When, therefore, Maximus introduces here the baptism of Christ, which took place when the latter was about thirty years old, and says that it was not done for himself, but for us, that is, for an example to be followed, and that he thereby confirmed the mystery of the new baptism, he certainly indicates thereby, that he is not speaking of the baptism of infants, since Christ, who, through his baptism, confirmed baptism, was not a child when he was baptized, but an adult person. Moreover, as no other, contrary testimony concerning him is found in the history of holy baptism, it seems probable, that he was not acquainted with any other baptism, and, consequently, not with infant baptism, or, at least, did not observe it.
_A. D. 428._--There were many persons accused, through the writings of Augustine, of being Anabaptists, or at least, of defending Anabaptism, inasmuch as they maintained that baptism administered by heretics or unbelievers was not to be regarded as true baptism, and that, therefore, those who had been baptized by such persons, ought to be rebaptized; in short, that there was no true baptism except that administered in the true church, and upon true faith. Among those thus accused Cresconius was not one of the least; in Augustine’s writings the following things are laid to his charge:
_Bapt. Hist., page 416_: “That there is but one true baptism; for it is written: One God, one faith, one baptism, one undefiled, true church: those who are not in it, the same cannot have any baptism.”
Again: “In baptism, regard is had to the certainty that he who administers it is such a one that does it in a holy manner; but this certainty respecting the one who baptizes, is not judged by the uprightness of his heart, which cannot be seen, but according to his good reputation, and the respect in which he is held.”
Again: “It is written: ‘The oil of the sinner shall not anoint my head’: hence it follows it is not the will of God, that an open sinner shall baptize.”
Again: “In view of this passage, can anything more absurd be said, than that one polluted person should purify another? that one impure person should wash another? that one unclean person should cleanse another? or that a blasphemer should make any one innocent?”
Again: “You, our gainsayers, do not distinguish between a believer and an unbeliever.”
Again: “If it were wrong [what we confess], and baptism may not be annulled [or re-administered], no matter who has administered it, then the apostles would not have baptized those who had been baptized by John; but the contrary is seen,” Acts 19:5.
Again: “In Acts 2:38, Peter commands every Jew to be baptized upon (or in) the name of Christ, though their forefathers had been baptized in the Red Sea (1 Cor. 10:2); hence, the previous baptism (that is, the one which has not been administered rightly), may justly be annulled or changed.”
These are the words, or, at least, the meaning, of Cresconius and his companions, as described by Augustine, and quoted in the History of Holy Baptism; from which it may be seen that also at that time but one baptism was recognized, which must be administered in the true church, by blameless teachers, and upon true faith, as stated elsewhere. Leaving this, we proceed to others, who at that time, and afterwards, confessed the same faith, or, at least, as far as we know, did not oppose it.
_A. D. 429._--It is recorded that at this time there flourished Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, who, writing, among other things, on baptism, has left some sound testimony concerning it.
In _Bapt. Hist., page 443_, the _Centuriatores Magdeburgenses_ have made some extracts from Cyril of Alexandria, _page 613_, where they say that he taught as follows, _book 6_, on John 14: “Through the water of the flood, the sins of the whole world were reconciled (or brought to an end), and those who were concealed in the ark, were preserved through the water (of the flood). This was a type of baptism, by which the impurity of all sin is put off, and the old life taken away.”