BAPTISM, in matters of religion, the ceremony of washing; or a sacrament, by which a person is initiated into the Christian church.—The word is formed from the Greek βαπτίζω, of βαπτω, to dip or wash. Baptism is known, in ecclesiastical writers, by divers other names and titles. Sometimes it is called polingeneſia, or laver of regeneration; sometimes ſalus, or life and ſalvation; sometimes σφραγίς, ſignaculum Domini, and ſignaculum fidei, or the ſeal of faith; sometimes abſolutely miſterium, and ſacramentum; sometimes the ſacrament of faith; sometimes viaticum, from its being adminiſtered to departing perſons; sometimes ſacerdotium laici, or the lay priſthood, becauſe allowed, in caſes of neceſſity, to be conſecrated by laymen: ſometimes it is called the great circumciſion, becauſe it was imagined to ſucceed in the room of circumciſion, and to be a ſeal of the Chriſtian covenant, as that was the ſeal of the covenant made with Abraham: ſo, in regard that baptiſm had Chriſt for its author, and not man, it was anciently known by the name of Δωρον and χριστία Κυρίω, the gift of the Lord: ſometimes it was ſimply called δωρον, without any other addition, by way of eminence, becauſe it was both a gratuitous and ſingular gift of Chriſt: in reference to the making men complete members of Chriſt's body, the church, it had the name of Τιμας, and Τιμα, the conſecration and conſummation; becauſe it gave men the perfection of Chriſtians, and a right to partake of the Το Τιμα, which was the Lord's Supper: it had alſo the name of μύτις and μυταγωγη, the initiation, becauſe it was the admittance of men to all the ſacred rites and miſteries of the Chriſtian religion.
Baptiſm has been ſuppoſed by many learned authors to have had its origin from the Jewiſh church, in which, as they maintain, it was the practice long before Chriſt's time, to baptize proſelytes or converts to their faith, as part of the ceremony of their admiſſion: a practice which, according to ſome, obtains among them to this day; a perſon turning Jew, is firſt circumciſed, and, when healed, is bathed, or baptiſed in water, in preſence of their rabbins; after which he is reputed a good Jew. Others, however, inſiſt that the Jewiſh proſelyte baptiſm is not by far ſo ancient, and that John the Baptiſt was the firſt adminiſtrator of baptiſm among the Jews. Of this opinion were Deylingius, J. G. Carpovius, Boernerus, Wernſdorffus, Zeltnerus, Owen, Knatchbull, Jennings, Gill, and others.
Grotius is of opinion, that the rite of baptiſm had its original from the time of the deluge; immediately after which, he thinks, it was inſtituted in memory of the world having been purged by water. Some learned men think it was added to circumciſion, ſoon after the Samaritan ſchiſm, as a mark of diſtinction to the orthodox Jews. Spencer, who is fond of deriving the rites of the Jewiſh religion from the ceremonies of the Pagans, lays it down as a probable ſuppoſition, that the Jews received the baptiſm of proſelytes from the neighbouring nations, who were wont to prepare candidates
for the more ſacred functions of their religion, by a ſolemn ablution; that by this affinity of ſacred rites, they might draw the Gentiles to embrace their religion, and that the proſelytes (in gaining of whom they were extremely diligent) might the more eaſily comply with the transition from Gentiliſm to Judaism. In confirmation of this opinion, he obſerves, firſt, that there is no divine precept for the baptiſm of proſelytes, God having enjoined only the rite of circumciſion for the admiſſion of ſtrangers into the Jewiſh religion. Secondly, that, among foreign nations, the Egyptians, Perſians, Greeks, Romans, and others, it was cuſtomary that thoſe who were to be initiated into their miſteries, or ſacred rites, ſhould be firſt purified by dipping their whole body in water. That learned writer adds, as a farther confirmation of his opinion, that the cup of bleſſing likewiſe, added to the paſchal ſupper, ſeems plainly to have been derived from a pagan original: for the Greeks, at their feaſts, had one cup, called ωραία αυτή δαιμόν, the cup of the good demon or god, which they drank at the concluſion of their entertainment, when the table was removed. Since then, a rite of Gentile origin was added to one of the Jewiſh ſacraments, viz. the paſſover, there can be no abſurdity in ſuppoſing, that baptiſm, which was added to the other ſacrament, namely circumciſion, might be derived from the ſame ſource. In the laſt place, he obſerves, that Chriſt, in the inſtitution of his ſacraments, paid a peculiar regard to thoſe rites which were borrowed from the Gentiles: for rejecting circumciſion and the paſchal ſupper, he adopted into his religion baptiſm and the ſacred cup; thus preparing the way for the converſion and the reception of the Gentiles into his church.
The deſign of the Jewiſh baptiſm, if baptiſm be praſtiſed by them, is ſuppoſed to be, to import a regeneration, whereby the proſelyte is rendered a new man, and of a ſlave becomes free. The effect of it is, to cancel all former relations; ſo that thoſe who were before akin to the perſon, after the ceremony ceaſed to be ſo. It is to this ceremony Chriſt is ſuppoſed to have alluded, in his expreſſion to Nicodemus, that it was neceſſary that he ſhould be born again, in order to become his diſciſeple.—The neceſſity of baptiſm to ſalvation is grounded on thoſe two ſayings of our Saviour; He that believeth, and is baptiſed, ſhall be ſaved; and Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. The ancients did not generally think the mere want of baptiſm, where the procuring it was impracticable, excluded men abſolutely from the hopes of eternal ſalvation. Some few of them, indeed, are pretty ſevere upon infants dying without baptiſm; and ſome others ſeem alſo, in general terms, to deny eternal life to adult perſons dying without it: but when they interpret themſelves, and ſpeak more diſtinctly, they make ſome allowances, and except ſeveral caſes, in which the want of baptiſm may be ſupplied by other means. Such are, martyrdom, which commonly goes by the name of ſecond baptiſm in men's own blood, in the writings of the ancients; becauſe of the power and efficacy it was thought to have to ſave men by the inviſible baptiſm of the Spirit, without the external element of water. Faith, and repentance, were alſo eſteemed a ſupplement to the want of baptiſm, in ſuch catechumens as died while they were piouſly preparing themſelves for baptiſm. Conſtantly communicating
communicating with the church, was thought to supply the want of baptism in persons who had been admitted to communion, on a presumption of their being duly baptized, though the contrary afterwards appeared. For infants dying without baptism, the case was thought more dangerous; as here, no personal faith, repentance, or the like, could be pleaded, to supply the defect, and wash away original sin: on this account, they who spoke most favourably of them, as Greg. Nazianzen, and Severus bishop of Antioch, only assigned them a middle state, neither in heaven nor hell. But the Latins, as St. Augustin, Fulgentius, Marius Mercator, &c. who never received the opinion of a middle state, concluded, as they could not be received into heaven, they must go to hell. Pelagius, and his followers, who denied original sin, asserted, that they might be admitted to eternal life, and salvation, though not to the kingdom of heaven; between which they distinguished. Where the fault was not on the side of the child, nor his parents, but of the minister, or where any unavoidable accident rendered baptism absolutely impossible, Hincmar, and others, make an exception, in holding the child saved without baptism.
The receiving baptism is not limited to any time, or age of life. Some contend for its being administered like circumcision, precisely on the eighth day, as Greg. Nazianzen; and others would have it deferred till the child is three years of age, and able to hear the mystic words, and make answer thereto, though he do not understand them. In the canon law we find divers injunctions against deferring the baptism of infants beyond the 37th day, 30th day, and the 9th day; some of them under pecuniary forfeitures.
Salmasius, and Suicerus from him, deliver it as authentic history, that for the two first ages, no one received baptism, who was not first instructed in the faith and doctrine of Christ, so as to be able to answer for himself, that he believed; because of those words, He that believeth and is baptized; which, in effect, is to say, that no infant, for the first two ages, was ever admitted to Christian baptism. But, afterwards, they own, that pædo-baptism came in, upon the opinion that baptism was necessary to salvation. But Vossius, Dr. Forbes, Dr. Hammond, Mr. Walker, and especially Mr. Wall, who has exactly considered the testimony and authority of almost every ancient writer that has said any thing upon this subject, endeavour to evince, that infants were baptized even in the apostolical age. It is certain, Tertullian pleads strongly against giving baptism to infants; which shows, at least, that there was some such practice in his age, though he disapproved of it. It is certain, the ordinary subjects of this sacrament, in the first ages, were converts from Judaism and Gentilism, who, before they could be admitted to baptism, were obliged to spend some time in the state of catechumens, to qualify them to make their professions of faith, and a Christian life, in their own persons: for, without such personal professions, there was ordinarily no admission of them to the privilege of baptism. Those baptized in their sick-beds were called clinici; and were held in some reproach, as not being reputed true Christians. Hence several censures, in councils and ecclesiastical writers, of clinic baptism. This clinic baptism was not suffi-
cient to qualify the person, in case of recovery, for ordination. Some had their baptism put off by way of punishment, when they fell into gross and scandalous crimes, which were to be expiated by a longer course of discipline and repentance. This was sometimes 5, 10, 20 years or more; even all their lives to the hour of death, when their crimes were very flagrant.
In the earliest ages of the church, there was no stated time or place for the reception of baptism. Afterwards Easter, Whit-sun-tide, and Epiphany, became solemn feasts, out of which baptism was not administered, except in cases of necessity. The catechumens who were to receive it at these times, were called competentes: and to these it is that St. Cyril addresses his catechets. In the apostolical age, and some time after, before churches and baptisteries were generally erected, they baptized in any place where they had convenience; as John baptized in Jordan, and Philip baptized the eunuch in the wilderness, and Paul the jailor in his own house. But in after ages, baptisteries were built adjoining to the church; and then rules were made, that baptism should ordinarily be administered nowhere but in these buildings. Justinian, in one of his novels, refers to ancient laws, appointing that none of the sacred mysteries of the church should be celebrated in private houses. Men might have private oratories for prayer in their own houses; but they were not to administer baptism or the eucharist in them, unless by a particular license from the bishop of the place. Such baptisms are frequently condemned in the ancient councils, under the name παρὰ βαπτιστικά, baptisms in private conventicles.
As to the attendant ceremonies and manner of baptism in the ancient church: The person to be baptized, if an adult, was first examined by the bishop or officiating priest, who put some questions to him; as, first, Whether he abjured the devil and all his works; secondly, Whether he gave a firm assent to all the articles of the Christian faith: to both which he answered in the affirmative. If the person to be baptized was an infant, these interrogatories were answered by his sponsors, or godfathers. Whether the use of sponsors was as old as the apostles days, is uncertain: perhaps it was not, since Justin Martyr, speaking of the method and form of baptism, says not a word of them.— After the questions and answers, followed exorcism; the manner and end of which was this: The minister laid his hands on the person's head, and breathed in his face, implying thereby the driving away or expelling of the devil from him, and preparing him for baptism, by which the good and holy spirit was to be conferred upon him.— After exorcism, followed baptism itself: and first the minister, by prayer, consecrated the water for that use. Tertullian says, "any waters may be applied to that use: but then God must be first invoked; and then the Holy Ghost presently comes down from heaven, and moves upon them, and sanctifies them." The waters being consecrated, the person was baptized "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;" by which "dedication of him to the blessed Trinity, the person, (says Clemens Alexandrinus) is delivered from the corrupt trinity, the devil, the world, and the flesh." In performing the ceremony of baptism, the usual custom (except in clinical cases,
Baptism. or where there was scarcity of water), was to immerse and dip the whole body. Thus St Barnabas, describing a baptized person, says, "We go down into the water full of sin and filth, but we ascend bearing fruit in our hearts." And this practice of immersing the whole body was so general, that we find no exceptions made in respect either to the tenderness of infants, or the bashfulness of the other sex, unless in case of sickness or other disability. But to prevent any indecency, men and women were baptized apart. To which end, either the baptisteries were divided into two apartments, one for the men, the other for the women, as Bingham has observed; or the men were baptized at one time and the women at another, as is shown by Vossius, from the Ordo Romanus, Gregory's Sacramentarium, &c. Add, that there was anciently an order of deaconesses, one part of whose business was to assist at the baptism of women. The precautions, however, rather indicate a scrupulous attention to delicacy, than imply any indecency in the circumstance of immersion itself. From the candidates being immersed, there is at least no reason to infer that they were naked: The present Baptists never baptize naked, though they always immerse. After immersion, followed the unction; by which (says St Cyril) was signified that they were now cut off from the wild olive, and were ingrafted into Christ, the true olive tree; or else to show that they were now to be champions for the gospel, and were anointed thereto, as the old athletes were against their solemn games. With this anointing was joined the sign of the cross, made upon the forehead of the person baptized; which being done, he had a white garment given him, to denote his being washed from the defilements of sin, or in allusion to that of the apostle, "As many as are baptized in Christ have put on Christ." From this custom the feast of Pentecost, which was one of the annual seasons of baptism, came to be called Whitsunday, i. e. White-sunday. This garment was afterwards laid up in the church, that it might be an evidence against such persons as violated or denied that faith which they had owned in baptism.—When the baptism was performed, the person baptized, according to Justin Martyr, "was received into the number of the faithful, who then sent up their public prayers to God, for all men, for themselves, and for those who had been baptized."
The ordinary ministers, who had the right of administering this sacrament, that is, of applying the water to the body, and pronouncing the formula, were presbyters or bishops; though on extraordinary occasions laymen were admitted to perform the same.
As to the present form of administering baptism, the church of Rome uses the following. When a child is to be baptized, the persons who bring it wait for the priest at the door of the church, who comes thither in his surplice and purple stole, attended by his clerks. He begins with questioning the godfathers, whether they promise, in the child's name, to live and die in the true catholic and apostolic faith, and what name they would give the child. Then follows an exhortation to the sponsors; after which the priest, calling the child by its name, asks it as follows: What dost thou demand of the church? The godfather answers, Eternal life. The priest goes on: If you are desirous of obtaining eternal life, keep God's commandments,
thou shalt love the Lord thy God, &c. After which he breathes three times in the child's face, saying, Come out of this child, thou evil spirit, and make room for the Holy Ghost. This said, he makes the sign of the cross on the child's forehead and breast, saying, Receive the sign of the cross on thy forehead, and in thy heart. Then taking off his cap, he repeats a short prayer; and laying his hand gently on the child's head, repeats a second prayer: which ended, he blesses some salt; and putting a little of it into the child's mouth, pronounces these words, Receive the salt of wisdom. All this is performed at the church-door. The priest, with the godfathers and god-mothers, coming into the church, and advancing towards the font, repeat the apostles' creed and the Lord's prayer. Being come to the font, the priest excises the evil spirit again; and taking a little of his own spittle, with the thumb of his right hand, rubs it on the child's ears and nostrils, repeating, as he touches the right ear, the same word (Epitha, be thou opened) which our Saviour made use of to the man born deaf and dumb. Lastly, they pull off its swaddling-clothes, or strip it below the shoulders, during which the priest prepares the oils, &c. The sponsors then hold the child directly over the font, observing to turn it due east and west: whereupon the priest asks the child, Whether he renounces the devil and all his works? and the godfather having answered in the affirmative, the priest anoints the child between the shoulders in the form of a cross. Then taking some of the consecrated water, he pours part of it thrice on the child's head, at each perfusion calling on one of the Persons of the Holy Trinity. The priest concludes the ceremony of baptism with an exhortation.—The Romish church allows midwives, in cases of danger, to baptize a child before it comes entirely out of its mother's womb: where it is to be observed, that some part of the body of the child must appear before it can be baptized, and that it is baptized on the part which first appears: if it be the head, it is not necessary to rebaptize the child; but if only a foot or hand appears, it is necessary to repeat baptism. A stillborn child thus baptized may be buried in consecrated ground.
The Greek church differs from the Romish, as to the rite of baptism, chiefly in performing it by immersion, or plunging the infant all over in the water.
The forms of administering baptism among us being too well known to require a particular description, we shall only mention one or two of the more material differences between the form, as it stood in the first liturgy of King Edward, and that in the English Common Prayer Book at present. First, the form of consecrating the water did not make a part of the office, in King Edward's liturgy, as it does in the present, because the water in the font was changed, and consecrated, but once a month. The form likewise itself was something different from that now used; and was introduced with a short prayer, that Jesus Christ, upon whom (when he was baptized) the Holy Ghost came down in the likeness of a dove, would send down the same Holy Spirit, to sanctify the fountain of baptism; which prayer was afterwards left out, at the second review.—By King Edward's first book, the minister is to dip the child in the water thrice; first, dipping the right side; secondly, the left; the third time, dipping the face toward the foot. This trine immersion was a very ancient
Baptism. cient practice in the Christian church, and used in honour of the Holy Trinity; though some later writers say, it was done to represent the death, burial, and resurrection, of Christ, together with his three days continuance in the grave. Afterwards, the Arians making an ill use of it, by persuading the people that it was used to denote that the three Persons in the Trinity were three distinct substances, the orthodox left it off, and used only one single immersion.
By the first common-prayer of King Edward, after the child was baptized, the godfathers and godmothers were to lay their hands upon it, and the minister was to put on him the white vestment commonly called the chrysoma, and to say, "Take this white vesture, as a token of the innocency, which, by God's grace, in this holy sacrament of baptism, is given unto thee; and for a sign, whereby thou art admonished, so long as thou livest, to give thyself to innocence of living, that after this transitory life thou mayest be partaker of the life everlasting. Amen." As soon as he had pronounced these words, he was to anoint the infant on the head, saying, "Almighty God, the father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath regenerated thee by water and the Holy Ghost, and hath given unto thee remission of all thy sins; may he vouchsafe to anoint thee with the unction of his Holy Spirit, and bring thee to the inheritance of everlasting life. Amen." This was manifestly done in imitation of the practice of the primitive church.
The custom of sprinkling children, instead of dipping them in the font, which at first was allowed in case of the weakness or sickness of the infant, has so far prevailed, that immersion is at length quite excluded. What principally tended to confirm the practice of affusion or sprinkling, was, that several of our Protestant divines, flying into Germany and Switzerland during the bloody reign of Queen Mary, and returning home when Queen Elizabeth came to the crown, brought back with them a great zeal for the Protestant churches beyond sea, where they had been sheltered and received; and having observed, that at Geneva and some other places, baptism was administered by sprinkling, they thought they could not do the church of England a greater piece of service than by introducing a practice dictated by so great an oracle as Calvin. This, together with the coldness of our northern climate, was what contributed to banish entirely the practice of dipping infants in the font.
Notions concerning the effects of baptism. Many different notions have been entertained concerning the effects of baptism, which it would be endless to enumerate.—The Remonstrants and Socinians reduce baptism to a mere sign of divine grace. The Romanists, on the contrary, exalt its power; holding, that all sin is entirely taken away by it; that it absolutely confers the grace of justification, and consequently grace ex opere operato. Some also speak of an indelible character impressed on the soul by it, called character dominicus, and character regius; but this is held, by others, a mere chimera; for that the spiritual character, conferred in regeneration, may easily be effaced by mortal sins. Dodwell maintained, that it is by baptism the soul is made immortal; so that those who die without it will not rise again. It must be added, he restrains this effect to episcopal baptism alone. From the effects ordinarily ascribed to bap-
tism, even by ancient writers, it should seem, that the ceremony is as much of heathen as Jewish origin; since Christians do not restrain the use of it, like the Jews, to the admission of new members into the church, but hold, with the heathens, a virtue in it for remitting and washing away sins. The Bramins are still said to baptize with this latter view, at certain seasons, in the river Ganges; to the waters whereof they have annexed a cleansing or sanctifying quality; and hence it is that they flock from all parts, even of Tartary, driven by the expectation of their being eased of their load of sins. But, in this point, many Christians seem to have gone beyond the folly of the heathens. It was only the smaller sins of infirmity which these latter held to be expiable by washing; for crimes of a blacker dye, they allowed no water could efface them, no purgation could discharge them. The Christian doctrine of a total remission of sins by baptism could not fail, therefore, to scandalize many among the heathens, and furnished Julian an occasion of satirizing Christianity itself: "Whoever (says he) is guilty of rapes, murders, sacrilege, or any abominable crime, let him be washed with water, and he will become pure and holy."
In the ancient church, baptism was frequently conferred on Jews by violence: but the church itself never seems to have allowed of force on this occasion. By a canon of the fourth council of Toledo, it is expressly forbid to baptize any against their wills. That which looks most like force in this case, allowed by law, were two orders of Justinian; one of which appoints the heathens, and the other Samaritans, to be baptized, with their wives and children and servants, under pain of confiscation. By the ancient laws, baptism was not to be conferred on image-makers, flagellators, gladiators, aurigæ or public drivers, magicians, or even strolling beggars, till they quitted such professions. Slaves were not allowed the privilege of baptism without the testimony and consent of their masters; excepting the slaves of Jews, Heathens, and heretics; who were not only admitted to baptism, but, in consequence thereof, had their freedom. Vossius has a learned and elaborate work De Baptismo, wherein he accurately discusses all the questions concerning baptism according to the doctrine of the ancients.
BAPTISM by Fire, spoken of by St John the Baptist, has occasioned much conjecture. The generality of the fathers held, that believers, before they enter paradise, are to pass through a certain fire, which is to purify them from all pollutions remaining on them unexpiated. Others, with St Basil, understand it of the fire of hell; others, of that of tribulation and temptation. Others, with St Chrysostom, will have it denote an abundance of graces. Others suppose it to mean the descent of the Holy Ghost on the apostles, in form of fiery tongues. Lastly, others maintain, that the word fire here is an interpolation; and that we are only to read the text, He that shall come after me will baptize you with the Holy Ghost. In reality, it is not found in divers manuscript copies of St Matthew.
The ancient Selucians and Hermians, understanding the passage literally, maintained, that material fire was necessary in the administration of baptism. But we do not find how or to what part of the body they applied it, or whether they were satisfied with obliging the
Baptism. the person baptized to pass through the fire. Valentinus rebaptized all who had received water-baptism, and conferred on them the baptism of fire.
Bis docuit tingi, traductoque corpore flamma.