The witnesses as regards the ordinance of the baptism of Jesus Christ, who have written in this century, are few, and their accounts are brief, but mostly clear and conclusive. First appears one Dionysius, surnamed Alexandrinus, who writes to his friend Sixtus about a certain brother, who considered the baptism of the heretics no baptism at all, and, therefore requested to be re-baptized.
He is followed by Justinus, who, in his letters written in defense of the Christians, as well as in his disputation with Tryphon, the Jew, speaking of baptism, treats of it throughout as of the baptism of Christ, which was administered to adults.
Then comes one Gratianus, who declares himself against retaliation; and also another (noticed in the margin), who was censured because he held that the body of Christ was not of the substance of Mary.
Then follows Clemens Alexandrinus, who nowhere speaks of infant baptism, though he treats much of baptism, and of its conditions and circumstances.
Then follows a certain testimony, from Walafridus Strabo, proving that in those early times it was not customary to baptize otherwise than in running water, and that only such persons were baptized, who were able to know and understand the benefits to be obtained in baptism.
The conclusion is taken from the 7th chapter of _De Ratione Gubernationes Ecclesiæ_, in which we read, that now there were baptized those who had previously been instructed in the principal articles of faith. With this we have concluded this century.
NOTE.--Since we have not come across any particular authors as regards the matter of baptism, with the first years of this century, we are compelled to begin with the year 126, and to proceed thence on; which method we shall also pursue in some of the other centuries.
_About the year 126._--The first place in our account of baptism in the second century, we shall accord to Dionysius Alexandrinus,[87] of whom it is stated (from his 5th book on Baptism) that he wrote to Sixtus, the bishop at Rome, as follows: There was with us a brother who had been a believer a long time, before ever I or my predecessor Heraclas was ordained bishop. Being present among those who were baptized, and hearing the questions put to them, and their replies, he came to me weeping, fell down at my feet, and began to confess that he had received baptism from the heretics in an entirely different manner, which baptism, since he saw that we administered baptism differently, he did not consider baptism at all. He therefore entreated to be cleansed and purified with the baptism of the Christian church, that he might receive the grace of the Holy Ghost.
[87] As regards the time of this Dionysius, we follow the date given by P. J. Twisk, A. D. 126; to distinguish between him and the martyr Dionysius Alexandrinus, who suffered under Valerianus and Gallienus, about A. D. 260.
Finally he writes these words: He (namely, the man mentioned above, who wished to be re-baptized) ceased not to sigh and to weep, and dared not to come to the Lord’s table, and, admonished and constrained by us, would scarce venture to be present at common prayer.
In regard to this, Eusebius Pamphilius of Cesarea, who has annotated this, writes thus: These and many other such questions concerning re-baptizing are noted by Dionysius throughout his books. _Euseb., lib. 7, cap. 8, from Dionysius._
NOTE.--P. J. Twisck discriminates this Dionysius Alexandrinus from another Dionysius, who, about A. D. 231, after Origen, was a teacher of the scholars of the faith, at Alexandria. See _Chron. 3d Book for the year 231, page 61, col. 1_. Also, _for the year 253, page 71, col. 1_.
Of the martyrdom of the latter we shall speak in the proper place, under the persecution of Valerianus and Gallienus. Others, however, hold that it was one and the same Dionysius, who wrote this, and suffered martyrdom. But this matters little, since the matters themselves, as stated by these writers, agree in general. We will leave this to the judgment of the intelligent reader.