ways, or at least most commonly, received Or dination from the Hands of fome CATHOLICK BISHOP or other; nay, generally the HERETICAL BISHOPS were Confecrated before they fell into Herefy, by CATHOLICK BISHOPS, or elfe afterwards by fome Trick or other, got private Confecration from them, that fo their Herefies might go down the better with the People: And the fame we find concerning Schifmaticks in those Days.

I defire that this may be more particularly taken notice of; becaufe it effectually filences all Objections brought from this Council's allowing of the Validity of Heretical and Schif matical Baptifms. For fuch their Allowance is no ways favourable to the Baptifms we are now difputing againft; for they are not only Lay, but Anti-Epifcopal Baptifmes; which were not the Subject of this Council.

The Council of Nice, Anno 325, confifting of about 300 Bifhops, Canon 19, ordains, "That the Paulianifts (who, by the way, did not Baptize in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost)" fhall be Re-baptiz'd who (6 return to the Church.

After the Council of Nice; It was a Prevailing Principle, "That thofe whom a Laick "Baptizeth are to be Re-baptized; for it was "the undoubted Principle whereby the Orthodox confuted the Luciferians, who began their "Schifm, upon occafion of the Council of "Alexandria's allowing the Ordination of the

"(

" Arian

1

"Arian Bishops: " For thus the Orthodox argued against thofe Schifmaticks: Thofe whom a Laick Baptizeth are to be Re-baptiz'd; but those whom an Arian Priest Baptizeth, are not to be Re-baptiz'd; therefore an Arian Prieft is not a Laick. And even Lucifer himfelf, the Author of that Schifm, granted the Major Propofition to be true.

In the Council of Carthage, Anno 348, before they proceeded to make Canons, the Prefident advis'd thus: "We must have such re66 gard to this time of Peace, that we neither "weaken the Obligation of the Laws, nor 66 yet prejudice the prefent Unity by TOO "MUCH SEVERITY. Then the firft Head "propos'd was about Re-baptization; he "ask'd whether that Man ought to be Re"baptiz'd who at his Baptifm made Profeffi" on of believing the Trinity. The BISHOPS "answered, God forbid; We declare that "this Re-baptization is unlawful, contrary to the Orthodox Faith, and the Ecclefiafti"cal Discipline.

66

St. Bafil Bishop of Cæfarea Anno 369, fays, "Thofe whom a Laick Baptizeth are to be Re"baptiz'd; he also maintains, that the Anci"ents were perfuaded that the Baptism of "Hereticks was ABSOLUTELY void: As "for Schifmaticks, he likes well enough St. "Cyprian and Firmilian's fubjecting them to "the SAME LAW; because being SEPA"RATE from the Church, they had not the

" Holy

<6

"holy Spirit, and fo could not give it; but " fays, he would not hinder the allowing of "the Baptisms of Schifmaticks, fince the Bifhops of Afia had thought it convenient to "admit them: But tho' the Encratites were "Schifmaticks, he declares that their Bap"tifm ought not to be approved, and that "those ought to be re-baptized to whom "they had given Baptifm, because they gave "it with Precipitation, on purpofe to HIN"DER the receiving of it from the Church; "nevertheless, if the contrary Custom [of al"lowing the Baptifm of Hereticks and Schifma"ticks] were established, he confeffes it ought "" to be followed.'

66

The Council of Laodicea, between Anno 360 and 370, Canon 8. fays, "That they must be "wholly Baptized anew who come from the "Sect of the Montanists."

The third Council of Conftantinople, Anno 383, in the last Canon, concerning the Manner of receiving Hereticks, who offer themselves to return into the Bofom of the Church, it is ordained, "That the Arians, Macedonians, "Sabbatians, Novatians, Quartodecimani, Te< tratites and Apollinarifts, fhall be received "after they have made Profeffion of their "Faith, and anathematiz'd their Errors, by "the Unction of the holy Spirit, and the "Chrism wherewith they fhall be anointed 66 on the Forehead, the Eyes, the Hands, the << Mouth, the Ears, at the pronouncing of

"thefe

"thele Words, This is the Seal of the holy Spi"rit. As to the Eunomians, the Montanists, "the Sabellians, and all the other Hereticks, "the Council ordains that they shall be re"ceived like Pagans, c. and at last they "fhall be Baptized."

The Council of Capua, Anno 390, decla"red, That it was not lawful to ufe Re-bap"tization, RE-ORDINATION, and the "TRANSLATION of BISHOPS.

The fecond Council of Carthage, Anno 390, in the 8th Canon declares, "That if a Prieft "Excommunicated by his own Bishop, un"dertake to offer up the Sacrifices in private, "and to fet up ALTAR againft ALTAR, "thereby making a SCHISM, he ought to "be anathematiz'd, because there is but "ONE CHURCH, ONE FAITH, and "ONE BAPTISM." My Remark upon this Canon is, That this ONE BAPTISM cannot be fuppos'd to be out of this ONE CHURCH, and therefore is only in it.

The third Council of Carthage, Anno 398, Canon 100, fays, "That a Woman ought 66 not to take upon her to baptize."

66

"St.Chryfoftom Archbishop of Conftantinople, "Anno 398, is exprefs for the Invalidity of Lay-Baptifm, and that it can be no more adminiftred by a Laick than the Eucharist. " (fays he) But all thefe are Things which can be adminiftred BY NO OTHER MAN "LIVING but by thofe SACRED HANDS

&

૯૯

"ALONE,

"ALONE, the Hands I fay of the PRIEST, Chryf. Lib. III. de Sacerd. C. 5.

"In the 5th Century flourish'd St. Auguftin, Bishop of Hipo in Africa; he argued vigor"oufly against the Donatifts, who began their "SCHISM by a Separation of fome African "Bishops, and proceeded fo far as to reckon "all other Churches as unclean, and indeed ' to be no Churches at all; and confequently "when any Catholick came over to their Par66 ty, they would not admit him without Re"baptization, making use of St. Cyprian and "his Collegues Authority, who taught, That σε Baptifm adminiftred by Hereticks and "Schifmaticks could not be valid, becaufe "they were out of the Church; and the "Donatifts efteemed the Catholicks to be no "better than fuch."

"6

St. Auguftin, in Oppofition to them, undertakes to prove, "That tho' his Party were 66 not the Church, yet the Donatifts were not to baptize them a fecond time; he confel fes, that Baptifm performed without naming the TRINITY, is Null; but affirms, "That if it be adminiftred in the Name of "the TRINITY, it is Valid, WHOSOEVER " he be that administers it, and ought not to "be repeated: That neither the Minister's "FAITH as to Religion, nor his Sanctity, "avail any thing to the Validity of Baptism: "That it is God, and not the Minifter, who

"

с

gives