It has been said, that soon after the apostolic age, s many Christian sects rejected baptism. But the ac- r counts of these sects are so obscure and contradicto- 1 ry, that no reliance can be placed upon them. It is probable this error was not so common as has been pretended. Perhaps the Valentinians embraced it. The Paulicians interpreted all that is said of baptism in an allegorical manner, and by the water understood the gospel. The Manichxans, however, did baptize ; though the contrary has been generally believed. The Quakers, at the present day, reject baptism, and maintain, that it was appointed only for the Jews on account of their prejudices; or, at most, was to be observed only once, when Christianity was founding, to represent visibly the mystical purification of the soul. In support of this opinion they adduce, 1 Cor. i. 17. But the context clearly proves, that though Paul did not commonly baptize, it was not because it was unnecessary, for the persons to whom he was wri ting were baptized ; but because that office was com mitted to others, to prevent the bad consequences which might have resulted from its being said that he baptized in his own name. They, likewise, adduce, Ephes. iv. 7, and maintain, that the one baptism, there mentioned, is that of the spirit. But the baptism of the spirit (an expression altogether figurative) was so far from superseding baptism by water, that, ac cording to the express reasoning of Peter, Acts x. 44, it both gave a right to it, and implied the necessity of its being administered. The words of the insti tution, likewise, as well as the practice of the apos tles, arc sufficient to prove that baptism was appoint ed for both Jews and Gentiles. The opinion of some Socinians, likewise, deserves notice. From the man ner in which Jewish proselytes were baptized, they maintain, that only converts from a different religion are proper subjects of baptism, and though the chil dren which were born to them before conversion are to be baptized, yet such as are born afterwards are baptized in their parents. But the legitimate office of analogy is not to prove but to illustrate ; and Jew ish baptism was so different from the baptism of Christ, that no just conclusion can be drawn from it. The whole tenor of scripture, likewise, even of those parts which were written many years after Christian ity was published, always represents believers as per sonally baptized. Many other arguments might be adduced, but they appear not necessary in this place. .As the commission to baptize was given to the apostles, we conclude that none but the ministers of Christ have authority to baptize. But we are far from thinking, as some have done, that none but the successors of the apostles in office should. administer this rite. Indeed, it would not be difficult to prove, that the apostles had really no successors. But if this should not be granted, we would ask, Was Phi lip, who baptized the Samaritan, an apostle ? Was Ananias, who baptized Paul, an apostle.? Certainly not. Others, therefore, besides apostles, had autho rity to baptize. As denconnesses, also, were appoint ed by the apostles, it is certain that they, at a very early period, administered baptism to their own sex. Immediately after the apostles, bishops only, or such presbyters as were authorised by them, baptized. But in the 2d century, Tertullian informs us, laymen baptized in cases of necessity ; though in a synod held at Elvira, in 306, this office was restricted to laymen who had not been married a second time. Persons
thus baptized, if they survived, were afterwards to be confirmed by the bishop. When Augustin, however, in the 4th century, established the doctrine of original sin, it was supposed that all infants, dying unbapti zed, were excluded from heaven. Hence, a licence to baptize was given to midwives; and this was soon extended to any person, whether Jew or Christian, righteous or wicked. The truth of history obliges us to add, that this doctrine was carried so far, that in difficult births water was commanded to be poured upon whatever part of the infant should appear, and when that could not be done, baptism was to be attempted, by means of a syringe, in a way that de licacy forbids us to explain. This practice is still authorised in the church of Rome. Even in England, the common prayer books of Edward and Elizabeth permitted lay-baptism in cases of necessity. In the Hampton-court conference, 1603, it was condemned with some difficulty. From that time it has been accounted unlawful.
When Christianity was first established, converts were admitted to baptism without any respect to time or place. But early in the 2d century, except in cases of necessity, the celebration of this rite was con fined to the festivals of Easter and Whitsuntide. Baptisteries and fonts were erected in the 3d and 4th centuries. The novitiate of catechumens, which then universally prevailed, was productive of two bad con sequences ; some converts, conscious of their imper fections, never imagined that they were sufficiently prepared, and refused to dedicate themselves to God; others, of which number was Constantine the Great, unwilling to forsake their sins, and imagining that baptism cancelled every violation of duty, postponed that ordinance to the end of life, that thus they might be dismissed pure to heaven. In this situation things remained till the Reformation. Even after the Re formation, the preface to the book of common prayer, published by authority in 151.9, enjoins the adminis tration of this rite, as far as can be done conveniently, only at Easter and Whitsuntide. Neither the re formed, nor the Greek church, observe any particular period ; but infants are commonly baptized by the latter on the eighth or tenth day.
Almost all the ceremonies formerly mentioned are still retained in the church of Rome. The Greek church observes nearly the same form, but employs im mersion. Immersion, either single or trine, is adopt ed in all the Oriental churches. The reformed churches, in general, reject human inventions, but observe sprinkling. The Baptists suppose immer sion and a personal profession of Christianity abso lutely necessary to the validity of the deed. Baptism has sometimes been performed in wine when water could not be obtained. In ancient times, the baptism of such as had committed public sins was often, by way of punishment, deferred till the end of life. The an cient rubricks almost universally condemn private baptism, except in cases of necessity, but grant a dispensation to the children of kings and princes. The giving a name to the child at baptism, though probably derived from the conduct of the Jews at circumcision, is by no means to be considered as part of the rite. (N)