66 a ftanding Law of the Church, that Deacons fhould act in Subordination to Bishops and Prefbyters, and give way to them in Sacred Miniftrations. Fourthly, His telling us of the Power of Baptizing in want of the Clergy [Quod & Laicis fidelibus plerumque permittitur, &c.] That "it is often [or fometimes] "permitted [allow'd or granted] to LayChriftians to Baptize, left any one should be call'd out of the World without the Remedy or Means of "Salvation;" is ftill confining the Power of Baptizing to a fuppos'd Commiffion to be first receiv'd, and abundantly fhews, that Lay-Chriftians have not that Power in themfelves as Chriftians, but it muft be acquir'd by an explicit Permiffion or Grant; fo that, if fuch a Commiffion could be given to LayChriftians, yet even then, this Paffage would not favour the Washings perform'd by our Laicks, whe never had any Commifhon at all. And further, here is no Evidence that Lay-men were in the general Senfe and Practice of the Church impower'd to Baptize in Abfence of the Clergy. Ifidore appeals to no general Council, or uninterrupted ancient Catholick Tradition or Practice: And being a Spanish Bishop, 'tis just and reasonable to believe, that he only has an eye to the Practice of the Spanish Church, in Confequence of their Council of Eliberis, which was no general Council, and determin'd nothing relating to Washings by Perfons who never were commiffion'd to Baptize. As for fome Mens particular Opinions about the Minifter of Baptifm, 'tis no wonder that [efpecially after St. Auguffin's Days] they ran fuch unaccountable Lengths, as at laft to reckon, that 'twas no matter who perform'd it, fo that 'twas done with Water and Invocation of the Holy Trinity; for they follow'd the Opinion of that Father, That Water, M 4 and * and the Name of the Trinity, were abfolutely necessary to the Salvation of all Men. St. Auguftin did not allow, that even Infants could be fav'd without Water; and hence he was for having Water apply'd by any one, with the Ufe of the Form, in the Name of the Trinity, as we have feen before; and to fuch a Latitude did Men run at laft, that they in exprefs Terms affirm'd Baptifin to be valid, tho' perform'd by a Pagan. Thus Gratian reckons Ifidore to have affirm'd; which if true, fhews how valuable his Authority is in the Cafe of Baptism perform'd by fuppofedly authoriz'd Lay-Chriftians. So the fame Gratian quotes at Pope of Rome afferting the Validity of Baptifm by a Pagan; and in another Place, that it is all one whether perform'd by a Chriftian or Pagan, fo that it was done in the Name of the Trinity: Nay, if it was done only in the Name of Chrift, by a Pagan, the Perfons fo baptiz'd ought not to receive any other Baptifin, So extravagant have Men been in their Notions of the meer Imitation of an opus operatum in this matter. But Mr. Bingham confeffes this to be a Popish Novelty, and fo indeed he ought in reafon to acknowledge, that Baptifm by Perfons never commif *Ifidor Non iteratur Baptifma quod à Pagano Miniftratur. Apud Gratian de Confecrat. Dift. 4. cap. xxii. pag. 1983. Edit. Taur. 1620. Romanus Pontifex, non hominem judicat qui Baptizat: fed fpiritum Dei fubminiftrare gratiam Baptifmi licet laganus fit qui Bap izst. Ibid. cap. xxiii. A quodam Judeo ne'citis utrum Chriftiano an Pagano, multos in patria veftra baptizatos afferitis, & quid de iis fit agendum confulitis. Hi profectò fi in Nomine Sanctæ Trinitatis, vel tantùm in Chrifti Nomine, ficut in actibus Apoftolorum legimus, baptizari funt (unum quippè idemque eft, ut fanctus exponit Ambrofius Lib.i. de Spiritu Sancto, cap. 3.] conftat cos non effe denuò baptizandos. Ibid cap. xxiv. fion'd . fion'd at all to Baptize, is as much a Novelty of corrupt Popery, fince the ancient Catholick Church never determin'd any thing in favour of these, any more than she did in favour of Pagan Baptifm; and a Pagan has as much Power and Authority to Baptize, as our Laicks who never were commiffion'd any more than he. XXXI. Our Reverend Hiftorian is fo fenfible, that what he has produc'd from the Antients is nothing to the Purpose of pretended Baptifms by Perfons never commiffion'd; that he fums up his whole Evidence in a very remarkable Manner, in thefe Words, Fag. 38. "Thus we have feen [fays be] for fix bun"dred Years, the general Senie and Practice of the antient Church, grounded, as they fuppofe, upon the Commillion given to the Apoftles, whereby Bishops, as the Apoftles Succeffors, are qualified firft to give Baptifm themselves, and then to grant a Commillion to others to Baptize, and that either to Presbyters or Deacons, or to Presbyters alone in o2dinary Cales, and in Cafes extraordinary and of extreme Neceffity to Deacons "and Lay-men." Thus Mr. Bingham acknowledges, that all his Evidences confpire in this, that the general Senfe and Practice of the ancient Church was, that Baptifm, whether in ordinary or extraordinary Cafes, was adminiftred by the Bishop, or else by fuch as had [or at least were fuppos'd to have had] an Epifcopal Commiffion to Baptize; from whence it neceffarily follows, that even this fuppos'd general Senfe and Practice of the Church, as ftated by Mr. Bingham, does not give Countenance to the Validity of pretended Baptifms perform'd adinarily as well as extrao2dinarily, by Perfons who never had an Epifcopal Commiffion, and who yet prefume prefume to attempt to Baptize, in Oppofition to the Divine Right of Epifcopacy: So far from this was the fuppofed General Senfe and Practice of the Ancient Church, that even in Cafes of Extreme Neceffity, we fee Baptifm was fuppos'd to be perform'd, by none but fuch as were reckon'd to be Impower'd by the Bishop: Infomuch, that our Laicks pretended Baptifms, tho' done in Extremity, where none of the Clergy can be had, can claim nothing of Benefit from the General Senfe and Practice of the Ancient Church for the firft 600 Years of Christianity, by Mr. Bingham's own Account of the Matter, whereby he makes Baptifm, even in Cafes of Extreme Neceffity, to be founded upon a Commiffion given by Bishops to Deacons and Lay-men to Baptize. § XXXII. But not to leave this Matter here I affirm, That all Mr. Bingham's Evidence fumm'd up together, do's not amount to fo much as a Proof, That the Ancient Catholick Church's Senfe and Practice for the first 600 Years, was, to Commiffion or Authorize Lay-men to Baptize, in want of the Clergy. For, The firft 300 Years have not fo much as One Evidence of any One Lay-man fo Authorized. Tertullian's Opinion was fingular, That LayChriftians, as fuch, had that Power in themselves: He did not fuppofe any fuch Authority given to them by the Bishops; nay, he fuppos'd them alfo to have Power to minifter the other Sacrament of the Eucharift, in abfence of the Clergy. But St. Cyprian, Firmilian, and their Colleagues, are plain Evidences against this his fingular Notion of Lay-mens Power to Baptize, and the Founda tion upon which he grounds their pretended Power, has been already overthrown. The Council of Eliberis, which made a Canon to Authorize fome particular fort of their own Laymen, who were in Communion with their Bishop, to Baptize a Catechumen in Danger of Death, when the Clergy could not do it, has been largely prov❜d to be a Contradiction to Tertullian's Notion; and that it was but a Provincial Council of Spanish Bishops, not a General Council, and there fore not Declaratory of the General Senfe and PraEtice of the Ancient Catholick Church; fince, in the whole space of the firft 600 Years, this Council ftands fingular by it felf; no other Council whatfoever, whether General or Provincial, during that Period, made any fuch Canon. The Story of the Boy Athanafius's Baptizing his Play-fellows in Sport, and of Alexander's determining, that the Children fhould have no other Baptifm; befides its being Fabulous, is no Inftance of a Laicks Baptizing by the Bishop's Commiffion and Authority: If it had been true, it would not have been an Inftance of the General Senfe and PraEtice of the Ancient Catholick Church; being, upon that Suppofition, but the Private Act of one fingle Bishop only: Nay farther, the fuppofing the whole Story to be true, and the Determination thereupon to be juft and good, would naturally tend to the Expofing of all Divine Inftitutions, to be Ridicul'd and Defpis'd, as infignificant and Childish things, and fo make way for the Extirpation of all Reveal'd Religion out of the World. St. Jerom's Saying, Of the Lawfulness of Laicks Baptizing in Cafe of Neceffity, has been prov'd to be built on Tertullian's falfe Foundation; to be no Inftance of the General Senfe and Practice of the Ancient |