(3). It is urged further against immersion that it carries with it too much of the appearance of a burden- some rite for the Gospel dispensation ; that it is too in- decent for so solemn an ordinance; that it has a ten- dency to agitate the spirits, often rendering the subject unfit for the exercise of proper thoughts and affections, and, indeed, utterly incapable of them ; that in many cases the immersion of the body would, in all probabil- ity, be instant death ; that in other situations it would be impracticable for want of water : hence it cannot be considered as necessary to the ordinance of baptism, and there is the strongest improbability that it was universally practised in the times of the New Testa- ment, or in the earliest periods of the Christian Church; indeed, the allegation of the txclusiveness of this mode is far from being adequately supported by ancient tes- timony, while in many instances (e. g. that of the Phil- ippine jailer, Acts xvii, 33) this theory involves the most unlikely suppositions. See above (I-V).
1Y. Subjects of Baptism. — The Christian churches generally baptize infants as well as adult believers, and this is believed to have been the practice of the
BAPTISM
648
BAPTISM
church from the apostolical age. The Roman ana Lutheran churches teach that baptism admits children into the church and makes them members of the body of Christ The Reformed churches, generally, teach that the children of believers are included in the cov- enant, and arc therefore entitled to baptism. The Methodist Church holds that all infants are redeemed by Christ, and are therefore entitled to baptism, wher- ever tluy can receive the instruction and care of a Christian church or family.
(i.) As to the antiquity of infant baptism, it is ad- mitted by Baptist writers themselves that it was prac- ticed in Tertullian's time (A.D. 200); but they insist that beyond that date there is no proof of any other baptism than that of adult believers. The principal passages cited in the controversy are from Origen, Tertullian, Irenaws, and Justin Martyr.
1. Origen (A.D. 185-253) speaks in the most un- equivocal terms of the baptism of infants, as the gen- eral practice of the church in his time, and as having been received from the apostles. His testimony is as follows : " According to the usage of the church, bap- .tism is given even to infants; when, if there were nothing in infants which needed forgiveness and mercy, the grace of baptism would seem to be super- fluous" {Homil. VIII in Levit. ch. xii). Again : " In- fants are baptized for the forgiveness of sins. Of what sins ? Or, when have they sinned ? Or, can there be any reason for the laver in their case, unless it be ac- cording to the sense which we have mentioned above, viz. that no one is free from pollution, though he has lived but one da}- upon earth? And because by bap- tism native pollution is taken away, therefore infants are baptized" (flomil. in Luc. xiv). Again: "For this cause it was that the church received a tradition from the apostles (-apdeome; aTTOTroXiKi)) to give baptism even to infants" (Comm. on Rom. lib. v, cap. 9). Ne- ander (Ch. Hist, i, 514) depreciates this testimony, but without any real ground. On any ordinary subject it would be taken as decisive, at least as to the prevalence of infant baptism in Origen's time, and long before.
2. 7\ rtullian (A.D. 1G0-240), in his treatise De Bap- tismo (e. 18), opposes infant baptism on the ground (1) "that it is too important; not even earthly goods are intrusted to infants;" (2) that "sponsors are imper- illed by the responsibility they incur." Tertullian adopted tie- superstitious idea that baptism was ac- companied with the remission of all past sins, and that sins committed after baptism were peculiarly danger- ous. He therefore advised that not merely infants, but young men and young women, and even young widows and widowers, should postpone their baptism until the period of their youthful appetite and passion should have passed. In short, he advised that, in all e i-es in which (hath was not likely to intervene, bap- tisra lie postponed until the subjects of it should have arrived at a period of life when they would be no longer in danger of being led astray by youthful lusts. And thus, f,,r more than a century after the age of Tertullian, we find some of the most conspicuous con- vert, to the Christian faith postponing baptism till the - lose of life. Further, if he could have said that infant baptism was ••an innovation," he would; no argu- ment was -nr-r or weightier in that age; and lie con- st intly appe lis to i other subjects. All attempts
to invalidate this testimony have failed. If any fact in history is certain, it is that infant baptism was prac- tised io Tertullian'- time, and long before. For the. Baptist \i. w, however, on this point, see an able arti- cle in the Chrutian Review, xvi. 610. See also Bib- I ..•/„, ;, Sat ii. iii. 680; v, ::ii7.
B. frenaut (circ. A.D. 125 190) has the following Gib. 'i- cap. S9): "Omnes venit per semetip- Bum salvare; omnes, inquam, qui per cum renatcuntor in Deum, infantes el parvulos ,.t pueros," etc.- i.e. "He « me to gave all by himself; all, I say, who.'by him, an born agak unto God, infanta, and little chil-