These were unquestionably worthy and learned men; and to these might be added many others who have expressed similar opinions. We do not say that these eminent men were infallible, or that we are under any obligation to adopt their principles, for we "call no man master upon earth;" but we do say, that when such men, holding such widely different views on religious sentiments, tell us we are right in our views on baptism, it certainly tends to confirm us in our belief that we are so. We say, then, that baptism was administered by immersion in the first century. In the second century, Justin Martyr wrote a book, the contents of which are still in existence. In that book he describes the manner in which members were introduced into the church. He says, "We bring them to some place where there is water;.... they are washed (or bathed) in the water, in the name of the Father, &c." In the second and third century, Tertullian wrote several books. He states, in a book written against the errors of the Marcionites, "Still the baptisms they administer were, in this respect, conformable to those of the church, that they baptized by total immersion." In the fourth century, Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem lived. He tells us, that in his time, "Candidates were conducted to the laver, and dipped three times into the water."* In the fifth century, Mezeray, the French historian, records, that "Clovis, the founder of the French monarchy, and his sister, were plunged in the sacred lavatory." In the sixth century, it was agitated whether the person to be baptized should be immersed once or thrice. Orchard For. Bap. In the seventh century, we read of the Paulicians, and others, who baptized by immersion. Robinson, History of Bap. In the eighth century, we read in Mezeray's French history, that baptism continued to be performed by immersion. In the ninth century, we read of baptismal churches in Italy, to which the people flocked for baptism. Robinson, Hist. In the tenth century, we read of the Paterines, "That these people held views on the ordinance similar to the baptists of modern times, is allowed by all respectable writers." Orchard, For. Bap. In the eleventh century, baptists were very numerous on the continent, and a considerable number came over to England, and so greatly did they prevail that Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote a book against them; for not only the poor, but some of the noble families adopted their sentiments. Thomson's Historical Sketch. In the twelfth century, Otho, a bishop, travelled through Poland and Pomerania, teaching and baptizing. He baptized by immersing in water. Basnage, in Rob. Hist. Bap. In the thirteenth century, sprinkling being in some instances substituted for immersion, an ecclesiastical assembly, held at Salis. bury, issued a decree enforcing immersion. Hinton's Hist. Bap. The practice of immersing three times (trine immersion) prevailed at an early period. But Tertullian in the third century, admits that it was "doing somewhat more than the Gospel required." And Basil and Jerome, in the fourth century, place it among those rites of the church derived from tradition. In the fourteenth century, an ecclesiastical assembly was held at Worcester, by which immersion was enforced. Hinton's Hist. Bap. In the fifteenth century, Erasmus writes, concerning the Hussites, that "They admitted none until they were dipped in water." In the sixteenth century, Frith, and Watson, Bishop of Lin. coln, unite in representing dipping as the usual mode of baptism in England. A. Taylor's History. In the seventeenth century, the baptists spread with great rapidity in England. A regular organized baptist church was formed of Englishmen in Holland, in 1607, by Mr. Smyth, on the principles of the General Baptists. A. Taylor's History. Some of the most distinguished characters of this century were baptists; as, Sir Henry Vane, General Harrison, Milton, Thomas de Laune, and John Bunyan. In the eighteenth century, a fact occurred which shews that the Greek church does not regard sprinkling as valid baptism. In the year 1745, when Sophia Augusta, who had been sprinkled by Protestants in her infancy, was espoused to the Czar Peter II., she was baptized by immersion, according to the rites of the Greek church.* A. Taylor's History. In the nineteenth century, the baptists occupy a very prominent position among the various sections of the church, and are rapidly extending east, west, north, and south. In selecting these facts, we have purposely introduced different denominations, and those of various parts of the world: our object being to show, that baptism has been administered by immersion in all ages of the church, without reference to doctrinal opinions. Here, then, is an important chain of evidence, proving that immersion has been practised in every century. The first link of that chain was firmly attached to the banks of the Jordan when the Saviour was immersed by John: link after link has been added in continuous and unbroken succession through intervening ages, until it has reached our own day; and now, "he that runneth may read." We know that attempts have been made to remove the first link of this chain from Judea to Rome, from Christ to Antichrist; it has been asserted that immersion came in among the early corruptions of the church of Rome; but this assertion is altogether destitute of support. We shall, in the next section, present a few plain facts on this topic. V. That unscriptural practices were very early adopted is evident from history: but that immersion was considered a corruption, or deviation from apostolic custom, is nowhere asserted or hinted at by any of the early christian writers that we have read. The Greek church has never discontinued the practice of immersion. "The Russians," (a branch of the Greek church) "baptize adults by trine immersion." Millar's Geog. Dr. Wall observes, that in all those "nations of Christians" that never owned the Pope's usurped power, baptism has ever been administered by immersion. The Nestorians, the Armenians, (inhabitants of Armenia) the Asiatic Jacobites, (inhabiting Syria and Mesopotamia) the African Jacobites, the Copts, the Abys sinians, the Georgians, these all baptize by immersion. Hinton's Hist, Bap. The first mention that is made of pouring, is made by way of regret at its adoption. Irenæus regrets the conduct of some "who thought it needless to bring the person to the water at all; but mixing oil and water together, they pour it on the candidate's head." The first person mentioned in history as being baptized otherwise than by immersion, is Novatian, in the third century. Novatian was dangerously ill, and supposed to be near death. As baptism was then supposed by some to be essential to salvation, Eusebius tells us that Novatian was "poured round on the bed on which he lay." Eusebius wrote in Greek; but in describing the ceremony performed on Novatian, he does not use the word baptizo, which is the word used by the New Testament writers in describing the ordinance of baptism, but perikytheis (poured about.) He was poured about, or poured round, as the nearest approach to immersion which the circumstances would admit. Novatian, however, recovered, and was afterwards chosen bishop of Rome. But mark! Eusebius further informs us, that "all the clergy, and many of the laity, withstood the choice, because, said they, it was unlawful to admit into clergy any that had been baptized as he was.” Magnus inquired of Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, whether persons thus baptized were to be regarded as "legitimate christians," inasmuch as they were not baptized by bathing, but by affusion." Cyprian replied, that each one must settle this question for himself. He gives his own opinion thus: "When there is a pressing necessity, with God's indulgence, the holy ordinances, though outwardly abridged, confer the blessing." In this same letter, Cyprian speaks of those who were sprinkled during sickness, as supposing themselves "empty, and devoid of a blessing, because they were not immersed, but sprinkled." Every circumstance connected with this case, shews that such an application of water was a departure from the established mode of baptizing. If sprinkling, or pouring, was the usual mode, and was regarded as scriptural, why was the validity of Novatian's pouring round called in question? Why did Magnus propose such a question as he did? Why did Cyprian return such an indefinite answer? Or why did those who were sprinkled or poured round during sickness, suppose themselves "empty and devoid of a blessing," because they were not immersed? Why these doubts and fears, if there was no departure from the ancient practice? And if pouring, or sprinkling, was considered a divine ordinance, what need was there of urgent necessity, or divine indulgence in order to make it pass? These things can only be accounted for on the supposition that such modes were contrary to the general practice of the church, and unauthorized by apostolic precedent. No regret is expressed by any of the early writers, that immersion was practised; not the slightest allusion is made to it as an innovation; nor is any doubt expressed, or question raised, as to its scripturalness and validity. How, in the face of such facts, can any doubt be reasonably entertained as to which mode was considered an innovation? Historical testimony shews, that sprinkling and pouring were exceptions, allowed only (not by scripture) in cases of supposed necessity. Eusebius states, that when Novatian received baptism by pouring, it was on "account of his sickness." Von Coelln. states, that "baptism was by immersion; only in cases of the sick was it administered by sprinkling." Baronius observes of cases of this kind, that those who were baptized upon their beds were not called christians, but clinics. If we trace the history of the church in succeeding ages, until the time of the reformation, we find abundant evidence that immersion was the general mode, and that sprinkling and pouring were exceptions allowed only in cases of necessity. In the eighth century, Pope Stephen II. being in France, was asked by the clergy, whether, in case of necessity occasioned by illness, it were lawful to baptize by pouring water out of the hand or a cup. Stephen answered, "If such a baptism were performed in such a case of necessity, in the name of the Holy Trinity, it should be held valid." The Edinburgh Encyclopædia states, in an article on baptism, that "In Scotland sprinkling was never used in ordinary cases till after the reformation." The early historical records of England shew, that immersion was the usual mode of baptizing. Venerable Bede states, the king and queen of the Northumbrians "were washed in the river Glen, as the bath of remission." The first liturgy of king Edward VI. required baptism to be administered by dipping. King Edward VI. and queen Elizabeth were both immersed. And in the existing ritual of the Church of England, we find dipping enjoined, and pouring allowed in case of necessity. "If they shall certify him that the child may well endure it, he shall dip it in the water discreetly and warily: but if they certify him that the child is weak, it shall suffice to pour water upon it." Many extracts might be given from ecclesiastical and historical records, from liturgies and rituals, to shew that sprinkling and pouring were deviations from the general practice; that they were not considered to have any sanction from the New Testament; but rested solely on the authority of men who assumed to themselves a power which the Scriptures now here delegate to any human being, namely, the power to alter the institutions of Jesus Christ. Here then, reader, we present you with five plain statements on the mode of christian baptism, which seem to us so firmly supported as to render their refutation impossible. 1. The facts, and circumstances, and allusions, which the New Testament contains with reference to baptism, are such as lead to the conclusion that immersion is baptism, and cannot be satisfactorily accounted for on any other supposition. 2. The word which is used in the New Testament to describe the ordinance of baptism, signifies immersion in Greek books, is generally acknowledged by the most learned men of all denominations to signify immerse, and is said by Greeks themselves to signify nothing else than immerse. 3. The most ancient and independent translations of the New Testament, render baptizo by a word signifying immerse. 4. Baptism has been performed by immersion in every age, and in various countries, from the time that Jesus was immersed in Jordan, until the present day. 5. The earliest allusions that are made to pouring and sprinkling, are made in such a way as to make it manifest, that such modes were considered innovations, or deviations from the usual mode: and subsequent history shews, that they have generally been so considered. In conclusion, we ask you, as you value the truth as it is in Jesus, calmly and seriously to reflect on these plain statements. If you have hitherto supported sprinkling as christian baptism, what reply could you give to the Saviour were he to ask, "Who hath required this at your hands? If Jesus Christ has said, "He that believeth and is immersed, shall be saved," do you believe that you complied with this requirement when you were sprinkled wITHOUT believing? If you say, that you think sprinkling will do as well as immersion, we ask, How do you know that it will? If scripture requires immersion, who has authority to decide that sprinkling will do as well? If you believe that immersion is scripture baptism, and doubt whether sprinkling or pouring is, is it not sinful to neglect the one and support the other? "To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin." "If our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things." But will not the "love of Christ constrain you" to yield implicit obedience to his command? Did he not bear for you the shame and agony of the cross, and will you refuse obedience to one of his precepts because obedience might attract the scorn of the world? Is he not your best friend? has he not done more for you than all your friends beside, and shall shame or fear prevent you from giving this testimony of your friendship for him? "Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you." In taking leave of you, with the prospect of meeting you at the bar of judgment, we ask, do you love Christ? Are you a disciple of Jesus? Have you been born again? If not, we point you to the "Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world," and exhort you to flee for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before you in the Gospel. And remember the solemn words of the Great Redeemer, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be damned." If you profess to be a disciple of the Saviour, we direct you to another of his affecting exhortations, "If ye love me, keep my commandments," and to his solemn declaration, "If a man love me, he will keep my words." LEICESTER: BAPTIST DEPOSITORY FOR TRACTS AND SABBATH SCHOOL FRINTED AND SOLD BY J. F. WINKS, HIGH STREET. Catalogues Gratis, on Receipt of One Postage Stamp. |