“PARATED from the Church." By which, and the other Monuments of that Age, it is evident, they held, that even Bishops, and all other lawful Ministers, lost their VERY AUTHORITY to do any thing more in the Ministerial Functions, when they either Schifmatically or Heretically separated themselves from the Church of Christ. Hence doubtless it came to pass that St. Cyprian and his Collegues esteemed all their Ministerial Acts, done while in Schism or Heresy, to be Null and Void, and consequently that the supposed Sacraments administred by them, and those whom they ordained, were no true Christian Sacraments, and therefore Invalid and Ineffectual. This, I say, appears to me to be the true Foundation of that great Dispute concerning the Validity of Heretical and Schisma tical Baptifms, and which "St. Cyprian mana"ged with so much Christian Humility and "Charity, that tho' Stephen Bishop of Rome " was so far from agreeing to the Reasons of "the Africans (whether because he imagin'd " they had a Design to condemn the Roman "Church, or because he thought this Que- "stion was of too great consequence) that " he was enrag'd against St. Cyprian and his "Collegues, and used their Deputies ill; nay, " he prohibited all Christians belonging to "his Church to receive or lodge them, de. " priving them not only of Ecclefiaftical "Communion, but also refusing them the "common common Civilities of Hospitality; yet he "[i. e. St. Cyprian] could not think of break"ing Peace with them, of giving up Com"munion with them, of Abstaining or Ex"communicating them; notwithstanding Ste" phen had taken upon him to excommunicate "those who oppos'd the Ratification of Here"tical and Schifmatical Baptifms. Upon the " whole, the Persecution of the Church by "Valerian, Anno 257. put an end to this "Controversy. St. Cyprian NEVER alter'd "his Opinion; the Greek Churches were, for " a long time after him, divided upon this "Question: The Council of Arles first de"cided it in the West; St. Austin followed its "Decifion; the Western Church has embrac'd " this Opinion; viz. That Baptifm by Here"ticks, in the Name of the Trinity, is Valid: "And tho' the Eastern Churches have not a"greed with her absolutely in this Point, yet " they always made a Distinction between " Hereticks, and differently receiv'd them. In the Canons that are call'd Apoftolical, we have these Remarkable Canons, according to the Division of Cotelerius. Canon 38. "We order, that a Bishop, "Prieft or Deacon, who has receiv'd Bap“ tism, &c. from an Heretick, be depo"fed; or, as the Learned Author of the Clergy-man's Vade-Mecum obferves, "The Bi"shop, Priest or Deacon, who allows the Bap"tism, &c. of Hereticks. Canon Canon 39. "If a Bishop or Priest do again "Baptize one who HAS REALLY receiv'd "Baptifm before; or if he do not Baptize one " that has been polluted by Wicked Men ; (i. e. Baptized by Hereticks, See Canon 38.) "Let him be depos'd, as one that makes NO "DISTINCTION betwixt PRIESTS and "PRETENDERS. "In the 4th Century, St. Athanafius re"jects the Baptifm of Hereticks. Pacianus " says, That Baptifm purifies from Sins, and "Unction brings down the Holy Spirit; and " both the One and the Other are apply'd by the "Hand and the Mouth of the Bishop. Optatus, "That the Donatifts (who, by the way, were "Schifmaticks) " committed a great Crime " in Reiterating Baptifm: (Where 'tis to be noted, That they Re-baptized the very Catholicks who came over to them.) "That 'tis not he "who gives this Sacrament of Baptifm, that "confers the Graces; but the Faith of him " that receives it, and the Virtue of the Tri"nity. We ask (fays he) if it be Lawful to " repeat Baptifm given in the Name of the "Trinity? Ye maintain that it is Lawful; "We fay that it is forbidden: The People " are in Suspence. Let us therefore fearch after "the Will of our Father, in the Gafpel; which " will inform us, That he who hath been " once washed, needs not to be washed a "gain; Wherefore (adds he) We do not "Re-baptize those who have been Baptized, "when " when they return again to us. He proves against the Donatifts, "That the Holiness "of the Minister does not contribute to the "Validity of the Sacrament of Baptifm; and " that, because the Effect of the Sacrament " is owing to God only; and in short, be"cause the Sacraments are Holy, and do "Sanctify by themselves. Yet he seems to think, "That we ought to Re-baptize those " who were Baptized by Hereticks; but does not make the fame Determination concerning those who were Baptized by Schifmaticks. "The Council of Eliberis, Anno 305, Ca" non 38, declares, That a Christian who is "neither Penitent, (i. e. not under Penance, nor a Bigamist, may Baptize in a "Case of NECESSITY, those who are on a "Journey, being at a great distance from a "Church, upon Condition that he present "him to the Bishop, if he survive, to be “PERFECTED by Imposition of Hands. Here it ought to be observ'd, that this Ancient Council was not a General one; and fo its Canon could not thus authorize all LayChriftians; it extended no farther than to the Subjects of those Bishops there afsembled. And therefore our Lay-Baptizers cannot act by virtue of this Canon; especially confidering further, that this Canon was not made as Declarative of any Proper Inherent Right or Authority that Lay-Chriftians, AS SUCH, had to to Baptize: It only appointed Some to do this, who had not Authority to do it before of themselves. Besides, it is plainly restrain'd to such as were in Communion with, and Subjection to their Bishops; they were not to be under PENANCE, &c. And therefore if this had been a General Council, as it certainly was not, our Lay-Baptizers who act in Oppofition to Episcopacy, could have receiv'd no Authority from this Canon. "The Council of Arles, call'd by the Em"peror Anno 314, confifting of Thirty three "Western Bishops, Canon 8. determines the " famous QUESTION about the Re bapti"zation of Hereticks, and ordains concerning " the Africans, who had ALWAYS Re-bap"tiz'd them, That if any one leave a Heresy, " and return to the Church, he shall be ask'd " concerning the Creed; and if it be known " that he was Baptiz'd in the Name of the Fa"ther, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Im"position of Hands only, shall be given him, " that he may receive the Holy Spirit: But if " he does not acknowledge the Trinity," I fuppose 'tis meant, if while a Heretick he did not acknowledge the Trinity, or if the Heretick who Baptiz'd him did not acknowledge the Trinity, (the latter is the most likely) " he " shall be Re-baptiz'd. By the way, in this Canon there is not one Word about LAY-BAPTISM: And as for the Hereticks who then Baptiz'd, they had always, |