him as one returning from a long peregrination out of his own country. For because before his baptism he was an enemy, but after baptism is made a friend of our common Lord, we therefore all rejoice with him and upon this account, the" kiss has the name of peace, that we may learn thereby, that God has ended the war, and received us into familiarity and friendship with himself. Hence it is, that to give the peace to any one, is the same thing many times in the writings of the ancients, as to salute him with the holy kiss, in the phrase of the apostle. |

Sect. 6.

And a taste of

honey and milk, in token of their new

birth.

23

They were used also to give to the newly baptized a little taste of honey and milk: which Salmasius and some others 20 suppose to be given them instead of the eucharist; but that is a mistake, for the eucharist was given them at the same time. The ancients themselves give another reason for it. St. Jerom" and Tertullian 22 say it was to signify their new birth, and that they were now as children adopted into God's family. Tertullian says moreover, That the Marcionites retained the custom for the same reason as they did many other usages of the church. St. Jerom" says further, That in some of the Western churches, the mixture was made up of milk and wine instead of honey, and this in allusion to those passages of the apostle, "I have fed you with milk, and not with strong meat;" and St. Peter's saying, "As new-born babes, desire the sincere milk of the word." For milk denotes the innocency of children. Clemens Alexandrinus also 25 takes notice of this custom, saying, As soon as we are born, we are nourished with milk, which is the nutriment of the Lord. And when we are born again, we are honoured with the hope of rest by the promise of Jerusalem which is above, where it is said to rain milk and honey. For by these material things we are assured of that sacred food. We learn further, from the third council of Carthage, that this milk and honey had a peculiar consecration distinct from that of the eucharist. It is there said to be offered at the altar,26 on a day most solemn, (which means the great sabbath, or Saturday before Easter, which was the most solemn time of baptism,) and there to have its proper benediction

19 Chrys. Serm. 50. de Util. Legendæ Scripturæ, t. 5. p. 686. Διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τὸ φίλημα εἰρήνη καλεῖται, ἵνα μάθ θωμεν ὅτι πόλεμον κατέλυσεν ὁ Θεὸς, καὶ πρὸς τὴν οἰκείωσιν ἐπανήγαγε τὴν ἑαυτοῦ.

20 Salmas. ap. Suicer. Thesaur. Part. 2. p. 1136. 21 Hieron. cont. Lucif. cap. 4. Deinde egressos lactis et mellis prægustare concordiam ad infantiæ significationem.

22 Tertul. de Coron. Mil. c. 3. Inde suscepti lactis et mellis prægustamus concordiam.

23 It. cont. Marcion. lib. 1. cap. 14. Sed et ille usque nec aquam reprobavit creatoris, qua suos abluit, nec oleum quo suos unxit, nec mellis et lactis societatem, qua suos infantat, nec panem, quo ipsum corpus suum repræsentat.

24 Hieron. in Esai. lv. 1. Lac significat innocentiam

Sect. 7. Then required it

for the mystery of infants, (that is, persons newly baptized, who are commonly called infants in the mystical sense,) that it might be distinguished from the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. This part of the canon indeed is omitted in some collections, but Labbe says it was in the ancient manuscripts, and it is now so read in the body of the African" Code; which puts the matter beyond all dispute. I have given this canon with a little explanatory paraphrase, because some learned men complain of the obscurity of it, and profess themselves to be in the dark about the mystery of infants, which seems to me evidently to refer to this custom of giving milk and honey to the newly baptized. When persons were thus adopted into God's family, and acknowledged say the Lord's as brethren in Christ, then they were prayer. admitted as sons to call upon God their Father, and immediately required to do it in the form of words taught us by Christ. The author of the Constit tions bids them repeat the Lord's prayer standing upright, because they were now risen with Christ from the dead: and after that repeat this other short form: "Almighty God, the Father of Christ, thy only begotten Son, give me an immaculate body, a pure heart, a watchful soul, an unerring knowledge. with the influence of the Holy Ghost, that I may possess and enjoy the fulness of the truth, through thy Christ, by whom all glory be to thee in the Holy Ghost for ever. Amen." St. Chrysostom also mentions their repeating the Lord's prayer presently after their coming up out of the water; and that standing also, not falling upon their faces, but looking up to Christ, to whose body they are united, as he sits above in heaven, where Satan has no access. And this was the first time they were allowed to use this prayer. For till men were baptized, and made sons of God by regeneration, they were not allowed to call God their Father. And though they learned the Lord's prayer before baptism, yet they were not permitted till after baptism to use it as a prayer publicly in the church.

Among other ceremonies after baptism, Gregory Nazianzen mentions their reception with psalmody," which,

Sect. & Received with psalmody,

parvulorum. Qui mos ac typus in Occidentis ecclesiis hodie usque servatur, ut renatis in Christo vinum lacque tribuatur. De quo lacte dicebat et Paulus, Lac vobis potum dedi, non solidum cibum. Et Petrus, Quasi modo nati parvuli, rationale lac desiderate.

25 Clem. Alex. Pædagog. lib. 1. cap. 6. p. 103.

26 Conc. Carth. 3. can. 24. Primitiæ vero, seu mel et lac, quod uno die solennissimo pro infantis mysterio solet offerri, quamvis in altari offeratur, suam tamen habet propriam benedictionem, ut a sacramento Dominici corporis ac sanguinis distinguatur.

27 Codex Eccles. Afric. can. 37. ap. Justellum.
28 Constit. Apost. lib. 7. cap. 44 et 45.
29 Chrys. Hom. 6. in Colos. p. 1953.

30 Naz. Orat. 40. de Bapt. p. 672.

he says, was a præludium or foretaste of those hymns and praises which should be the employment of the life to come. But whether this means any particular psalms appointed to be sung at baptism, or the common psalmody of the church, he does not inform us. If I may be allowed to conjecture, I should conclude for the former, because the common psalmody of the church was no more than what catechumens were allowed to hear before, as being part of the missa catechumenorum, or first service, at which not only catechumens, but professed Jews and heathens might be present. Perhaps they sung the 118th Psalm, in which are these words, "This is the day which the Lord hath made, we will rejoice and be glad in it;" because St. Austin," speaking of the Easter festival, seems to refer to it, saying, This is the day which the Lord hath made, higher than all, brighter than all, in which he hath acquired to himself a new people by the Spirit of regeneration, and hath filled our minds with joy and gladness. And Paulinus speaks of singing hallelujahs upon this occasion. But in doubtful matters I will not be over-positive to determine. It is more certain, that as soon as And admitted im- the ceremonies of baptism were fincommunion of the ished, men were admitted to a participation of the eucharist. For this was the rò rλov, the perfection or consummation of a Christian, to which he was entitled by virtue of his baptism. Therefore all the ancient writers speak of this as the concluding privilege of baptism, which in those days was always immediately subjoined to it. And this was observed, not only with respect to adult persons, but children also. For proof of which custom, at present it will be sufficient to allege the testimony of Gennadius," who joins the baptism of infants, and confirmation, and the eucharist all together. And this continued to the ninth century, as appears from the rituals of that age, some of which have been produced before," and many others might be added; but these belong to another place, where it will be more proper to treat of the communion of infants among other things

Sect. 9.

mediately to the

altar.

31 Aug, Serm. 163. de Tempore, t. 10. p. 332. Hic est dies, dilectissimi, quem fecit Dominus, celsior cunctis, lucidior universis, in quo sibi novam plebem, ut videtis, regenerationis Spiritu conquisivit, &c.

32 Paulin. Ep. 12. ad Sever. p. 145.

Hinc senior sociæ congaudet turba catervæ;
Alleluia novis balat ovile choris.

33 Gennad. de Eccles. Dogm. cap. 52. Si parvuli sint, qui doctrinam non capiant, respondeant pro illis qui eos offerunt, juxta morem baptizandi: et sic manûs impositione et chrismate communiti, eucharistiæ mysteriis admittantur. 94 Book XII. chap. 1. sect. 2.

35 Vicecom. de Ritib. Bapt. lib. 3. cap. 20.

36 Aug. Ep. 118. ad Januarium, p. 213. Si autem quæris, cur etiam lavandi mos ortus sit: nihil mihi de hac re cogitanti probabilius occurrit, nisi quia baptizandorum corpora per observationem quadragesimæ sordidata, cum offensione

that relate to the subject of the eucharist, which, together with the ancient psalmody, reading of the Scriptures, preaching, and prayers, which make up the whole ordinary service of the church, under the name of missa catechumenorum, and missa fidelium, will be the subject of the next volume, which is intended to give an account of the liturgy of the church.

35

Sect. 10. Of the ceremony of washing the feet,

churches.

There was one ceremony more, used in some churches, but rejected by others, which it will not be improper retained in some to give some account of here in the close: that was the custom of washing the feet of the baptized. Vicecomes thinks, at first it was a ceremony preceding baptism, and used on Maundy Thursday, or the same day that our Saviour (from whose example it was taken) washed his disciples' feet. And this seems to be clear, he says, from St. Austin's words, who has occasion to mention it in two of his epistles. But in the former epistle," St. Austin is speaking of the custom of bathing the whole body before Easter, that the catechumens, who had neglected themselves in the observation of Lent, might not appear offensive when they came to be baptized: therefore Maundy Thursday was chosen as the day to cleanse themselves, by bathing, from the bodily filth which they had contracted. And because this was allowed to the catechumens, many others chose to bathe themselves with them on that day also, and relax their fast, because fasting and bathing would not agree together. So that this washing was not the washing of the feet, however Vicecomes came to mistake it, but the bathing of the whole body; and not used as a religious ceremony, but as a ceremony of convenience and civil decency, that they might not be offensive to the senses of others, when they came to baptism. In the other epistle he speaks particularly of washing the feet, but that was after baptism, on the third day, or the octaves, or such other time as those churches which retained the ceremony thought fit to appoint it. For many churches," he says, would never admit of this custom at all, lest it should seem to belong to the

sensûs ad fontem tractarentur, nisi aliqua die lavarentur. Istum autem diem potius ad hoc electum quo cœna Domini anniversarie celebratur. Et quia concessum est hoc baptismum accepturis, multi cum his lavare voluerunt, jejuniumque relaxare.

37 Aug. Ep. 119. ad Januar. cap. 18. De lavandis vero pedibus, cum Dominus hoc propter formam humilitatis, propter quam docendam venerat, commendaret, sicut ipse consequenter exposuit, quæsitum est, Quonam tempore potissimum res tanta etiam facto doceretur, et in illud tempus occurrit, quo ipsa commendatio religiosius inhæreret. Sed ne ad ipsum sacramentum baptismi videretur pertinere, multi hoc in consuetudinem recipere noluerunt. Nonnulli etiam de consuetudine auferre non dubitarunt. Aliqui autem, ut hoc sacratiore tempore commendarent, et a baptismi sacramento distinguerent, vel diem tertium octavarum, quia ternarius numerus in multis sacramentis maxime

properly so called, allowed by the church. And why.

church and state against the repetition of it, when once duly performed. The ancients generally determine against a repetition of baptism; though Vossius thinks' their reasons are not always strictly conclusive. Some argued, that baptism was not to be repeated, because we are baptized into the death of Christ, who died but once. So St. Basil, and St. Austin. But Vossius thinks there is no weight in this argument, because that which is but once done, may be often represented; as the sacrament of the eucharist is often repeated, though it also be in remembrance of the Lord's death till he come. Others prove it from those words of our Saviour, John xiii. 10, "He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit." This argument is used by Optatus, St. Austin, Fulgentius, Pacianus, and St. Ambrose. But Vossius thinks there is as little force in this reason as the former; because men may become polluted and unclean after baptism, and so have need of a second washing, if there were no other reason against it. Others argued from those words of the apostle, Heb. vi. 4, " It is impossible for those who are once enlightened, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance." The ancient expositors, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Primasius, Sedulius, and Haimo, understand this as a prohibition of renewing men to repentance again by a second baptism; for they do not deny absolutely the possibility of a second repentance or pardon, but only upon a second baptism. And so Vossius says it is also expounded by Epiphanius, Cyril of Alexandria," St. Jerom, St. Austin,' and St. Ambrose." But he thinks their exposition not so agreeable to this place, as that of others, who interpret the falling away, either to mean the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, or

1 Voss. de Bapt. Disp. 17. n. 5. p. 210.

2 Basil. de Spir. Sancto, cap. 15.

Aug. de Vera et Falsa Pœnit. cap. 3.
Epiphan. Hær. 59. Novatianor.

what St. John calls "a sin unto death," or a total apostacy from the Christian religion, for which there is no renewal of repentance. But I will not be so positive as Vossius, that any of these are better interpretations of that text, which is so unanimously urged by the ancients against the Novatians, as a prohibition, not simply of a second repentance, but of a repentance by a second baptism. Others made use of those words of the apostle, Eph. iv. " One faith, one baptism." Which is the argument urged by Cyril of Jerusalem and Pope Leo against rebaptization. But this, as Vossius observes, probably was not intended as a prohibition of a second baptism, but only to declare the community of that baptism, which is received one and the same by all, without exception. As the apostle calls the eucharist " one bread," not because it was only once to be received, but because it was that common bread, of which all were partakers. The true reason, Vossius thinks, why baptism is not to be repeated, is the Divine will that so appointed it. For there is no command to reiterate baptism, as there is to repeat the eucharist, in the words of institution. Neither is there any example of any rebaptization in Scripture, though we often read of men's falling into gross and scandalous sins after baptism. To which may be added, that baptism succeeds in the room of circumcision, being the entrance and seal of the covenant, which, on God's part, is never broken: so that as circumcision was never repeated, though the passover was yearly; in like manner, men enter into the covenant by baptism, and their breaches of the covenant are not to be repaired by repeated baptisms, but by confession and repentance, which is the method prescribed by the apostle for restoring fallen brethren. St. Jerom' observes, that though there were many heretics in the apostles' days, as the Nicolaitans and others, yet there was no command given to rebaptize them upon their repentance. And Optatus 10 makes the unity of circumcision a good argument for the unity of baptism, in which both the catholics and Donatists agreed. For though the Donatists rebaptized the catholics, yet they did it not under the notion of a second baptism, but as supposing they had received no true baptism before. Indeed, among all the ancient heretics, we find none for a plurality of baptisms, but only the Marcionites. Which Epiphanius observes to have been an invention of Marcion, their first founder,

Sect. 2.

Only the Marcion

ites allowed baptism

to

ed.

be thrice repeat

approbemus, hæreticis sine baptismate debere pœnitentiam concedi. Nunquid dixit, Rebaptizentur qui in Nicolaitarum fidem baptizati sunt?

10 Optat. lib. 1. p. 35. Quid magis dici pro nobis, et nostrum esse potest, quam quod dixisti, in comparationem baptismatis semel factum esse diluvium? Et singularem circumcisionem salubriter profecisse populo Judæorum, magis pro nobis, quasi noster locutus es.

in regard to his own conversation :" for he having | been guilty of deflowering a virgin, invented a second baptism, asserting, that it was lawful to repeat baptism three times for the remission of sins. So that if any man fell, he might receive a second baptism after the first, and a third after that, upon his repentance. Which he pretended to ground upon those sayings of our Saviour, "I have a baptism to be baptized with, and I have a cup to drink;" which have no reference to any other baptism in water, but to his baptism in blood, that is, his death and passion. Of which the ancients speak much, as they do of some other sorts of baptism, which are only metaphorical, as the baptism of afflictions, the baptism of tears and repentance, and the bap tism of fire at the last day. But here the question is only about proper baptism by water, which the Marcionites affirmed might be repeated three times in the same way, which the church never allowed of. It is true, indeed, there were some

Sect. 3.

did in doubtful cases,

baptization.

What the church doubtful cases, in which it might hapnot reckoned a re- pen accidentally that a man might be a second time baptized; but these were such cases only, in which the party was reputed not to have received any former baptism at all. As when a man could neither give any account of his own baptism, nor were there any other credible witnesses that could attest it. Which often happened to be the case of those who were taken captives in their infancy, and made slaves by the heathen. When any such were redeemed or recovered by the Christians, the church made no scruple to baptize them; because, though they might perhaps have received a former baptism, yet no evidence of it appeared. And so this was not reputed a rebaptization. A decree was made to this in the fifth council of Carthage," upon a purpose question put by the bishops of Mauritania, who affirmed that they redeemed many such captive children from the hands of the barbarians: the council ordered, That in this case, as often as it happened, that there were no certain witnesses found, who could give undoubted testimony of their baptism; nor were they able of themselves to affirm, by reason of their age, that they ever had received it; they should be baptized without any scruple, lest a hesitation in this case should deprive them

"Epiphan. Hær. 42. Marcionit. n. 3.

12 Conc. Carthag. 5. can. 6. Placuit de infantibus, ut quoties non inveniuntur certissimi testes, qui eos baptizatos esse sine dubitatione testentur, neque ipsi sint per ætatem idonei de traditis sibi sacramentis respondere, absque ullo scrupulo eos esse baptizandos, ne ista trepidatio eos faciat sacramentorum purgatione privari. Hinc enim legati Maurorum fratres nostri consuluerunt, quia multos tales a barbaris redimunt. Vid. Cod. Eccl. Afric. can. 72. et Conc. Trull, can. 84.

13 Leo, Ep. 37. ad Leon. Raven. Non potest in iterationis crimen devenire, quod factum esse omnino nescitur.

Nei

of the purgation of the sacraments. The like determination was also given in one of the Roman synods under Leo upon the same case, where it was concluded," That in such a doubtful case, neither the baptizer nor the baptized incurred the crime of rebaptization. And Leo resolves the matter" himself after the same manner in other places. ther was it reckoned any crime, though it afterward appeared that the party had been baptized before, because it was done in ignorance: but yet, like clinic baptism, it was a sort of blemish to him, that deprived him of ecclesiastical promotion, except in some extraordinary case, as we learn from Theodore's Poenitentiale, cited by Gratian. Neither was it reckoned properly

Sect. 4.

Nor when she bap.

tized those who ad been unduly

a second baptism, when the church baptized any who had before been un- tized before in be duly baptized in heresy or schism. sy or schism. For then she did it only on presumption that they had received no true baptism before. Some heretics corrupted baptism by altering the necessary form, and others corrupted it by changing the matter of it into some other substance of their own appointing; and the baptisms of all such were looked upon as no baptisms; and therefore the church ordered all those to be baptized upon their return to her communion, in the very same manner as Jew and Gentiles, as supposing their former pretence of baptism to be nothing at all, but her own baptism the first true baptism that was given them. And even the Cyprianists, who baptized all that had been baptized in any heresy or schism whatsoever without distinction, did it still only upon this sup position, that the baptism which they had received before, was no baptism at all, but a mere nullity. But if any had been baptized in the catholic church, and after that turned heretics or schismatics, or even apostates, Jews or Gentiles, they never gave such another baptism upon their return to the church again.

14 Id. Ep. 92. ad Rustic. cap. 16. Si nulla existant indicia inter propinquos aut familiares, nulla inter clericos aut vicinos, quibus hi, de quibus quæritur, baptizati fuisse doceantur; agendum est ut renascantur, ne manifeste pereant, in quibus quod non ostenditur gestum, ratio non sinit ut videatur iteratum.

15 Theodor. Pœnitent. ap. Gratian, Dist. 4. de Consecrat. cap. 117. Qui bis ignoranter baptizati sunt, non indigeat pro eo pœnitere: nisi quod secundum canones ordinari non possunt, nisi magna aliqua necessitas cogat.

16

Aug. de Bapt. lib. 2. cap. I. Cont. Liter. Petil. lib. 2. cap 7 et 48. Cont. Crescon. lib. 2. cap. 16.