Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

HISTORY

OF THE

Corruptions of Christianity.

PART VII.

The Hiftory of Opinions relating to BAPTISM.

THE INTRODUCTION.

THE rite of baptifsm was perhaps first practifed by John, whose commiffion from God, was to baptize unto repentance all who should profefs themselves to be his difciples. Our Saviour himself, was baptized, and probably all the apoftles, who, by his directions, baptized others, even in his life time; and in his giving his commiffion to them, he commanded them to baptize, as well as difciple all nations. Accordingly we find, in the book of Acts, that all who were converted to christianity, Jews as well as Gentiles, were received into the christian church by baptism; and at that time this rite appears to have been geneF 2 rally

rally, though probably not always, performed by dipping the whole body in water.

As this rite is usually called the baptifm of repentance, it was probably intended to represent the purity of heart and life which was required of all who profeffed themfelves to be chriftians; and therefore a declaration of faith in Christ, and also of repentance, was always made by those who presented themselves to be baptifed, at least if it was required of them. Nothing more, therefore, seems to have been meant by baptism originally, than a folemn declaration of a man's being a christian, and of his refolution to live as becomes one; and very far was it from being imagined, that there was any peculiar virtue in the rite itself. It was confidered as laying a man under obliga`tion to a virtuous and holy life, as the profeffion of christianity neceffarily does, but not of itself making any person holy.

It is certain, that in very early times, there is no particular mention made of any perfon being baptized by fprinkling only, or a partial application of water to the body; but as on the other hand, the dipping of the whole body is not exprefsly prescribed, and the moral emblem is the fame, viz. that of cleanness or purity, produced by the use of water, we feem to be at liberty to apply the water either to the whole body, or to a part of it, as circumftances fhall make it convenient.

The

The Greek word Cand certainly does not always imply a dipping of the whole body in water. For it is applied to that kind of washing which the Pharifees required before eating. See Luke xi. 38. Mark vii. 4. We read in the fame evangelift of the baptifm not only of cups, pots, and brazen veffels, but also of couches. Alfo, as in the Old Testament we often read of Sprinkling with water, as Num. xix. 13. 18. Ezek. xxxvi. 25. and it is referred to in the New, Heb. ix. 19. where we read, And Mofes fprinkled both the book of the Law, and all the people; I think it moft probable, that when great numbers were baptized at the fame time, the water was applied in this manner, the practice being fufficiently familiar to Jews.

In the three firft centuries it was not uncommon to baptize perfons at the hour of death, and in this cafe they certainly did not dip the whole body. Epiphanius fpeaks of a Jewish patriarch being baptized by a chriftian, who was introduced in the difguife of a physician, on account of his being unwilling that his relations should know it; and the water was brought by a fervant, as if it had been for fome other purpose. Whether the story be true or falfe, it equally fhews that the minds of chriftians in that age, were not fhocked at the idea of baptizing in a manner which must have been nearly as it is now used, and that such

Hær. xxx, Opera, vol. i. p. 128.

F 3

was

was deemed a fufficient baptifm. It is faid, indeed, by fome*, that the Eunomians made this change in the rite of baptifm; thinking it indecent to plunge persons over-head in water, and especially naked; and that they therefore only uncovered them as far as the breast, and then poured the water upon their heads. But as the Eunomians were a branch of the Arians, it is not probable that the catholics, as they were called, would adopt the cuf tom from them. Befides, if the practice of immerfion had always been thought absolutely necessary to baptifm, it is not probable that the chriftians of that age would have ever departed from it. As fuperftition increased, we shall have evidence enough, that they were more ready to add than to diminish, with respect to every thing that was of a ceremonial nature.

It has been much debated whether infants were confidered as proper fubjects for baptifm in the primitive church. Now, befides, that we are not able to trace the origin of infant baptism, and therefore are neceffarily carried back into the age of the apostles for it, a controversy arose pretty early in the chriftian church, which would naturally have led fome perfons to deny the antiquity of the practice, if they could; and confidering the state of opinions and practices with respect to things of a fimilar nature, it is natural to fup

See Jortin's Remarks, vol. ii. p. 282.

pofe

« AnteriorContinuar »