BAPTISM. 



245 



Baptism, to remark, that as the baptism of Christ differed 



1 v ' from that of John, so both differed, perhaps still 



more, from the washings which were called bap- 

 tisms by the jews. It is, however, highly probable, 

 that a ceremony prevailed at the initiation of prose- 

 lytes into the Jewish church, which bore a striking 

 resemblance to baptism, and which, from its being 

 known to the people to whom his religion was first 

 proposed, might not only suggest the idea to our 

 Saviour, but also induce him to adopt it. If bap- 

 tism had been altogether unknown to the. Jews, they 

 would have contemplated John's conduct with that 

 astonishment which novelty always excites. But 

 they were so far from expressing any surprise, that 

 they spoke of baptism as a familiar rite, and said to 

 him, " Why baptizest thou then, if thou be neither 

 Christ nor Elias (" John i. 25. Nor is it difficult to 

 trace the source of their ideas of baptism. Not only 

 was Moses commanded to wash Aaron and his sons 

 at their consecration, but no person, who had con^ 

 traded ceremonial impurity, was admitted into the 

 sanctuary till it was removed by washing. This 

 law must have extended to the Gentiles, who became 

 proselytes of righteousness, and who must have been 

 introduced into the Jewish church by washing as well 

 as circumcision. But though Arian, who calls one 

 of the Jewish proselytes PiGxfift-uos, baptized, and 

 the Mishna, composed about toe beginning of the 

 third century, prove that this was then practised ; 

 yet the silence of Philo and Josephus, and the Tar- 

 gums, written about the close of the first century, 

 has been adduced to prove, that it was unknown ir. 

 the time of our Saviour. Had this been the case, 

 however, we can never imagine that the inveterate pre- 

 judices of the Jews would allow them to have borrow- 

 ed that ceremony from his religion. Nor can it be 

 said, that allowing baptism to have prevailed before 

 John, yet as it was not expressly commanded by 

 God, it was unworthy of our Saviour's attention. 

 For, though it is not mentioned by Moses, yet 

 Ezekiel's allusion, xxxvi. 24, 25. gives it almost a 

 divine sanction, and the conduct of Christ in the in- 

 stitution of his supper would correspond to his con- 

 duct upon this occasion. As the Jews, without any 

 command from God, concluded their passover by 

 giving to every person a piece of bread and a cup of 

 wine, our Saviour set aside, as the nature of his of- 

 fice required, the rites enjoined by Moses in that or- 

 dinance which he had then been commemorating, and 

 retained the bread and cup added by the Jews. In 

 the same manner, when instituting the initiatory rite 

 of his religion, our Saviour set aside circumcision ap- 

 pointed by Moses, and retained the washing or bap- 

 tism added by the Jews. Impartiality, therefore, 

 leads us to conclude, that though the washing of 

 proselytes in the Jewish church was different in some 

 circuniotances from baptism, yet it resembled it so 

 far as to be a proper foundation on which our Sa- 

 viour might raise a nobler edifice. 



Baptorn, in the apobtolic age, was performed by 

 immersion. Many writers of respectability main- 

 tain, that the Greek verb /2*VI<w, as well as its He- 

 brew synonyme, sometimes denotes sprinkling ; but 

 version l ' le vano " 3 passages to which they appeal, will lead 

 every candid mind to a different conclusion. The 



Mode in 

 v.-lrdi l>jp 

 tism was 

 adminis- 

 tered 



circumstances recorded concerning the first admini- Baptism, 

 stration of baptism are, likewise, incompatible with v 



sprinkling. Had a small quantity of water been suf- 

 ficient, the inspired historian would never have said, 

 that John baptized in the river Jordan, and in Enon, 

 because there was much water there. The admini- 

 strators and the subjects of baptism are always de- 

 scribed as descending into the water, and again ascend- 

 ing out of it. When Paul affirms that we are bu- 

 ried with Christ in baptism, and raised again, he 

 not only alludes to immersion, but, upon any other 

 supposition, there would be no propriety in the me- 

 taphor which he employs. We are likewise said to 

 be saved by Si Astjk, the washing, or, by the bath, 

 of regeneration ; where there is a manifest reference to 

 baptism performed by immersion. Immediately af- 

 ter the apostolic age, however, trine immersion was 

 introduced, either to signify the three persons of the 

 Trinity, or the three days that Christ lay in the 

 grave. But as the Arians, who arose in the fourth 

 century, maintained that this implied that the three 

 persons were three distinct substances, it was laid 

 aside, for a short time, by the orthodox. 



It is impossible to mark the precise period when Sprinkliii"- 

 sprinkling was introduced. It is probable, however, 

 that it was invented in Africa, in the second century, 

 in favour of clinics. But it was so far from being ap- 

 proved of by the church in general, that the Africans 

 themselves did not account it valid. The first law 

 for sprinkling was obtained in the following manner. 

 Pope Stephen III. being driven from Rome by As- 

 tulphus, king of the Lombards, in 753, fled to Pe- 

 pin, who a short time before had usurped the crown 

 of Prance. Whilst he remained there, the Monks 

 of Cressy in Brittany consulted him, whether, in a case 

 of necessity, baptism, performed by pouring water 

 on the head of the infant, would be lawful. Stephen 

 replied, that it would. But though the truth of 

 this fact should be allowed, which some Catholics 

 deny, yet pouring or sprinkling was only admitted in 

 cases of necessity. It was not till 1311, that the 

 legislature, in a council held at Ravenna, declared im- 

 mersion or sprinkling to be indifferent. In this country, 

 however, sprinkling was never practised, in ordinary 

 cases, till after the Reformation ; and in England, 

 even in the reign of Edward VI. trine immersion, 

 dipping first the right side, secondly, the left side, 

 and last, the face of the infant, was commonly ob- 

 served. But during the persecution of Mary, many 

 persons, most of whom were Scotsmen, fled from 

 England to Geneva, and there greedily imbibed the 

 opinions of that church. In 1556, a book was pub- 

 lished at that place, containing, " The form of pray- 

 ers and ministration of the sacraments, approved by the 

 famous and godly learned man, John Calvin," in 

 which the administrator is enjoined to take water in 

 his hand, and lay it upon the child's forehead. These 

 Scotish exiles, who had renounced the authority of 

 the Pope, implicitly acknowledged the authority of 

 Calvin ; and, returning to their own country, with 

 Knox at their head, in 1559, established sprinkling 

 in Scotland. From Scotland, this practice made ita 

 way into England in the reign of Elizabeth ; but 

 was not authorised by the established church. In 

 the Assembly of Divines, held at Westminster, in 



