingdom of heaven"^, &c., St. Austin
makes no answer but what seems defective. ' How is

* it then,' says he, ' does the apostle speak contrary to
' the Lord ? Or do these men not understand what

* they talk of?' He refers them to Christ's following
words. With men this is impossible ; but with God
all things are possible. Those they explained thus,
as he tells us ; ' Christ knew that several rich men,
' upon hearing the gospel, would sell their estates
' and give them to the poor, &c., and so that would
' be done which seemed so difficult : not that any of

^ Matt. xix. 17, 21. 1 I Tim. vi. 17, 18, 19.

m Matt. xix. 23, &c.

398 St. Austin, of a rich man,

CHAP. * them continuing in their wealth, would, by keeping
' * those rules of the apostle, lay hold on eternal life :
(A.D.410.) ' ^^* ^^^ selling all that they had, they would
' so fulfil those rules of the apostle.' \k^. 28.]

Here St. Austin observes, that according to this
their own interpretation, ' our Lord does, contrary
' to their tenet, set forth his own grace ; for he does

* not say, " that which seems to you impossible, is
' easy for men to do, if they will." But he says,
' that which is impossible with men, is easy with
' God^ And following on that point, he forgets to
return and give any answer how he himself would
have those words of our Saviour to be understood.
Only he observes that the apostle's words could not
be so meant as they explained them, viz. of selling
all they had : because he gives several rules how
they should provide for their servants, children, &c.,
which is not consistent with selling all they had :

* For,' as he observes, ' how can this be done with-
' out a house, and something to keep it ?' [^. 29-
et seqq^

Our Saviour seems in that saying, a rich man
shall hardly enter into the kingdom of God, to have
meant, as he does in many other places, by the
kingdom of heaven, and the kingdom of God, not
the kingdom of glory, but the state of the profes-
sion of the gospel, and of faith in him, as it was at
that time, when both himself and all that would be
his disciples, were so persecuted, that they could
not think of keeping any estate if they had it. And
as things so stood, it was very hard to persuade any
rich man to enter into it ; so hard, that humanly
speaking, it was impossible. Only God by the
power of his grace might overcome that love of their

and of swearing i Sfc. 399

wealth, which hindered them from owning Christ, chap.
Now that difficulty is not at all times ; but only in

times of persecution. (A.D.410.)

If this be the sense ; the translation would be
more intelligible if it were said, not ' shall hardly,'
but * will hardly enter,' &c.

And if this be the sense ; then what St. Austin
answers is pertinent and full : viz. that there are
many rich men, who, though they do not actually
sell all, and give to the poor, yet are ready to part
with all, if occasion should be, for the sake of Christ
and his truth ; and who in the meantime do keep
their families in Christian discipline, use hospitality
and beneficence to the poor, receive a righteous man
in the name of a righteous man, &c. And he takes
notice that Pelagius himself was relieved in his ne-
cessities by such rich men, and entertained by them ;
(and others speak of him as a great haunter of such
men's houses :) he says,

' These men, if they expect to be such as the apo-

* stle speaks of, that shall judge angels^, ought to
' resolve beforehand to receive into everlasting hahi-

* tations those that have ynade them their friends

* with the mammon of unrighteousness^.

' Those servants of God, who having sold all, do
' afterwards live upon the honest labour of their own
' hands, may with much less impudence condemn
' men from whom they receive nothing ; than those

* that not being able by reason of some infirmity to

* work with their hands, do condemn the men that

* maintain them.' [§. 37, 38.]

' I that write this, was greatly in love with that

* perfection of which our Lord spoke, when he said

y I Cor. vi. 3. ^ Luke xvi. 9.

400 St. Austin, of a rich man,

CHA P. ' to the rich man, Go and sell all, &c., and I did so ;

XIX.

not by my own strength, but by his assisting grace.

(A.D.410.)' -^^^ though I was not rich ; there will never the

* less be imputed to me for that : for the apostles
' themselves, that did this first, were no rich men,
' But he parts with all the world, that parts with

' all that he has, or hopes to have. And I do

' my utmost endeavour to persuade others to this

* purpose ; and I have in the name of God several
' partners, who have by my ministry been brought
' to it. But still so, as that the sound doctrine is
' preserved among us ; and that we do not in way

* of vainglory censure those that do not take the
' same course; and tell them that it will not avail

* them to live chastely in matrimony, to order their
' houses and families Christian like,' &c. [§. 39.]

I think this to be a modest and handsome rebuke
of the pride of those two monks ; who valued them-
selves so much upon their selling their temporal
possessions, that they censured all that did not do
the like, as incapable of God's kingdom. St. Austin
shews that he and several others had done the
same, with less noise and less spiritual pride and
censure.

To the fourth about swearing, he says thus:
' Avoid swearing as much as is possible : for it is
' better not to swear even to the truth, than by a

* custom of swearing to fall often into perjury, and
' always to come in danger of it. But these men, as
' far as appears by what I have heard some of them

* talk, do not know what is swearing; for they

* think they do not swear when they say, " God
' knows," or, " God is witness," or, " I call God to wit-
' ness upon my soul;" because it is not said " By God:"

and of swearing^ ^c. 40l

' and because such j)lirases as the forementioned are chai'.

■y I ■y

' found in the apostle Paul. But even that phrase ' ' '

which they confess to be swearing is found in him, , . ]l°- .

•' o J (A.L).4iO.)

' when he says, by your rejoicing which I have in
' Christ Jesus our Lord^. For in the Greek this
' plainly appears to be swearing : so that one cannot
' take those words in the Latin, j^cr vestram cflo-
* riam, " by your rejoicing," as those, jjer meum ad-
' ventum iteruni ad vos^, " by my coming to you
' again," and many such like, where it is said, " by
' any thing," and yet there is no swearing, are to be
' taken.'

' But because the apostle, a man most strong in
' the truth, swore in his epistles, we must not there-
' fore make a sport of swearing. As for us, it is
' much safer, as I said, never to swear ; but to make
' use of Yes, yes ; and No, no ; as our Lord advises :
' not that it is a sin to swear truly ; but it is a
' most dreadful sin to swear falsely : into which he
' naturally falls that accustoms himself to swear,'
[SS. 40.]

This is St. Austin's sense : and whereas some of
the ancienter Fathers are against all swearing ; there
was a particular reason in their time : because all
the oaths then administered in courts were by the
heathen gods, or the genii of the emperors.

The instance that he gives of St. Paul's swearing
is the plainest in the scripture : for whereas the
Latin language uses the word per, as the English
the word dy, to many other purposes, as well as
swearing ; the Greek, as St. Austin observes, has a
peculiar word vrj for by, in the case of swearing by
any thing, and which is never used but in swearing :.

a I Cor. V. 31. '^ Piiil. i. 26.

WALL. VOL. I. I) (1

402 Pelagius and St. Austin.

CHAP, as vri Aiciy and vi] tov^ GeoJ?. And so vrj rrjv vjULerepau

/ ^' Kav-)(t](7iv, is, without any more addition, ' I swear [for

^^|/°',q)' wbieli our English have put I protest] by your

' glory, [or rejoicing,] which I have in Christ Jesus

* our Lord,' i. e. by that M^hich is our common

Christian hope and joy.

XXII. There came the same year some more
questions out of Sicily for St. Austin to resolve, from
Eutropius and Paulus. They sent him a paper,
entitled, Dejimtiones, ut dicitur, Ccelestii, ' Argu-
' ments given out, as is said, by Cselestius.'

It contained fourteen arguments, or rather one
arocument diversified in words fourteen times : to
prove that a man may be without sin if he will.
That argument is no other than this dilemma^
' God's commands are either possible or impos-
' sible,' &c.

It might be worth the while of a young sophister
to read them for a pattern to see how many ways
that fallacy may be varied ; as, ' sin is either a thing
' that may be avoided, or that cannot be avoided,' &c.,
' sin is either a thing of will, or of necessity,' &c.
but they are not worth reciting here. St. Austin
recites them, and gives particular answers to each
of them '^i that a man may by God's grace have in
general a will, desire, and aim to avoid all sin : but
by reason of our frailty, no man finds that purpose
to hold out so steady in all particulars but that he
often slips, and sometimes falls. Neither does it do
us any good to prove how unblameable we should be
on supposition that our will were faultless : since
our greatest blemish is the corrupt inclination of our

^ Lib. de Perfectione Justitise Hominis, ad Eatropium. [Op.
torn. X. p. 167, &c.]

Pelag'ms and St. Austin. 403

■will itself, which complies with the tentations, in all chap.

XIX.

men at some times and to some degree ; but in men

destitute of God's grace, so far as to yield the do-^^^ fJ°",o)
minion to sin. And since this is too plain by expe-
rience ; what do sophisms to the contrary avail us ?
Our business is to get cure by God's grace for this
distemper, not to dispute ourselves out of the sense
of it.

About this time Pelagius wrote one of his most 314-
elaborate pieces, entitled, ' Of the Abilities of Na-

* ture.' To which 8t. Austin, next year, wrote
an answer, entitled, 'Of Nature and Grace*^,' Hes'S-
owns*^ that Pelagius had shewn an example of a
most strong and nim])le wit, and had well reproved
those that excuse their wickedness by laying all the
fault of it on the nature of man : but that he had
carried this zeal too far, in saying that men that are
wicked might have been sinless if they would ; and,

* that if they were sinners because they could not be

* otherwise, they are not to be blamed.' On which
St. Austin makes this remark^, ' mind what he says:
' now I say that an infant born and surprised with

* death in such a place where he cannot be relieved
' by the baptism of Christ, is as he is, (viz. dies
' without the washing of regeneration,) because he

* could be no otherwise. Let him then absolve such
' an one, and set open the kingdom of heaven to him,
' in spite of our Lord's declaration,' &c.

Among several arguments as good as the case
would bear, Pelagius there uses one very silly lo-
gical quirk. In opposition to what the church held
of our nature in the state in which it now is, viz.
that it is depraved and weakened by sin, he said",

J [Op. torn. x.p. 127, &c.] t Cap. 6. f Cap. 7.

g Apud Augustin. de Natura et Gratia, cap. 19.

D d 2

404 Pelagius affirmed the Virgin

CHAP. * What is sin ? Is it any substantial thing ; or a

XIX '

' name without any substance, by which is meant

fA D °io ) ' ^^^ ^^y ^^^^ thing, not any existence, not any bo-
' dily thing ; but the act of something done amiss ?
' And how can that which has no substance weaken
' or change human nature ? '

St. Austin produces the instance of some godly
man, crying out, as it is, Ps. xli. 4, Lord, be mer-
ciful to me^ heal my soul, for I have sinned against
thee, &c. He bids Pelagius ask such a man, ' What

* he ails ? What is sin, is it a substance,' &c. ?
' How can a thing that has no substance defile thy
' soul,' &c. ? And then adds, ' would not the man,
' in the bitterness of his soul, bid him begone,' &c.?
' You see whither this argument tends, and to what
' it would lead us ; to think those words spoken

* to no purpose ; Thoti shalt call his name Jesus,
'■for he shall save his people from their sins. For
' how shall he save them if they have no ailing ?
' Sins, from which the gospel says Christ's people
' are to be saved, are no substances, and so cannot

* defile. Oh, brother, it were a good thing if you
' would remember that you are a Christian'^ !'

XXIII. Pelagius proved that men may be with-
out sin, by instancing' in a great many persons who
had been so, as he pretended : Abel, Enoch, Melchi-
zedek, and twenty more : and in some women ;
Deborah, Anna, Judith, &c., and also the mother of
our Lord and Saviour; concerning whom he said,
' That it is necessary for our religion that we do

* confess her to be without sin.'

St. Austin answers, ' Excepting the holy Virgin
' Mary, concerning whom I am not willing, for the
' honour of our Lord, to hold any dispute at all
'' [Cap. 20.] i Apud Augustin. de Natura et Gratia, cap. 36.

Mary to he Sinless. 405

* when Ave are talking about sin, (Uncle enim scimns chap.
' quid ei plus gratia) collatum fuerit ad vincendum L_

' omni ex parte peccatum, quae concipere ac parere (A.D.410.)

' meruit [eum], quern constat nullum liabuisse pec-

' catum ? Hac ergo virgine excepta &e.) For how

' do we know what more grace was bestowed on her

' to overcome all sin, who had the honour to con-

' ceive and bring forth him who certainly had no

' sin ? But (this Virgin excepted) if we could have

* called together all those holy men and women

* when they were alive, and have asked them whe-
' ther they were without sin ; what do you think

* they would have said ? As this man says, or as
' the apostle John says ? Tliey would all have

* cried out with one voice. If we say that we have
' no sin, we deceive ourselves,^ &c.

From what the papists nowadays say and practise
in reference to the blessed Virgin, one would think
that all antiquity had believed her to be sinless : but
by examining we shall find that Pelagius here is the
first that ever said that she was without sin. St.
Austin indeed makes a very modest answer; as
thinking it decent for us, in regard to the honour
of our Saviour, not to hold any talk about the sins
of his mother : but as one may guess by this place,
and more plainly by some other, he was far from
affirming her to be sinless. He often speaks posi-
tively of all mankind as sinful, excepting only our
Saviour Christ. And for other Fathers, they make
no scruple, when it comes in their way, to speak
particularly of her failings : as Chrysostom on John
11. 3. And St. Hierome having repeated her Can-
ticum, bids Pelagius mark, that ' she does not call
' herself blessed for any merit or virtue of her own ;

406 Pelagius affirmed the Virgin

CHAP. ' but by the mercv of God, who vouchsafed to in-

XIX. , , . . T

' habit in her^

(A.D.410.) Aquinas having produced, by way of objection
against himself, several reasons and some author-
ities, that she had sin'"', answers them all with that
text. Cant. iv. 7, Thou art all fair, my love, there
is no spot in thee; and with this passage of St.
Austin. Now this is not to his purpose as it stands
here : but in Aquinas' citation the words are altered.
He reads them thus, ' Inde enim scimus quod ei plus
' gratise coUatum fuerit ad vincendum ex omni parte
' peccatum, quod concipere,' &c. ' For we know that
' more grace was bestowed on her to overcome all
' sin, by this ; that she had the honour to conceive
' [or, deserved to conceive,'] &c. But the Jesuit
Vasquez had something more of honesty : for though
he would have the words read as Aquinas reads
them ; yet he confesses that he found them in the
book as I have transcribed them. He quotes ' Unde
' enim,' but adds as of his own, ' or rather inde
' enim :' and he quotes ' quid ei plus gratiae ;' but
says, as of his own head, ' or rather, qtiod ei plus
' gratice^.^ And the word quce he does not pretend
to alter into quod at all.

The edition that Vasquez had, was more unex-
ceptionable, and gives even less occasion to the
popish alterations, than that out of which I tran-
scribe, which is Erasmus', printed at Venice, 1551.
(and his editions are commonly the least tainted

i Dialog. I. [contra Pelagianos, §. 16. Op. ii. p. 698.]

^ Thonice Aquinatis Summa Theologica ; pars tertia, qusestio

27. art. 3, 4.

1 Comment, in tei'tiam partem Summse Thomje : torn. ii. Disp.

117. cap. 3.

Mary to he t^liilcss. 407

with their corriii)tions of the text); for Vasquez chap.

XIX

reads quid, which, together with the sense of the

discourse there, justifies mv alteration. If there,. ?v° ^

«' • (A.1J.410.J

were not some eye kept over these men, they woukl,
both in the Fathers, and in the scri|)ture too, alter
the words as some of them have done here, to serve
their turn.

They had better take Pelagius' words, which serve
their purpose without any alteration : it would not
be the first time they have borrowed from some
heretic a doctrine which was never owned in the
ancient catholic church. Pelagius does not only say
she was sinless, but makes it a necessary point of
religion to believe so ; m liich fits them to a hair.

XXIV. Pelagius lived all this while at Jerusalem :
but what he wrote was in Latin ; so that his opin-
ions were more talked of in the west, where he had
lived, and where that language was understood and
spoken, than in the east, where he now was; be-
cause little but Greek was read or spoken there.

He could not have found a more convenient re-
treat than at Jerusalem : for John the bishop there,
with whom he lived, was himself addicted to new
opinions. Both Epiphanius and St. Hierome had a

ffood while before wrote ajjainst him for holding se-
es r> o

veral of the condemned opinions of Origen ; to which
some of Pelagius' tenets were pretty near akin.

About this time there ha])pened a meeting of
bishops at Jerusalem : and Orosius, a young man,
who had been with St. Austin, and was now at
Bethlehem with St. Ilierome, came to this meet-
ing ; and declared to them what a noise there was
in the west, about some doctrines published by
Ciclestius, and countenanced by some writings of

408 Pelagim accused.

CHAP. Pelagins, and that St.Austin had wrote against them.

/" ' ' And he caused to be read"^ to them (as well as
(A D °io ) ^'^^^^ ^® done by an interpreter) St. Austin's letter
315- to riilarius, mentioned before in ^. 20, 21". Pela-
gius being asked whether he had taught those doc-
trines, against which St. Austin there writes ; an-
swered, ' Who is that Austin ?' [or, what is Austin
to me°?] Some in the council answered, ' He that
' speaks against that bishop by whose means God
' has restored unity to all Africa, deserves to be
' turned out not only from this assembly, but from
' the whole church.'

They referred to the service St. Austin had done
in reducing the Donatists.

But bishop John, who presided, interposed for
him : and all that was urged against him at that
time being this, that he had maintained that a
man might live without sin ; John said, ' If he had
' maintained this to be possible without God's help,
' it were a thing to be condemned ; but since he
' adds that, what have you to say? Do you deny
' God's help?' So a squabble arising, and Orosius,
who could speak no Greek, as they no Latin, not
being able to make them understand the fallacy
which Pelagius concealed under that word, ' God's
' help ;' the issue was, that the matter should be
referred to Innocent, bishop of Rome, and that in
the mean time Pelagius should keep silence : and
so nothing at this meeting was said about original

™ Pauli Orosii Apologetic, [contra Pelagium, de Arbitrii li-
bertate; sub init. p. 590. edit. Haverkamp, Lugd. Bat. 1738.]

[° See above, p. 392.]

o [The words, as quoted by Orosius, are, ' et quis est mihi Au-
gustinus ?']

Pelagkis recants. 409

sin. And John the bishoj) took occasion quickly chap,
after to fall out with Orosius : upon which he wrote _____

his Apologetic, which is still extant, and out of,. ^'°- ,.
which some quotations to our purpose about infant-
baptism might be taken ; but they have nothing
different from what St. Austin, and St. Hierome,
and Pelagius himself, have: and therefore I shall
for brevity omit them.

But about the latter end of this year 415, there 3'S-
was another assembly of fourteen bishops in this
country, at the town which in scripture is called
Lydda, but was then called Diospolis, to which
Pelagius was summoned. And there he could come
off no other way but by denying several of his
opinions, which he had promoted before ; and which
(as St. Austin makes appear) he for all this denial
continued to promote afterward.

The articles objected to him were taken, partly
out of some books of his own ; partly out of some
books of Caelestius, who was looked on as his
scholar ; and partly out of the acts of a council at
Carthage, where Crelestius had been condemned;
and partly out of that catalogue of new opinions
wliich Hilarius had sent to St. Austin out of Sicily,
and which St. Austin refuted in the forementiond
letter.

Of what was cited from his own books, he denied
part ; and said the book was not writ by him, though
it went under his name. The rest he defended, and
put as fair a colour on as he could ; which was easy
to do, because what he had wrote in Latin, (which
these bishops did not understand,) he explained to
them in Greek'': (for he did not speak to them by

P Aug. de Gestis Pelagii Falsest, cap. i. §. 2.

410 Pelagius recants.

CHAP, an interpreter, as Mr.Le Clerc mistakes the matter:)
_ and because bis accusers were not there, being sick ;

(A,D.4io.) ^^^ o^^y their libel was read.

But he himself had been wary in his expressions,
for what Ccelestius had. Of the articles taken from
the books or words of Caelestius he defended some ;
as, ' The possibility of avoiding all sin, by God's
' help,' &c., but renounced the rest, in these words ;
' The other things, as they confess themselves, were
' not spoken by me ; and so I have no reason to
' answer for them. Yet, for the satisfaction of the
' holy synod, I do renounce [anathematize] all that
' do hold sol.' So he got off with a whole skin ;
but left several of his beloved opinions behind him
condemned, as appears by minding which those
were that he renounced.

The account of the whole is long: especially of
those articles which bore a dispute in what sense
he had spoke or understood them. What is most
material to give us the sense of the church at that
time, is, to recite those which the council condemned,
and he was forced to condemn : which you have in
the words of St. Austin, in his letter to Paulinus^
expressed much shorter than in the book De Gesds
PalcBst., (where the acts of this council are at large
recited,) but to the same effect. He writes thus :

' For beside those articles which he ventured to
' defend as well as he could ; some things were
* objected to him, which unless he had renounced
' [anathematized] he would have been renounced
' himself.

' For it was objected, that he said [or held,]

q August, eodem libro, [cap. ii. §. 34.]

»■ Epist. io6. [186. cap. 9. §. 32, 33. ed. Benedict.]

Pelag'ms recants. 411

1. 'That Adam, wlietlicr he liad sinned or not, chap.
would liave died.

2. ' That his sin hurt himself only, and not man-, -Vx"* x

•' (A. r).4io.)

' kind.

3. ' That infants new born arc in the same state
' that Adam was before his fall.

4. ' That neither by the death or fall of Adam
' does all mankind die, nor by the resurrection of
' Christ does all mankind arise.'

These you see, are the same that had been ob-
jected to Caslestius^ four years before.

5 ' That infants, though they be not baptized,
' have eternal life.

6. * That rich men, unless they part with all, &c.,
' cannot have the kingdom of God.'

These two were taken out of the heads of new
doctrine broached at Syracuse *.

7. ' That the grace of God is not given in every
' action ; but is in freewill ; or, in the law and
' doctrine.'

And several other articles about grace and merit.

' All these Pelagius did so renounce [anathe-
' matizavit] as the acts of the council do shew,
' that he did not produce any thing in defence of
' them. From whence it follows, that whosoever
' will own the authority of that episcopal judgment,
' and the confession of Pelagius himself, must hold
' these things, (which the catholic church has ever
' held,) viz.

' That Adam, if he had not sinned, would not
' have died.

' That his sin hurt, not himself only, but man-
' kind.

s See above, §.5. * See above, §. 20.

412 Synod of DiospoUs.

CHAP. ' That infants new born are not in the state that
' ' Adam was before his fall, &c.

rAD° ) ' ^^^^^ unbaptized infants will miss, not only of
' the kingdom of heaven, but also of eternal life,'
Sue.

Though this must needs have cost Pelagius a
sore pang; yet so it happened, that the news of
his being acquitted in this council made more noise
among the vulgar people to his advantage, than his
being compelled to renounce those opinions did
against his cause : especially in the west, where
they heard he was acquitted and approved ; but did
not hear upon what terms. He himself also pub-
lished accounts of the matter to his own advantage",
and triumphed of his success. So that the Pelagians
were never more uppish, than they were for a while
after this synod.

And yet, upon the whole matter, though St. Austin
does often speak of these bishops, as having been
imposed on by Pelagius in matter of fact ; and do
shew how he disguised and concealed his true mean-
ing from them ; and though he do, in a letter, which
he a little while after this wrote to John bishop of
Jerusalem, desiring him to send a copy of the acts
of the council, say thus, ' As for Pelagius, our
' brother and your son, whom I hear you love very
' well ; I advise you so to manage your love to him,
' that they that know him, and have attentively
' heard him, may not judge your holiness to be
' imposed on by him, &c. For when you hear him
' confess the grace and help of God, you think he
' means the same that you do, who have a catholic
' sense of it, because you do not know what he has

" Aug. de Gestis Pelagii Paleestin. cap. 30.

Greek Ghiwch against Pelagitis. 413

wrote in his book : and for that reason I have c h a p.

XIX.

sent you his book, and mine written in answer to

' it^.' And though St. Ilierome do on this account (a.d.^io.)
call this synod, ' the pitiful synod of ])ios])olisy ;'
yet, I say, upon the whole matter, it appears by the
acts of this council, that these bisho})S, though as
St. Austin says, * they could not thoroughly ex-
' amine the man ; yet for the heresy itself, they
' gave it a deadly wound ^.' For by forcing Pela-
gius to declare what he did, about the sin of Adam,
the natural state of infants, and the necessity of
God's grace, and the renouncing of merit, they
shewed that they were far enough from Pelagian-
ism : so that St. Austin says, that when he read the
acts of this council, and before he saw Pelagius'
books of freewill, wherein he returned to his vomit
again ; he thought ' that this question had been at an
' end ; and that Pelagius had plainly owned original
' sin in infants''*.'

XXV. This I note the rather, because some among
us nowadays, that shew a good-will to Pelagianism,
and do strangely shuffle with that ninth Article of
the church of England, which is of original sin, ex-
pounding it all away, do shelter themselves under
the ])retended authority of the Greek church, as if
the Greek Fathers had not owned that doctrine.
Whereas not only this council that acquitted Pela-
gius, yet condemned the opinions laid to his charge ;
but also the other councils of the eastern nations
agreed with the Latins in condemning the said

X Epist. 252. [179. §. I — 5. ed. Benedict.]
y Hieronym. Epist. 79. [143. ed. Vallars.]
z De Gestis Pal, cap. 21.
a Lib. ii. de Peccato Origin, cap. 14.

41 4 Greek Church against Pelagius.

CHAP, doctrines; and the men too when it appeared that

XIX

they really held such doctrines.

CAD^io^ For three years after this, Theodotus bishop of
3'8- Antioch held a synod at Jerusalem, to which Pela-
gius was cited, and there condemned ; as is recorded
by Marius Mercator, Commonitor. cap. 3.

And sometime after, Julian the Pelagian, with
seventeen more of his party, wrote to the bishop of
Thessalonica, representing their own doctrine in the
fairest colours, and that of the catholics in the west
in the blackest ; hoping to make a party in the
Greek church^ : but found none, or hardly any, that
they could bring over.

Cselestius, before his condemnation at Rome, went
to Constantinople, to try if any interest could be
made there. But Atticus, the bishop there, would
neither receive him nor his doctrine'^. St. Austin
mentions this in short, lib. iii. Contra Julian, cap. 1.
But Mercator more at large, Commonitor. cap. 1.
' Some years after he went to Constantinople, in
' the time of Atticus of holy memory ; where being
' discovered to hold such opinions, he was by the
' great care of that holy man driven from that
' city : and letters were sent concerning him into
' Asia, to Thessalonica and Carthage, to the bi-
' shops there ; of which I have copies ready to be
' produced. But the said Cselestius being driven
' from hence also went to Rome/ &c.

At Ephesus also they were rejected and disowned,
' not suffered to abide there ;' which is the word of

^ August, ad Bonifac. contra duas epistolas Pelagian orum,
cap. 1. §.3.

c Acta concilii Ephesini, part. i. cap. 18. [Labb. iii. p. 353.
Mansi, iv. p. 1025.]

Greek Charch against Pelaglas. 415

Prosper, who relates this, lib. de Inc/ratis, cap. 2. ^ "'^^•
But Mr. Le Clerc expresses it, ' ill treated.

The only hopeful attempt they ever made in the(A.D.°io.)
Greek church was about fifteen years after this time : 33'-
when a general council being called to Ephesus on
account of Nestorius, (who had innovated in the
doctrine of the incarnation,) they joined their party
with his, as is usual for discontented parties to do ;
and made in all at first forty-three, but quickly
dwindled to thirty, as appears by the address of the
council to the emperor ; where they say, ' It is an
' absurd thing that thirty men only (some of whom
' had been a good while ago deposed, some are of
' the false opinion of Ca3lestius, &c.) should set
' themselves against a synod of 210 bishops, with
* whom all the western bishops (and so the whole
' world) do consent.' They made also canons^', ' that
' if any clergyman did publicly or privately promote
' the opinions of Nestorius or Ca^lestius, they should
' be deprived.'

These things, and more to the same purpose, are
largely and particularly quoted out of the acts of
that council, by bishop Ussher, in the forementioned
treatise®. So that it is hard to guess what these
men get by appealing to the Greek church.

And for the Greek Fathers before this time ; Vos-
sius has largely shewn in his Pelagian history^,
that they commonly teach the doctrine of original
sin. Only he thinks Clemens Alexandrinus must be

d Can. 4. [apud Labb. iii. p. 805. Mansi, iv. 1473.]

e See above, cap. 1 1 .

' [' Historia; de controversiis quas Pelagius ejusque reliquiae
' moverunt libri vii.' published separately more than once, and
in the sixth volume of his collected works, fol. Amst. 1701.]

416 Greek Church against Pelagius.

CHAP, excepted: but Dr. Hammond shews? that there is
' no reason for that exception. Vossius is of opinion

,310. that there is no difference between St. Austin and
(A.D.410.)

the ancient Greek Fathers about that other point,
of pra^destination ; but that^ what the ancienter Fa-
thers omitted concerning prasdestination, he adds.
But, allowing that to be a matter in which men
will always pass various judgments, and will find
each their own sentiments both in the scripture and
the Fathers ; it cannot with any modesty at all be
pretended that they do not ow^n and complain of
original sin, or natural corruption. It is true, that
most of them were of opinion that this corruption or
sin should in unbaptized infants be punished no
otherwise than by the loss of the kingdom of heaven.
And in this indeed they differed from most of the
Latins.

Mr. Le Clerc says', ' they that have so ill an opin-
* ion of Pelagius, as St. Austin had, do say, that if
' St. Austin had been able to read the Greek doctors,
' he would have found that they speak no otherwise
' than Pelagius does ; as may,' says he, ' be seen in a
' great many places in St. Chrysostom, and in Isi-
' dore of Pelusium, whom some moderns have openly
' accused of Pelagianism.'

By singling out St. Chrysostom, he follows the
steps of the old Pelagians; for it appears out of
St. Austin's books against Julian the Pelagian, lib. i.
and lib. iii. that he and Anianus do make their
chief boast of St. Chrysostom, and do fetch more
for their purpose out of him than out of any other
Greek writer. They translated some of his orations

S Aunot. on Psalm 5 r. '' De Historicis Latinis, lib. ii. cap. i.
' Bibl. Univers. torn. viii. p. 192.

Greek Church against Pelagius. 417

that were most for their turn: and St. Austin, chap.

XIX.

though not very conversant indeed in the Greek

language, yet shewed that he could read and tole-z^.i). 410.1
rably understand it, by giving instances wherein
they had made them more for their purpose than
they were, by their translation, as I recited before
in chap. xiv. And besides, he answered them by
producing other places of his, M'here he plainly owns
original sin.

And for other Greek doctors, who were more to
be regarded (for St. Clirysostom was no ancienter
than St. Austin himself,) he shews the doctrine of
Irena^us, St. Basil, St. Gregory, &c., to have been
clear and full in this matter: and says'^, though he
had a translation of the sermon of St. Basil, which
he quoted, yet ' he chose rather to translate it liim-
' self word for word out of the Greek, that it might
' be more exact.' The like he does in the same
book with two passages of St. Chrysostom, setting
down the Greek words. So that the foresaid censure,
passed on him, has more in it of the assuming
humour of a critic, than it has of truth or good
manners.

And to expect of St. Austin that he should have
read Isidore, to know the sense of the Greek church,
is (if one consider the age of each) a jest indeed.

I gave some instances above, in chap. xiv. where
both St. Chrysostom, and this Isidore, and also
Theodoret, (for they all run in one vein, and the
two latter shew a great ambition to imitate the
former,) have expressions something like those of

^ Lib. i. Contra Julian, [cap. 5. §. 18.]

' Sermo i. de Jejunio [apud Hasilii Opera, torn. ii. p. i, he.
edit. Benedict.]

WALL, VOL. 1. E e

418 Greek Church against Pelagius.

CHAP. Pelagius about infant-baptism, viz. ' that infants are
___1__ ' baptized though they have no sins :' where yet it
.^ 3 lo-^^ appears by circumstances that their meaning vras
315- only that they had no actual ones.

XXVI. About the same time that the synod of
Diospolis was held, St. Hierome published his three
books against the opinions of Pelagius "\ (not naming
him, but sufficiently decyphering him,) in form of
dialogues between a Pelagian and a Catholic, under
the feigned names of Atticus and Critobulus ; At-
ticus representing the Catholic, and Critobulus the
Pelagian. The far greatest part of them, (which I
must omit,) is taken up in setting forth the pride
and presumption of that tenet of Pelagius, that a
man may in this life be without sin ; which had
been so smartly done by Atticus, that toward the
end of the third dialogue, Critobulus, reckoning that
he could maintain this to be true in the case of
infants at least, if not of grown persons, says thus ;

[§. 17.]

Crit. ' I can hold no longer; all my patience is
' overcome by your provoking way of talk. I pray

* tell me wherein have infants sinned ? Neither can
' the conscience of any fault, nor can their ignorance
' be imputed to them ; who, according to that of the
' prophet Jonah, know not their right hand from
' their left. They are in no case to commit sin, and

* yet they are in a case to perish : their knees
' double under them ; their tender age can utter no
' words ; with a mouth that would speak if it could,
' they give a smile ; and the torment of eternal
' misery is prepared for the poor babes.'

"^ [' Dialogus contra Pelagianos, libris iii.' — This is printed in
vol. ii. p. 683, &c. of Vallarsius' edition.]

St. Hierome against Pelagius. 419

Att. * Oh! you are grown mighty eloquent,' &,c. chap.
-' But do not run upon me with your flowers

* of rhetoric (which are none of your own neither^ , . •l'°- ,

• 11., / (A.D.410.)

* with which the ears of boys and shallow men

' are wont to be caught ; but tell me plainly what
' you would say of them.'

Crit. ' This I say ; grant me but this, that they
' at least who cannot sin, are without sin.'

Att. 'I shall grant it, provided they be baptized
' in Christ ; and yet you shall not bring me to
' yield to your proposition, *' that a person may be

* without sin, if he will." These have neither power
' nor will, but they are free from all sin by the
' grace of God, which they receive in baptism.'

Crit. ' You will force me to come to that invi-
' dious question, and to say, what sin had they?

* That you may make the people presently throw
' stones at me ; and that when you cannot murder
' me by strength, you may by a device.'

Att. ' He murders a heretic that suffers him to

* continue such,' &c.

Crit. ' Tell me, I beseech you, and free me from
' all doubt ; for what reason are infants baptized V
Att. ' That in baptism their sins may be for-

* given.'

Crit. ' What sin have they incurred ? Is any one
' loosed that never was bound V

Att. ' Do you ask me? That trumpet of the

* gospel, that teacher of the gentiles, that golden

* vessel shining through all the world, shall answer
' you. Death reic/ned from Adam to Moses, even

* over them that had not sinned after the similitude

* of Adaju's transgression, who is the figure of
' him that was to come,' &c. [he goes on to recite

E e 2

420 St. Hierome against Pelagius.

CHAP, the fifth chapter to the Romans]. ' And if you ob-

1_ ' ject that it is said, that there were some that had

/A ?^'°* x*not sinned; understand it, that they sinned not
(A.U.410.) ' "^

' that sin which Adam committed in paradise, by

* breaking God's command. But all persons are
' held obnoxious either by their own, or by their
' forefather Adam's sin. He that is an infant is in
' baptism loosed from the bond of his forefather ; he

* that is of age to understand, is by the blood of
' Christ freed, both from his own bond, and also
' from that which is derived from another.'

* And that you may not think that I understand

* this in an heretical [or heterodox] sense ; the
' blessed martyr Cyprian, (whom you pretend to
' have imitated in collecting into order some places
' of scripture,) in the epistle which he writes to
' bishop Fidus, about the baptizing of infants, says
' thus :

' " If then the greatest offenders, and they that

* have grievously sinned against God before, have,

* when they afterwards come to believe, forgiveness
'■ of their sins ; and no person is kept off from bap-
' tism and the grace : how much less reason is there
' to refuse an infant, who being newly born has no

* sin, save that being descended from Adam, ac-
' cording to the flesh, he has from his very birth

* contracted the contagion of the death anciently
' threatened," &c.' [§.18.]

He goes on to recite verbatim all the rest of the
epistle to the end ; which I recited before in chap.
vi. ^. 1. and then proceeds :

' That holy and accomplished person, bishop
' Austin, wrote some time ago to Marcellinus (who
' was afterward, though innocent, put to death by

* the heretics, on pretence that he had a hand in chap.

>S^^. Hierome against Pelagiiis. 421

5, on pretence that he had a hand in
' Heraclius' usurpation) two books concerning the
' baptism of infants, against your heresy, by which you (a.d! 410.)
' would maintain that infants are baptized, not for

* forgiveness of sins, but for the kingdom of heaven,
' according to that which is written in the Gospel,
' Ed'cept a person be born again of water and the
' Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven.

* And a third book to the said Marcellinus, against
' those that say (what you say) that a man may,
' without the grace of God, be without sin if he will.
' And a fourth to Ililarius, against your doctrine
' that brings up so many odd things. And, they
' say, he is setting out some more books particularly
' relating to you ; which are not yet come to my
' hands. So that I think it proper for me to spare
' my pains on this subject ; lest that of Horace be
' said to me, " Never carry timber into the woods."
' For either I must superfluously say the same that
' he has said : or else, if I would say any new
' things, his excellent wit has forestalled all the
' best.

' This one thing I will say, that this discourse
' may at last have an end ; either you must set forth
' a new creed, and after the Father, the Son, and the
' Holy Ghost, baptize infants unto the kingdom of
' heaven : or else, if you acknowledge one baptism
' for infants, and for grown persons ; you must own
' that infants are to be baptized for forgiveness
' of sins ; sins after the similitude of Adam's trans-
' gression.

' And if the forgiveness of sins, which are the
' sins of another, do seem to you unjust, or such as
' he that could commit no sin himself has no need

422 St. Hierome of the Eeason

CHAP. * of : then march over to your beloved", who holds

XIX

1_ * that in baptism are forgiven those old sins which

(A D 410 ) ' ^^^^ heen committed in a former state in the

* coelestial regions : and so as you are influenced by

* his authority in your other points, partake with
' his error in this too.' [§. 19-]

Though St. Hierome, after having in these dia-
logues largely confuted the other errors of Pelagius,
do insist but briefly on this proof of original sin
from the baj^tism of infants, as being a matter M^hich
had been fully handled by St. Austin in the books
he here mentions, and of which I gave some account
before", yet this little seems to have nettled and
puzzled Pelagius more than all that was said by
St. Austin. The Pelagians confessed that adult
persons were baptized for ' forgiveness of sins ;' but
infants, having no sins, were baptized only for the
' kingdom of heaven.' This was to establish two
sorts of baptism : which was contrary to that article
of the Constantinopolitan creed, then received in all
the world ; ' I acknowledge one baptism for the re-
' mission of sins.' Pelagius could never get clear
from this argument. And it appears by his answer,
which we shall see presently, that he yielded more
to the force of it than of any other.

XXVII. But in the mean time, and quickly after
the synod of Diospolis, he pubhshed four books Pro
Libero Arhitrio, ' In Defence of Freewill :' in which,
beside what he has about the point of God's grace,
he does, as St. Austin expresses it, ' not by any sly
' intimation, [as formerly,] but in a most open
' manner, maintain by all the force of argument he
' can, that human nature in infants is in no manner

" Origen. " Sect. 6, 7, &c. ad 22.

of Infant-baptism. 423

* polluted by derivation p [or birth].' St. Austin gives c ii a p.

XIX.

there an instance of one of his sayings, in the first

of the said four books ^. , . ^1°- ,

(A.D.410.)

' All the good or evil for which we are to be
' praised or blamed, does not come into the world
' with us, but is acted by us. For we are born
' capable of either of these ; not full [or possessed]
* of either of them. And as we are at first formed
' without any virtue ; so likewise without any vice-
' And there is in a person, before the actings of his
' own will, nothing but what God has created [or,
' put into him].'

When people wondered how he could reconcile
this with what he had said in the said synod ;
where he had, as was shewed before ^ anathema-
tized all that held any of these opinions : 1. ' that
' Adam's sin hurt himself only, and not mankind :'
2. ' that infants new-born are in the same state
' that Adam was before his fall :' 3. ' that infants,
' though not baptized, have eternal life :' he in-
vented these salvoes ; which St. Austin mentions in
a book written some time after ^, and which shew
that he had a faculty of juggling and equivocation
enough for a Jesuit.

1. That it might be said truly enough, that
Adam's sin did hurt mankind as well as himself.
But how ? ' Not by derivation, but by the ill ex-
' ample it gave.' The Socinians may thank him
for this explication : for it helps them to much
such another about Christ's death doing good to
mankind.

2. That infants new-born are not in the same

P De Peccato originali, lib. ii. cap. 21. q Cap. 13.

r Sect. 24. s De Peccato origin, ii. cap. 15.

424 Pelagius^ Equivocation

CHAP, state that Adam was before his fall, is true enough.
^ But for a reason very different from what those

, . A'°' s bishops, whom he bantered, could imasrine ; viz.
' because he was a man, and they are but children.'

3. All the reason he could give for his condemn-
ing those that said, ' Unbaptized infants shall have
' eternal life,' was a saying which he often had in
his mouth, 'As for infants that die without bap-
" ' tisni, I know whither they do not go ; but whi-
' ther they do go, I know not, i. e. I know they do
' not go to the kingdom of heaven ; but what
' becomes of them I know not *.'

It is plain enough from many places in St. Austin,
that his followers held, that they should have a cer-
tain ' eternal life,' but not in the kingdom of heaven.
But he himself, it seems, at least at this time, to
salve what he had said in the synod, renounced those
that determined so ; and kept himself in reserve con-
cerning their future state.

St. Austin's note on all this is, ' Does he think
' that when these propositions were set him to con-
' demn in one sense ; he does, by expounding them
' in another sense, make it out, that he did not
' deceive his judges ? So far from that ; that he
' deceived them so much the more slily, as he now
' explains himself the more craftily ^.'
316. XXVIII. The next year two councils were held
in Africa, both about the same time : one at Car-
thage of sixty-eight bishops, the other at Milevis,
for the province of Numidia, of sixty-one bishops.
They had not then seen Pelagius' last four books,
and had but an imjjerfect account of what had
passed at Diospolis. But they found it necessary

t August, ibid. cap. 21. u Ibid. cap. 16.

concerning Original Sin. 425

to condemn the Pelagian opinions; which had chap.

taken some footing in those countries, but much _

more at Rome. And therefore they both of them (^^^'°*,q ^
did, by synodical epistles written to Innocent bishop
of Rome, desire the concurrence of that church ;
not that they thought their own decrees invalid
without a confirmation from Rome, but because
Rome was most infected. With which desire In-
nocent did very cordially comply in his answers;
which answers, though written the year after, I
shall recite here, leaving out both in the epistles
and answers the greatest part, which is about grace ;
but inserting what they say about infants.
The Synodical Epistle of the Council of Carthage 316.

to Innocent^.
They take notice of the report that Pelagius had
been acquitted at the council of Diospolis, by deny-
ing most, of the tenets objected to him ; and then say,
' If Pelagius do seem to your reverence also justly

* acquitted by those episcopal acts which are said to
' have passed in the east ; yet the error itself, and

* the impiety which has so many abettors in several
' places, ought to be condemned by the authority of

* the apostolic see. Let your holiness then consider,
' and have a fellow-feeling with us in your pastoral
' bowels, how mischievous and destructive a thing
' that is to the sheep of Christ, which follows from
' their sacrilegious disputations ; that we need not
' prat/ that we enter not into temptation,' &c. [§. 4.]

They proceed to shew the necessity of praying
for God's assisting grace, from Luke xxii. 32. Eph.
iii. 14, &c. And then conclude their letter thus ;

" Apud Augustinum, Epist. 90. [175. ed. Bened. Also in the
Concilia, edit. Mansi, torn. iv. p. 321.]

426 Council of Carthage.

CHAP. < They say also, " That infants are not to be bap-

L. * tized for that salvation which is given by Christ

(A.i)!4i6.) ' ^^ ^ Saviour;" and so they kill them eternally by

* their pernicious doctrine. They maintain that,
' " Though they should not be baptized, yet they

* would have an eternal life : and that they are not

* of those of whom our Lord says, The Son of man
' came to seek and to save that which was lost. For
' these, say they, were not lost, neither is there any
' thing in them that needs saving or redeeming at

* so great a price. For thei*e is nothing in them

* that is corrupted, nothing that is held captive

* under the power of the Devil ; nor was the blood
' which was shed for forgiveness of sins, shed for
' them." Though Caelestius has by his book, for-

* merlyy given in to the church of Carthage, owned

* that infants have redemption by the baptism of
' Christ. But a great many who are said to be, or

* to have been, their disciples, do not cease with all
' their might to uphold these evils ; by which they
' endeavour to overthrow the Christian faith.

' So that suppose Pelagius and Cselestius be re-

* formed, or do say that they never held these

* things, and do deny that any of the writings pro-

* duced against them are theirs, and the contrary

* cannot be proved ; yet in the general, whoever
' maintains these tenets, and does affirm, " That
' human nature can be sufficient of itself to over-
' come sin, and keep God's commandments," and so
' is an adversary to the grace of God which is
' plainly proved from the prayers of holy men : and,
'" Quicunque negat parvulos perbaptismum Christi

* a perditione liberari, et salutem percipere sempi-

y Five years before.

Council of Carthage. 427

* tern am ;" whoever denies tliat infants are by Chris- chap.

XIX

' tian baptism delivered from perdition, and brought

' to eternal salvation : let hira be anathema.' .. r»"^* /;^

' (A.D.410.)

* And for the other things that are objected to
' them, vre donbt not but your reverence will, when

* you shall have seen the episcopal acts which are
' said to have passed in the east, judge so as to
' give occasion to us all to rejoice in the mercy of
' God.' [^. 6.]

The Synodical Ejnstle of the Milevitan council 316.
to Innocent^.

They represent to him that there was *a new
' heresy sprung up of men that were enemies to
' the grace of Christ, who went about to deprive
' people of the benefit of the Lord's Prayer,' &c.
And after many things said on that subject, they
add,

* Also they do by a wicked presumption contend
' that little infants shall have an eternal life, though
' they be not renewed by the sacraments of the
' Christian grace ; making that of no effect, which
' the apostle says, Bi/ one man si?i entered into the

* tvorld,' &c. [^. 2.]

* Therefore to omit many other things which

* they discourse against the holy scriptures ; these
' two things, which do support the hearts of the
' faithful, and in which they go about to subvert
' all our Christianity, viz. " That God is not to be

* prayed to, to be our helper against the evil of sin,

* and for working righteousness ;" and, " that the
' sacrament of the Christian grace is not helpful to

* infants for obtaining eternal life ;" these when we

z Apud Augustinum, Epist. 92. [176. ed, Bened.]

428 The African Bishops.

XIX. ' Iiave signified to your apostolical breast, we have

;: — ' not need to say much,' &e. [§. 3.]

(A.b.416.) There was another letter'^ written to Innocent at
the same time, and on the same subject, in a more
familiar style, by five bishops, who, I suppose, had
some personal acquaintance with him, viz. Aurelius,
who had made one at the council of Carthage ;
Alypius, St. Austin, and Possidius, who had been
in the other council ; and Euodius, whose name is
to neither of them. They give him to understand
that they hear there are several at Rome, who do
favour Pelagius ; some who are brought over to his
opinion ; others that will not believe he is of that
opinion. That in all probability Pelagius had im-
posed upon the bishops at Diospolis ; who, when
they heard him own the ' grace of God,' could think
no other but that he meant that grace by which we
are made good Christians, and not that only by
which we are made rational men : whereas he, in
his books (which the bishops of Diospolis had not
seen) says to God in effect, ' Thou hast made us
' men, but we have made ourselves good men.'
Therefore they advise him to send for Pelagius to
Rome, or to deal with him by letters ; that if he
will explain himself in a catholic sense he may be
acquitted indeed. [^. 1 — 3.]

To that purpose St. Austin sends to Innocent a
letter that he had written to Pelagius, desiring him
to send it to him ; ' For then,' says he, ' he will
' the rather vouchsafe to read it, regarding more
' him that sent it than him that wrote it.' ["^. 6,
and 15.]

They sent him withal a book of Pelagius ; I

^ Inter Epistolas Augustini, Epist. 95. [177. ed. Bened.]

Innocent I. against Pelagius. 429

suppose, that de Viribiis Natiirce^ spoken of in chap.
§.22.

Innocent returned three letters in answer to these rj^_^^'(,\
three. They are the 91st, 93rd, and 96th ^ that 317-
are printed among- the letters of St. Austin. He
agrees perfectly with them in the points of doctrine,
and in the proofs that they had brought for them.
And for the case of infants particularly, he saysS
that which Pelagius and Ciclestius do teach, viz.
that they may have eternal life without baptism, is
* perfatuum, very absurd.' He says, they would by
this means ' make their baptism of no use.' That
' if it did them no hurt that they are not regene-
' rated, then the same men must hold that the
' waters of regeneration do them no good.' [^. 5.]
It seems probable by these words, that this pope
did not understand how Pelagius distinguished
between eternal life and the kingdom of heaven.
In fine, he gives his sentence, that they are to be
accounted excommunicate, till they do repent and
recant.

And to what St. Austin and the other four had
desired, that he would send for Pelagius, or write
to him, he answers ;

' He ought rather to come himself that he may
' be absolved : for if he be still of the same opinion,
' when will he ever commit himself to our judg-
' ment, how many letters soever be sent him, when
' he knows he must be condemned ? And if he
' were to be sent for, it might be better done by
' them that are nearer him, and not separated by
' so great a space of land. But yet, if he will give

Ij [In the Benedictine edition, Nos. 181, 182, 183.]
c Epist.93. [182.]

430 Innocent /. against Pelagius.

CHAP. < any room for medicine, our care shall not be "want-

XIX.

1— ' ing : for lie may condemn the ojDinions he has

(A.i).4i6.)' ^^^^ of> ^1^^ send his letters, and ask pardon for
' his error, as becomes one that returns to us.'
[^.4.]

* For his book which you sent, I have read it :
' in which I find a great many blasphemous things'^,'
&c. [J. 5.]

XXIX. These letters of Innocent are dated in
317. January, 417, and he died the March following.
And whether he had before his death wrote to
Pelagius, or whether Pelagius had heard of what
passed, he did write to Innocent an apologetic
letter, and sent withal Libelliim fidei, ' a written
* account of his faith *'.' In which he endeavours
both to shew his own faith to be blameless, and
also to be even with St. Hierome for his Dialogue :
so that Julian calls it an answer to them ^. But
Innocent being dead before they came, they were
delivered to Zosimus, who had been chosen bishoi^
in his stead. Caelestius also came thither himself,
and published and gave into the hands of Zosimus
his * Libellus,' or ' Draught of Faith' likewise.

Some learned men & make Cselestius to have
published two treatises at Rome at this time; one
called Confessio Jidei Zosimo PapcB oblata : and the
other, Ad Zosimum Papain libellus. And that the

d Epist. 96. [183.]

c [August, de Gratia, &c. I. c. 30. §. 32. De Peccato orig. ii.
c. 18. §. 19.]

f Apud Augustin. Operis imperfecti, contra Julianum, lib. iv.
c. 88. [torn. X. p. 872.]

g F. Gamier [in the treatise subjoined to Marias Mercator,
referred to above, at p. 35 3. J and Dr. Cave^ Hist, literar. in
Pelagio et Ceelestio. [torn. i. p. 293, 295.]

Cwlestius' Confession. 431

Confessio Mei was in a manner the same with chap.

XIX

Pelaffius' Lihellus in sentences and words. And ^

that Pelagins' Lihellus is that which goes ^^iider.^j^'''' ,
the name of St. Hierome's Explanatio Symholi ad
Damasum : and Cselestius' Confessio fidei is for the
greatest part the same with that which goes for
St. Austin's Sermo 191- [Append. 236.] de Temjmre.

But Cfelestius pubhshed but one : which may be
called, Confessio fidei, or Lihellus fidei. St. Austin
always calls it by the latter name. And that did
considerably differ from Pelagius' Lihellus ; being
(as St. Austin observes'', and we shall see) * much
* more frank and open in the denial of original sin.'

And whereas they make one to be like the
E.vplanatio Symholi in St. Hierome ; and the other
to be in a manner the same with the Sermo 191.
[236, App.] in St. Austin's works ; these two are
not only in a manner the same, but are the very
same, (being Pelagius' Lihellus aforesaid,) saving
a few various lections, and saving that that in
St. Austin's works has an impertinent preface
affixed to the beginning, and a bit cut off from
the end by some idle monk, to make it serve for
a sermon.

I shall recite it here at large S (though a small
part of it only do relate to our purpose,) and add
a few short notes on it. And this I do for two
reasons :

1. For the credit of Pelagius, and of our country.
St. Austin always speaks of him as a man of extra-
ordinary capacity and accomplishments ; and one

^ De Peccato orig. c. 2.

i [From Hieronymi Opera, torn. xi. p. 146, ed. Vail, or Au-
gustin. Serm. 236 : Op. torn. v. Append, p. 274. ed. Benedict.]

432 Pelagius' Creed.

CHAP, whom he should much admire and love, were it not

XIX.

^ for his heterodox opinions. And the works of his

'A.D.417.^ that are left, do shew him a man of very good parts.
There are none left entire but this, and a letter of
his to Demetrias. Both that letter is as polite and
(as Orosius expresses it) elaborate a piece as any
that age afforded; and also this confession of his
faith is as handsomely and learnedly penned as any
of the creeds drawn up by private men of that time,
whereof there were many ; save that he does not
speak home to the clearing of that point on which
317- he was questioned. And yeU though these are by
much the most ancient pieces extant that ever were
written by one born in our country, they have
never yet been published in our language.

Secondly, I do it that I may put our Socinians
out of love with him. They do much hug some
notions of his, which being first dressed up and
represented plausible for their turn in French, they
have translated and published in English^. But
they shall see that how well soever he please them
in some of their lesser errors ; yet as to their main
article he is their mortal enemy, and counts them
worthy of an anathema : being as decretory against
them as Athanasius, or Austin, or any of the an-
cient catholic Christians were, whose names they
hate.

His creed ' is this, sent with a letter to pojie
Innocent, but finding him dead, as I said.

k [See above, p. 350]

1 This creed for so ancient a one (for it is much ancienter
than that which goes under the name of Athanasius, and within
thirty-six years of the Constantinopohtan) is very express and
particular in reference to the holy Trinity : and St. Austin finds

Pelagius' Creed loith brief Notes. 433

' We believe in God the Father Almiohty, Maker chap.

. XIX

of all things visible and invisible. We believe also ^

.V7-
no fault with it as to that matter ; he only says, ' After he has (A.D.417.)

' ended a discourse as long as he pleased, from the unity of the
' Trinity to the resurrection of the flesh, which nobody de-
^ manded of him, he says,' &c.*

It is to be noted that he had, before he fell into any heresy,
written ' three Books concerning the Faith of the Trinity ;'
which Gennadius, in the catalogue he gives t of Pelagius' books,
commends as useful ones. And since they are lost, this Creed
may serve for an abridgment of them.

And here 1 will make a remark on the title of another book
of his, which Gennadius there mentions, which is lost, except
a few fragments. For why should not I, as well as others, take
a little pride in the mending the writing of an ancient book }
Pelagius gathered together, and published some select places of
scripture relating to moral duties and the practical part of reli-
gion. Gennadius recites the title of this book. It is in the
ordinary editions, ' Pro actuali conversatione Eulogiarum ex
' Divinis Scripturis liber unus, capitulorum indiciis in modum
' Cypriani Martyris prsesignatus.' Eulogiarum there is no sense.
So some have put instead of it the Greek evXoyiuv ; and others
have made other guesses. But I have a very old edition of
some of St. Hierome's Works, Ven. 1476, in which this passage
of Gennadius is recited at two several places ; in one it is
Eulogarum, in the other it is jEglogarum : so that I make no
doubt but the true writing was Eclogarum. And so the title of
the book was plainly this, ' Collections of the Texts of holy
' scripture concerning a man's actual conversation.' This is
that book of his, to which St. Hierome refers, when he in the
passage even now recited, speaking to Pelagius, says, ' The
' blessed martyr Cyprian, whom you pretend to have imitated
' in collecting into order some places of holy scripture +,' &c.

The same edition § that I mentioned would help to correct
several places in the text of St. Hierome himself, which are
depraved, and some of them, I doubt, on purpose.

* De Gratia Christi, cap. 32. •)- De Script. Eccl. cap. 42.

X [Sect. 26. p. 327.] § [This edition of r476 is expressly noticed

by Vallarsius, in the preface to liis own, the last and best collection of
St. Jerome's works.]

WALL, VOL. I. F f

434 Pelagius' Creed with hrief Notes.

CHAP, 'in our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom all things

XIX

!_ ' were created ; very God, the only begotten, the

f A D "^ I " 'j ' ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ God, not a made or adopted one, but
' begotten : of one substance with the Father, which

* the Greeks express by 6/uloovctiov : and in such a
' manner equal in all things with the Father, that he
' cannot be [accounted] inferior either in time, or
' degree, or power. And we acknowledge him that
' is begotten to be of the same greatness as he is
' that begot him.

' And whereas we say, the Son is begotten of the
' Father; we do not ascribe any time to that divine
' and ineffable generation : but do mean, that nei-
' ther the Father nor the Son had any beginning.
' For we cannot otherwise confess the Father to be
' eternal ; unless we do also confess the Son to be

* co-eternal : for he is called the Father, as having

* a Son ; and he who ever was a Father, ever had
' a Son.

' We believe also in the Holy Spirit, very God,
' proceeding from the Father™, equal in all things
' with the Father and the Son, in power, in will, in
' eternity, in substance. Neither is there any de-
' gree [or graduatio7i\ in the Trinity ; nothing
' that can be called superior or inferior, but the
' whole Deity is equal in its perfection : so that
' except the words that signify the propriety of the
' persons, whatsoever is said of one person, may
' very well be understood of all three.'

'" Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father'] No ci'eed at this
time had any more. His procession from the Son also, has
been since put into the ConstantinopoUtan by the Latins. So
also afterward, he says nothing of Christ's descent into hades,
or hell : which was not as yet put into any creed of the catho-
lics, except that of Aquileia.

Pelagius' Creed with brief Notes. 435

* And as, in confutation of Arius, we say that tlie c h a p.

* substance of the Trinity is one and the same, and ^^'^'

* do own one God in three persons ; so avoidino; the, ^^t-

(A.D.417.)

' impiety of Sabellius, we distinguish three persons
' expressed by their property : not saying that the
' Father is a Father to himself, nor the Son a Son

* to himself, nor the Holy Spirit the Spirit of him-
' self; but that there is one person of the Father,
' another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.

* For we acknowledge not only [several] names, but
' also properties of the names, that is, persons ; or,
' as the Greeks express them, hypostases. Nor does
' the Father at any time exclude the person of the
' Son", or of the Holy Spirit ; nor again does the Son,

* or Holy Spirit, receive the name or person of the
' Father ; but the Father is always Father, the Son
' always Son, and the Holy Spirit alM-ays Holy

* Spirit: so that they are in substance one thing,
' but are distinguished by persons and by names.'

' And we say that this Son of God, who, with the
' Father and the Holy Spirit, inherited eternity
' without any beginning, did, in the end of the
' world, take upon him, of JNIary, who was always
' a virgin, perfect man of our nature ; and the Word
' was made flesh, by taking manhood to him, not by
' altering his Deity.'

' And we do not say that the " Holy Spirit was

^ Exclude the person of the Son.] In all the editions both of
St. Hierome's and St. Austins works, which I could see, it is
excludit. But I guess it is false printed for includit, induit, ac-
cipit, or some such word. \_Excludit stands as before, both in
the Benedictine edition of Augustine, and in Vallarsius' St.
Jerome, without the least notice of any variety of reading.]

o Holy Spirit instead of seed."] I do not remember any

F f 2

436 Pelagius' Creed with brief Notes.

CHAP. ' instead of seed, as a certain person does most
" * impiously hold ; [or as some very impious persons

3^ ^ 'hold;] but that he operated by the power and
' influence of the Creator.'

' And we do in such a manner hold that there is
' in Christ pne person of the Son, as that we say
' there are in him two perfect and entire substances,
' [or natures,] viz. of the Godhead, and of the man-
' hood which consists of soul and body.'

' And as we do condemn Photinus, who confesses in
' Christ only a mere man ; so we do anathematize
' Apollinaris, and all of that sort, who say that the
' Son of God did take on him any thing less than
' the whole human nature ; and that the man [or
' manhood] which was assumed, was either in body,
* or in soul, or in mind?, unlike to those for whose

sect that held this. TertuUian had, in an allusive way of speak-
ing, said, ' Being the Son of God from the seed, that is, the
' Spirit of God his Father ; flesh without the seed of man was
' to be taken by him^ that he might be the Son of Man. For
' the seed of any man was not proper for him who had the
' seed of God*.' And St. Hilary in the same way of speaking,
had called it, ' The seminative power of the Spirit coming on
' herf.' But Pelagius seems to aim at some person or persons
then living. In one of my copies it is, ' Ut quidara scelera-
' tissimi opinantur.' But in that elder one that I mentioned, it
is, ' Ut quidam sceleratissime opinatur.' I am afraid St. Hierome
might have somewhere said some such thing by way of allusion :
for Pelagius' chief spite was at him. But I do not remember it.
[Both Vallarsius and the Benedictine editors of St. Augustine
read opinantur.']

P Or in soul, or in mind.'] The words are, 'Vel in anima,
' vel in sensvi.' But they must be intended for the translation
of ^vxn and voCy: for Apollinaris said, that Christ's human nature
had -^vxriv, but not vovv.

* De Carne Christi, cap. i8.

•|- Lib. ii. de Trinitate, [sect. 24, 26. p. 800. edit. Benedict.]

Pelagius* Creed with brief Notes. 437

* sake it was assumed ; whom we do hold to have chap.

VTV'

' been like unto us, saving only the stain of sin, L_

' which is not natural to us^i. , , iV''* x

(A.D.4I7.)

' We do also abhor in like manner the blasphemy

* of those who go about by a new interpretation to
' maintain, that since the time of his taking flesh,

* all things pertaining to the Divine nature did pass
' into the man*" [or manhood], and so also that all

q Sin which is not natural to usJ] He takes some advantage
of this for his opinion against original sin. But that which was
not natural to man, as God made him, is become, in some sense,
natural since his depravation.

^ All things pertaining to the Divine nature pass into the man,
and e contra.] He is large against this impiety, which was held
by the Arians and the ApoUinarists. The Arians had this aim
in teaching it, that by owning the Divine nature of Christ to
have suffered, the Christians might fall into their opinion, that
this Divine nature was not the same with that of God the Fa-
ther. Phoebadius had a little before this written a tract against 259.
the form of faith drawn up at Sirmium ; wherein he mentions *
an epistle of Potamius the Arian^ that had disseminated this
doctrine, that the Divinity of Christ had suffered. ' This you
' do,' says he, ' that people should not believe him born of him
' who is undoubtedly incapable of suffering.' And Epiphanius
says the same thing of the Arians, Haer. 69.

The Eutychians also ran far into this notion of the commu-
nication of properties : but that was a good while after Pelagius'
time.

As it is hard for eager spirits to keep the mean, it was but ten .',48-
years after this, that Nestorius made a very ill use of this same
notion of the properties of each nature being incommunicable,
to establish an impiety in the other extreme, viz. that the Xdyo?
and the man Christ are two persons. Under pretence of in-
veighing against one error, he runs into the other. For speak-
ing of his adversaries, he says. ' They make use of the union of

* [Phcebadii Aginnensis episcopi liber adversus Arianos, sect. 5. — Apud
Bibl. Pati-um, ed. Lugd. torn. iv. p. 301. ed. Gallandii, torn. v. p. 251.]

43 8 Pelagius' Creed loith hrief Notes.

CHAP. ' things belonging to the human nature were trans-

' ferred into God [or the Divine nature]. From

(A.i).4i7.)' whence would follow (a thing that no heresy ever

* offered to affirm) that both substances, [or na-
' tures,] viz. of the divinity and the humanity,
' would by this confusion seem to be extinguished,
' and to lose their proper state, and be changed into
' another thing. So that they who own in the Son
' an imperfect God, and an imperfect man, are to be
' accounted not to hold truly either God or man.'

' But we do hold that our nature capable of suf-
' fering was so assumed by the Son of God, as that
' the Divinity did remain incapable of suffering.

* For the Son of God suffered (not in appearance
' only, but really) all those things which the scrip-
' ture speaks of, i. e. hunger, thirst, weariness, pain,
' death, and the like : but he suffered in that nature

' God and ir.an to establish a confused mixture*, &c. They
' speak of God the Word, who is consubstantial with the Father,
' as if he had taken the beginning of his origin from the Virgin
' mother of Chi-ist ; as if he had been built together with his

* temple, and buried with his flesh. They say that the same
' flesh did not remain after his resurrection, but did pass into

* the nature of the Godhead,' &c. But then he adds, * the virgin,

* whom many have ventured to call the mother of Christ, they
' are not afraid to call the mother of God.'

There wanted only the accuracy of speaking, which Pelagius
had here used, to clear and settle that dispute between the Nes-
torians and Eutychians. He grants here that the Son of God
was born, suff"ered, died, &c., i. e. the same person who is the
Son of God ; but not in that nature by which he is God, or the
Son of God. However, when that feud broke out, the Pelagian
party joined their interest with the Nestorian, as I shewed
before t-

* Ad Cselestinum Papain, Epist. i. [apud Concilia, edit. Labb. tom. iii»
p. 349. ed. Mansi, iv. 102 i.]

t §.• 25.

Pelagius' Creed tcith brief Notes. 439

* which was capable of suffering-, i. e. not in that chap.

* nature which did assume, but in that which was 1—

* assumed. For the Son of God is in respect of his/^ p^' ^

* Godhead incapable of suffering, as the Father ; in-

* comprehensible, as the Father; invisible, as the

* Father. And though the proper person of the

* Son, that is, the Word of God, did take on him

* humanity capable of suffering ; yet the Godhead
' of the Word in its own nature did not suffer any
' thing by the inhabiting of the humanity ; as did

* not the whole Trinity, which we must of necessity
' confess to be incapable of suffering. The Son of

* God therefore died according to the Scriptures, in

* respect of that which was capable of dying.' ' The

* third day he rose again. He ascended into heaven.

* He sits on the right hand of God the Father;

* the same nature of flesh still remaining in which

* he was born and suffered, in which also he rose

* again. For the nature of his humanity is not

* extinguished, but is glorified, being to continue
' for ever with the Divinity. Having therefore
' received of the Father the power of all things in
' heaven and earth, he will come to judge the living

* and the dead ; that he may reward the just, and

* punish the sinners.'

' We do also believe Hhe resurrection of the flesh,
' in such a manner as to say that we shall be re-
' stored again in the same truth of our limbs*, in

* [Augustine here reads, ita credimus ut :' but Jerome, as edited
by Vallarsius, ' confitemur et credimus ut,' &c.]

t In the same truth of our limbs.'] ' In eadem veritate mem-
' brorum in qua nunc sumus.' St. Hierome had inveighed
against Rufinus and the Origenists for denying this, and say-
ing that it would be an ethereal body, not of such limbs as we

440 Pelagiws* Creed with, hrief Notes.

CHAP, 'which we are now; and that we shall for ever
* remain such as we shall be once made after the

(A.D.41 7.) 'resurrection.'

That there is one life for the saints, but rewards
' different according to their labour : as on the other
' side the punishments of wicked men shall be
' according to the measure of their sins.'

* Baptisma unum tenemus, quod iisdem sacramenti
' verbis in infantibus quibus etiani in majoribus as-
' serimus^ esse celebrandum.'

' We hold one baptism, which we say ought to
' be administered with the same sacramental words
' to infants^ as it is to elder persons.'

now have : and he had reflected upon the Pelagians, as leaning
toward them in many things. But Rufinus had renounced any
such opinion ; and so does Pelagius here.

In the last clause of this article [for ever remain such'] he re-
flects not only on Origen, who believed a great many changes
in the future state ; but on St. Hierome, who had spoke of hell
torments, as if there were hope that they would not be eternal.

" [Augustine reads dicimus : ed. Benedict.]

^ With the same sacramental words to infants.'] St. Hierome
had said, as I repeated before*, that they must either own that
infants are baptized for ' forgiveness of sins,' or else make two
baptisms. Pelagius was therefore forced to say, as he does here.
And Cselestius in his Draught of his Faith, which I shall recite
presently f, gives this reason why he grants that infants are bap-
tized for forgiveness of sins, ' That we may not seem to make
' two sorts of baptism.'

St. Austin quotes this saying of Pelagius, and some others
verbatim % as out of his Libellus fidei, and makes some animad-
versions on them. Which makes it so plain that it is Pelagius',
that no critic, great or small, has of late years taken it to be
St. Austin's own, except the great master of that art, mentioned
at §. 2. [M. Le Clerc]

* Sect. 26. t Sect. 31. % De Gratia Christi, cap. 32.

Pelagms* Creed with brief Notes. 441

' If after baptism a man do fall, we believe lie chap.

XIX

* may be recovered by repentance y [or penance].' L_

' We receive the Old and New Testament in the,. iV^-

(A.D.417.)

' same number of books ^ as the authority of the

* holy catholic church doth deliver.'

' We believe that our souls are given by God, and

* we hold that they are made by him ^ ; anathema-
' tizing those who say that souls are, as it were, a

* part of the substance of God ^. We do also con-

* demn the error of those who say, that the souls

y recovered by repentance.^ This is against the Novatians. In
the copy that is in St. Austin's works it is said, ' Primo per re-
' conciliationem, deinde per poenitentiam,' ' first by reconciUa-
' tion [or absolution], and then by repentance [or penance].'
That insertion looks like a monk's hand. But the old edition
is as I have translated it. [And VaUarsius retains the same
text.]

z same number of books.'] Rufinus had then lately published
an Exposition on the Apostles' Creed, in which he had given a
catalogue of the books of the Old and New Testament, which
the catholics owned in opposition to the heretics, exactly agree-
ing with that of the Protestants ; and said, ' These are those
' which the Fathers have ranked within the canon ; and on which
' they would have our doctrines of faith to depend. But it is to
' be known that there are some other books which have been
' called by the ancients not canonical, but ecclesiastical.' Where
he reckons ' Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, Maccabees,
' Hernias, and Judicium Petri. Which,' he says, ' the ancient
Christians would have to be read in the churches ; and for
' other books, they would not have them read in churches at
' all.'

a souls made by God.'] This is aimed against St. Austin ; who
inclined to the other opinion, that the soul is by propagation,
but never positively asserted either side.

^ The soul not a ]}art of the substance of God.] Against the
Manichees and PrisciUianists.

442 Pelagius* Creed with brief Notes.

CHAP. ' have sinned in a former stated or that they have
' lived in the coelestial regions, before they were sent

(A.D.417.)' ^^^^ bodies.'

* We do also abhor the blasphemy of those who

* say that any impossible thing is commanded to
' man by God ; or, that the commandments of God
' cannot be performed by any one man, but that by
' all men taken together ^ they may. Or, that do

* condemn first marriages in compliance with Mani-
' chaeus, or second marriages in compliance with the
' Montanists.'

' Also we do anathematize those who say, that the
' Son of God did tell lies by necessity of the flesh ;

* and that because of the human nature which he

c Souls sinned in a former state.'] He clears himself from the
suspicion of Origenism as to that particular : but yet some of
his party embraced it, that they might the better account for
the baptism of infants without owning original sin.

d Commands of God not performed by one man, but by all taken
together^ This is the sentence which Mr. Le Clerc cites as if
it were St. Austin's ; to shew that he contradicts St. Hierome ;
as I mentioned, §. 2. And indeed it does not only contradict
him, but is levelled at him as a blasphemer : for St. Hierome
writing * against that opinion of Pelagius, that a man may live
without sin, had used a long discourse, to shew that those men
that are free from some sort of faults are subject to other sorts,
and that no man can have all virtues. Pelagius is here in hopes
to make heresy and blasphemy out of that.

Also, the other clause of this paragraph about condemning
marriage, is meant against St. Hierome ; who, in many of his
works, and particularly in those against Jovinian f , had so ex-
cessively commended virginity, that some of his expressions
were reproachful to the state of marriage, especially of second
marriages ; and he had been forced to write an apology to ex-
plain his meaning.

* Dial. I. [contra Pelagianos : Op. torn, ii.]

■\- [Ad versus Jovinianum libri duo. Op. torn, ii.]

Pelagias' Creed loith brief Notes. 443

' had taken on him, he could not do all things that chap.

XIX

' he would ^.' 1—

(A.D.417.)

« Did tell lies by necessity of the flesh, and that because of the
human nature which he had assumed, he could not do all things that
he icould.'] This is a severe animadversion on St. Hierome ; who,
in the second of the dialogues which he wrote against Pelagius,
being eager in shewing the presumption of that tenet of his,

* That it is possible for a man to avoid all sin if he will,' had
argued thus ; ' I cannot,' says Christ, ' do any thing of myself, &c.
' The Arians here raise a cavil ; but the church answer, that
' this is spoken in respect of the human nature which he
' had assumed. You, on the contrary say, " I can be without
' sin, if I will." He can do nothing of himself, that he may
' shew the truth of human nature. You can avoid all sin ; that
' you may, even while you are in the body, set yourself forth as

* a God.

' He told his brethren and kindred that he would not go to
' the feast of tabernacles ; and yet it is written afterward, " But
' when his brethren were gone up, then he also went up to the
' feast." He said he would not go ; and yet afterwards did

* what he denied he would do. Porphyry snarls at this, and
' accuses him of inconstancy and change : not considering that
' all things that give offence are to be referred to the flesh [or

* imputed to the human nature].'

St. Hierome does not however call this a lie, as Pelagius
would represent his words ; but an alteration of purpose inci-
dent to human nature.

And at another place in the same dialogue, having quoted
that saying of our Saviour, Father, if it be possible, remove this
cup from me : he adds, ' Why, I pray you, does he use the words
' of one that were in doubt ? He had said in another place,
' The things that are impossible with men, are possible with God.
' But being a man, and to suffer, he speaks in the language of
' a man. He says. If it be possible, let one hour pass from
' me. You say it is possible to avoid sin all one's life.' Not
only Pelagius was of opinion that these sayings were irreverent,
and did impute sin to our Saviour as a man ; but Theodorus
also, bishop of Mopsuestia, who was a Pelagian likewise, wrote
a treatise, ' Against those that say Men sin by Nature, and not

444 Pelagius Creed with hrief Notes.

CHAP. ' We do also condemn the heresy of Jovinian,
1_ ' who says, that in the life to come there will be no

317.
(A.D.417.)

' by their Will.' He calls the adversary, whom he there ex-
presses by a feigned name, Aram ; but he means St. Hierome.
Photius gives an abstract of the book *. And therein Theodorus
imputes to his adversary this saying. ' That even Christy having
* assumed the human nature which is infected with sin, was
' not free from wickedness.' But this is to put a very malicious
interpretation upon St. Hierome's words, which were indeed not
very warily spoken.

The writer of the first of those two letters of the Pelagians
against which St. Austin wrote his four books to pope Boniface,
made afterward the same spiteful reflection, saying of his adver-
saries (i. e. the Catholics) in general, that they held (among a
great many horrid things which he there heaps up) ' That Christ
' was not clear from sin ; but that he told lies by the necessity
' of the fleshy and was stained with other sins.' To which St.
Austin there f answers, ' Let them look to it whom he has
' heard say such things, or in whose books he has read some-
* thing perhaps which he did not understand, and has turned
' to this slanderous sense by a deceitful malice.' St. Austin
speaks so, as that one may guess he knew where they had this,
but was not willing to enter into a dispute to vindicate St.
Hierome's words.

The eighteen Pelagian bishops had this over again in their
letter to the bishop of Thessalonica, as we may see by St. Au-
stin's second book to Boniface, cap. vi. And Julian again,
as appears by St. Austin's answer to him, lib. iii. cap. 6. [torn. x.
p. 368.]

St. Hierome at many other places owns in plain words, that
our Saviour had no sin : and therefore this spiteful advantage
ought not to be taken of his words in this one place. Even in
these very dialogues, Dial. 2. having shewed that all that are
mere men have some failings, he adds, ' To have all things, and

* Bibliotheca cod. 177. [p. 396. edit. Hoeschelii, 1653. Some fragments of
this work were published l)y Noris in his Historia Pelagiana ; again by Gar-
nier, in his edition of Marius JMercator ; and they are very properly ap-
pended by Vallarsius to St. Jerome's dialogues against the Pelagians, in the
second volume of his collection of that Father's works.]

t Contra duas epistolas Pelagianorum lib. i. ad Bonifac. cap. 12.

Pelagius' Creed with brief Notes. 445

'difference of merits; [or rewards;] and that we chap.

Y TV

* sliall have tiiere virtues [or graces] which we took ^ ' '

* no care to have here ^. ,.^V' .

(A.D.417.)

' to be wanting in nothing;, is peculiar to the virtue of him,

* who did no sin, neither was any guile found in his mouth.'

St. Hierome had moreover in the third of these dialogues
cited a place in the ' Gospel of the Nazarenes,' where Christ is
brought in speaking thus, ' What sin have I committed that I
' should go and be baptized of John, unless this that I have
' spoken be a sin of ignorance ?' But he does not pretend there
that this book is authentical, or to be credited. And yet the
Pelagians afterward objected this to him, as if he had by this
quotation gone about to establish ' a fifth Gospel, which taught
' that Christ did sin.'

e And that we shall have there virtues which we took no care to
have here.'] St. Hierome had not said so, but he had said some-
thing which Pelagius would draw to that sense. He had said,
' So long as we have this treasure in earthen vessels, and are
' encompassed with ft-ail and mortal and contemptible flesh, we

* think ourselves happy, if in some single virtues, or parts of
' virtue, we do service to God. But when this corruptible shall
' be clothed on with incorruption, and death shall be swallowed
' up in the victory of Christ, then God will be all things in all
' men : so that Solomon will have not only the grace of wisdom,
' David of meekness, &c., and each two or three virtues ; but all
' will be in each, and the whole number of saints shall triumph
' in the whole chorus of virtues*.' Though these words give no
sufficient ground for this calumny, yet the Pelagians ceased not to
inculcate their accusation of the doctrine of the catholics upon
occasion taken from them. Julian and the seventeen bishops
harped upon the same string. For we find St. Austin answering
them thus ; ' Who can bear it, when they object to us as if we
' did say that after the resurrection there will be such a profi-

* ciency, that men shall there begin to keep those commands of
' God, which they refused to keep here ; and all this because
' we say that there will be there no sin at all, nor any conflict
' with the concupiscence of sin ? As if they themselves did dare
' to deny thisf.'

* Dial. I. [sect. 18. p. 699. ed. Vallars.] f Lib. 3. ad Bonifac. cap. 7.

446 Pelagius' Creed with brie/ Notes.

CHAP. ' Freewill we do so own as to say, that we

XIX.

!_ ' always stand in need of God's help^ : and that as

(A.D.417.) ' w®ll t^®y ^1'® i^^ ^^^ error, who say with Manichseus,

* that a man cannot avoid sin ; as they who affirm
' with Jovinian, that a man cannot sin. For both
' of these take away the freedom of the will. But
' we say, that a man always is in a state that he
' may sin, or may not sin ; so as to own ourselves

* always to be of a freewill.'

' This is, most blessed pope, our faith, which we

* have learned in the catholic church, and have
' always held. In which if there be any thing that

* is perhaps unwarily or unskilfully expressed ; we

* desire it may be amended by you, who do hold
' both the faith and the see of Peter. And if this
' our confession be approved by the judgment of
' your apostleship ; then whoever shall have a mind
' to find fault with me, will shew, not me to be a
' heretic, but himself unskilful or spiteful, or even
' no catholic'

XXX. Together with this confession of his faith,
Pelagius sent a letter to Innocent, apologizing for
himself, and endeavouring to shew that he did not
in all points hold as his adversaries gave out, and to
justify what he did hold. He was very desirous to
continue in the catholic church, and not be sepa-
rated from it. He used great art in reciting the
articles objected against him, so as that he could

f We do always stand in need of God's help.'] St. Austin quotes
this sentence, and then says, ' Here again we would know what
' sort of help he owns us to stand in need of, and again we find
' him ambiguous ; for he may say that he means the law, and
' Christian doctrine, by which our natural power is helped.' &c. *

* De Gratia Christi, cap. 33.

Pelagms Letter to Innocent. 44<7

easily answer them or deny them; and in wording chap.
his own opinion, so as he could easily defend them.

The letter is lost, except such parts of it as St. Au-^^^'^- s
stin has preserved, by quoting them as he had occa-
sion to write animadversions on them. I shall re-
cite only that passage of St. Austin, where he quotes
that part of the letter which speaks of the baptism
of infants, which is this :

Augustiii. de Peccato originali, cap. 17, 18, &c.

' Observe how Pelagius attem])ted slily to deceive
' even the episcopal judgment of the apostolic see
' in this very question of the baptism of infants.
' For in the letter which he sent to Rome to holy
' pope Innocent of blessed memory, which finding
' him not in the body, was delivered to holy pope
' Zosimus, and by him transmitted to us : he says,

' Se ab hominibus infamari, quod neget parvulis
' baptismi sacramentum, et absque redemptione
' Christi aliquibus coelorum regna promittat.' ' That

* men do slander him, as if he denied the sacrament
' of baptism to infants, and did promise the king-

* dom of heaven to any persons without the redemp-
' tion of Christ.'

' But these things are not so objected to them as

* he has set them down. For they do not deny the
' sacrament of baptism to infants ; neither do they
' promise the kingdom of heaven to any without the
' redemption of Christ. So that the thing he com-
' plains he is slandered in, he has set down so as
' that he might easily answer to the crime objected,
' and yet keep his opinion. But the thing that is

* objected to them is this, that they will not own
' that unbaptized infants are liable to the condem-

* nation of the first man, and that there has passed

448

Pelagius^ Letter to Innocent.

(A.D.417.)

CHAP. « upon them original sin, which is to be cleansed by
' regeneration ; but do contend that they are to be
' baptized only for their receiving the kingdom of
' heaven, &;c. — — And then mark how he answers,
' and mind his lurking-holes of ambiguity, &c. For,
' having said,

* Nunquam se vel impium aliquem haereticum au-

* disse, qui hoc quod proposuit de parvulis, diceret :'

* That he never heard, no not even any impious
' heretic, or sectary, who would say that (which

* he had mentioned) of infants f
He then goes on, and says,

* Quis enim ita evangelicae lectionis ignarus est,
qui hoc non modo aflSrmare conetur, sed qui vel
leviter dicere aut etiani sentire possit? Deinde
quis tam impius, qui parvulos exortes regni coelo-
rum esse velit, dum eos baptizari et in Christo re-
nasci vetat ?' ' For who is there so ignorant of
that which is read in the gospel, as (I need not say
to affirm this, but) in any heedless way to say such
a thing, or even to have such a thought ? In a
word, who can be so imjiious as to hinder infants
from being baptized and born again in Christ, and
so make them miss of the kingdom of heaven?'

' All this talk is nothing to his purpose. He does
not clear himself by this. That infants without
baptism cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven,
is a thing which they themselves never denied.
But that is not the question. The question is
about the cleansing of original sin in infants: let
him clear himself on that point. He will not own
that the laver of regeneration has any thing which
it need wash off in infants. And let us see what
he says next. After reciting that testimony of the

Pelapius' Letter to Innocent. 449

' gospel, that, Nisi renatus ew aqua ct Spiritu c ii a p.

' Sancto, regnum cwlorum nullus possit intrare : '

'None can enter into the kingdom of heaven, that j^^^''\

' is not horn again of umter and the Holy Spirit:

* about which there is, as I said, no question ; he

' goes on, and says, " Quis ille tarn impius est, qui

' cujusHbet aetatis ])arvulo interdicat communem hu-

' mani generis redemptionem ?" " Who is there so

' impious as to refuse to an infant, of what age

' soever, the common redemption of mankind?"

' This too is ambiguous, what redemption he
' means : whether from a bad estate to a good one ;
' or from a good one to a better. For Ca^Iestius
' did own, in his book at Carthage, the redemption
' of infants; and yet wouhl not own that sin did
' pass from Adam on them. But mind his next
' words, " Et in perpetuam certamque vitam renasei
' vetet eum qui natus sit ad incertam?" " And to
' hinder him that is born to an uncertain life, from
' being born again to an everlasting and certain one ?'"
K-20.]

St. Austin is something long in conjecturing what
he means by these last words : but he pitches on
this ; that as Pelagius would not own children to
be by nature in a state of condemnation, and on the
other side granted that they were not born in a
state to go to heaven ; so he would not determine
so positively as some of his abettors did, that they
should have an eternal life out of the kingdom of
heaven ; but left it as an uncertain thing what
should become of them : and therefore said, that
they were ' born to an uncertain life ;' but that if
they were baptized they would have an ' everlasting
' life,' and that certainly in heaven. And he quotes

WALL, VOL. I. G g

450 Pelagius' Letter to Innocent.

CHAP, on this occasion that saying of his which I men-
_J tioned before, * For unbaptized infants, I know whi-

(A.D.417.)* ^^^^^' *^^®y ^'^ ^^^ ^*^ ' ^^^ whither they do go, I
' know not.' And this plirase of his, vitam incer-
tayn^ is much the same with that which I recited of
St. Ambrose^, ' Opertam illam poenarum immunita-

* tem,' 'That state of freedom from punishment, which
^ is not clear.'

The chief thing I observe in this letter is the con-
fession of Pelagius, that he had never heard, no not
even any sectary, deny the sacrament of baptism to
infants. For the M^ords of the letter, if we put to-
gether the i^aragraphs which stand disjoined in this
animadversion of St. Austin on them, were thus:

' Men slander me as if I denied the sacrament of
' baptism to infants, or did promise the kingdom of

* heaven to some persons without the redemption of
' Christ : which is a thing that I never heard, no
' not even any wicked heretic, say. For who is
' there so ignorant of that which is read in the gos-
' pel, as (I need not say to affirm this, but) in any

* heedless way to say such a thing, or even have
' such a thought ? In a word, who can be so im-

* pious as to hinder infants from being baptized and
' born again in Christ, and so make them miss of
' the kingdom of heaven ; since our Saviour has
' said, that none can enter into the kingdom of hea-

* ven that is not born again of water and the Holy
' Spirit ? Who is there so impious as to refuse to an
' infant of what age soever the common redemption

* of mankind, and to hinder him that is born to an
' uncertain life from being born again to an ever-
' lasting and certain one V

s Ch. xiii. §. 2.

Ccelestius' Creed. 451

XXXI. The Creed, or book of faith, which Csc- chap.

lestius presented, is nowhere extant. St. Austin __;

has recited some parts of it, which shew i)lain,, A'''" ^

. , (A.D.417.)

enough tliat it differed from that of Pelagius. I
will mention one passage wliich he recites', which
is to our purpose.

* Infantes autem debere baptizari in remissionem
' peccatorum, secundum rogidam universalis ecclesifr,

* et secundum evangelii sententiam, confitemur ; quia

* Dominus statuit regnum coelorum non nisi bapti-
' zatis posse conferri : quod quia vires natunu non

* liabent, conferri necesse est per gratia} libertatem.
' In remissionem autem peccatorum baptizandos in-
' fantes non idcirco diximus, ut peccatum ex traduce
' firmare videamur ; quod longe a catholico sensu
' alienum est. Quia peccatum non cum homine

* nascitur, quod postmodum exercetur ab homine :

* quia non naturae delictum, sed voluntatis esse de-
"■ monstratur. Et illud ergo confiteri congruum ; ne

* diversa baptismatis genera facere videamur : et hoc
' praemunire necessarium est, ne per mysterii occa-
' sionem, ad creatoris injuriam, malum, antequam fiat
' ab homine, tradi dicatur homini per naturam.'

' We own that infants ought, according to the
' rule of the universal church, and according to the

* sentence of the gospel, to be baptized for forgive-
' ness of sins, because our Lord has determined that
' the kingdom of heaven cannot be conferred upon
' baptized persons : which because it is a thing that
' nature cannot give, it is needful to give it by

* the liberty of grace. But when we say that in-

* fants are to be baptized for forgiveness of sins, we

* do not say it with such intent as that we would

• De Peccato originali, cap. 5 et 6.
G g 2

452 The Evasions of the Pelagians.

CHAP. « seem to confirm the opinion of sin being by deri-

— . * vation [or propagation], which is a thing far from

(A.D,4i7.} ' the catholic sense. For sin is not born with a
' man, which is afterward acted by man ; because it

* is demonstrable that sin is a thing not of nature
' but of choice. Therefore it is both proper to own
' the former, that we may not seem to make two
' sorts of baptism ; and also necessary to give a cau-

* tion about the latter, lest on occasion of the sacra-
' ment it be, to the reproach of the Creator, said,

* that evil is by nature conveyed to a man before it
' be acted by him.'

XXXII. Pelagius expressed himself more slily in
his creed : he said that infants are to be baptized
with the same words as elder persons are. St. Austin
excepts against that*^, and says, ' It is things that
' we regard, and not words only.' But beside, Pe-
lagius did not nigh so plainly or openly in his creed
to Innocent deny original sin, though he had in
other books.
319- But at last Pelagius swallowed this morsel too.
For Pinianus, Albina, and Melania^ do certify St.
Austin that upon their importunity used with Pela-
gius to renounce the opinions for which he was cen-
sured, he had in their hearing said, Infantes in re-
missione^n peccatorum percipere haptismum : ' that
* infants do receive baptism for remission of sins.'
St. Austin answers ™, that ' that is indeed more than
' he had said in his Libellus : for now he does not
' say, " with the words of forgiveness," but confesses
' that they are baptized for forgiveness itself. And

k De Gratia Christi, cap. 32.

1 [The persons to whom St. Austin addressed this treatise.]

m Ibidem.

The Evasions of the Pelagians. 453

* yet if you should ask him what sin he thinks is chap.

* forgiven them, he would maintain that they had

' none at all. Who could think that under so plain (a.d.I'io
' a confession a contrary sense could lie hid, if
* Ca^lestius had not bolted it out V &c.

They that would maintain a dispute, or theolo-
gical wrestle, and would not take this for a fair fall
or baffle, it could be no longer worth the while to
contend with them. Pelagius had had at the coun-
cil of Diospolis some silly sayings objected to him
out of a book : and when he denied the book to be
his, they asked him, ' whether since he disowned
' those sayings, he would anathematize those that
' said such things ?' He answered ", ' I anathema-
' tize them for fools, not for heretics ; for there is
' no article of faith spoken of in them.' But now
he himself, when he is driven to this plunge as to
grant that infants are baptized for pardon of sins,
and yet have no sin, shews himself as absurd as they
could be.

But the way by which his partners went about to
make sense of this odd saying, we have in a letter of
St. Austin to Sixtus ^, written a good while after
these times. There St. Austin having said of the
Pelagians, that they are so Circumstipati et divina-
rum aicctoritate lectmium, et antiqidtus tradito et
retento firmo ecclesice ritu in haptismate parvulo-
rum, 'beset both with the authority of God's word,
' and with the usage of the church that was of old
' delivered to it, and has been since kept by it, in
' the baptizing of children ;' that they dare not

" [August, de Gestis Pelagii Falsest, cap. vi. §. 16.]

o Epist. 105. [194. torn. ii. p. 544. ed. Benedict, cap. 10.

§• 43- 45-]

317-
(A.D417

454 The Evasions of the Pelagians.

CHAP, deny that infants are baptized for forgiveness of

XIX .

L_ sin ; and, that it must not be supposed that the

church does this fallaciter, ' in any trickish or de-
' ceitful meaning ;' but ut fide agatur quod agitur,
utique fit quod dicitur ; * since what is acted, is
' acted seriously, that which is spoken must be sup-
' posed to be really done.' He adds,

' That therefore which they have devised to say,

* when this manifest force of truth weighed them
' down, what Christian is there that will not laugh
' to hear, though he must own it to be very
' crafty ? For they say that " infants do indeed an-
' swer truly by the mouths of those that bring
' them, that they believe in the forgiveness of sins ;
' not that any sins are forgiven to them ; but that
' they believe that in the church, or in baptism, sins
' are forgiven to those that have any, not to those
' that have none." And so they do not yield that
' infants are baptized for forgiveness of sins in such
' a sense as that any sins are forgiven to them who,
' they say, have none ; but that they, though they
' be without sin, yet are baptized with that baptism

* by which is granted forgiveness of sins to all that
' have any.'

There will ever be this difference between a man
of sense, and a thick-skulled man ; that the former,
if he find himself gravelled, will at least have the
modesty to give over talking. Pelagius, after he
was brought to this contradiction, kept silence ; and
we hear no more of him.

But Cnelestius blundered through all this, and a
great deal more : when he was excommunicated at
one place, going to another. And he, after all this,
continued to make such a noise in the eastern parts,

TJie Evasions of the Pelagians. 455

that the heresy which was called Pelagian in the chap.
west, was there called the Cnelestine heresy. After ^

several excommunications in particular churches, he^^i)'^',^)
was at last pronounced a heretic in the general
council or meeting of all the eastern and western 331-
bishops at Ephesus.

F. Gamier p reckons up twenty-four synods, in
several parts of the world, held against this error :
whereof this of Ephesus was the last, and the
twenty-second was at St. Alban's in Britain, (the
year of Christ 429, as bishop Ussher '^ and Garnier32'>
out of him do shew) : so that, if Pelagius lived to
this time, he lived to see himself condemned by his
own countrymen.

I shall take notice only of two more artifices that
these men used to stave off excommunication, and so
dismiss them.

XXXIIT. 1. They spoke with words of seeming
submission to the bishops to whom they appealed.
You see with what a compliment Pelagius concludes
the confession of his faith to pope Innocent : and Cse-
lestius began his to Zosimus with one of the like na-
ture. For in the preface of it there were these words ■",
' that if any mistake have by chance happened to
' me through ignorance, as being a man ; it may by

* your skill be corrected :' and when Zosimus asked
him if he would ^ ' renounce all those tenets which
' had been objected to him formerly by the deacon

* Paulinus, and would give his assent to the letters

* of the apostolic see, which had been written by
' his predecessor of holy memory, he refused to

P [In his edition of Marius Mercator, referred to above.]

q [Britann. Eccles. Autiquit. p. 176. edit. 1687.]

r August, de Peccato orig. cap. 6. => Ibid. cap. 7.

456 Zosimus sides with the Pelagians.

CHAR ' renounce the articles objected by the deacon, but
. " " ' ' he did not dare to oppose the letters of holy pope

(.\.D.4i-.)' I"i^o<^®i^t- N^^J' he promised to renounce all things
' which that see did renounce.' This St. Austin
repeats from the acts of his examination.

But what do these general words avail, when he,
reciting the particulars of his faith, did, as we see,
plainly renounce the doctrine of original sin ; in an
absolute contrariety to the letters of Innocent, to
which he protended to submit.

Yet, as all men have a weak side on which they
receive flatterers ; this verbal compliance took so far
with Zosimus, that he undertook the patronage of
these men against the African bishops; and wrote
318. several letters on their behalf, and continued so long
to hold on their side, till at last he found it too hot
to hold any longer; and then, when he saw they
were condemned by the council of Carthage, and by
the emperor, and would be condemned by the Chris-
tian world, whether he would or no ; he himself
wrote an encyclical epistle, as zealous in their con-
demnation as he had been before in their defence ;
a part of which I shall presently recite.

This made Julian and the other following Pela-
gians say*, 'that pope Zosimus and the rest of the
' clergy of Rome were turncoats.' Indeed he acted
so as to make it plainly appear, that the infallibi-
lity of that see is a gift that has been bestowed upon
them since that time : for mind the particulars ;

1. Pope Innocent had by his letters dated in

317 January 417, which I mentioned before", fully and

plainly condemned the doctrine that denies original

t August, contra duas Epist. Pelag. ad Bonifac. lib. ii. cap. 3.
" §. 28.

Zosimus sides with the Pelagians. 457

sin; and had condemned Pelagius and Caelestius chap,
unless they did recant. _J__1_

2. Pope Zosimus sometime in the summer of the,, ^■"- ^

, (A.D.417.)

same year, upon Caelestius' application to him, ' sat
' on a day of hearing in St. Clement's church,' &c.

' and caused C?clestius' Lihellus which he had

' given in [this is the same Lihellus Jidci, or Creed,
' of which I just now cited a part, denying original
* sin] to be read over.' And he writes a letter to
the African bishops, that he had done so, (which is
his third epistle extant, tom. 1. Conciliorum^^
wherein he blames them as having been too hasty
in censuring Pelagius and Caelestius, and sends a
copy of Ca}Iestius' Lihellus to them, and orders
thus ; ' Either wdthin two months let somebody
' come that may convict him to his face, of holding
' other opinions than he has set down in his books
' and confession ; or else, after such plain and ma-
' nifest declarations made by him, let your holiness
' know that there is no doubt remaining, viz. but
' that he is to be acquitted.'

3. A little while after, viz. September 21st, he
writes another letter to them^, that he now had re-
ceived Pelagius' letter and Lihellus likewise ; and
a letter from Praylius bishop of Jerusalem, in his
behalf. That ' these had been publicly read over;
' and that the contents of them were all to the same
' purpose, sense, and tenor with what Caelestius had
' produced before. Oh, brethren ! that any of you
' had been present at the reading of them. What

X [|Tom. ii. p. 1558. edit. Labb. — tom. iv. p. 350. edit.
Mansi.]

y Zosimi Epist. quarta, tom. i. Conciliorum. [tom. ii. p. 1561.
ed. Labb. tom. iv. p. 353. edit. Mansi.)

458 Zosimus sides with the Pelagians.

CHAP, 'joy there was of the holy men that were present !

XIX

' Some could scarce forbear weeping, tales

rAD^i /^^^'^^^^ \J'' ^^'^] cihsolutcB fidei infamari potuisse,
' that it should be possible for such men of so unre-

' bukable a faith to be slandered.' Then he

inveighs against their accusers, and at last says, ' If
' the father rejoice at the return of his son that had
' been dead, and was alive again, had been lost, and
' was found, &c., how much greater rejoicing of
' our faith is this, that these men, of whom false
' stories were reported, never were dead nor lost ! I
' have sent therefore to your charity copies of the
' writings which Pelagius sent,' &e.

317. 4. Zosimus declared that Libellus of C<elestius
(in which he says, as I rehearsed before, that ' the
' opinion of sin being CcV traduce, by derivation or
' propagation, is far from the catholic sense') to be
catholic, or orthodox. This will appear by the next
quotation.

317- 5. The African bishops wrote ^ answer to Zosimus
the latter end of this year, wherein they plead,
' That Caelestius ought to clear himself at another
' rate than that of saying in general, that he would
' assent to the letters of pope Innocent. That he
' ought to be compelled to recite and condemn those
' ill things which he had put in his Libellus : lest,
' if he did not do that, a great many persons of

* weak judgments might be more ready to think
' that those doctrines, poisonous to our faith, which
' were in his Libellus, were approved by the apostolic

* see, because that see had said that that Libellus
' was catholic ; than they would be to think them
' corrected by it, because he said he would assent

z August, ad Bonifac. lib. ii. cap. 3,4

Zosimus changes sides. 459

to pope Innocent's letter.' And the next year chap.

XIX.

the same bishops in a fuller meeting send him
another letter to the same purpose, but more per- .^-J-j'^'^ .
emptory ; wherein, without any more staying for his
consent, or joining with tliem, they determine that
Pelagius and Ca^lestius are to be accounted excom-
municate till they do recant, &c.

6. Then at last, when the emperor also hads'S.
declared to the same purpose, Zosimus himself like-
wise condemned these men, and the opinions they
held against original sin, as well as the rest of the
world did, and his own predecessor had done ; and
sent, as I said, an encyclical or circular letter about
to the churches, declaring his excommunication of
them. A part of it is recited by St. Austin, in these
words^ ; ' Our Lord is faithful in his words ; and

* his baptism has the same plenitude [or force] in
' deed that it has in words ; I mean, in its operation,
' in the owning the true forgiveness of sins, in
' all sexes, ages, and conditions of mankind. For
' none is made free, but who was a servant of sin ;
' nor can any be said to be redeemed, but who was
' before truly a captive by sin ; as it is written. If
' the So?i do mahe you free, ye shall be free indeed :
' for by him we are spiritually regenerated, by him
' we are crucified to the world ; by his death that
' bond, contracted by jiropagation, of death brought

* upon us all by Adam, and transmitted to every
' soul, is cancelled ; and there is not any one of all
' that are born, but what is bound and liable to that
' bond, until he be by baptism freed from it.' Here
he sings the same tune with his predecessors;
thanks to the African bishops.

* Epist. 157. ad Optatum. [190, ed. Benedict, cap. vi. §. 23]

460 Zosimus changes sides.

CHAP. And the church of Rome from that time has been

XIX.

, very zealous in the same doctrine, till now in this

(A D^i8)^^®^ ^S^ ^^^^y ^^'® grown great latitudinarians in this
matter. The Jesuits have of late set themselves
strongly to overthrow St. Austin's doctrine of prae-
destination : and, not content with that, have pushed
their arguments so far as to undermine the doctrine
of original sin. And the court of Rome shews
so much favour to their endeavours, that it is pro-
bable they would (if they could avoid the slur that
would thereby be brought on their infallibility) once
more declare for Pelagius.

It seems that a book of cardinal Sfondrata^, which

b [Entitled, ' Nodus Praedestinationis ex sacris Litteris Doctri-
* naque Sanctorum Augustini et Thomse, quantum homini licet,
' dissolutus, a Cselestino S. R. E. Card. Sfondrato.' 4". Romae
1696.

On the appearance of this work, the prelates of France took
alarm, and their sentiments not only came before the public, but
were communicated officially to the pope. Le Tellier, archbishop
of Rheims, their primate, wrote a letter on the subject, which
was published under the title of ' Sentiment de M. Le Tellier,
' Archeveque de Rheims, sur le livre du Cardinal Sfondrate, qui
' a pour titre. Nodus Prcedestinationis, &c., contenu dans une lettre
' de ce prselat, du 14 Janvier 1697.' — 12°.

This was soon followed by a letter addressed (on Feb. 21.
1697) to Innocent, by the archbishop and other French prelates,
(among them were De Noailles and Bossuet,) against the work.
Innocent returned an answer on the 6th of May ; and both letter
and answer were translated into Latin, and published at Paris in
the same year, 1697.

In 1698 appeared a burlesque piece, entitled, ' Appendix ad
' Nodum Sfondratianum ; sive Litterse Parvulorum sine Baptismo
' mortuorum, scripts e limbis ad suee quietis perturbatores.'
80. Colonise 1698.

In the next year, ' Dispunctio notarum quadraginta, quas
' scriptor anonymus Card. C;i'lestini Sfondrati libro, cui titulus

Zosimus changes sides. 461

denies the propagation of original sin, and any c ii a p.
pnnishmcnt of iinbaptized infants, finds so much ^

favour; that though several French bishops ^1e- ,^]^'^-|g ,
manded judgment of the pojie against it, they could
obtain none. On the contrary, Innocent XII. re-
commended the printing of it. And tliere was
lately printed an address to the assembly of French
bishops, anno 1700, that they would censure it ;
but without any success that I have heard of: the
title whereof is, Augustiniana Ecclesice Romans
doctrina^ &c. The book I have not seen, but an
abstract of it in the common prints from Holland.
It shews, it seems, that such a book as the aforesaid
gives occasion to the heretics to say, That Rome is
turning Pelagian.

Zosimus might have been fallible in the case of
Pelagius himself, and might have been excused ;
because he in great measure concealed his opinion
in his letter and Libellus : so the mistake midit be
only in matter of fact. But Caelestius' Libellus spoke

' Nodus PrcEdestinationis, inussit,' was published in his vindica-
tion, 80. Coloniae. And in 1700 came forth the piece named by
Dr. Wall, bearing this title : ' Collectio variorum Scriptorum
' adversus librum cui titulus, Nodus Prcedestinationis ; sive Au-
' gustiniana ecclesiae Romanae doctrina a Card. Sfondrati Node
' extricata, per varios sancti Augustini discipulos.' Colonise 1 20.
1700.

The cardinal's book was reprinted in 1 705 ; and two years
afterwards Louis P. de Vaucel, the translator and editor of the
letters to and from pope Innocent, published a volume of Ani-
madversions upon it, by himself, the archbishop of Rheiras and
others, 4°. Cologne 1707. Whether Sfondrati published any
thing more upon this subject, does not quite appear : but the
editor of his Nodus names in the preface, among other pieces
left by the cardinal at his death, ' Dissertationes eruditissimpe
' dufe contra hicreticos de Baptismo Infantium.]

46^ St. Austin excuses Zosimus.

CHAP, open enough ; and yet he declared it catholic : and
' that not as a private man, but sitting in judicature

(A D ^i8 ) ^^^ ^ ^^y ^^ hearing in St. Clement's church. And
F. Garnier grants, and even proves^ by good reasons,
that this was done in a synod.

XXXIV. St. Austin endeavours to throw a cloak
over the nakedness of this pope. For when the
Pelagians afterward claimed him as theirs ; and said,
he must be so, or else he must be owned to have
declared contrary to himself; and urged the letters
aforesaid ; St. Austin pleads ^ :

1. That Zosimus did not in any of his letters deny
original sin. True, but he declared that Libellus of
Csclestius to be catholic, which did openly deny it to
his face.

2. ^ That Zosimus urged Cselestius to assent to
the letters of pope Innocent ; which letters main-
tained the true doctrine. This indeed shews that
Zosimus did not perceive a plain contradiction when
it came in this way.

3. He takes a charitable advantage of those
words in the preface of Caelestius, ' That if any
' mistake have happened to me, &c., it may by your
' skill be corrected.' And says^, ' whereas Cselestius
' put this [denial of original sin] into his Libellus,
' only among those things of which he owned him-
' self as yet to doubt, and to desire to be instructed ;
' it was the desire of instruction (in a man of good
' wit, who, if he had been reformed, might have
' done a great deal of good) that was approved ;
' and not his false doctrine. And in that sense his
' Libellus was pronounced catholic ; because this is

c Dissert, de Synodis in causa Pelagiana.

d Ad Bonifac. lib. ii. cap. 3. ^ Ibid. cap. 4. ^ Cap. 3.

St. Austin excuses Zosimus. 463

' the part of a catholic mind, if it has any oijinions c h a p.

XIX

' contrary to the truth, not to define them posi- "

' tively, but renounce them when tliey appear to bc/^l^'^'^gv

* such.'

We must commend St. Austin's charity both to
Zosimus and Caelestius. But, as Vossius and bisho]>
Ussher observe, he that reads Zosimus' letters will
see that for a long time he defended Caelestius, not
as one that was in an error, and was willing to be
taught better ; but as one that was in no error, but
had ajiproved himself to have ahsolutam Jidem, (as
he in his third and fourth epistle calls it,) a faith
absolved from all blame. So that, how favourable
an account soever St. Austin gives of this matter ;
Facundus tells it thuss: ' Zosimus, contrary to the 440-
' sentence of Innocent his predecessor, commended
' the faith of Pelagius and of his partner Caelestius,
' and blamed the bishops of Africa for counting
' them heretics.'

One thing indeed St. Austiu there says, which is
a good ansv/er to the Pelagians, who accused the
church of Rome of changing sides, and prevaricating
in their doctrine wdien Zosimus turned against
them ; viz. that if Zosimus did ever declare for
them and their doctrine, that rather ought to be
accounted the prevarication. ' For,' says he^, ' wdien
' in reverend Innocent's letters, which say that in-
' fants, if they be not baptized in Christ, will remain
' in eternal death, the ancient catholic faith is set
' forth ; he certainly ought to be accounted the
' turncoat of the Roman church, that shoukl have

g [Defensio Concilii Chalcedonensis, lib. vii, cap. 3. — edit.
Lutet. Par. (una cum Optato) 1676.3
n Ad Bonifac. lib. ii. cap. 4. §. 8.

464 St. Justin excuses Zosimus.

CHAP. < deviated from that sentence ; which by God's mercy

11— ' was not done.'

(a.d!4i8.) XXXV. Another thing that Pelagius and Cae-
lestius pleaded was, that supposing they were mis-
taken in their opinion that there is no original sin ;
yet this ought not to be accounted heresy, nor to
deserve excommunication. It was no article of our
faith to hold one way or the other ; it was but one
of the questions of lesser moment.

For Cselestius, says St. Austin ', ' spoke in the

* ecclesiastical acts at Carthage after this manner ;
' " I told you before concerning the derivation of sin,
' that I have heard several in the catholic church
' deny it, and some I have heard affirm it. It is
' a matter of controversy, not of heresy. As for
' infants, I always said that they stand in need of
' baptism, and that they are to be baptized. What

* would he have more ?" He spoke this with an
' intent to signify, that if he had denied that infants

* ought to be baptized, then indeed it might have

* been judged heresy : but now that he confesses
' that they are to be baptized, though he give not
' the true reason of their baptism ; yet he supposes
' he does not err in a matter of faith, and therefore
' is not to be accounted a heretic.

' Also in the Libellus which he gave in at Rome,
' when he had spoke as much as he pleased in
' declaring his faith from the Trinity of one Deity
' down to the resurrection of the dead, concerning
' which matters nobody ever demanded or objected
' any thing to him ; when he comes to the matter in
' hand, he says, " and if any questions have arisen
' which many people disjiute about ; I have not

* De Peccato originali, cap. 22^ 23, 24.

Pelaffius and Ccvlestius, 4'c. 465

termined any thing by definitive authority, as if I chap.
would be the author of any dogma [or article of

' faith] ; but I offer those things which T have col- (v.d.ViS.)

* lected from the fountain of the prophets and apo-
' sties to be tried by the judgment of your apostle-
' sliip, he. " You see his purpose of this prefacing
' is, that if he be found in a mistake, he may seem
' not to mistake in the faith, but in some questions

' that are beside the faith, &c. But he is much

' out of the way in thinking so. These questions,
' which he thinks to be beside the faith, are of a
' very different nature from those in which one may
' be ignorant, or mistake, without hurt to the faith ;
' as for example, if a question be put, where the
' garden of paradise is, &c. ? But in the con-
' cerns of those two men, by the first of whom we
' are sold under sin, and by the other redeemed
' from sin, &c., the Christian faith does properly
' consist." '

And afterward : ' Therefore whosoever does main-
' tain that human nature, in any age whatever, does
' not stand in need of the second Adam for a physi-
' cian, as not being defiled in the first Adam ; this

* man's mistake is not in a question in which one
' may doubt or err without hurt to the faith, but he
' is convicted as an enemy of God's grace, by the
' very rule of faith, by which we are Christians'^.'

XXXVI. The most material thing to our pur-
pose to be observed from these passages of the
latter part of this history, is this ; how exceedingly
the Pelagians were pressed with this argument
taken from the baptism of infants ; and to how
many absurdities they were driven in answering

^ Ibid. c. 29.

WALL, VOL. I. H h

466 Pelagius and Ccelestius^ he.

CHAP, of it. Sometimes they said they were not baptized

XIX

' for forgiveness, but for something else. Sometimes
(A D ^i8 ) *^®y owned they were baptized for forgiveness, not
that they had any sin, but that the uniformity of
the words might be kept ; or because they were
baptized into the church, where forgiveness was to
be had for those that wanted it ; or because they
were baptized Avith a sacrament which had the
means of forgiveness for any that had sinned, or
should sin. And some flew to that, that infants
have sin, though not by propagation from a sinful
stock ; but either before they were born, in a former
state, or since they were born, by peevishness, &c.
Since these men resolved not to own original sin
in infants; how much had it been for their turn
to deny that they were to be baptized at all ! If
they had known of any church or society of Chris-
tians, then in being, or that ever had been, that had
disowned infant-baptism ; their interest would have
led them to allege their example, or to plead it in
their own behalf. But far from that, Cselestius
does own that infants are to be baptized according
to the * rule of the universal church ;' and Pelagius
moreover confesses (the same thing in effect that
St. Austin in another place urges) that ' he never
' had heard, no not even any impious heretic or
' sectary, that denied infants' baptism ;' and that
* he thought there could not be any one so ignorant
' as to imagine that infants could enter the king-
' dom of heaven without it.' You have their words
before, §. 29, 30.

And if there had been any such church of anti-
psedobaptists in the world, these two men could
not have missed an opportunity of hearing of them,

St. Austin. 467

being so great travellers as they were : for they chap.
were born and bred, the one here in Britain, tlie ^

other in Ireland. They lived the prime of their .^ ^ ^'^g .
age {diutissime^ a very long time, as St. Austin tes-
tifies ^) at Rome, a place to which all the people of
the world had then a resort. They were both for
some time at Carthage in Africa. Then the one
settled at Jerusalem, and the other travelled through
all the noted Greek and eastern churches in Europe
and Asia. It is impossible there should have been
any church that had any singular practice in this
matter, but they must have heard of them. So that
one may fairly conclude, that there was not at this
time, nor in the memory of the men of this time,
any Christian society that denied baptism to infants.
This cuts off at once all the pretences whicli some
antipsedobaptists would raise from certain jiroba-
bilities, that the Novatians, or Donatists, or the
British church of those times, or any other whom
Pelagius must needs know, did deny it. I shall
however more particularly consider those proba-
bilities at another place "\

XXXVII. Besides the passages I have here re-
cited of this controversy, St. Austin wrote a great
many more, which I must omit, because the reciting
of them all would make a large volume of itself.
Several whole books, and many long epistles, he
wrote to several men against the doctrine of Pela-
gius, where he always makes use of the argument
taken from the constant use of the church in ba}itiz-
ing infants, to prove it to be the general sense that
they have original sin.

1 Peccato original!, cap. 21. «» YarX. ii. ch. 4.

11 h 2

468 St. Austin.

CHAP. I will only give the names of some of them, that

they that have a mind to read more of this matter,

fAD^iSi ™^^ have recourse to them, if they please.

* Augustini ad Valerium, de Nuptiis et Concupiscentia.
Two books.

* Ad Bonifaciura, contra duas Epistolas Pelagianorum.
Four books.

t Enchiridion. One book.

* De Gratia et libero Arbitrio. One book.

* De Oorreptione et Gratia. One book.

* De Prsedestinatione Sanctorum. One book.

* De Dono Perseverantise. One book.

* Contra Julianum Pelagianura. Six books complete,
and other six left imperfect.

* De Gestis Palsestinis. One book.

t De octo Dulcitii Qusestionibus. One book.

§ Comment, in Psalm, li. I was shapen in iniquity, &c.

II Sermo x. item xiv. de verbis Apostoli. item in Sancti

Johannis nativitatem.
^ Letters to Paulinus, to Optatus, to Sextus, to Caeles-

tinus, to Vitalis, to Valentinus, and several others.

All these I pass over, saving that as I have al-
ready here and there fetched in some passages of
them, I shall at the end of this chapter recite two
or three that will shew how the state of this con-
troversy stood between St. Austin and Julian, some
years after Pelagius had been condemned and given
over disputing.

But first, I must give an account of a canon of

318. the council of Carthage held anno 418, about this

matter : which is one of the eight that have for-

[* The pieces thus marked are to be found in the i oth vo-
lume of the Benedictine edition of St. Austin's works.]

[t Ibid. vol. 6.] [§ Ibid. vol. 4.] [|| Ibid, vol. 5.]

1% Ibid. vol. 2.]

St. Austin. 469

merly by a vulgar error been attributed to the chap.
council of Milevis, held anno 416. Whereas the

5 jQ

council of Milevis did only write their sentence in a(A.b.4i8.)
synodical letter to Innocent ; which letter, together
with that of the council of Carthage of the same
year, I recited before". That was in the year 416.
And the next year, 417, there was another meeting
of the bishops at Carthage, of which nothing is ex-
tant, save that it appears by some passages of St.
Austin recited before, §. 33, and some others recited
<§. 15, that they declared that they could not ac-
quiesce in that judgment which pope Zosimus had
passed in favour of Cnelestius ; of which they ad-
vertised Zosimus by their letter.

But the next year after, viz. 418, there was a full
assembly at Carthage of the bishops of all the pro-
vinces of Africa, 214 in number. Then it was they
sent that peremptory letter to Zosimus, which I
spake of. And then also they passed eight canons
against the Pelagian tenets.

In the second they mention the baptism of in-
fants, condemning two errors about it. One, of
those who thought that an infant must upon no ac-
count be baptized before he be eight days old.
I shewed before?, that one Fidus, a bishop near
Carthage, had held so 150 years before ; and it
seems some people were still of that opinion. The
other, of those that held that absurd o])inion, (which
Pclagius and Ca^lestius had made their last refuge,)
that infants are baptized for forgiveness of sins, and
yet have no sin. The canon is this ;

" §. 28. P Chap. vi. §. I.

470 Council of Carthage, 418.

CHAP. Concilii Carthaq. anno 418*^. Cmion secundus.

XIX.

. . /" ' Item placuit, ut quiciinque parvulos recentes ab

(AD418)' uteris matrum baptizandos negat; aut dicit in re-

3'8. < missionem quidem peccatorum eos baptizari, sed

' nihil ex Adam trahere originalis peccati, quod re-

* generationis lavacro expietur ; (unde fit consequens

* ut in eis forma baptismatis in remissionem pecca-

* torum non vere sed false intelligatur;) anathema sit.

* Quoniam non aliter intelligendum est, quod ait
' apostolus, Per unum hommem peccatum intravit in
' mundum, et per peccatum mors, et ita in omnes
' homines pertransiit, in quo omjies peccaverunt :

* nisi quemadmodum ecclesia catholica ubique dif-
' fusa semper intellexit. Propter banc enim re-

* gulam fidei, etiam parvuli qui nihil peccatorum in
' semetipsis adhuc committere potuerunt, ideo in
' peccatorum remissionem veraciter baptizantur, ut
' in eis regeneratione mundetur, quod generatione
' traxerunt.'

' Also we determine, that whosoever does deny
' that infants may be baptized when they come

* fresh from their mothers' womb ; or does say, that
' they are indeed baptized for forgiveness of sins,
' and yet that they derive no original sin from
' Adam, (from whence it would follow that the form

* of baptism for forgiveness of sins is in them not

* true, but false,) let him be anathema. For that

* saying of the apostle. By one man sin entered into
' the world, and death hy sin ; and so death passed
' upon all men, for that [or, in whoni] all have

y [Labbe (see Concilia, torn. ii. p. 1538.) assigns these canons
to the Milevitan council of 416: and Mansi adheres to that
arrangement, torn. iv. p. 325.]

Council of Carthage, 4<\S. 471

* sinned, is to be understood in no other sense than chap.

XIX

' as the catholic church spread over all the world _

' has always understood it. For by this rule ^^t^.K^s.)

* faith, even infants, who have not yet been capable

* of committing any sin in their own persons, are in

* a true sense baptized for forgiveness of sins, that
' in them what was derived by generation may be

* cleansed by regeneration.'

Here this canon ends in most copies : but in
some there is a further clause against such as allow
an eternal life in happiness to unbaptized infants,
though not in the kingdom of heaven. I shall have
occasion to recite that clause, and my opinion about
it, in the next chapter. [§. 6.]

The reader will without any admonition perceive
the mistake of those men, who speak of this canon
as if infant-baptism were established by it as a
thing that had been questioned, or was then newly
brought into use. It a})pears with plainness more
than enough, that as well the makers of this canon,
as they against whom it was made, did both of
them look on the thing itself as undoubted ; they
differed about some of the reasons or effects of it
only.

But Grotius did very unkindly give an occasion
to vulgar ignorant people to run into this mistake,
by that saying of his, recited chap. vi. §. 4, that
' there is in the councils no earlier mention of in-
' fant-baptism than in the council of Carthage:'
meaning this, or that two years before. Whereas he
himself might know well enough, that beside the
other passages in authors, and beside the councils I
mentioned in chap. xvi. it is mentioned in one of the
first councils of which we have any good account

472 St. Austin against Jtdian.

CHAP, since the apostles' time, as I shewed in the aforesaid

XIX. -IT

. sixth chapter.

(a.d!4'i8.) XXXVIII. Pelagius and Cselestiiis being thus
condemned, and the bishops that woukl not sub-
scribe to their condemnation being deprived, which
were eighteen in number in all the western empire ;
they made remonstrances, and sent about into the
East to several places, but found no countenance.
Yet Julian, who had been bishop of Eclanum in
Italy, and was the best j^enman among them, main-
330- tained the dispute with St. Austin for some years ;
each of them writing twelve books one against the
other. And St. Austin died while he was writing
the last six.

If they had said any thing new in reference to
our subject, it had been necessary to relate it : but
there being nothing new, I shall only recite two or
three passages, to shew that they spoke about in-
fant-baptism in the same tenor as before.

After the condemnation, one of the Pelagian party
sent a letter to some of the clergy at Rome, hoping
to retrieve an interest there. St. Austin thought it
was written by Julian, and answers it as his. But
Julian disowned it ; and St. Austin was content they
should ascribe it to which of their sect they pleased.
In it they say many things to clear themselves ;
and, among the rest, this, which is recited by St.
320. Austin^: ' we do acknowledge that the grace of
' Christ is necessary for all, both grown persons and
' infants ; and we renounce all that should say that
' one that is born of parents both baptized ought
' not to be baptized.' And so in the letter which all

r Lib. i. ad Bonifac. cap. 22.

1

St. Austin aaainst Julian. 473

tlie eiohteen of them subscribed and sent to the chap.

O YIY

East, * we OMn baj)tisni to be necessary for all ages^.'

To which St. Austin answers, 'What does it sig-,^ J^'^'jg^
' nify that they do own baptism to be necessary for
' all ages, (which the Manichees hold is needless for
' any age,) so long as they suppose it has no effect
' in infants for the forgiveness of sin ^ ?'

And speaking to Julian himself, ' As to the ques-
' tion of baptism, about which you complain that
' there is a great odium raised against you among
' ignorant people by our lies, it is strange how
' neatly you come off. You clear yourself of this
' odium, by owning that "infants are to be bap-
' tized ; because," you say, " the grace of baptism
' is not to be altered for the causes [or subjects] 321-
' of it ; since it dispenses its gifts according to the
' capacity of those who come to it. And so Christ,
' who is the Redeemer of his own workmanship,
' does by a continued bounty increase his benefits
' towards his image ; and those whom he had made
' good at first, he makes better, by renewing and
' adopting them ".'

' Is this all you have to say why there should be
' no odium raised on you about the baptism of in-
' fants ? as if any of us had said that you deny that
' infants ought to be baptized ? you do not say that
' they ought not to be baptized ; but according to
' your great wisdom you say certain strange things.
' You say, they are baptized in the sacrament of the
* Saviour ; bat yet they are not saved from any

s Apud August, lib. iii. ad Bonifac. cap. 25.

' Lib. iv. ad Bonifac. c. 4.

" Lib. iii. advers. Julian, cap. 3.

474 Julians Rage^ ^c.

CHAP. ' thing. They are redeemed by it, you say, and yet
' they are not delivered from any thing by it/

(A.D.41S ) ^^^ ^^ ^^® ^^^^ ^^ ^^^^ chapter, ' They are strange

* things that you say. They are new things that you
' say. Tliey are false things that you say. As strange,

* we are amazed at them ; as new, we are shy of

* them ; as false, we confute them.'

And again, chap. 5, having produced a great many
proofs that infants have need of the grace of Christ
for acquitting them from the guilt of a corrupted
nature, he says to Julian,

' If you would come to be of this mind, you

* would own the grace of God toward infants in its
' true and natural sense. And you would not be
' put to those shifts, to say things impious and ab-
' surd ; either that infants are not to be baptized,
' which perhaps you will hereafter say : or that so
' great a sacrament is in their case such a mockery,
' as that they are baptized in a Saviour, but not
' saved from any thing ; that they are washed in
' the laver of regeneration, but have nothing washed
' off in it, &c. And all this, because you are afraid
' to say, they should not be baptized ; lest not only
' the men should spit in your faces, but the women
' also should throw their sandals at your heads.'

In the sixth book, cap. 3, he puts Julian in mind

of his own baptism in infancy ; and how ungrateful

a thing it is for him to disown the forgiveness of

286. sin, that was granted to him therein. * Your good

* father,' says he, (St. Austin had been acquainted
with his father,) ' ran with you, little thinking how
' ungrateful you would be for that mercy.'

Though St. Austin does over and over again tell
the Pelagians, that nobody accused them of denying

Julian's Rage, Sfc. 475

baptism to infants; yet it is probable it was him ^^}^^^
himself they meant to have raised that odium

against them among the vulgar. For he speaks,^ J,' ^•^g^
here and at other places, as if he thought they had
a great mind to deny it, if they could have had the
face. He had formerly in a sermon'', (which he
had preached against them, and which was pub-
lished,) after many things said to prove that infants
have sin, and that it is for that they are baptized,
added this ; ' Nemo ergo vobis susurret doctrinas

* alienas. Hoc ecclesia semper habuit, semper te-
' nuit : hoc a majorum fide percepit ; hoc usque in
' finem perseveranter custodit : quoniam non est
' opus sanis medicus, sed segrotantibus,' &c. ' There-
' fore let nobody whisper [or insinuate] any strange
' doctrines to you. This the church has always had,
' and ever held ; this it has received from the faith
' of its ancients, and this it keeps constantly to the
' end, that the whole have no need of a physician,
' &c. What need then has an infant, if he be not
' sick V &c.

But whoever it were that had raised this report,
the Pelagians did always carefully and industriously
declare their disowning of any such thought or pur-
pose. For, as Pelagius, in his letter before re-
hearsed, declares that neither he himself, nor any one
in the world that he knew or had ever heard of, was
ever so ignorant or so impious, as ' either to say so,

* or have such a thought :' so likewise Julian was
so enraged against any that insinuated that he or
his party denied, or ever meant to deny it ; that he
sticks not to anathematize all that deny it : for so

''Serin. lo. de Verbis Apostoli. [Serm. 176. cap. 2. torn. v.
p. 584. ed. Benedict.]

476 Theodorus against St. Justin.

CHAP, are his words, ' We are so far from denying it to be

XIX.

' profitable to all ages, that we allot an eternal

(A.D.418.) ' ai^athenia to those that say it is not necessary even
' for infants y.'

Yet Marius Mercator would needs have it, that
their inward sense was against it : only to keep up
their credit with Christians they in words and de-
clarations owned it. This he goes about to jjrove
by consequences from their other doctrines ; and
then says, ' So that it is plain you must think that
' they need not to be baptized : only you impose
' upon us in your words, but in your heart you hold
' the impiety of Jews and heathens ^' This was
hard, when they made such protestations to the
contrary. He had no other reason than that it
would best have fitted with their other doctrines.
But Mercator wrote his tract ten years after this of
Julian ; so that it could not be him that Julian
meant.
331 XXXIX. Theodorus, who was at this time bi-
shop of Mopsuestia in Cilicia, was in this question
of the mind of the western Pelagians. And Julian,
when he was deprived, retired to him. Some will
have it that he was elder in this sentiment than
Pelagius himself. It might be so, for he was bishop

292 fi-om the year 392 to 428. However that be, he
328.

seems to have concealed this, as well as some other

heterodox tenets he had, all his lifetime : they were

discovered afterward by some writings he left. He

had such singular opinions, especially about the au-

y Apud Augustinum, Operis imperfecti contra Julian, lib. i.
cap. 53.

'- Subnotationum in Scripta Julian, cap. 8. [responsio 2,
p. 53. edit. Garner.]

Theodorus aaainst St. Austin. 477

thority of some books of scripture, that he was, chap.
after his death, condemned in some j^eneral councils ^

for a heretic in greater points than this. This con- •^^- >
demnation of him shews the weakness of the argu-
ment of a modern writer*'', who wonhl prove that
the canon of Scripture was not settled in the church
at this time, because he rejected some books of it.
He shews that he did that, forgetting to tell us that
he was therefore condemned as a heretic.

As for the book he wrote on the Pelagian side ;
there is particular reason to conclude that it did not
come abroad into the world, till after St. liierome
and St. Austin were dead : because they never take
any notice of it, though it be aimed chiefly against
them tM'o without mentioning their names.

This book is not now extant : but an abstract of
it is given by Photius ''. If it be lawful to take a
quotation at second hand from any author, later
than our period, it is from Photius : he was patri-
arch of Constantinople, anno 858, and the collec-758.
tions of so learned and judicious a man are valued
almost as much as if we had the originals.

The title of the book was, ' Against them that
' say, men sin by nature and not by will.' There
are particular reflections plain enough upon the two
Fathers I mentioned. But one of the opinions he
there ascribes to his adversaries as an absurd one,
is, ' That infants, even when they are new born,
* are not without sin ; because our nature being by
' Adam's fall become sinful, that sinful nature is
' derived to all his posterity.' And one of the argu-

a M. Basnage, [in Histoive de I'Eglise, livr. viii. cli. 5. §. 6.
torn. i. p. 430. ed. Rotterdam, 1699.]
I' Bibliotheca. Cod. 177.

478 Theodorui against St. Austin.

CHAP, ments he makes them use to prove it, is this ; ' For

^^^' ' what rea,son are the holy mysteries given to in-

321- 'fants? Why are they accounted worthy of bap-

' tism [or proper to be baptized,] but because they

' are full of sin, sin being implanted in their na-

' ture? For it is for forgiveness that these things

* are done to them.'

The answer that he gives is, as Photius observes,
the oddest that ever was given. He does not deny
that they are baptized for forgiveness. But he says
there is one sort of forgiveness which is for sins
past : and another to procure a state for us in which
we shall no more sin. And that is given, partly in
this life, and ' perfectly (as Photius recites his
' words) in that restauration which is to be after the

* resurrection ; for the obtaining of which both we,
' and also new-born infants, are baptized.' He gave
himself a great latitude in the use of words, to call
that foTCjiveness.

I mention this man, only to shew that he, as well
as the Pelagians of the west, took it for granted
that infants are to be baptized, though he thought
they have no sin. And even as for that opinion
against original sin, (whatever he thought or kept
in writing by him,) he found it necessary for him
to join with the neighbouring bishops, in a synod
held there, to condemn Julian and his opinions ;
as we understand by Mercator*^.

XL. After this time, the Pelagian opinions being
so universally condemned, none but some very few
and very desperate persons did venture to declare
for them, or against original sin. But a considerable

•^ Preefat. in Symbolum Theodori [Mopsuesteni, Op. torn. i.
P- 95 •]

Semi-pelagians and Prwdestinarians. 479

number did still oppose another opinion that St. c.hap.
Austin held about particular pra^destination. These

were called by their adversaries Semi-pelagians, (A.D421 )
though they expressly renounced Pelagius as a he-
retic. And they called their adversaries Praedesti-
narians. But as to the matter we are treating of,
they all agreed, that there is original sin in infants :
that all baptized infants dying in infancy are saved :
and, that no infant dying without baptism goes to
heaven.

The difference between them, as to the case of
infants that die in infancy, was this : St. Austin
and his followers held, that God, by his mere gra-
tuitous pleasure, does ordain that such or such
infants shall come to have baptism, and so be
saved, and others shall miss of it ; without any re-
gard had to the qualifications, which they would
have had if they had lived.

But the Semi-pelagians (so called) said, that such
infants as God foresaw would have been faithful
Christians if they had lived, those he by his provi-
dence procured to be baptized : and suffered others
to miss of it.

So both agreed, that in both cases, salvation at-
tends baptism.

This appears at large in the works of Prosper, 344.

407*

Fulgentius, Cassian, and others of each party ; and 324,
in the latter works of St. Austin himself, wherein
he labours to expose his adversaries' opinion as
absurd ; since God, who in Scripture is said to
judge every one according to what they have done,
is brought in by these men, as judging infants by
what they did not do, but would have done, if they
had lived. And they answered, that this is more

480 Semi-pelagians and Prcedestinarians.

CHAP, reasonable than to judge without any consideration
* at all.

32 1. He objects, that according to their hypothesis,

it is to little purpose which is said in the Book of
Wisdom ^, of one that died young, He was taken
away, lest wickedness should alter his understand-
ing, &c., if God will judge him according to what
he would have done. To which they answer : that
that is not canonical scripture : and he does not go
about to maintain that it is ^.

I shall have occasion to produce some of their
sayings hereafter f, (where I give some account of
the opinion of the ancients concerning the future
state of infants dying unbaptized) and therefore
omit them here.

In this dispute the popes and clergy of Rome
w^ere generally zealous for the Pra^destinarian side,

323- as Ccelestine, Sixtus, Leo, Hormisdas, &c. The

332.

340. other side found most abettors in France, especially
'^^^' about Marseilles.

CHAP. XX.

Quotations out of St. Austin and Vincentius Victor.

THERE were no need of quoting any more out
of St. Austin, either of the doctrine that he held, or
of the testimony that he gives of the churches'
practice in his time or before ; were it not that this
Vincentius, saying some new things about the case

d Ch. iv. II.

'^ [See the epistle of Hilary to St. Austin, prefixed to Austin's
treatise ' de Prsedestinatione Sanctorum,' torn. x. p. 519. and
that treatise itself, cap. 14. sect. 28. torn. x. p. 534.]

f Part ii. ch. 6. §. 4.

solve St. Austins Doubt. 481

of infants that had never been said before, gave chap.
occasion to St. Austin also, who answered him, _____

to insist on some new proofs and defences of the,. •\'9-

i (A.D.419.)

catholic doctrine.

Vincentius seems to have been so inconsiderable
a person, that his name would not have been re-
membered to the next generation, if he had not
ventured to write against St. Austin ; which now,
by the books which that Father vouchsafed to write
in answer to him, which are four books, intitled,
' Of the Soul and its Origin^,' is likely to be spoken
of as long as the world lasts.

He was a young layman, remarkable for two
things, malapertness in judging and determining of
controversial points ; and a certain bombast in his
style, which St. Austin^, out of his wonted civility
and condescension, allows to be eloquent ; and would
make him believe, he might, if he would use his
parts well, do God much service.

He was lately come off from the schism of the
Donatists, which about this time mouldered away ;
but being of a restless head, could scarce keep
clear of the heresy of the Pelagians, which had
been (at the time when St. Austin wrote his first
book against him) newly condemned. For so are
St. Austin's words, ' Secundum Pelagianam haere-
' sim, olim damnabilem, nu})errimeque damnatam^'
' According to the Pelagian heresy, which always
' deserved condemnation, and is just now con-
* demned.'

s [De Anima et ejus Origine, contra Vinccntium Victorepi,
libri quatuor ; contained in vol. x. of St. Austin's works^ ed.
Benedict.]

^ Lib. i. de Anima et ejus Origine, cap. ii. 3. ' Ibid. cap. 19,

WALL, VOL. 1. I i

482 Vincmtius' Answer

CHAP. I take notice of this last circumstance, to set the
' time of this dispute right : for inasmuch as the

fAD^i \y^^^ ^^^ ^^^ (^^ bishop Ussher expresses it) the
fatal year for the Pelagian heresy (for it was in
that year that the canons of the forementioned
great council of Carthage were published, on May
the first ; and the imperial edicts on April 30 ; and
318. pope Zosimus' circular letter a little after), this book
of St. Austin's must probably have been written
the latter end of that year, or the beginning of
the next.

I shall by and by make some use of this observa-
tion about the year, in explaining a passage which
will give some light to this observation, and receive
some from it.

^.2. Vincentius wrote two books, chiefly against
that opinion (to which St. Austin inclined) that the
soul is by propagation. He owned original sin*^,
which was the most material point in which he
differed from the Pelagians. The soul, he said, is
a corporeal substance'; and so is the spirit (which
he took to be different from the soul) : on which
St. Austin observes, that according to him a man
consists of three bodies. But he granted that God
is of an incorporeal nature : on which St. Austin
says, ' I am glad that in that point however he
* keeps free from the dotages of Tertullian™.' It
is to be noted that Tertullian said, that God also
is a body, or else he would be nothing at all.

When he came to speak of that question, whether
the soul be propagated from the parent to the child,
or be by immediate creation; he determined, that

^ Ibid. cap. 9. I Ibid, cap, 5. "^ Lib. ii. cap. 5.

dmcerning Infants baptized. 483

it is immediately created ; and withal expressed chap

a great contempt of the dulness and ignorance of

those that did at all doubt or demur on that , . J^"^* « a

(A.D.4I9.)

question. And he reflected on St. Austin parti-
cularly and by name, as one that had confessed his
inability to resolve it, because of that objection ;
how it could consist with God's justice to put a
soul that is not derived from Adam, but is created
pure, into the body of an infant, where it imme-
diately contracts guilt and defilement.

We saw before ° how much St. Austin was puz-
zled with this objection ; and how St. Hierome,
being desired by him, had refused to meddle with
the solution of it. But now here Vincentius under-
takes easily to answer it. But St. Austin shews
that unless he could have brought a more skilful
answer, he were better have demurred too ; and

* were better have confessed his ignorance than

* betrayed his folly.'

The answer he had given was this :
1. First, in respect to such infants as do by God's
providence come to have baptism ; that ' they being

* by God's praescience praedestinated to eternal life,

* it does them no hurt to continue a little while
' under the guilt of another's sin.' That * as the

* soul contracts a disease by sinful flesh, so sancti-
' fication [viz. that of baptism] is likewise conveyed
' to it by means of the flesh ; so that as by it the
' soul lost its merit, [or innocence,] by it also it re-

* covers its state °. For shall we think that, because
' it is the body that is washed in baptism, that
' [benefit] which is believed to be given by baptism,

1 Chap. XV. sect. 6, 7.

o Apud Augustin. lib, i. de Anima et ejus Origin, cap. 8.

1 i 2

484 V incentius' Answer

CHAP. ' is not conveyed to the soul or spirit ? Fitly there-

'- — * fore it does by the flesh recover its former dispo-

(A.D.419.) ' sitioU;, which by the flesh it had seemed for a
' while to have lost ; that it may begin to be re-
* generated by that by which it had been defiled? :
' so that though the soul, which could have no sin
' of its own, did deserve [or had the fate] to be
' made sinful ; yet it did not continue in a state of
' sinV&c.

Against this answer St. Austin objects, that if
we examine it strictly, it makes God first do an ill
thing, in bringing an innocent soul into a sinful
condition ; and then make amends for it a little
after by the grace of baj^tism. ' Avertat autem
' Deus, et omnino absit, ut dicamus, quando lavacro
' regeneration is Deus mundat animas parvulorum,
' tunc eum mala sua corrigere V &c. ' But God
' forbid, and far be it from us that we should say,
' that God, when he cleanses the souls of infants
' by the washing of regeneration, does then make
' amends for his own faults,' &c. However, he says
this is something ; and may, after a fashion, serve
for such infants as do come to be baptized. ' De
' his quidem parvulis — invenit qualitercunque quod
' diceret^' &;c. ' He has found something to an-
f swer after a fashion for such infants.'

But the chief diflficulty is about those that miss
of baptism ; of whom we are to see in the next
place what Vincentius said.

2. In reference to such as are never baptized,
he, in his first book (for he wrote two, as I said)
determined thus ; ' Habendam dicimus de infantibus

V Lib. iii. cap. 7. Q Ibid. cap. 8. »" Lib. i. cap. 7.

s Lib. i. cap. 8.

cmicerning Infants baptized. 485

istiusmodi rationem, qui procdestinati baptismo chap.
vitae pra^sentis, antcqiiam renascantur in Cliristo,

praeveiiiuntiir occiduo, he. Aiisim dicere istoS/^^"^' x

pervenire posse ad originalium indulgeiitiam pec-
catorum ; noii tameii ut coeleste inducantur in reg-
num : sicuti latroni confesso quidem, sed non bap-
tizato, Doniinus non coelorum regnum tribuit, sed
paradisum ; cum utique jam maneret *,' &c.

* We must give some account of those infants,
which being designed to be baptized in their h'fe-
time, are, before they be regenerated in Christ,

prevented with death. 1 may venture to say

that tliey may obtain forgiveness of their original
sins ; and yet not be admitted to the kingdom of
heaven. As our Lord granted to the thief, that
owned him and was not bai)tized, not the kingdom
of heaven but paradise; that sentence being in
force ; He that is not born again of water and
the Holy Spirit, shall not enter into the kingdom
of heaven. Especially when our Lord says, that
his Father has onani/ mansions; by which are
meant the many and different merits [or o-eivards^
of those that shall dwell in them. So that there
both the'^unbaptized may be admitted to pardon,
and the baptized to the crown which is procured
by grace.

' For such infants indeed I give my opinion, that
there be offered for them daily oblations, and con-
tinual sacrifices of holy priests. This I prove to
be fitting to be done, by the example of the Mac-
cabees" that fell in the battle'^,' &c.

On which determination of his, St. Austin, in t,he

* Apud August, lib. ii. de Aiiima, &c. cap. 9, lo.
u 2 Maccab. xii. 43. " [Lib. i. cap. 11.]

486 Vincentius thinks unhaptized

CHAP, next wordsy, makes this remark, ' Cernis hominem,

! — ' paradisum atque mansiones quae sunt apud Pa-

(A.i).4iQ.) ' trem, a regno separare coelorum ; ut etiam non
' baptizatis abundent loca sempiternse felicitatis,
&c. ' You see how the man, that he may find

* places of eternal happiness for such as are not
' baptized, is fain to separate paradise, and the

* mansions in God's house, from the kingdom of
' heaven.'

And a little after, * How can he hope that he
' himself shall enter into the kingdom of heaven,

* from which kingdom he excludes the house of the
' king himself to what distance he pleases?' And
in the third book written to Vincentius himself, he
observes, ' Christ does not say, as you cite his
' words, Mi/ Father has many mansions : and if
' he had said so, they could not be understood to be
' any where but in his Father's house^. But he
' says expressly, In my Fathe7''s house are many

* mansions ^.'

And having a little after observed also that our
Lord does not say. If any one be not horn again of
water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the king-
dom of heaven b : but, he cannot enter into the king-
dom of God : he then concludes, ' So I suppose

* you may by this time understand how wide from
' truth it is to separate any mansions in the house
-' of God from the kingdom of God.'

To the instance that Vincentius gives of the
thief who went to paradise, though not baptized, as
he sup})osed ; St. Austin answers, shewing how ex-
traordinary his case was. That he, owning Christ

y [Lib. i. cap. lo.] z Cap. ii. ^ John xjv. 2,

y> John iii. 3,5.

Infants may go to Heaven. 487

at that time when they were putting both Christ chap.
and him to death, may well go for a martyr bap-

tized in his own blood ; that St. Cyprian reckons (A.D.4'19.)

him as such ; that moreover we are not sure but

that he had been baptized, &;c., and concludes, ' Ve-

' rum haec ut volet quisque accipiat ; dum tamen de

' baptismo non priescribatur Salvatoris praicepto,

' hujus latronis exemplo : et non baptizatis parvulis

' nemo promittat inter damnationem regnumque coe-

* lorum, quietis vel felicitatis cujuslibet atque ubili-
' bet quasi medium locum ^.'

* But of these let every one take which he pleases ;
' always provided that the example of this thief be
' not made use of for a prescription against our Sa-
' viour's rule concerning baptism : and that no man

* do promise to unbaptized infants a place of rest
' and happiness of any sort, or any where, as a kind

* of middle place between condemnation and the
' kingdom of heaven.'

III. But Vincentius in his second book went fur-
ther: for there having reassumed the instance of
the thief, and of one Dinocrates^, (a boy that died
at seven years old ; and a sister of his that sur-
vived and suffered martyrdom, named Perpetua",
had, while she lay in prison, a dream or vision,
wherein she saw him in a jjlace of darkness and
misery ; and afterward, having prayed for his soul,
she had another vision or dream, wherein she saw
him in a place of happiness. This was recorded in
a history that was then 200 years old, and is still 100.
extant^,) he says of the thief, and of this Dinocrates,

c Lib. i. cap. 9. ^ [Lib. ii. cap. 12.] e [Lib. i. cap. 10.]

f Passio sanctae Perpetuse et Felicitatis. [This was published
by Lucas Holstenius, at Paris, in 1664 : and is found, with

488 Vincentius thinks unhaptized

CHAP, (who he supposes died iinbaptized, because born of

^^' heathen parents, as the story shews,) that they, for

319- all their want of baptism, obtained paradise : and
(A.D.419.) ^ ' ^

then adds, ' Or if any one do contend that the soul
' of the thief, or of Dinocrates, were placed in para-
' dise only for a time, and that they shall have at

* the resurrection the reward of the kingdom of
' heaven ; although that principal sentence. He that

* is not born again of imter, &c. be against this ;
' yet he shall have my willing assent, if this do
' more set forth the effect of the divine mercy and
' prescience, and our love of them^.' Shewing
hereby, as St. Austin takes it, his opinion to be,
that unbaptized infants also may, after staying some
time in paradise, attain at the resurrection to the
kingdom of heaven.

On which St. Austin says, ' Is it possible for any
' one to shew greater boldness, rashness, presump-
' tion of error in this matter ? He remembers our
' Lord's sentence, he repeats it, he sets it down in
' his book ; he says, " Although that principal sen-
' tence, &c. be against this :" and yet he dares exalt
' the neck [or pride] of his own opinion against the

' principal sentence. 1 entreat you, brother, con-

' sider, whoever gives assent to any thing against
' the authority of the principal sentence, what sen-
' tence he deserves at the hands of the prince.' And
at another place, ' You do not consider how much
' worse you hold in this matter than Pelagius. For
' he, standing in awe of our Lord's sentence, by

additional remarks, in the Acta Sanctorum, for the 7th day of
March ; and in Ruinart's ' Acta sincera Martyrum/ fol. Am-
sterdam, 1713^ p. 90, &c. See also the next page.]]
^ Apud August, lib, ii. de Anima, &c. cap. 12.

Infants may go to Heaven. 489

' which unbaptized persons are not permitted to ^"^P-
' enter the kingdom of heaven, does not dare send

' infants [viz. unbaptized ones] thither, though he(A.D.4i9.)
' think them free from all sin'\'

But St. Austin does here something stretch Vin-
centius' words ; for he does not speak this expressly
of infants, but of the thief and Dinocrates ; and of
them but doubtfully.

As to Dinocrates, St. Austin answers \

1. That the book, that tells this story, is no ca-
nonical book.

2. That Perpetua, or whosoever wrote it, does
not say that he died unbaptized. For that being-
seven years old, he might have been baj^tized by
the procurement of somebody else, or by his own
choice, though his father were a heathen.

And he might have answered further, (as bishop
Fell does'S to some papists that build the belief of

1' Lib. iii. cap. 13. i Lib. i. cap. 10.

k Notis in Passionem Perpetuse, &c. edit. Oxon. 1680. [p. 14.
These notes, which I have had some difficulty in tracing out,
occur in an edition of the Passion of Perpetua, &c. appended
to Lactantius' treatise ' de Mortibus Persecutorum,' pubhshed
by bishop Fell at Oxford, in the year 1680. It is remarkable,
that none of the biographical dictionaries, nor Watt in his
' Bibliotheca Britannica/ nor even Antony a Wood, the diligent
inquirer into all these matters, take any notice of such a work
having been edited by the bishop : and perhaps it is also curi-
ous, considering all the circumstances of the work itself and
of its editor, that no copy of it is found in the Bodleian library.

Wood mentions, that Fell ' published or reprinted every year
' while he was dean of Christ Church a book, commonly a clas-
' sical author, against new-year's tide, to distribute among the
' students of his house : to which books he either put an epistle,
' or running notes, or corrections. These,' says he, ' I have

490 Vincentius thinJcs unhaptized Infants, S^c.

CHAP, purgatory, and the duty of praying souls out of it,
on this story,) that here is no other evidence of

(^ D^" X Dinocrates being removed from torment to happi-
ness, than a dream of Perpetua, who, as the bishop
shews by some circumstances, was probably a Mon-
tanist ; and they were a sect that attributed more

' endeavoured to recover, that the titles might be known and
' hei'e set down, but in vain' Athense Oxon. vol. iv. c. 198.

In all probability this Lactantius was one of the pieces al-
luded to. As it is of considerable rarity, I subjoin the title :

• Lucii Cffihi Firmiani Lactantii de Mortibus Pei-secutorum
* liber. Accesserunt passiones SS Perpetuse et Felicitatis, S.
' Maximiliani, S. Felicis. Oxonii. e theatro SheldonianOj anno
'Dora. 1680.' 12°. pp. I — 108, and i — 56; with a separate
preface to each part.

It was not the bishop's custom to put his name to these
annual publications ; but it was sufficiently known at the time
that he was editor. In the present instance he distinctly an-
nounces himself in the preface, which commences with the
words, ' Cum in Operum Cypriani et Lactantii editione quarn
' adornamus — tardius procedatur,' &c. He therefore resolves to
publish the Lactantius alone : and accordingly it does not occur
in his edition of Cyprian which appeared two years afterwards,
nor is there any notice of it in the preface to that Father's
works.

The supplementary pieces of Perpetua, &c. are not reprinted
in the second Oxford Lactantius, edited by Sparke in 1684, 8vo.
nor in that published, with the collected notes of various editors,
by Paulus Bauldri at Utrecht, in 1692 ; but in the preface to
this last there is honourable mention of Fell's edition ; and
although not named, he was certainly knoivn to Bauldri, as its
author. Walchius likewise, in his ' Bibliotheca patristica,'
p. 149, cites this edition as appearing 'cum brevibus scholiis
' Joann. Felli.' Oxonise, 1680. 12°.

I may add, that the Passion of Perpetua is corrected by the
bishop from a manuscript in the Salisbury library, the various
readings of which, together with his own terse notes, are ap-
pended to every page.]

Vincentius did not deny Infant- Baptism. 491

to their dreams and revelations than to the Scrip- chap.

XX

tnre. Nor does any author before Vincentius quote

this book, but Tertullian, who was himself a Mon- , . ^')- .,
' (A.D.419.)

tan i St.

St. Austin shews also that Vincentius is the first
that ever advised the prayers of the church to be
used for any that had died unbaptized, or for any
but church members. They had then, and so they
had in Tertullian's and Cyprian's time^, a custom
of commemorating, at the receiving of the eucharist,
the names of the faithful deceased, and of making
some general prayers for them, such as, 'God rest

* their souls, and grant them a happy resurrection :'
but nothing like those prayers which the papists
make for souls supposed to be in purgatory ; nor did
they use them for any but baptized and faithful
Christians. Therefore, whereas Vincentius advises
these prayers to be used as an after remedy for
such infants as had died without being partakers of
baptism ; St. Austin on this account says, * Do not
' believe, nor say, nor teach, that the sacrifice of
' Christians is to be offered for such as die unbap-
' tized, if you will be a catholic. For neither do
' you shew that that sacrifice of the Jews which you
' mention out of the books of the Maccabees was
' offered for such as died uncircumcised. In which

* your opinion so new, and set up against the au-
' thority of the whole church "\' &c.

IV. I have recited these passages the larger, and
in Vincentius' own words, because there has been

1 Tertull. de Monogam. ' pro anima ejus orat, et refrigerium,'
.&c. [cap. 10.]

K» De Anima, &c. lib. 3. cap. 12.

492 Vincentms did not deny Infant-Baptism.

CHAP, lately a hot dispute between Colonel Danvers", an

_!___ antipsedobaptist, on one side ; and Mr. Baxter and

fK^'^' > Mr. Wills on the other; whether this Vincentius

denied infant-baptism. You may judge by what

I have rehearsed of Vincentius' own words, that the

Colonel undertook a hard task. Yet he maintained

his post a great while, referring the reader for

•309. proof to Austin and Tho. Waldensis^, which latter

11 [For some notice of Mr. Danvers, see pp. 133, 257. above.
For the particulars of this dispute, and the opinions maintained
by the sevei'al parties here mentioned, the reader is referred to
the following pieces :

1. R. Baxter: (besides his other controversial tracts against
Tombes and Bedford) ' Plain Scripture proof of Infants' Church-
' membership and Baptism.' 4to. 165 1 : again, 1656.

' More proofs of Infants' Church-membership, and con-

' sequently their right to baptism.' 8vo. 1675.

[See particularly this latter treatise, written expressly against
Tombes and Danvers, part ii. oh. 4. §. 18.]

2. H. Danvers; 'A Treatise of Baptism, wherein that of
' Believers, and that of Infants, is examined by the Scriptures.
' With the history of Christianity amongst the ancient Britains
' and Waldensians.' Bvo, 1674.

' Innocency and Truth vindicated : or a sober Reply to

' Mr. Wills' Answer to a late Treatise of Baptism.' Bvo. 1675.
' Second Reply/ &c. Bvo. 1 676.

3 . Obed Wills : ' Infant-Baptism asserted and vindicated by
' Scripture and antiquity, in Answer to a Treatise of Baptism
' lately published by Mr. Henry Danvers.' Bvo. 1674.

' Vindici?e Vindiciarum ; or a Vindication of the said

' Treatise,' &c. also ' An Appeal to the Baptists against Mr. Dan-
' vers for his strange Forgeries,' &c. Bvo. 1675.

.' Censura Censurse ; or a just Censure of the unjust Sen-

' tence of the Baptists upon an Appeal made against Mr. H.
' Danvers.' Bvo. 1676.]

[o See 'Thomse Waldensis, Anglici Carmelitse, doctrinale Anti-
quitatum Fidei Ecclesise Catholicae/ 3 tom. fol. Venetiis, 157 1.
Especially the treatise ' De Sacramento Baptismi,' ch. 99. tom. ii.
p. 164.]

Vincentiits did not demf Infant-baptism. 493

lived but about 300 years ago. But his antagonists, chap.

XX.

searching and reciting the places to which ho had —
referred, made it plain that neither of them had (A.D.419.)
said any otlier thing of Vincentius' opinions than
what is to the same pur])ose with that which I
have here recited from himself. This had been
enough to damp the courage of an ordinary man.
But he, being thus home charged, and not used to
yield, said at last, ' He denied it, as the denial of
* infant-baptism went in those days,' viz. 'that
' children might be saved without it p.' The sense
of which words, if they have any, is this : that no-
body in those days denied infant-baptism any other-
wise than by saying that children might be saved
without it. Which is to yield the whole matter
in dispute about the practice of those times, for fear
of seeming to yield in one particular.

The truth of the matter is ; that if we except
Tertullian, (whose words I shewed before to be am-
biguous and inconsistent,) this Vincentius is the first
man upon record that ever said that children might
be saved without baptism ; if by being saved we
mean going to heaven : for that many before him
thought they would be in a state without punish-
ment, I have shewed before.

V. Vincentius does not speak positively neither ;
and that which he did say, he, some time after he
had received these books of St. Austin wrote against
him, recanted. This St. Austin lets us know in the
Review of his own works, written seven years after
this time ^U For there, speaking of these books which

P Second Reply, p- 37-

1 Rctractat. lib. ii. cap. 56. [Op. torn, i.]

494 Coimcil of CaHhage.

CHAP, he had wrote in answer to Vincentius, he adds,

XX

' * Which young man I treated with all the mildness
(AD^i )* possible, as one that was not hastily to be detest-

* ed ; but to be as yet instructed ; and I received

* from him writings in answer, containing his re-

* cantation.'

VI. Here is a proper place to say something of
that clause, which I said even now "" is found in some
copies of the canons of the council of Carthage,
anno 418, annexed as a part of the second canon.
It is this:

' Item placuit, ut si quis dicit ideo dixisse Do-
' minum, I71 domo Patris mei mansiones muUce sunt,
' ut intelligatur, quia in regno coelorum erit aliquis

* medius, aut ullus alicubi locus, ubi beate vivant
' parvuli, qui sine baptismo ex hac vita migrarunt ;
' sine quo in regno [/. regnum] coelorum, quod est

* vita seterna, intrare non possunt, anathema sit.'

' Also it has seemed good to us, that if any one
' affirm that our Lord did therefore say. In my

* Father's house are many mansions ; that it should
' be meant, that there will be in the kingdom of

* heaven any middle place, or any place any where,
' in which infants may live in blessedness that have

* died without baptism ; without which they cannot

* enter into the kingdom of heaven, (which is all
' one as eternal life,) he should be anathema.'

Most part of the copies have not, as I said before,
this clause. But it is found in several. Mr. Du
Pin mentions an old MS. that has it ; and says that
Photius cites it ; [Cod. 53.] and that the Codex pub-
lished by Quesnellus has it. Cardinal Noris quotes
it, but thinks it spurious. And those antipaedobap-

f Ch. xix. §. 37.

Council of Carthage. 495

tists that examined Wills' appeal against Danvers, chap.

say that they find it in the CoUectio Regia, torn. iv. __ii__

p. 559 ^ The critics have not, as I know of, dven,. i'9-

> (A.D.419.)

any account of this difference in the copies ; of
which I will here give my conjecture.

I believe the canon, as it was first enacted and
published (which was, as I shewed before, in the
council in May 418) had not this clause. But
F. Garnier * and bishop Ussher before him " have
plainly shewn that there was in June the next year,
viz. 419, another council of the bishops of all the
provinces of Africa, in which ' the canons of the
« former council were read over and confirmed ;' and
also (as bishop Ussher has it) ' some peculiar matter
* against the Pelagian tenets enacted.' He does not
give any guess what that peculiar matter should be :
but he proves that there was some such thing,
partly from Prosper, and partly from this following

8 [It is indeed recited in the above place, but in smaller let-
ters than the rest, with this introduction : ' Quidam pervetustus
• codex hoc loco hujusmodi caput insertum habebat : Item pla-
' cuit,' &c. Labbe's edition does not notice this clause : but in
that of Mansi, torn. iv. p. 504, we again find it, printed in
smaller type, headed, ' Nota ex Surio et Binio,' (editors of the
Councils in 1567 and 1606) with a remark that it was found in
that old MS. of canons which was published by Quesnel. — This
may be seen in the second volume of Pope Leo I.'s works by
that editor: where, at cap. xiii. sect. 3. p. 75, the clause ap-
pears, as among canons passed at a full council holden at Car-
thage, against Pelagius and Cselestius, in the year 418. See too
Quesnellus' defence of the canon, in his ' Dissertatio xiii. de
Concihis Africanis,' ibid. torn. ii. p. 699.]

t Dissert, de Synodis in Causa Pelagiana [Diss. 2. cap. 16.
apud Mercatoris Op. tom. i. p. 2j8.]

" Ecclesise Brit. Antiquit. cap. 10. prope finem.

496 Council of Carthage.

CHAP, passage of St. Austin in his letter to Valentinus ;

' ' What was written to pope Zosimus from the Afri-

/ A ^^' s ' can council : and his letter to the bishops of all
(A.D.419.) ' '■

' the world ; and what we did, in the following
' ])lenary council of all Africa, enact in short against
' that error ^.' That plenary council, which he calls
the following one, and places after Zosimus' letter,
must have been in 419; since I shewed before, that
that letter was after the council in 418.

I also shewed before, at ^. 1, that this new fancy
of Vincentius was published and canvassed in the
time that passed between those two councils, viz. in
the latter end of the year 418, or in the beginning
of the year 419. And it was published in Mauri-
tania Csesariensis, one of the African provinces : for
there Vincentius lived, as St. Austin tells us y. And
it had some followers ; for he speaks of one Peter,
a presbyter, that among others embraced it.

I believe then, that the canon of 418 had only
so much as is in the ordinary copies ; but that the
bishops, meeting in 41 9j and understanding that
this opinion had been, since their last meeting,
vented in one of their provinces, to support by a
new salvo the Pelagian hypothesis ; they then added
to the second canon, which spoke of the case of
infants, this clause.

My chief reason is, because this addition recites
the very words of Vincentius, and does condemn
them in almost the same words which St. Austin
had used in the confutation of them : as will appear
to any one that will turn back to §. 2, 3. And the

^ Epist. 47. [215. ed. Benedict, sect. 2. where see the editor's
note ] y Retractat. lib. ii. cap. 56.

Infant-Baptism. 497

fancy was so new and iincouth, that no council chap.

XX.

could have thought of it, but on such a particular — —

occasion. (A.D.419.)

And I believe the reason why most copies of that
council do now want this clause is,

1. Because the canon having been first published
without it, many copies went abroad before that
appendix Mas added. And,

2. Because the modern church of Rome has set
up an hypothesis so like this of Vincentius, and
their limhus infantum does so nearly resemble his

feigned paradise, being as that was, a kind of
middle place; that those of that church, Avho had
the transcribing of copies, did not like well of an
anathema denounced against such an opinion.

CHAP. XXI.

Irenceus, Ejyipltanius, Philastrius, Si. Austin., and Theo-
doret, who icrote each of them catalogues of all the
sects and sorts of Christians that they knew or had
ever heard of do none of them mention any that denied
infant-haptism, except those who denied all baptism.

4. I. THE Christians have always been of two 67—330.

(A. D.

sorts, viz. catholics, who, though they inhabited 167—430.)
several countries, yet did all own communion one
with another, and so made one catholic body, or
church ; and sectaries, or heretics, who renounced
the catholic body aforesaid, and separated into seve-
ral parties on account of some tenets, opinions, or
practices in religion, which they held different from
the catholic church ; or sometimes merely on ac-
count of some quarrel with the governors thereof.
The church of Christ never was, nor ever in this

WALL, VOL. I. K k

498 The Sectaries owned, &^c.

CHAP, world will be, so happy as to be without such sects
and divisions. But woe be to the men by whom

fZD° ^h®y come.'
167—430.) 'pjjg quotations hitherto produced do concern the

practice of the catholics in this matter of infant-
baptism ; saving that here and there by the by
there has been mention made of the tenets of some
of the heretics or schismatics. As of the Donatists,
chap. ix. ^. 1 ; chap. xv. sect. 4. ^. 4 ; chap. xvi. $.1,2:
and of the Arians, chap. xii. §.9, 10 : and of the
Pelagians, chap. xix. per totum: of all whom it
appears that they practised infant-baptism, as the
catholics did ; and that without any difference of
opinion concerning the use or effect of it ; save that
the Pelagians held that it was not for the cure of
original sin, but for other purposes. Also we saw
in the said chap. xix. the several declarations of
St. Austin, at §.17, pleading that he had never
heard, and of Pelagius at §. 30, granting that he
also had never heard, of any sect or sort of Chris-
tians that denied infant-baptism. And that which
they two do say there in general, I find to be agree-
able to the account that is given by all the rest that
write histories of the several sects in particular, viz.
that among all that vast immber of sects, and their
several opinions which they recite, they mention
none that denied baptism to infants.

They do indeed each of them mention some sects
that used no baptism at all ; of which sects I do
give a catalogue in the second part of this work^.
St. Austin observes they were all of them such as
disowned also the scripture, or a great part thereof.
But my meaning is, that of all the sects that owned

z Chap. V.

IrerKsus' Account of Sects. 499

any water-baptism at all, they mention none that chap.

XXI

denied it to infants. __11__

Now since they do all of them make it their ^'^\J#'
business to rehearse all the tenets, opinions, and "67— 430-)
usages, which these men held different from the
catholic party, and yet do mention no difference in
this particular ; one may conclude that they all of
them practised in this particular as the catholics
did. If the catholics had not baptized infants, and
the sectaries had ; it would have been noted. And
if the catholics did bajitize them, and the sects had
not ; that also would have been noted. For thev
recite all that each sect had singular. And they
mention differences of much less moment than this
would have been. Now what evidence there is of
the practice of the catholics in this matter, must
be left to be judged by him that has read the fore-
going chapters : for the authors cited in them were
all members of the catholic church, save that Ter-
tullian afterward revolted from it, and Pelagius with
his followers were excommunicated out of it.

II. The first treatise concerning sects or heresies,
that is extant, was written by Irenseus. He, about
twenty years after St. John's death, was a hearer of
Polycarp (St. John's disciple and acquaintance) at 20,
Smyrna ; and about forty-seven years after that, was ''
made bishop of Lyons in France : so that, having
lived and conversed in such distant countries, and
with such men, he had an opportunity of knowing
what sects there were or had been. He wrote this
tract about the year after the apostle's death 76 or
77, as I shewed before in chap. iii. '^. 6. He men-
tions the sects that arose in the time of the apostles,

K k 2

500 Irencews' Account of Sects.

CHAP, and those that had sprung up in the seventy-six

— 1— years that had passed since their death.

^/aT D? They were all of them but a few in comparison

167— 43o-)of the number that arose afterward: but a great

many considering the time that had then passed.

He takes most pains in refuting the Valentinians ;

who, it seems, were most numerous at that time and

place. But he says himself that his purpose was

to rehearse all that were, or had been ; which was

easy to do for so short a space.

After much discourse against the Valentinians,
he goes to prove that they derived their opinions,
not from Christ or his apostles ; but from the for-
mer heretics which had in the apostles' time set
themselves against the apostles. These are his
words :

' Since then that there is manifold evidence
' against all the sects ; and that my purpose is to
' confute each of them according to their several
' tenets ; I think it proper in the first place to
' recount from what fountain and original they
' sprung ^'

Then he declares how Simon the magician, men-
tioned by St. Luke'', was the first, who, after he
was rejected by the apostles, set up a sect; and
taught that this world was made, not by the good
and supreme God, but by inferior and evil powers :
and proceeds in the following chapters to shew that
this impious tenet made a main part in the doctrine,
not only of the Valentinians, against whom he was
principally engaged ; but also of most of those elder

* Lib. i. cap. 19. [cap. 22. sect, 2. edit. Benedict.]
^ Acts viii. 9.

Irenwiis' Account of Sects. 501

ones that had followed Simon's example in setting chap.
up sects. For the same thing was taught by Me- " " '
nander, Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Cerin- ^l~-l^°-
thus, Cerdo, and INIarcion, as well as by Valentinus. '67—430)
And so it was, after Irenseus' time, by Manes and
the INIanichees.

Of these heretics mentioned by him, the first two,
Simon and Menander, do seem to have endeavoured
to obliterate the memory of Jesus Christ. For each
of them pretended himself to be that great power
of God^ [viz. of the supreme God] that was to
redeem men from the malice and tyranny of that
angel, or inferior god, that made the world, and
gave the law.

The two next, Saturninus and Basilides, owned
Jesus Christ that came in Judiea : but they owned
only his divine nature ^. For they said he was not
really a man, nor did really die, but only in appear-
ance.

The two next, Carpocrates and Cerinthus ^, owned
him to be a man and a saviour ; but not to be God,
nor to have had any being before his human birth.
Only they said, a divine power from the Supreme
God came down at a certain time upon him, and
dwelt in him, which enabled him to do what he did.
This last opinion is now going to be revived.

All these three branches of heresy arose while
St. John was alive : and so did the Ebionites and
Nicolaitans, which he mentions likewise ^ These
did not join in the foresaid blasphemy against the
Creator of the world. But had other abominable

c Irenseus, lib. i. cap. 20, 21. [cap. 23.] ^ Ibid. cap. ^22.

23. [cap. 24.] e ibi(j. cap. 24, 25. [cap. 265, 2.] f Ibid,

cap. 26, 27. [cap. 26.]

502 An Account of the First Sects.

CHAP, tenets. The Nicolaitans, chiefly in reference to
XXI. , . .

practice : allowing fornication, &c. And the Ebion-

sties'^time.' i^cs in point of faith : disbelieving the divinity of
our Saviour, (as the Cerinthians and Carpocratians,)
and renouncing and railing at the apostle Paul, and
all his writings ; which do now make one half, and
at that time made the much greatest part of the
scriptures of the New Testament : for St. John had
not written when they set up their sect. This
would make one stand amazed at the impiety of
those men nowadays, that calling themselves Christ-
ians, would yet persuade us that these Ebion-
ites were the true Christians of those times: that
they were the orthodox ; and those whom we call
catholics, were erroneous. The tendency of such a
tenet is to persuade us, together with the doctrine of
Christ's divinity, to renounce also half the books of
the New Testament. As St. John lived to see all
these heresies vented ; so one may perceive that he
at several places of his writings opposed himself to
such opinions.

Of sects that had arisen after the death of the
apostles, he mentions^ the Encratites, the Caians,
the sects of Cerdo, of Marcion, and of Valentinus.
The last four of these were an offspring of those
first mentioned, (who were by a general name called
Gnostics,) and did all agree with them in the point
afore mentioned, that the Maker of heaven and
earth is not the supreme God ; but that there is an-
other far above him : and that it was that ujjper one
that sent the Saviour.

It was in opposition to this sort of heretics, that
the catholic church found it necessary to insert that

ff Iren. lib. i. cap. 28, 29, 30, 35. [cap. 27, 28, 31.]

And of their Ways of Baptism. 503

clause, The Maker of heaven and earth, chap.

\xi
into the first article of the creed. For the most _1_1__

ancient creeds had no more in that article than, ' I ^" ij'e apo.

' sties time.

' believe in God the Father Almighty/ The eastern
church, where those heresies were most rife, insert-
ed it first; and the Latins from them. The Latins
had it not in their creed at the year 400. Without
that clause, the Manichees, Gnostics, &c., would say,
they believed in God the Father Almighty ; but
would mean a quite different God from him w4iom
the Christians owned : who always meant the Cre-
ator of the world, and author of the Old Testament,
to be the same with the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ.

It pleased God by his providence so to order it ;
that though some heresies were very ancient, yet
they are all so absurd, that they can tempt no man
of ordinary sincerity that reads the scriptures.

The points concerning baj)tism, in which Irenaeus
notes any of the said sects to have held any thing
singular, are these :

Menander promised ^ that all that would be bap-
tized with his baptism, [or baptism in his name,]
should presently have a resurrection ; and after that
should never die nor grow old, but be immortal.
Whereupon Tertullian, about 100 years after Me-
nander's death, challenges^ that sect to produce any
of their fellows that had been baptized by JMenander
himself, that was yet alive.

The Carpocratians ear-marked their proselytes.
And that, as I understand Irenseus ^, went for their
baptism. ' They burned a whole in the hinder part

h Iren. lib. i. cap. 21. [cap. 23.] > De Anima, cap. 50.

k Lib. i. cap. 24. [cap. 25.]

504 An Account of the First Sects.

CHAP. * of the lap of the right ear.' Here let me add a

" ' • few of the next words, though not to this purpose.

In the apo- < They Call themsolves Gnostics, [i.e. the men of

sties time. '' •- .

* knowledge ;] they use also certain images, some
' painted, and some carved ; and say, they are pic-
' tures of Christ drawn by Pilate, while Jesus lived
' among men. On these they put garlands, and set
' them up together with the images of the phi-

* losophers of the world, as Pythagoras, Plato, and
' Aristotle, &c. And they use all such ceremonies to
' them as the heathen do.' These men, and some
people at Paneas, mentioned by Eusebius^ to have
had the like heathenish fancy, as he calls it, are the
' first authors of the worship of Christ by an image
' that are any where mentioned.' Epiphanius also
mentions the ear-marks used by the Carpocratians,
Haer. 27.

The Valentinians had several under-sects, of
which Irenseus speaks particularly. And for their
baptism, he says™ they had as many sorts of it as
there were teachers among them ; but all contrary
to the true. Some instead of baptism dressed up a
marriage-bed, and with certain profane words acted
a marriage of the person to Christ. Others put the
person into the Avater indeed, but instead of the
Christian form of baptism used a strange and un-
couth one, which I have occasion to repeat at an-
other place ", and anointed the baptized person with
balsam. ' There are some of them,' says Irenseus,
' who think it needless to bring the person to the
* water at all ; but mixing oil and water together
' they pour it on his head, [by which words of his,

1 Hist. Eccl. lib. vii. cap. i8. >» Lib. i. cap. i8. [cap. 21.]

" l*art ii. chap. v. §. i.

Various Interpretations, S^c. 505

* and by a thousand other instances it aj)pears that c n a p.
' the catholics did ordinarily put the whole body in ' ' '

' the water,! and they use certain words not much ^" '^eapo-

-^ •' _ sties' time.

' different from those I mentioned before ; and they
* will have this to be redemption, [or baptism,] and
' these also use balsam.' Others of them used no
water at all, nor other external ceremonies ; but
said : ' s})iritual baptism, which consists in the
' knowledge of the unspeakable Majesty, is all in
' all.'

III. Some of them did pour oil and water on the
heads of people newly dead, with such words and
imprecations as he had before mentioned ; and they
told the dead man's soul what it should say, if in its
way to the supreme heaven, it should meet with any
of the principalities or powers that belong to him
that made this world. The soul was to say, ' that
' it was better than the power that made them.'
And a great deal more such blasphemous stuff.

Irenaeus excuses himself from descending to more
particularities : for that they inventing every day
new ways and opinions, it was endless to describe
them all.

As to the Corinthians and Marcionists, he is very
short, and says nothing about their baptism. But
Epiphanius*' speaks of a tradition that the Cerin-
thians did use to baptize some living person in
the stead of any friend of theirs that had happened
to die unbaptized : and that it was in relation to
such a practice that the apostle says p, If there he no
resurrection of the dead, why are they then baptized
for the dead ? And St. Chrysostom, in his explication
of that text, says, that the INIarcionists did the same.

o Haer. 28. [cap. 6. torn. i. p. 114.] Pi Cor. xv. 29.

506 Various Interpretations of

CHAP. And Tertullian in bis fifth book against Marcion'i,

XXI.

, !_ S23eaks of that custom, and the apostle's mentioning

sties^time' ^^ ^^ ' ^^^^ sheAvs that his mentioning of it is no
evidence that he aj)i)roved it. The Comments
ascribed to St. Ambrose do also so interpret the
place.

There are two objections against that interpreta-
tion.

1. One is, that the Marcionists for certain, and
probably the Cerinthians, were not in being when
that apostle wrote. Cerinthus had a party before
St. John's death ; but this epistle of St. Paul was
a long time before that.

Therefore Scaliger and others think that some
zealous, but ignorant people, among the catholics
had upon a sense of the necessity of baptism begun
this custom in St. Paul's time : and that in the
catholic church it was quickly left off; but that it
was continued afterward among the Cerinthians and
Marcionists.

2. The other is, that St. Paul would not probably
draw an argument for the resurrection of the dead
from so weak a topic as the practice either of abo-
minable heretics or mistaken Christians.

But these men do not seem to have minded that
St. Paul does sometimes take in the suffrages even
of heathen men in his arguings. He might reason-
ably enough propose to himself to shame those
among the Christians at Corinth that did not be-
lieve the resurretion, by instancing in the general
assent that was given to that article among all
Christians : and even among those who, how much
soever they might be mistaken in thinking that that

q Cap. lo.

Baptism for the Dead. 507

vicarious baptism would avail the dead, yet did chap.

XXI

plainly shew that they fully believed the resurrec-

tion of the dead, when they practised this sort of '[jj^],'^^^"
ba})tism for them.

This interpretation is certainly the most obvious.
And it is something confirmed by the ill success
of those that have attemjited any other. That

* baptized for the dead' should stand instead of
' baptized for their bodies'*.' Or, that 'for the dead,'
should be construed, ' for the state of the dead *;' or,
' for their dead Adam^;' or, ' why are they baptized
' for the dead?' i. e. why are persons ready to die
desirous of baptism ' that it may be w^ell with them
' after they are dead"?' Or, that virep veKp^v should
be translated, * over the dead,' i. e. why do people
choose to receive their baptism at the tombs of dead
martyrs^ ? Or, * that baptized for the dead,' should
mean nothing but * washed after the touch of a dead

* bodyy.' These are the essays of learned men. But
the more one observes the apostle's phrase, the less
probable they appear.

The latest that has been given, is, I think, the
worst ; ' why are they baptized for the dead V that
is, ' why are new Christians baptized every day in
the room of those that die ^ ?' For that fits neither
the phrase nor the scope of the place.

r Tertullian. contra Marcion. lib. v. cap. lo.
8 Chrysost. in loc. [Homil. 40. Op. torn. x. p. 378.]
' Vossius de Baptismo, Disp. 12. cap. 2.
u Epiphan. Hser. 28, — cap. 6.

* Prudent. Hymn. 8. [De loco in quo martyres passi sunt,
nunc baptisterium dicitur.]

y Vasquez in tertiam part. Thomse Aquin. Disp. 157.
z Mr. Le Clerc. Annot. in loc.

508 Various Interpretations, Sj-c.

CHAP. iirep Toov veKpwv for virep rrjv Tcov veKpwv ava<rTa<Tiv^

L_ ' upon the faith of the resurrection of the dead,'

stieJtime"' ^^o^^^ ^^ the senso very well : but it is a great
stretch of the words. ' Baptized for the dead, i. e.
' buried under water for dead,' or, as if they were
dead'', is a mere Anglicism ; that would never in
Greek have been expressed virep veKpwv, but wael
veKpol.

St. Chrysostom's objection^ against this sense of
the place, that St. Paul should refer to such a custom
among some Christians, is this ; ' If Paul meant so,

* to what purpose is the threatening of God against

* one that is not baptized ? For if this shift [viz. of
' a living person to be baptized for one that is dead]
' be admitted, none will ever miss of baptism ; or, if

* he do, it will be the fault of those that survive, and
" not of the dead person.' But St. Chrysostom does
not seem to have considered, that, (as Tertullian
says,) the apostle might mention this custom without
approving it. Though a mistaken practice, yet it
shewed still the faith of the resurrection.

The Marcionists had also several other singular
opinions about baptism. They would baptize no
married person till he did divorce his wife : for they
said that marriage and all the works thereof were
wicked things, and were ordered by that evil god or
angel that gave the law, and made mankind. Hence
Tertullian jeers tliem'^, saying, that they ' reserved

* a man's baptism till he was divorced or dead.'

What Irenseus here says of one sort of the Valen-
tinians, that they baptized some persons after they

* Hammond, in loc. '^ Sir Norton KnatchbuU.

•^ In loc. [Homil. 40. §. i.]

^ Contra Marcionem, lib. iv. cap. 1 1 .

Writers that say nothing of Infant- Baptism. 509
were dead, Philastrius 6ays^ was the common tenet chap

XXI.

of the INIontanists or Cataphryges. ' Hi mortuos
' baptizant.' These baptize people after they are^Jey^i^P"'
dead. There were also here and there some in the
catholic church, who through a mistaken zeal and
compassion to persons that died unbaptized, would
sometimes do the same. For there is a canon in the
third council of Carthage against that practice.
That council allows sick people to be baptized
though they be speechless, if there be good evidence
of their fitness and desire of it^. But yet they say&,
' Let not any priests be so ignorant as to think that
' dead persons may be baptized.'

Inasmuch as Irenaeus, among all these observa-
tions, says nothing pro or contra about baptizing
infants among the heretics ; it may, as I said, be
concluded that they had nothing singular in that
point, but practised as the catholics did. And for
the catholics, I produced before^ the saying of
Irena^us himself, where he speaks of infants being,
as well as grown persons, the ordinary subject of re-
generation. And that by regenerated, he and all
the ancients did understand baptized, whatever
pains might be necessary to shew it then in that
chapter, I suppose there is none needful now : be-
cause the reader has since that seen that all the
authors do speak in that language.

IV. The other four, Epiphanius, Philastrius, From 265

to 350-

e Hseres. Cataphrygum. [cap. 49. p. 103. edit. Fabricii, 120.
1721. Fabricius refers to Dr. Wall's notice of this passage, in
his note.]

*" [Concil. Carth. iii. anno Christi 397. apud Labb. ii. p. 1167,
&c.] Canon 34.

S Canon 6. ^ Chap. iii. §. 2.

510 Writers thai say nothing of

CHAP. Austin, and Theodoret, were all living at one time;

. 1_ only Epiphanius was the eldest, and Theodoret the

^^aTd ° youngest. I shall not with these take the same
365— 450.) pains as I did with Irenseus, of setting down all the
customs or tenets that they recount the several
sects to have held different from the catholics, in the
matter of baptism : it would be too voluminous. It
is sufficient that they do none of them mention any
thing concerning infant-baptism either as practised,
or as not practised by any of the sectaries, (a plain
proof that they held nothing in that point different
from the ordinary practice of the church,) save that
St. Austin notes of the Pelagians (which is in his
account the eighty-seventh and last heresy that had
risen) that though they agreed with the church that
infants are to be baptized, yet they held a different
opinion concerning the ground or reason of their
baptism. His words are these*; * Parvulos etiam
' negant, secundum Adam carnaliter natos, conta-
' gium mortis antiquae prima nativitate contrahere.

* Sic enim eos sine ullo peccati originalis vinculo as-
' serunt nasci, ut prorsus non sit quod eis oporteat
' secunda nativitate dimitti : sed eos propterea bap-

* tizari, ut regeneratione adoptati admittantur ad
' regnum Dei, &c.'

* They do also deny that infants which are de-

* scended from Adam according to the flesh, do, by
' their first birth, contract any contagion of the an-
' ciently threatened death, (for they affirm them to
' be born without any bond of original sin ;) so that
' there is nothing in them that needs to be forgiven
' by the second birth ; but that they are baptized

' Lib. de Haeresibus, cap. 87. [Op. torn. viii. p. 20.]

Infant- Baptism. 511

* for that reason, that beiiie: by this rec^eneration chap.

XXI

' adopted, they may be admitted to God's kingdom ;

' being by this renewal advanced from a good state ^^/^^j''°*

* to a better, but not absolved from any ill state of 365— 450-)
' the old obligation. For, though they be not bap-

' tized, these men do promise them a certain eternal
' and happy life ; not in the kingdom of God indeed,
' but of a peculiar sort.'

This was the only sect that he knew of, he says^,
that denied infant-baptism to be for original sin.
And for any that denied it absolutely, he knew of
none at all.

]\Ir. Tombes, being to answer Mr. Marshall^ who
had produced a great many of the Fathers that
speak of infants as baptized, makes this exception ;
that there are several others of them that have no-
thing at all of that matter. * It is wonder to me,'
says he™, ' that if it were so manifest as you speak,
' you should find nothing in Eusebius for it, nor in

* Ignatius, nor in Clemens Alexandrinus, nor in

* Athanasius, nor in Epiphanius.'

The objection is but weak. For there is no age
of the church in which one may not find many
books that say nothing of that matter ; because they
treat of subjects on which they have no occasion to
speak of that. Ignatius wrote nothing but a few
letters to the neighbouring churches, to exhort
them to constancy in that time of persecution.
Athanasius was wholly taken up about the Trinity.

^ See chap. xix. §. 17.

' [See Stephen Marshall's Sermon on Infant- Baptism, 40.
1644: and his Defence of Infant-Baptism in answer to Mr.
Tombes, 40. 1648.]

™ Examen, p. 9. 40. 1645.

512 The Sect of the Hieracites.

CHAP. Clemens Alexandrinus with the heathen ]ihilosophers ;

XXI

(yet in him we have now fomid a place where he in

(A r)°°oo ^ ^ transient and cursory way mentions the apostles
baptizing infants.) Eusebius writes the chronicles
of the succession of kings, emperors, bishops, and
the state of the church, either flourishing or perse-
cuted, under each of them.

But I think Mr. Tombes could not well have said
a more unlucky thing for his own cause, than to in-
stance in Epiphanius. For since he wrote nothing
to speak of, but a catalogue of those opinions which
the several sectaries held contrary to the church ; to
plead that he says nothing of infants' baptism, is in
effect to give an argument that there never was any
sect that in that matter practised otherwise than the
church did in Epiphanius' time, who died after the
300. year 400. And that the church at that time used
infant-baptism is so plain, that the antipsedobaptists
do seldom deny it.

V. But Mr. Tombes gives an instance of a case in
which he thinks it would have been proper for
Epiphanius to have mentioned infant-baptism, if it
had then been in universal use in the church. For
Epiphanius gives an account" of a sect, that had
begun about 100 years before, called the Hieracites ;
who taught that no infant dying before the use of
reason could come to the kingdom of heaven. Their
reason was, If any one strive, he is not crowned,
Ccvcept he strive lawfully'^. ' How much less can an
* infant be crowned, who never strives at all ?'
They thought of the kingdom of God in heaven, as
the antipaedobaptists do of his kingdom on earth,

1 Hseres. 67. [cap. 2. — Op. torn. i. p. 711.] ^2 Tim. ii. 5.

All the Sects reduced Sfc. 51 3

that it is no state for babes. Now INIr. Tombes chap.
thinks that Epiphanius, among the arguments he ^^^'

brings that infants may be glorified, wouki have ^°°-

. ./ o (A.U.300.)

pleaded their baptism, if the baptizing them had
been usual in the church.

But he seems not to have considered, that heretics
and schismatics do not use to be prevailed on by ar-
guments drawn from the practice or doctrines of the
church. And as for arguments from scripture, Epi-
phanius uses those that do more expressly and im-
mediately prove their admission into the kingdom of
God ; as that saying of our Saviour, Of such is the
kingdom of God, &c., and is but short in all.

It might be objected again, that in all probability
these heretics did not baptize their own children.
If they did, it could be only in prospect of some be-
nefit it might do them afterward, if they lived. And
if they did not baptize them ; it had been proper
for Epiphanius to mention that, as a thing wherein
they differed from the catholics, supposing that the
catholics did baptize theirs.

But upon a more careful reading of their opinions
there rehearsed, it appears that they could have no
children. For one of their tenets was, that all mar-
riage and getting of children is unlawful under the
New Testament ; and that ' no married person can
* inherit the kingdom of God. That the only end
' of Christ's comino; was to settle an absolute conti-
' nence. For what new thino- did he brina^ into the
' world else ? Against malice, covet ousness, injustice,
' fornication, &c., the law had well enough provided
' before.'

Whether these men would have baptized their
children if they had had any, is uncertain. But the

WALL, VOL. I. L 1

514 All the Sects reduced

CHAP, first body of men we read of, that did deny baptism

to infants, which were the Petrobrusians, anno

(A.D.°co.) I^o^- 1150, did it upon a gromid or reason which
'°5°'they held common with these men, viz. that infants
baptized or not baptized, are incapable of the king-
dom of heaven ; as I shew in the Second Part of this
work, chap. vii. ^. 5.
^74- Epiphanius reckons in all eighty heresies, which
he saysP, ' were all that he heard of in the world.'
He says nothing of their baptizing or not baptizing
infants. But in the end of his work he recites the
faith held by the church, in opposition to all he-
resies. In settling the articles of faith he is large ;
but he has also a few words concerning the rites of
the church. He mentions the fasts and feasts, &c.
and he adds, ' as for the other ordinances concerning
* baptism and the internal mysteries ; as the tradi-
' tion of the gospel and of the apostles is, so they are
' ordered.' And after some mention of the manner
how the catholic church uses the prayers, psalms,
ways of relieving the poor, &c. ; he adds, ' and for
' baptism, she [the catholic church] accounts it to
' be in Christ [or to the Christians] instead of the
' old circumcision i.' The like he says in his eighth
chapter, which is of the Epicureans ; ' the law had
' the patterns of things in it ; but the truth of them
' is in the gospel. The law had the circumcision in
' the flesh, serving for a time, till the great circum-
' cision came, that is, baptism ; which circumcises us
' from our sins, and seals us unto the name of God'".'

^ Hser. 8o. [cap. lo. torn. i. p. 1076.]

q [See Epiphanii Expositio Fidei Catholicse, cap. 22, et 24. —
Op. torn. i.p. i 106, IT07.]

' [Lib. i. cap. 8. §. 6. — Op. torn. i.p. 19.]

to four general Heads. 515

Philastrius makes above 100 heresies. He makes chap.

XXI

a difference in opinion about any trifling matter to

be a heresy. He mentions no dispute about infant- ,^£j°°-^ v
baptism. 280.

Theodoret has wrote in the best method about 330-
heresies*. He has reduced them to some general
heads. He makes four. The first, of those before-
mentioned and such others as have denied that the
world was made by God. The second, of those that
have attributed to our Saviour no other nature than
the human. The other two, of other sects. He
says the first sort had at that time hardly any that
adhered to them : and the second sort, none at all.
He mentions some sects that used no baptism at all.
But it was only some of the most absurd and im-
pious. But of those that used baptism, he has none
that renounced infant-baptism. After the four books
of these four sorts of heresies, he adds a fifth ; which
is, 'Of the True and Orthodox Doctrines and
* Usages of the Church.' He mentions there the
baptism of infants, not as a thing disputed of, or
denied by any sect : but occasionally. Shewing the
advantages of baptism, that it conveys not only par-
don for the sins of men's former life, but many
other graces ; he proves it by the baptism of infants,
who have committed no sin. The words I had
occasion to recite before*. There is another cata-
logue of heresies at the end of Tertidlian de Prce-
scriptione. But it hath nothing about baptism ;

s [See his Haereticarum Fabularum Compendium, (introduc-
tion,) in vol. iv. p. 187. of his works, publis^hed by Sirmondus,
fol. 1642.)

t Ch. xiv. §. 4.

L 1 2

516 References to Authors of tlie fifth Century.

CHAP, save that Meiiander said, none could be saved, that

XXI

" were not baptized in his name.
200.
(A.D.300.) ,

CHAP. XXII.

Containing References to the BooJcs of some Authors of
the next succeeding Times.

3°o— 400. ^. I. THIS is the best account I can give of the
400—500.) passages concerning infant-baj^tism that are in the
genuine books of the writers that flourished from
the apostles' time to the year of Christ 400. The
reason that I go no further is, because for the next
700 years the matter is clear. Yet of those years
and of the Waldenses that arose about the year
1050. 1150, I intend to discourse something in general,
in the Second Part of this work*.

And here, for the sake of those that have any
mind to trace the quotations for about one hundred
years further, I have set down some references to the
places where they are to be found. To set down
344- the words is too long ; they being all to the same
effect with those already rehearsed.

Prosper^, in almost all his works against the Pela-
gian and Semi-pelagian tenets, makes use of the ar-
gument taken from the necessity of the baptizing
of infants. Particularly,

Epist. ad Augustiniun, prefixed to St. Austin's
book de PrcBdestinatione Sanctorum. [Op. tom. x.]

a Part ii. ch. 7.

b [See Prosperi Opera, ab Olivario edita, fol. Paris, 1671.
Some of these pieces are printed in the Appendix to vol. x. of
the Benedictine edition of Augustine's works. Also in Cassiani
Opera, fol. 1628. p. 887, &c.]

■M^

References to Authors of the fifth Century. 517

Epist. ad Demetriademt among the works of '-ha p.
St. Ambrose.

De Vocatione Gentium, lib. i. c. 16, 22. lib. ii. ^°(a7i)°°'
c. 20, 21, 22, 23, &c. I know it is questioned whe- 4°°-5°°)
tlier this be Prosper's, or pope Leo's, or some other
man's work ; but it is much one to this purpose?
since whoever he were, he lived about this time.

Carmen de Ingratis, cap. 1, 6, 21, i30, 31, &c.

Contra Collatorem.

Epist. ad Rufinum, circa medium.

Defensio Augustini.
Orosius Apologetic. 316'.

Paulinus Diaconus, Libello ad Zosimum Papam. a^o**.

Hilarius Arelatensis, Epist. ad Augustinum, 330".

Marius Mercator, Commonitorii, cap. 1, & 4. aiS^.

Prsefatione ad Subnotationes.
Subnotat. cap. 6. item 8.
Cffilestinus Papa, Epist. ad Maximian. apud Acta Con-323&.

cilii Ephesini.
Epist. ad Gallos Episcopos.
Epistola Synodica Concilii Ephesini ad Cselestinum Pa- 331".

pam.

c [Pauli Orosii adversus Paganos Historiae, ut et Apologeticus
contra Pelagium de Arbitrii Libertate, — cura S. Haverkampi, 4to.
Lugd. Bat. 173S. It is reprinted in the Bibliotheca Patrum, by
Gallandi, torn, ix.]

tl [See this in the Collection of Councils ; edit. Labbe, vol. ii.
p. 1578. edit. Mansi, torn. iv. p. 381.]

e [See these among St. Austin's epistles, No. 156, and 226,
torn. ii. p. 414, and 626.]

f [M. Mercatoris opera, cura Garnerii, 2 torn. fol. Paris. 1673.
cura Baluzii, 8vo. Paris, 1 684 : and in the Bibliotheca Patrum
by Gallandi, torn, viii.]

S [See these, in the Collection of Councils, edit. Labbe,
vol. ii. p. 1618, 1630: edit. INJansi, vol. iv. p. 464. vol. v.
p. 271.]

•' [See Councils ; edit. Labbe, vol. v. p. 660. edit. Mansi, iv>
p. 1329.]

518 References to Authors of the fifth Century.

335*- Auctor Prsedestinati, a Sirmondo editus, Paris. 1643.

330''- Possidius in vita Augustiiii.

33°^- Auctor Hypognosticwr, inter opera Augustini, lib. iv. v.

et passim.
312". Isidorus Pelusiota, lib. i. epist. 125. lib. iii. epist. 195, &c.
324''- Cassianus, de Incarnatione Domini, lib. v. e. 11.
3120. Cyrillus in Levitie. c. 8.
323P. Theodoretus in 1 Cor. vii. 14.

Epitome Decret. Divin. lib. v.
340''- Leo magnus Papa, Epist. 37. ad Neonara.
Epist. 92, ad Rusticum, cap. 16.

Epist. 86, ad Nicetam Aquilejiensem. Item Epist. 88,

ad Episcopus Germ.

All these were contemporary with St. Austin, but

younger than he, and wrote before the year 450.

And in the next fifty or sixty years, these following :

i [And reprinted in the first volume of Sirmondus' Works,
fol. Paris, 1696. p. 449. Also in the Bibliotheca Patrum, by
Gallandi, torn, x.]

•^^ [This is printed in the Appendix to the 10th volume of St.
Austin's works, Benedictine edition, p. 164.]

1 [In the Appendix to vol. x. of the Benedictine edition, p. 3.]

Ki [Published at Heidelberg in 4to. 1605 ; by Schottus in
1623, 1629, and at Pai'is in 1638. They are also printed in the
Bibliotheca Patrum, torn. vii. Lyons edition.]

n [See Jo. Cassiani opera, cura A. Gazsei, fol. Atrebati, 1628.
p. 1036.]

o [See Cyrilli Alexandrini Opera, cura I. Auberti, fol. Lute-
tise, 1638. tom. i. p. 343.]

P [These are found in volumes 3 and 4 of the works of Theo-
doret, published by Sirmondus, fol. Paris, 1642.]

q [The epistles of Leo were published in 1591, 1671, and
1675, 2 tom. 4to. This last is the most full and correct edition.
The epistles named in the text, bear in this the numbers 135,
2, 6 ; and the last of them, as being considered spurious, is
placed in vol. ii. p. 632. They are also printed in the Bibho-
theca Patrum, vol. vii. and in the Councils ; by Labbe, vol. iii.
by Mansi, vols. v. and vi.

References to Authors of the fifth Century. 519

Faustus Rhegiensis, one of those then called Semi-pela- IT^^-

gians, de liboro Arbitrio, lib. i. c. 1, 2, 14.
Gennadius, One of the same, de Ecclesiasticis Dogma- 395*-

tibus, c. 52.
And his interpolator, a Pr?edestinarian, c. 31.
Fulgentius, a Praedestinarian, de Veritate Prsedcstina- 407*-

tionis, lib. i. per totum.

De Inearnatione et Gratia Jesu Christi, c. 15, item 30.
De Fide ad Petrum, c. 27, 30. &c.
De Remissione Peccatornm, lib. i. c. 14.
Epistola Synodica Episcoporum in Sardinia exulum ;

Bibl. Patr. Colon. 1618. torn. vi. De Prfedestinatione

et Gratia, c. 3. "
Joannes Maxentius, Catholica de Christo Professio, j9ro^<? 420X.

finem. Bibl. Patr. toni. vi.
The council of Gerunda, Can. 5. 417^-

The council of Ilerda, Can. 18. 424^-

Ferrandus, (a deacon of Carthage) his letter to Fulgen-423*-

tins about the baptism of a certain negro.
Fulgentius' Answer. 423''«

r [This work of Faustus is published in the Bibhotheca Patrum,
Lyons edition, vol. viii. p. 525.3

s [See the edition of Hamburg, 4to. 161 4.]

t [See Fulgentii Opera, cura G. Desprez, 4to. Paris, 1684. —
Also the Bibliotheca Patrum, torn. ix. Lyons edition ; and
torn. xi. edit. Gallandi.]

" [See also the Collection of Councils ; by Labbe, torn. iv.
p. 1593 ; by Mansi, torn. viii. p. ^92.]

" [See the Bibliotheca Patrum, torn. ix. p. 534, edit. Lyons.]

y [See the Councils; Labbe, torn. iv. p. 1568 ; Mansi, torn,
viii. p. 549.]

z [See the Councils; Labbe, torn. iv. p. 1613 ; Mansi, torn,
viii. p. 612.]

* [See Fulgentii Ferrandi opera, cura Chifletii, 4to. Divione,
1649. — P- 55- -^Iso the Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. ix. Lyons edition ;
vol. xi. edit. Gallandi.]

^ [See F. Ferrandi Opera, p. 58. and the Bibliotheca Patrum,
as above.]

520 The Case of a Negro

c H A P. The substance of this last mentioned letter, and

A.A.1I,

the answer to it, is this : a gentleman of Carthage
(A.D!52^.)had bought a negro slave, that had been brought
out of the inmost and savage part of Africa, where
Christianity was not then, nor is yet known. His
master had caused him to be instructed in the faith :
he was a catechumen for some time, and at last
was admitted among the competents for baptism.
He had rehearsed in the congregation the Creed,
the Lord's Prayer, &c., and had made the usual re-
nunciations of the Devil, &c., as the custom of that
church was for the competents to do some days be-
fore their baptism ; and at the time of baptism they
used to do it by way of answer, again. But just
before the time in which he was to be baptized, he
fell sick of so sudden and violent a fever, that at the
time of baptism he was speechless, and without
sense. They baptized him however ; ' And we,' says
Ferrandus, ' answered in his name, as if it had been
' for an infant. And he dying presently after, never
' understood, I believe, that he was baptized. Now
' I entreat your opinion, whether his want of speech

* will be no hinderance to his obtaining eternal sal-

* vation. For I am much afraid lest our Lord, to
' whom all things are possible, did therefore deny

* him the faculty of speech, because he thought him
' unworthy of tlie benefit of the second birth. For
' how that age of his that was capable of reason,
' could be cleansed by another's confession, I do not
' see. For it is infants only, who have no sin but
' original sin, whom we believe to be saved by the
' faith of those that bring them, &c. And if it be
' said, that the confession he made before, when he
' was well in his senses, will avail for his forgive-

baptized when speechless. 521

• ness ; I do not see how we can stand to that ; for chap.

WI I

* then another will conclude, that he would have _11_1_

' been saved if he had had no bodily baptism at all. .^ y-^' x
' And at that rate, why might we .not baptize peo-
' pie after they are dead, if they be such whose

* devout and faithful purpose was known before ? I

* know the ordinary canon '^ prescribes that sick per-
' sons, that are not able to make the answers, may
' be baptized ; ])rovided their friends will at their

* own peril testify that they had such a purpose
' before their sickness. This indeed justifies the
' minister in giving the baptism : but I make some
' question concerning the benefit that such a person
' receives by it.'

The answer which the bishop Fulgentius gives to
this scruple, tends all toward the comforting P'er-
randus concerning his doubt of the man's salvation.
He argues that all the condition required by our
Saviour for adult persons being, that they should
believe and be baptized; this man had both. That
faith and the profession of it are the act of the
man : the baptizing him is the act of the minister.
And though this man had not his senses when the
minister performed his act; yet he had when he
himself performed his own. That God's taking
away his senses was not so great a sign of his re-
jecting him, as the continuance of his life till he
could be baptized, was of his receiving him. ' It is
' true,' says he, ' that we believe none but infants
' are saved by the faith of those that bring them,
' &c. ; and that in the age of reason one's own
' confession is required, &c. But this man had his

c Concilii Carthag. tertii Can. 34.

522 The Sin of keeping Negroes unbaptized.

CHAP. ' senses when he professed, and he had yet life when

^. L ' he was baptized.'

(A.D.5'23.) ^^ grants in the following discourse, that if he
had died before he had been actually baptized, he
could not have been saved : which is very hard, and
contrary to the determination of St. Ambrose and
other Fathers in a like case, as I shew in my Second
Part'i.

The reason why I recite this at large, rather than
the other passages to which I have given references,
is not that it speaks more, plainly than the rest
about infant- baptism : on the contrary, the rest
speak more directly to that matter than this does.
But I recite it, that the earnest concern that this
master and minister and bishop do shew for the sal-
vation of this poor slave, may fly in the face, and
strike with shame and terror the consciences of such
profane traders of our nation, as having plantations
in the West Indies, do keep hundreds of such ne-
groes, and are so far from any concern for their
souls, that on the contrary they do all they can to
hinder them from Christian faith and baptism, and
discourage those that would procure them means
of it.

I do not conceive that all the masters there are
of this temper. But for those that are, and are
resolved to continue so ; as I doubt they have but
little belief of the truth of the scripture ; so it were
for their interest that it were not true. For there
is nothing plainer by the tenor of it, than that such
masters are in God's sense a much worse sort of
heathens than their slaves, and liable to a far
greater condemnation; and that beside their own

d Ch. iii. §. 3. Item ch. vi. §. 3.

The Sin of keeping Negroes unhaptlzed. 523

personal sins, the blood of those poor creatures will chap.
be required at their hands. I would crave leave to J.

recommend to these Qontlemen the reading'- of a,.;'^-''- ,

o o (A.D.523.)

little book, published about twenty years ago, by a
clerofvman^ that had lived in Barbadoes, called ' The
' Negro's and Indian's Advocate.'

That I may tell the reader in short the substance
of the places to which I have referred him ; they do
all speak of infant-baptism, as of a thing taken for
granted. And those of them that do at all enlarge
on the matter, do speak of it as absolutely neces-
sary to the infant's obtaining the kingdom of hea-
ven. And this, whether they be of the Prsedes-
tinarian or Semi-pelagian opinion. And I am con-
fident there is no passage in any author from this
time to the year of Christ 1150, or thereabouts, that '050-
speaks against it ; save that Walafridus Strabo, about
the year 850 (though he were for infants' baptism, 750-
and thought it necessary for their salvation, yet)
gave his singular opinion, that it had not been
practised from the beginning, but had come into
use first in St. Austin's time ; which how palpable a
mistake it was, I suppose every reader is by this
time satisfied. I give you his words hereafter^
And save that Mr. Stennet produces one Macaire,
an unknown author, living in the ignorant times,

e [Viz. the Rev. Morgan Godwyn, student of Christ Church,
Oxford ; who ' became minister in Virginia, and continued there
' many years,' says Antony a Wood. He pubhshed ' The Ne-
' gro's or Indian's Advocate, suing for their admission into the
• Church ; or a persuasive to the instructing and baptizing of
' the Negroes and Indians in our plantations.' 8vo. London,
1680 : and in the next year, ' A supplement to the Negro's and
' Indian's Advocate,' in one sheet and a half, quarto.]

f Part ii. ch. 2. §. 2.

524 Clemenfs Constitutions.

CHAP, who talks much as Strabo does. Of whom I must
•^^"^ also speak hereafter, part ii. ch. 2.

423-

(A.D.533.) < — •-

CHAP. XXIII.

Quotations out of some booh that are spurious, i. e. ivere
not ivritten hy those whose name they hear ; hut yet are
proved to be ancient.

V 1- LET the first of these be that out of the
(A.D.400.) book called 'Clement's Constitutions.' They are
called his, because he is feigned to have been the
compiler of them from the mouths of the apostles.
The history of which book, as near as learned men
have traced it, is this.

There were in the very early times certain tra-
ditionary accounts handed about as the preach-
ings, doctrines, or rules that had been delivered
by such or such an apostle or apostolical man ;
something like the shorthand notes of sermons,
which it was the late custom in England to take
from the mouths of celebrated preachers. One of
which would be called, for example, At^a^^j? Tlerpov
* the doctrine of Peter :' another, AiSaa-KoXla KX^imev-
T09, ' the preaching of Clement,' &;c. And several of
these being by some studious persons collected and
put together, were entitled AiuTa^ei?'' A-n-oaroXcov, 'the
' Rules, or Constitutions of the Apostles ^'

^ The Constitutions of the Apostles appear to have been
first pubhshed in Greek in the year 1^40 : Cotelerius edited
them in Greek and Latin, with learned notes and dissertations,
among his Patres Apostolici, 1 torn. fol. 1700, reprinted 1724.
The Greek text, accompanied by an English version and a dis-
sertation, was given by Whiston, in his ' Primitive Christianity
' revived,' vols. 2 and 3, 8vo. 171 1. — And the text is printed by
Gallandi, in his edition of the Bibliotheca Patrum, vol. iii.]

Clement's Constitutions. 525

If they had been all of them iudicioiis and sincere chap.

. XXIII

persons that first took these notes of the preachings

or sayings of the apostles; and they that collected .^^°°;^^s
them into volumes had been the like ; there is no
doubt but the collections would have been highly
valuable. And as they are, they do for the most
part consist of pious rules and exhortations. But
according to the various memories, or judgment, or
honesty of the first recorders, or after-compilers,
these compositions were in many things various,
uncertain, and by men of different inclinations dif-
ferently interpolated, and so of no authority.

In Eusebius' time, anno 320, there was a volume 220.
of this nature, called AiSa-)(^al ' Attoo-to'Awi/, ' Doctrines
' of the Apostles ;' which he reckons^ among the 270.
spurious books. Epiphanius ^ fifty years after cites
a book called * Constitutions of the Apostles ;' which
he says was of doubtful credit ; and it has also been
altered since his time. About the year 400 it seems 300.
to have been licked and brought into that form of
eight books, in which we now have it, and to have
been set forth with that confident title, as if the
whole had been put into form by St. Clement. This
is confirmed by the quotations'^ of it by the Author
of the ' Opus imperfectum in Matthseum,' who lived
about that time.

a Hist. Eccl. lib. iii. cap. 25.

^ [Hseres. xlv. sect. 5 : item Hseres. Ixx. sect. 10—12, Haeres.
Ixxv. sect. 6. Ixxx. sect. 7.]

c [See these given by Cotelerius, at torn. i. p. 191 of his
edition of the Patres ApostoUci ; also by Gallandi, at p. 5 of his
prefatory matter to the Constitutions, Bibl. Patrum, torn. iii.
The work itself is found among the spurious pieces ascribed to
St.Chrvsostom, in vol. vi. of Montfaucon's edition, p. Ixxiv.]

526 The 'pretended Dionysius

CHAP. Hence it appears, that for any particular clause
or chapter of it, one does not know how long, or

(^J)°°oo)how little while before the year 400 it has been
inserted. The clause to the present purpose is this,
Constitut. Apostolic, lib. vi. cap. 15.
The apostles are there brought in speaking. And
after they have disallowed of such as baptize twice ;
and also set forth the wickedness of those that
despise all baptism, they say :

' And he that says, " I will be baptized when I
' am going to die, that I may not sin after it, and

* defile my baptism ;" such a man has no true know-
' ledge of God, and is ignorant of his nature. For,
' Delay not thou to turn to the Lord ; for thou

* knoivest not what to-morrow will hrmg forth ^

And then they add,

BaTrr/^ere oe vixihv KcCi tu vrjiria, kol eKxpecbere avTo.
ev iraioeln Ka\ vovOeala Qeov. "Acpere yap, (ptjcr], to,
iraio'ia ep-^ecrOai irpos /xe, Kai iJ.rj KcoXvere avra.

'And baptize your infants, and bring them up
' in the nurture and admonition of God. For he
' says. Suffer the little children to come to me, and

* forbid them not^

How little assurance soever there is, from the
credit of this book, that these are the apostle's
words ; yet they shew that it was the received
doctrine at the time when they were put into the
book.

II. The quotation of the book of ' The Eccle-
' siastical Hierarchy <^' is commonly thought worth
the while by those that write on this subject.

d [See Dionysii Areopagitse Opera, studio B. Corderii, 2 torn,
fol. Lutetiae, 1644.]

the Areopagite. 527

Otherwise I for my part should hardly think it chap.

XXIII

worth the setting down.

Partly, because of the abhorrence one should have . . ^°- ,

•" (A.D.400.)

of so gross and impudent a forger ; who having,
about the year 400, if not later, composed some 300.
books remarkable for nothing but affected high-
flown expressions, thought them fit to be fathered
upon Dionysius the Areopagite, mentioned Acts xvii.
34. . Unless we are to think that the author him-
self was not guilty of this imposture ; but that
somebody else having got the copies of these books
into his hands, did thrust in here and there a sen-
tence which should represent that Dionysius as the
author. Which I have sometimes thought.

And partly, because what he says on this subject
seems to me spoken with less judgment than usual ;
towering in words, but shallow in sense.

I shall forbear setting down the original, (for it
is not worth reciting twice,) only give the transla-
tion of his bombast Greek in as plain English as
I can.

He in this treatise gives an account of the several
rites used at the eucharist, at ordinations, &c., and
among the rest, at baptism, (which he generally
calls by the name of the divine birth,) and of the
reasons of them. What he has of baptism does
mostly concern the baptism of the adult, and their
professions. What he says of the baptism of in-
fants, is in answer to the objections the heathens
made against it, and is as follows :

Ecclesiastic. Hierarch. cap. 7. in fine. [sect. 11.
tom. i. p. 360.]

' But that children also, who cannot yet under-

528

The pretended Dionysius

CHAP.
XXIII.

.qoo.
(A.D.400.)

stand the divine mysteries, should be made par-
takers of the divine birth, and of the most sacred
signs of society with God, does seem, as you say,
to men that are profane and ill-affected to our
religion, a thing fit to be laughed at : that the
bishops should teach the holy things to those that
are incapable of them, and should bestow the
things which by sacred tradition they have re-
ceived, upon such as have no sense of them. And,
what is more ridiculous, that others should pro-
nounce the renunciations and holy professions for
them in such a fashion as if they were doing it for
themselves.

' Now your episcopal wisdom ought not to be
angry with those that are in error ; but to answer
their objections with a religious meekness, for
their instruction and edification : adding this also
as from our holy religion ; that our knowledge is
not able to comprehend all divine things : and that
a great many things which we cannot understand,
have really reasons that are worthy of God, un-
known to us, but known to the higher beings :
and even those higher natures are ignorant of
many things which are known only to the all-wise
Deity, the author of all wisdom.

* And yet, as to this particular matter, that we
do say the same things which our divine ministers
of holy things have delivered down to us as they
were taught them from ancient tradition. For
they say, and it is true, that children, if they be
brought up to holy rules and institutions, will
come to be of a good temper of mind ; free, and
disentangled from all error, and out of the danger
of an unclean life. Our divine instructors consi-

The Areopagite. 529

* (lerinsr this, have thought fit that children slioukl chap.

XXIII.

* be admitted after this holy manner :

'That the natural parents of the child which is^.^^^";^^

* brought, should deliver him to some one that is
' himself baptized, as to a good instructor in the
' things of God : and that the child should after-

* ward learn of him, as of his father in God, and

* his sponsor in things that are for salvation. And

* then of this person, who undertakes to instruct

* the child in holiness of life, the bishop does de-

* mand, as I may call it, the declaration of his re-
' nonncings, and the other holy professions. Not

* that he does (as they jeeringly represent it) initiate
' the one in the other's stead in the holy rites :
' for he does not say thus; " I do in the stead of
' this child renounce or promise," &c. ; but, " This
' child does renounce, profess," &c. ; that is, I pro-

* mise to persuade this child, when he shall come of
' age to understand the holy things, by my religious

* instructions, to renounce the adverse powers, and
' keep clear from them, and to profess and fulfil the

* divine proposals.'

* It is therefore, as far as I can see, no absurdity
' that the child should be entered into the divine

* life ; whenas he has a guide and sponsor that will
' instruct him in the knowledge of divine things,
' and keep him safe from the adverse powers. And

* the bishop does make the child partaker of the
' holy mysteries, that he may be educated according
' to them, and may lead no other life but such as
' has always a regard to those divine things, and an

* agreement with them, and is in a holy manner

* habituated to them. And to this he is led by his

* divine sponsor.'

WALL, VOL. I. M m

530 The Sense of the

c H A. P. His mentioning ancient tradition in this matter,
/ ^ would make one think wliat I hinted before, that

fAD° "j^^^® author had no purpose of putting on the vizor
of Dionysius the Areopagite : for to make him talk
of ancient tradition in any thing of Christianity,
which was all new in his time, was to betray his
own cheat. Beside, it is not in this book of the
* Ecclesiastical Hierarchy,' that there are any tokens
of its being written by Dionysius, but only in some
of the other books of the same author.

The interpretation he gives of the professions
made by the godfathers is very singular : he will
not have it that the godfather does renounce, pro-
fess, &c. in the child's name or stead. But both
the ancients generally, and the moderns, do so under-
stand it as that he does. But perhaps both of these
may be reconciled. The godfather does not profess
in the child's stead, so as that the godfathers
performance of those professions should be in stead
of the child's performance of them : and in this sense
this author denies it. But the godfather does pro-
fess in the child's stead, so as to declare the obliga-
tion of the child to perform, and does in his name
own that obligation, and make the promise : and in
this sense the other ancients affirm it. To the in-
tent it may more fully be declared that the benefits
of baptism are conveyed to the child not absolutely,
but on condition that if he live, he do perform his
part of the covenant ; the godfather expresses those
things that are the child's part. As if a great bene-
factor will settle a large estate of inheritance on a
child, upon condition that he pay a small quitrent
in acknowledgment ; this is so beneficial to the
(?hild, that there ought to be no doubt of his

Godfathers Profession. 531

acceptance. The contmct is therefore made in the chap.
chikl's name : and becanse he is not of a^e, his J____

ffnardian seals it in li is stead. This tlie chnrch oi,.-^°- ,

" (A.D.^oo.)

England does more plainly express ; who pnts the
words thus, ' Dost thou in the name of this child
* renounce?' &c. And so did the ancients, who
put them thus, * Does this child renounce?' &c.

As for the age in which these books were written,
it is best gathered from Photius^: who gives the
abstract of a book written by Theodoras Presbyter,
wherein he pretended to maintain that these books
are the genuine work of Dionysius the Areopagite,
against some that then opposed the authenticalness
of them. The man must have had a hard task.
But yet it is a proof that they were known then,
and for some time before. This Theodoras lived,
as Dr. Plammond saysf, anno 420 ; but others place
him much later, in the seventh century.

III. Tiiere does not lie any such prejudice for
any design of forgery against the author of the
' Quaestiones ad Orthodoxos=,' which commonly go
among the works of Justin Martyr: only that piece
going about, as it seems, without the name of the
author, somebody in the early times ascribed it to
him. It cannot be his, because it makes mention of
Irenaeus and of Origen, who lived something after

6 [See Photii Bibliotheca, p. 3, 4. edit. Hoeschelii, fol. Ro-
thomagi, 1653. Photius however gives no ' abstract,' beyond
one single sentence, ' Aveyvaxrdr] Qto8a>pov npfo-^vrepov, ort yvrjtr'ui

T) roil ayiov Aiovvcriov /3tjSXoj,]

f Six Queries. Infant Baptism. [The editor of Photius ob-
serves, and as was natural to him, laments, that this work of
Theodorus is not now extant]

S [See Justini Martyris opera, edit. Benedictin. fol. -Paris.
J 742. p. 462.]

M m 2

532 The Case of Infants

CHAP, his time ; unless those passages that mention Ire-

XXIIl.

L nseus and Origen have been since the first writing

(a'd°oo)^^ the book foisted into it. I shall not pretend to
guess at the time of the writing of it ; only it is
known to be ancient. The passage I would quote
is this,

Qusestiones ad Orthodoxos, qusest. 5Q.

5T71 /

Et TO. TeXevTwvra /Specprj eiraivov r] /j.efx'Yiv ovk e-^ov-
(Tiv et epycou, r/? ^ oia<popa ev Trj auaaTaa-et toov vtto
aWwv fxev (^a-Trria-QevTwv Koi fxrj^ev irpa^avTwv, Koi tociv
[xi] ^aTTTKjQivTMV Kai 6/u.oiu>g juriSeu tt pat^avTOOV ',

^A-TTOKpicrig.

AvTt] co-tIv r] Siacpopa toov /SairTKrOevTcov irpo^ ra jmij
^awriaOevTa, tov TV^elv ixev tu ^airTiorQevTa toov vta
Tov jSaTrr/cTyuaTO? ayaQwv, ra Se fit] ^airricrBevTa [xtj
Tvyelv. ^ A^iouvTai Se toov Sia tov ^aTTTia-juaTOS ayaOwv^
Trj TTicTTei TOOV TTpoarCpepovTOov aVTU tm ^aTTTicriuiaTi.

Question.

* Since children that die in infancy have no praise
' nor no blame from any thing that they have done,
' what difFei-ence will be made at the resurrection
' between such of them as have been by the means
' of others baptized but have done nothing them-
* selves, and such as have not been baptized and
' have likewise done nothing ?'

Answer.

' This will be the difference between those that
' have been baptized, and those that have not : that
' the baptized will be made partakers of the bless-
' ings granted by baptism ; and the unbaptized not.
' And these blessings of baptism are vouchsafed to
' them for the sake of the faith of those that bring
' them to baptism.'

dying unbaptized. 533

He speaks of the case of unbaptized infants after chap.
the rate that most Greek writers do, viz. that they '

will lose all reward, without mentioninof any posi- 300.

, . (A.D.400.)

tive punishment. This was the general oj)inion of

the Christians of the Greek church, that infants
dying unbai)tized would miss of heaven, but not be
under any positive punishment : as appears by the
words of Gregory Nazianzen cited before'*, and as
I shall more fully shew at another place'.

IV. There is a spurious book ascribed to Atha-
nasius, called Qucpstionefi ad AntiocJmm, which gives
their opinion in this matter very particularly. Some
quotations out of that book ought to have had a
place here, but that it seems to have been written
after our period, and by ignorant men crowded in
among the works of Athanasius^. But the follow-
ing passage I recite, because of its affinity to the
foregoing.

QucEst. ad Antiochum, qu. 115.

JTTl /

IIou inrayovai ra TeXevTuivra [xtcrra] vrjiria \ e<V
Kokacriv, )] €1? ^acTiXelav ; Ka\ irou tu twv airia-Toov vrjiria ',
Kai TTov ra toov ttkttcov a^aTTTiuTa cnroOv^a-KOVTa
TUTTOvrai , jULCTa tu>v tticttoov, t] aTTKTTCop ;

'ATTO/CjOtCrt?.

Tou Kvplov \eyovT09, "Acpere to. 'iraiSia epyeaOai irpog
p.€, TWV yap TOtovTcov ecTTiv 1] iSacriXeia twv ovpavwv Ka\
TTuXiv Tov ^Attoo-toXov (paarKOVTOf;^ vvv Se to. tckvu v/uoov
ayia ea-Ti' Jlp6S}]Xov otl (1)9 aairiXa Ka\ TriuTa el<s Tt}v
^aaiXelav eicrep^ovTai tu. twv ttkttwv /Se^airTia-fxeva

h Chap. xi. ^^. 6. • Part ii. chap. 6. §. 4, k [gee

Athanasii opera, studio Monachorum Benedictin. 3 torn. fol.
Paris. 1698. toni.ii. p. 295.]

58 4 The Case of Infants

CHAP, vtjTria. Ta Se ajSaimcrTa Kal to. edviKO. ovre eig
XXIII
" ^acrikeiav eia-ep-^ovTUL' aXX ovre ttoXiv eh KoXacriv'

(\^°' 'A/uapriav yap ovk eirpa^uv.

Question.

' Whither do [faithful] infiints go when they die,

'' into punishment, or into the kingdom ? And par-

' tieularly, whither go the children of heathens ?

^ And where are placed the children of the faithful

' that die unbaptized ? Are they placed with the

'' believers, or with the unbelievers ?

Answer.

' Insomuch as our Lord says, Suffer little chil-

^ dren to come to me, for of such is the kingdom of

* heaven : and again the apostle says, Noiu are

' your children holy, [or saints,] it is plain that (|

* the children of believers do, if they be baptized,
' go as spotless and faithful into the kingdom. But
■* those of them that are not baptized, do not enter
' the kingdom, as also neither do the children of
' unbelievers. But yet neither on the other side do
^ they go into torment ; for they have committed
'^ no sin.'

They that would read any more of those spurious
passages that are later than the year 400, but as-
cribed to authors before that time, and yet are not
very scandalous, as being really within a century
of it, or thereabouts, in which there happens to be
mention of infant-baptism, may have some of them
in the said book : Athanasii QucBstiones ad Anti-
ochum, qucBst. 2. item qu. QQ. And also, Athanasii
Dicta et interpretatio Parabolarum S. Script.
qucBst. 94.

And more in books ascribed to St. Chrysostom,
as Chrysostom in Psal. xiv. ' One brings an infant

dying unbaptized. 535

• to be baptized ; presently the priest requires a chap.
' covenant,' &c. Idem, Homilia de Adam et Eva. '

* Let us consider the meaning of what the church , ^ 3°°- .

o (A.D.400.)

' all over the world j^ractises in the baj^tizing of
' infants or adult persons,' &c,

V. There is also commonly ])roduced a passage
very ancient indeed ; if one might rely upon it : an
order of Ilyginus, bishop of Rome ; that ' in all 22.
' baptisms there must be one \_patrmus'] godfather,
' and one godmother.' But as this is of no credit
for authenticalness, having no voucher elder than
Platina', so also it does not necessarily relate to
infants : for they had witnesses that are sometimes
called patrmi, in the case of adult persons.

This sort of testimonies is better omitted. For
in any cause whatever, evidences of no good credit
do more hurt than good.

1 In vita Hygini. [Historia de vita et moinbus summorum
Pontiticum. The editions of this work are numerous.]

END OF VOL. I.

^

i

1

<

.it',

Princeton Theological Seminary Libraries

1012 01184 9645

DATE DUE

'''*''***5^«S«Bp:

i^E: i?nf

r;

GAYLORD

PRINTED IN us A