led them into a contrary, and (what fome of our Moderns call) an Uncharitable Notion, That only Epifcopal Baptifm, and no other, can be a Means of our Second Birth? No, certainly, fo holy a Bishop would never, in his Inftructing of the Ignorant, have inftill'd an Uncharitable, Falfe Doarine into them, contrary to the Lawful, General Senfe and Practice of the Church, if Baptifm, by whomsoever Chriftian performn'd, was then juftly efteem'd to be Valid, by the Church's General Senfe and Practice. Is it not rather evident, that Epifcopal Baptifm alone, was, in the General Senfe and Practice of the Church in his Days, the only Means of our Regeneration? Do's it not plainly appear to have been fo, by his Inftructing fuch as were, before their Baptifin, to be taught the more neceffary Truths of Chriftianity, That this only was the Means of their Second Birth? If any Baptifm with Water, and pronouncing the Form, In the Name of the Trinity, had been Valid, as fome now fay it is, What need was there of keeping Catechumens under fo long a Difcipline and Inftruction as was then practis'd, and telling them, That their Regeneration and New Birth could not be accomplish'd " any otherwife than by the Sacra"ment of Baptifm and Chrifm, and the Miniftry of "the Bishop; and that we obtain the Benefits of "Both these by the Hands and Mouth of the "Bishop?

*

If our Modern Notions had been true, Catechumens night have been Regenerated in Baptifm by a Shorter Way; for the great Zeal they had, to procure as foon as pollible this Spiritual Benefit, would have made 'em run to any other than an Epifcopal Hand for Baptifm, if they had been taught, that fuch Baptifm was as good as the Bishops: They might have fav'd

them

themselves the Penance of Long Delays, &c. impos'd on them before they were admitted to Epifcopal Baptifm; and might have obtain'd the Long'd-for End of all their Toil and Labour, by another Baptifm in a much shorter Time, and with lefs Pains, without fubmitting to fuch appointed Preparations, and confining themtelves to the Will and Pleasure of the Bishop, for the Time of their Initiation into the Church of Chrift, upon our Modern Schemes of Liberty and Latitude. But Pacianus and his Catechumens were not fuch Free-thinkers; they were limitted in their Opinions by Divine Laws, and Ecclefiaftical Conftitutions agreeable thereto; and in Conformity to thefe, that holy Bishop taught, and his Catechumens believ'd, (as thofe of other Churches, doubtlefs did, if we may judge of their Belief by their pious Practice, of fubmitting to these appointed Delays, and waiting patiently for Baptifm by the Bishop's Authority)" That the Regeneration and New Birth of Chriftians, cannot "be accomplish'd any otherwise, than by Epifcopal Baptifm," &c. and that confequently, thofe Washings which are not Epifcopal, are Ineffective Acts, and not Means of Accomplishing our Spiritual Regeneration; and therefore Null and Void for the Purpofes of Epifcopal Baptifm: For if they are good and valid, then our Regeneration and New Birth can be accomplish'd without the Bishop's Baptifm and Chrism; which is contrary to Pacianus's Affertion, who fays, That "they cannot be accomplish'd "without 'em.

66

XXI. In the fame Century liv'd Optatus Bishop of Milevis, a City of Numidia in Africa, whofe Opinion Mr. Bingham gives us in his 44th Page, thus ; Optatus (fays our Hiftorian)

ત

H 4

"thought

66

66

"thought that Chrift gave a Commiffion to his Apostles to Baptize, but yet not fuch an one, as peremptorily annull'd and evacuated all Baptifms that were performed by any other. Our Saviour (says Optatus) gave Commandment in whofe Name "the Nations fhould be Baptized: But he did not Determine, without Exception, by whom they should "be Baptiz'd. He faid not to his Difciples, This fhall ye do, and no other fhall do it. For *, whoever Baptizes In the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, fulfils the Work of the Apoftles. Optatus concludes, "That it was the Name of the Trinity, and not the Work of the Agent, that Sanctifies the Mystery; and that the Minifters of "Baptifm were only Labourers, and not Lords of "the Action.' This Quotation Mr. Bingham pro"duces, to fhew that Optatus held, All thofe to "have Baptifm, wherelöever or by whomsoever "Baptiz'd, that had receiv'd it in Faith, and with"out Diffimulation, in that Form of Words which is "prefcrib'd by the Gofpel," &c. for Mr. Bingham adds, a little after thofe Words, thus ; "Optatus

was plainly of the fame Opinion, P. 45. Now, upon the reading of Optatus's Words, if they muft be taken in the full Senfe of his [Quifquis] Whoever; 'tis plain, That he utter'd only his own private Opinion, and not the General Senfe and Practice of the Church.

For, ft, The word [Quifquis] Whoever, is of both Genders, and includes Women as well as Men; and fo if we take Optatus's Opinion in the full Extent of his own Words, we fhall make him

* Quifquis in Nomine Patris Filii & Spiritus Sancti Baptizaverit, Apoftolorum Opus implevit. Optat, contra Parmen, lib.5. pag. 9o.

to

כ,

to have held, That Baptifm ordinarily perform'd by any Perfon, whether Woman as well as Man, if done with the Ufe of the Form, in the Name of the Trinity, was Good and Valid; for no lefs than this is included in the full Senfe of Optatus's Quifquis [Whoever, &c.] This Latitude, is contrary to what Mr. Bingham acknowledges, viz. That "As to ordinary Cafes, it is agreed on all "bands, That Women were abfolutely forbidden to "meddle with any Ecclefiaftical Office, and Baptifm "in particular. And Mr. Bingham as fairly agrees alfo, "That the Ancient Church did not allow "them to Baptize in Extraordinary Cafes of extreme Neceffity, p. 46. And, finally, he does not venture to Determine, that Baptifin by Women is good and valid, but leaves it "to the Fudgment of others, and farther Enquiry," pag. 49. And yet this Paffage of Optatus, [Whoever Baptizes, &c.] allows of the Validity of Baptifin by Women, tho' the General Senfe and Practice of the Ancient Church gives not the leaft Countenance to the fuppos'd Validity thereof by Mr. Bingham's own Confeffion.

And, 2dly, Optatus's [Quifquis] Whoever, &c. is of fo great a Latitude, That it admits of Baptifm to be Valid, tho' perform'd by Unbaptiz'd Infidels, Jews, or Pagans, whether Men, Women, or even Children, who were never Commiffion'd for this Sacred Function; a Latitude fo very unaccountable, that Mr. Bingham confeffes, 'tis "One of "the Novelties of Popery, p. 98. utterly without "Precedent in the Primitive Church," pag. 100. And therefore, upon Mr. Bingham's own Principles, Optatus's Quifquis [Whoever Baptizes, &c.] allowing of the Validity of Baptifm by Women, and allo by Unbaptiz'd Infidels, Jews, or Pagans,

whether

whether Men, Women, or Children; was no-ways confonant to the General Senfe and Practice of the Church, but a Novel, Singular Opinion of his own, and therefore of no value in our prefent Enquiry after the Ancient Church's Catholick Tradition: And fo Optatus's Opinion is a perfect Blank in this Difpute; because his [Quifquis,] his Whoever Baptizes, &c. is of fo unlimitted an Extent and Latitude, as that it can no ways be accounted for in the Church's General Senfe and Practice

XXII. But I am not fo uncharitable as to believe that Optatus was fo great a Latitudinarian as fome of our Moderns reprefent him; I don't think that He would have ftood by this fingular Notion which Mr. Bingham fathers on him, viz. That "Baptifm, wheresoever or by whomsoever adminiftred, is Good and Valid, in his pag. 45. For tho' Optatus does uncautioufly fay, Quifquis Baptizaverit, &c. Whoever Baptizes

66

fulfils the Work of the Apoftles; which if taken in an unlimitted Senfe, makes all Baptifm by Perfons never Commiflion'd, in Ordinary and Extraordinary Cafes, whether by Men, Women, or Children, Chriftians in or out of Communion with their Bishop, Excommunicates, or Apoftates, Infidels, Jews, Turks, or Pagans, &c. if done with the Form, In the Name of the Trinity, to be Good and Valid: Which Latitude of Baptifm by Women, Infidels, Jews, Turks, or Pagans, Mr. Bingham acknowledges, has no Precedent in the General Senfe and Practice of the Church, and the latter of Baptifm by Infidels, he calls "One of the Novelties "of Popery," &c. (as before obferved:) Yet, I fay, to do fomething towards taking off the Reproach, which, by fuch a Latitudinarian Notion, is caft on