was carefully made, between sins before baptism, and sins committed afterwards. The former, it was believed, were wholly removed, by Christ, in baptism. But for subsequent sins, the man himself must make satisfaction(1). This satisfaction consisted in Penance, or voluntary self-inflictions; (which were considered as punishments, that the person laid upon himself, in order to escape divine punishment;) and in good works, among which, fasting, prayer, and alms-giving, were especially recommended. Also the intercessions of living christians, and of glorified saints, were supposed to contribute` very efficiently, to the forgiveness of these sins. Whether, after one penance, a second penance could be admitted, and whether it was possible, to do penance in the last moments of life, there was not entire agreement; but the majority answered affirmatively. Faith was considered, as the general requisite, to a participation of the blessings of christianity. By faith, was understood, embracing the christian religion, or rather, orthodoxy. But the necessity of uniting good works with faith, was strongly urged; and the nature of good works, which must originate from faith, and derive all their value from it, was the most precisely explained by Augustine. At the same time, the opinion was more and more distinctly held, that a man could perform more, than he was properly required to do, (works of superogation,) and thereby attain to higher perfection and recompense (2). The word justification, (justificatio,) was oftener used for sanctification(3), than for the pardon of sin.

Reference. Historia antiquior dogmatis de modo salutis tenendae, et justificationis seu veniae peccatorum a Deo impetrandae instrumentis ;-auctore Henr. Leonh. Heubner. Part I. and II. Wittemb. 1805. 4to,

(1) Clemens Alex. Strom. Lib. IV. p. 634. Origen, in Ep. ad Rom. Lib. III. p. 516, 517. Cyprian, de opere et eleem. p. 197. Cyril Jerus. Catech. XVIII. sec. 20. Chrysostom, in Evan, Joan. Homil. LXXII. (Tom. VIII,

p. 466.) Augustine, Enchirid. ad Laurent. c. 70, 71. de

Historian. History of Baptism and the Anabaptists, (in German,) by J. A. Stark, Lips. 1785. 8vo.

The earliest description of baptism among Christians, is given by Justin Martyr(1). The fathers, very early, ascribed to this act a peculiar efficacy, in the forgiveness of sins, and in the sanctification of the soul: and there was a continued advance in the degree of efficacy ascribed to it. Ordinarily, baptism was administered by immersion(2), and only to the sick, by sprinkling; and it was regarded, as necessary to salvation(4), unless it was compensated by a bloody baptism i. e. martyrdom(5). With baptism, it was common to join exorcism and unction.

Note. Singular idea of some fathers, concerning baptism performed in the lower world. (6) (1) Apol. maj. p. 79, 80.

Barnabas, Ep. c. 3. Clemens Alex. Strom. tismo. c. 4, 5, 6, 15.

Theoph. ad Autol. Lib. II. p. 361. I. c. 6 &c. Tertullian, de BapBasil the Gr. Homil. de Baptismo. (Opp. T. II.) Gregory Nyss. de Baptismo Christi. (Opp. T. III.) Cyril Jerus. Catech. I. c. 3. II. c. 11, 15. XVII. c. 37. XX. c. 6. Gregory Naz. Orat. XL. Augustine, Enchirid. ad Laurent. c. 43, 64.

(3) Turtullian, adv. Prax. c. 26. Irenaeus, adv. Haer. I. c. 18. Basil the Gr. de Spir.S. c. 27.-Sprinkling used: Cyprian, Ep. 69, ad Magnum, p. 185 &c.

(4) Irenaeus, adv. Haer. III. c. 17. Origen, Exhort. ad Martyr. sec. 30. Tertullian de Baptismo, c. 12, 13.

Augustine de Peccator. meritis et remiss. Lib. III. c. 3-5, and c. 12, 13. Enchirid. ad Laurent. c. 43. (5) Origen, Exhort. ad Martyr. sec. 30. Tertull. de Bapt. c. 16. Cyprian, Ep. 73.

(6) Clemens Alex. Strom. Lib. II. p. 452, and VI. p. 762,

763.

SEC. 100. Infant Baptism.

All the earlier traces of infant baptism, are very unde cisive; and Tertullian(1) is the first who mentions it, to disapprove of it. On the contrary, Origen (2) and Cyprian (3) patronize it. In the fourth century, its legality was universally admitted (4), notwithstanding the fathers often found occasion, to warn christians against delaying it; and even Pelagius (5) did not dare to question its correctness. Augustine (6) assigned to it the distinct object, to take away the innate sin, and guilt of the child and by his views of it, the general practice of it was promoted.

Historians. Wm. Wall, History of Infant Baptism; Lond. 1705. 2 vol. 8vo.

J. G. Walch, Historia Paedobaptismni IV. priorum saeculor;-in his Miscell. Sacra. 1744.

David Rees, Infant Baptism no institution of Christ ;" and the rejection of it, justified from Scripture and antiquity; Lond. 1734. 8vo.

Robert Robinson, The history of Baptism :-abridged by D. Benedict. Boston 1817. 8vo.

(1) de Baptismo. c. 18.

(2) in Levit. Homil. VIII. (Opp. T. II. p. 230.) in Ev. Lu. Homil. xv. Comment. in Ep. ad Rom. Lib. v. (Opp. T. iv. p. 565.)

(3) Ep. ad Fiduin. p. 158.

(4) Gregory Naz. Orat. xl. Gregory Nyss. de Infantibus, qui pracmature abripiuntur. (Opp. T. III.) Augustine, de Genesi ad Literam. Lib. x. c. 23. &c. &c.

(5) Professio Fidei.

(6) Ep. CLVII. sec 11. Ep. XCVIII. Ep. CLXXXVII. sec. 22 &c. de Genesi ad Lit. Lib. x. c. 23. de Peccator. meritis et remiss. Lib. I. c. 26.

SEC. 101. Heretical baptisms.

Much longer, continued the doubt, whether those who were baptized by heretics, had received valid baptism. The African churches were convinced, that true baptism existed only in the Catholic church. In this, they differed from the Romish church; and the bishops, Stephen and Cyprian, had a controversy on the subject. Even the decrees of the Councils of Nice and Constantinople, did not produce uniformity of sentiment. The Catholics of Africa, were led by the Donatist controversy, to depart from their former principles. Augustine devised the doctrine, that the validity of baptism depends, not on the orthodoxy of the church in which, or of the person by whom, it is administered, but solely on the invocation of the Trinity; yet that baptism can conduct to salvation, only those that belong to the true church. This doctrine, he labored to establish, yet with the greatest tenderness for the reputation of Cyprian.

References. Cyprian, Epistolae LXIX-LXXV.-Augustine, de baptismo, contra Donatistas, Libri VI.

SEC. 102. The Lord's Supper.

Historians. De Eucharistiae sacramento, Lib. III; authore Edm. Albertin; Daventr. 1654. Fol.

Histoire de l'Eucharistie; par Matth. de Larroque, Amst. 1671. 8vo.

Rudolph Hospinian, Historia Sacramentaria; Genev, 1681. II. vol. Fol.

J. Aug. Ernesti, Antimuratorius; Lips. 1755. and in his
Opusc. Theol. Lips. 1792.

History of the doctrine of the Lord's Supper: (in German,)
in Cramer's Continuation of Bonuet's Introduction to the
History of the world and of religion, vól. V. P. II.
La perpetuité de l'église catholique touchant l' Eucharistie ;
Paris 1670-74. III. vol. with volumes IV. and V. (by

Euseb. Renaudot,) Paris. 1711, 1713. 4to. and the writings in reply, by J. Claude..

The Lord's supper (uxapsia, duvaĝis duλoyia, missa) was solemnized by christians, after the example of Christ, and as a memorial of him. After the second century, it was likened to the pagan mysteries, and was kept from the sight of all unbaptized persons. In it, common bread was used, and the wine was mixed with water. The custom of some heretical sects, of witholding the cup, or of presenting water instead of wine, was disapproved. Baptized children(1) were allowed to partake of the Lord's supper. The zeal of the fathers led them to exhibit, under the strongest imagery, this transaction as very holy, very efficacious, and very awful.

(1) Cyprian. de Lapsis, p. 132.

SEC. 103. The Lord's Supper as a sacrifice.

According to the concordant decisions of the ancient fathers, the Lord's supper is to be considered, as a sacrifice (Judia, podpopa, oblatio, sacriticium.) Yet Justin(1) and Irenaeus(2) make it to be only a thank-offering. The African fathers, Tertullian (3) and Cyprian(4), speak of offerings for the dead; and the latter represents the Lord's supper, as being an act of the priest, in which he, in Christ's stead, presents bread and wine to God, in imitation of the sacrifice of Christ. In the fourth century, the Lord's supper was universally considered, as an unbloody sacrifice; whereby the accompanying prayers of the living and the dead, obtained peculiar efficacy, and were potent to the averting of all sorts of evils. The idea, that the Lord's supper was a memorial of the sacrifice of Christ, was gradually supplanted by another, that it was a repetition of that sacrifice; and the doctrine of purgatory being introduced, the idea of the sacrifice of the Mass, grew up in the Latin church..

(1) Apolog. maj. p. 82, 83. (p. 98. ed. Col.) Dial. p. 209, 210.