Origen, speaking on native depravity, says: "Since the baptism of the church is given for the remission of sins, baptism is given, according to the observance of the church, even to children." And again: "Because, through the sacrament of baptism, the pollution of nativity is removed, therefore children also are baptized." Elsewhere, commenting on the words of David, "In sin did my mother conceive me," he says: "For this also the church has received a tradition from the apostles to give baptism even to children; for they to whom the secrets of the divine mysteries were committed knew that in all persons there is the native pollution of sin, which must be done away by the water and the Spirit."

On these passages we remark: 1. As already seen, there is an uncertainty as to the genuineness of these passages, since it is confessedly true that Jerome and Rufinus, in whose translations they occur, often interpolate remarks of their own which represent, of course, the views and practice nearly two centuries later than Origen, when infant baptism was fully established. 2. The word parvulus, used in these passages, is not restricted to the designation of an infant, but is more commonly used for a child of greater age. Origen himself uses it to designate Christ when at the age of twelve he went up to the temple; in connection with which event, also, he designates Christ infantulus, puer, infans, clearly showing that these terms were applied to youth. There is no adequate evidence, therefore, that parvuli in these passages designates newborn infants; the probability is in favor of the reference to early youth. 3. Origen elsewhere clearly states who, and who only, were properly baptized. Thus, in his work against Celsus, the sceptic, he says: "We exhort sinners to come to the instruction that teaches them not to sin, and the unintelligent to come to that which produces in them un

derstanding, and little children to rise in elevation of thought to the man, and the miserable to come to a fortunate state, or (what is more proper to say) a state of happiness. And when those of the exhorted that make progress show they have been cleansed by the word, and, as much as possible, have lived a better life, then we invite them to be initiated among us." Again, in his Commentary on Romans, he says: "If any one is previously dead to sin, he of course is buried with Christ; but if any one does not before die to sin, he cannot be buried with Christ, for no one while alive is buried. But if he is not buried with Christ, neither is he lawfully baptized." It seems evident, therefore, that Origen, like Tertullian, knew nothing of infant baptism as the baptism of new-born children, but only of the baptism of children, too young, indeed, to make a credible profession, but not to make a voluntary one. And the Chevalier Bunsen is clearly right when he says: "Tertullian's opposition is to the baptism of young, growing children; he does not say a word about new-born infants. Neither does Origen, when his words are accurately weighed."

Thus far we have reached the following results: 1. That in the first two centuries no trace of infant baptism is found; the rite was administered only to those who made a credible profession of faith. 2. That in the beginning of the third century tendencies appeared, especially in North Africa, to baptize at an earlier period, which, though resisted by Tertullian, ultimately resulted, under Cyprian, about the middle of that century, in establishing infant baptism in the North African orthodox churches, the opposition finding place chiefly in the ranks of the Montanists. 3. That no evidence is found of the existence of infant baptism, even at this time, elsewhere than in North Africa.

The foundation on which infant baptism based itself

was the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, and the consequent absolute necessity of the rite to salvation. The tendency to confound the thing symbolized and the symbol is seen, indeed, in the earliest Fathers. Justin Martyr speaks of baptism as "the water of life, which alone is able to cleanse those who have repented." Clement of Alexandria says: "Being baptized, we are enlightened; being enlightened, we are adopted; being adopted, we are made perfect; being perfected, we become immortal." Even Tertullian, in opening his work De Baptismo, apostrophizes "the blessed sacrament of water, by which, being washed from the faults committed in our former blindness, we are made free and heirs of eternal life." He declares that the Spirit"descends and broods over" the baptismal waters, "sanctifying them by his power; and when so sanctified, they acquire the power of sanctifying." Neander, in his Church History, says: "From the want of duly distinguishing between what is outward and what is inward in baptism (the baptism of water and the baptism of the Spirit), the error became more firmly established that without external baptism no one could be delivered from that inherent guilt, could be saved from the everlasting punishment that threatened him, or be raised to eternal life; and when the notion of a magical influence, a charm connected with the sacraments, continually gained ground, the theory was finally evolved of the unconditional necessity of infant baptism. About the middle of the third century this theory was already generally admitted in the North African church. The only question that remained was, whether the child ought to be baptized immediately after birth or not till eight days after, as in the case of the rite of circumcision."* The language of the later Fathers affirms in the strongest manner the efficacy and necessity of * Vol. i., p. 313.

baptism. Thus, Ambrose says: "In the font there is a transition from the earthly to the heavenly;" and Jerome: "In the laver the old Adam altogether dies and the new one is raised up together with Christ; the earthly perishes, the super-celestial is born." Schaff, in his Church History, remarks: "Like Ambrose and other Fathers, Augustine taught the necessity of baptism for entrance on the kingdom of heaven, on the ground of John iii. 5, and deduced therefrom, in logical consistency, the terrible doctrine of the damnation of all unbaptized children, though he assigned them the mildest grade of perdition. The Council of Carthage, in 318, did the same."* Indeed, infant baptism and infant communion were based by the Fathers on precisely the same ground-that is, their necessity in order to salvation. Neander says: "As the church in North Africa was the first to bring prominently into notice the necessity of infant baptism, so, in connection with this, they introduced the communion of infants; for, as they neglected to distinguish clearly between the sign and the divine thing signified, and as they understood all that is said in the sixth chapter of John's Gospel concerning the eating of the flesh and drinking of the blood of Christ to refer to the outward participation of the Supper, they concluded that this, from the very first, was absolutely necessary to the attainment of salvation."+ All historical testimony thus clearly points to this fontal error-the miraculous efficacy of the sacraments, and their consequent necessity in order to salvation as the one source of infant baptism.

This rite, however, though originating in a superstition already widely diffused in that age, only slowly spread in actual practice over Christendom. Of this the proofs are abundant.

*Church History, vol. ii., p. 482. † Church History, vol. ii., p. 333.

1. The catechumenical system, in which, as is well known, great multitudes, both in youth and in adult age, were instructed preparatory to baptism. These preparatory schools belonged to every important church, and formed a prominent feature in church history from the second. to the sixth century. They doubtless originated in the apostolic custom of brief instruction and examination before baptism, which gradually expanded into an elaborate course of training. Fully developed, these preparatory schools were graded in three classes-the Auditores, or hearers, who were admitted only to the reading of the Scriptures and the sermons; the Prostrati, who were allowed also to join with the church in the prayers; and the Competentes, who stood as formal applicants for baptism, and who, on completing the course became Perfectiones or Electi, accepted candidates for that ordinance. No careful student of history can doubt that this was the ordinary method of entering the church during that period. In the large cities the catechumens often numbered several thousand, and many of the most distinguished men thus entered the church. Schaff says of these schools: "They embraced people of all ranks, ages, and grades of culture, even philosophers, statesmen, and rhetoricians-Justin, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Annobius, Lactantius, who all embraced Christianity in adult years."* That the system embraced children of Christian parents, as well as others, is plain from the words of Basil, who, in his Exhortatio ad Baptismum, reproving the delay of baptism by catechumens, says: "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? A seeker all your life long, a considerer till you are old? When * Church History, vol. i., p. 397.