About this time comes in the Fable of the Boy Athanafius baptizing his Play-fellows in Sport, and the pretended Determination of Bishop Alexander, that the Baptism was Valid, refuted at large,

IV. Century.

P.57.

Nineteen Bishops in the Spanish Council of Eli

beris, made a Canon,

which [according to

Mr. Bingham

vefted

Some of their own Laymen, but not all, with Authority to baptize in want of the Clergy; but this with particular Limitations and Reftrictions, p.58. So this Council is of no Benefit for unautho riz'd Baptifms, but the direct contrary. p.59. The Author of the Life of Athanafius in Photius, fuppofes that the Boy Athanafius baptiz'd his Play-fellows by a Divine Infina,

p. 72.

And

Optatus, Bifhop of Milevis, [if his Words are taken in their full Latitude] allows of Baptifm not only by Chrifian Lay-men, but alfo by Women, nay by unbaptiz'd Infidels, Jews, or Pagans, even in ordinary Cafes, p. 103.

p. 97.

Lay-men did not then baptize, Pacian, Bishop of Barcelona, teaches, that the New Birth cannot be effected but by Epifcopal Baptifm, p.99. Optatus's Words candidly interpreted, speak only of Baptifm adminifter'd by the then ordinary Minifters of Baptifm, whether Catholicks or Schifmaticks; and they were Epifcopally Commiffion'd,

p. 106.

St.

St. Jerom reckons it frequently Lawful for Lay-men to baptize but this when Neceffity compels, p. 120. He refers to no Law of God, or the Catholick Church for this, p. 121. His falfe Maxim whereon he founds this Power of Lay-men, p. 122. This Affertion of his, inconfiftent with his Dialogue against the Luciferians, P.131.

St. Chryfoftom, Arch-Bifhop of Conftantinople, do's the fame, p. 114. The Conftitutions call'd Apoftolical do fo like

p. 117.

wife, St. Jerom, derives the Power of Presbyters and Deacons to baptize, from the Dginal Power of the Bishop, p. 120. If St. Ferom on the other fide, means that fome Bishops authoriz'd Laymen to baptize in Cafe of Neceffity, then 'tis plain his Evidence is only for what he thought were Epifcopally Authoriz'dTM Bap

He

tifms,

p. 122. ulls Lay-Baptifm in his Dialogue againft the Luciferians, in which he confutes their Affertion, that Arian Priefts were Laicks, by this Principle, "That if they were "Laicks, the Bap"tifms administer'd by them ought to be rejected, p. 123,&c. He

He fays, That without Priests there is no Church; therefore fay 1,no Baptism, p.139. St. Auguftin, as quoted by Gratian, fpeaking of Lay-mens baptizing in Cafe of Ñeceflity, founds it upon Authority 02 Commiffion descended by Bishops from the Apostles, p.144. Another Paffage of his as quoted by Gratian, which Nulls Baptifms by our Laicks, p. 146. St. Auguftin befitates about the Validity of ufurped Lay-Baptifm in time of fuppofed Neceffity, He is not pofitive, but fuch a Ufurpation is a Sin.

p. 151.

p. 153. Therefore 'twas not the

general Senfe and Pratice of the Church, p. 153, 154. He acknowledges that the Validity of LayBaptifm in ordinary Cafes tho' his own Opinion] was not the Determination of any generalCouncil,conJequently

V. Century.

VI. Century. Gratian makes Ifidore fay, That Baptifin by a Pagan is Valid.

p. 155.

fequently 'twas not the general Sense of the ancient Catholick Church, He calls fuch Baptifms unlawful Ufurpations; and fays, That the unlawful Ufurpation must be corrected by a fincere and affectionate Repentance, elfe the Baptifm will remain to the Punithment of the Giver and Receiver, p.154. This is in effect a Nulling of fuch Baptisms,

p. 157.

V. Century.

Gelafius, Bishop of Rome, reftrains the Office of Baptizing in ordinary and extraordinary Cafes to Perfons authoriz'd by Bishops, p. 162, 164.

VI. Century.

Ifidore, Bishop of Sevil, in Spain, do's the like, p. 165.

Mr. Bingham makes the Sum of his whole Evidence to be, that for the firft Six hundred Years of Christianity,

the