that, by reason of this uncertain state of remembrance, 'their souls are brought into danger; for that, under pretence of caution, the grace is denied them, Quæ ideo non impenditur quia putatur impensa; being, therefore, not given them, because it is supposed that they ⚫ have had it already.

When, therefore, the scrupulousness of some bre'thren did, not without cause; make a doubt of administering to such persons the sacrament of our Lord's mystery, we did, as I said, at a synodical meeting, 'take this sort of case into our consideration, and set ' ourselves to discuss the point with a careful diligence, according to the opinion of every one, that, by the judgment of many considering the matter together, we might more certainly fix on the truth; and that ' which, by God's guidance, came into my mind, the numerous consent of the brethren confirmed.

'We ought then, above all things, to beware that ' while we shew a sort of caution, we do not fall into a 'failure of regenerating their souls; for who would be 'so addicted to his suspicions, as to define a thing to be true which, without any full proof, he, by an uncertain ' opinion, surmises to be so?therefore, when as nei'ther he that desires the regeneration does remember 'that he was ever baptized, nor any one else can testify of his consecration [or sanctification] there is no reason to think there is any sin in doing this, when neither he that is consecrated, nor he that consecrates him, ' acts any thing against his knowledge [or conscience]. 'I know indeed that it is an inexcusable fault, when, according to the fashion of the heretics, which is con. 'demned by the holy fathers, any one is compelled to reiterate his baptism, which is once for all given to 'those that are to be regenerated: the apostolic doc'trine being against such a practice, and teaching us that there is but one Godhead in the Trinity, one confession in the faith, and one sacrament of baptism; 'but there is nothing like that to be feared in this case; for that cannot be brought within compass of the crime

' of reiteration, of which we are not sure that it has been 'done once.

<

And, therefore, when any such case comes before you, first examine the matter narrowly, and continue your search for a great while (unless the party seems to be nigh his end) whether there be no body at all to be found that can help out the ignorance of such a person that knows not his own condition; and if it appear that he that wants the sacrament is kept off only by a vain surmise, let him come without fear to the obtaining of the grace of which he does not find any evi'dence that he has had it before; and let us not be 'afraid to open the gate of Salvation to him who cannot be proved as yet to have entered into it.

but

But if it can be proved that any such person has 'been baptized, tho' by the heretics, let the sacrament ' of regeneration be by no means reiterated on him; 'let that only which was wanting there, be now added, 'that he have the imposition of hands by the bishop, for the obtaining the grace of the Holy Spirit.

These things, dear brother, I was willing should come to the knowledge of you all, lest, while you allow too much to your scruples, the mercy of God be denied " to those that desire to be saved.

Dated the ninth before the kalends of November, in the consulship of Marcian, the emperor.'

The same question being put to him by Rusticus, Bishop of Narbon, he resolves it to the same effect; and so does Gregory the Great, in the next age [490]†; and so does the council in Trullo, can.84, anno 691 [491].

The heretics that Leo talks of, as reiterating baptism, were either the Marcionites, who gave to some people a second or third baptism, though they owned the first to have been true baptism, —or else the Donatists, who thinking no baptism to be true that was not given by such holy and pure men as themselves, gave a

* Epist. 52, cap. 16.

+ Lib. 12, ep. 31.

new baptism to all that came from any other party to theirs.

The Church of England is very careful, as not to let any one go without baptism, so also not to baptize again those that have been baptized already; and, therefore, when any person is brought to baptism, concerning whom they cannot be sure whether he is already baptized or not, they order him to be baptized with these conditional words preceding the form of baptism, If thou art not already baptized, N. I baptize thee, in the name, &c.

It had been usual to do so for many hundred years before [1059]; but Luther found great fault with this custom; and Vossius dislikes it, but gives no other reason against it than that there is no example of such conditional baptism in Scripture, nor in the records of the first ages; which, in a case that so seldom happens, is no wonder; for in the Church of England, where it is appointed in a certain case, yet, that case being rare, very few have ever had occasion to practise it; but it is certain that all that do baptize in such a case, do understand that condition, though they do not express it; for they do it on a supposal that the party is not baptized already.

The next Council of Carthage that I know of that had any occasion to mention infant baptism, was that anno 411 [311], or the beginning of 412, where Celestius was challenged for denying original sin, and thought to escape the brand of heresy by declaring, that whatever he thought of sin in infants, yet he owned their baptism, This council is not in the volumes; but St. Austin has preserved some of the acts of it, by quoting them in his writings; and I had occasion to recite out of him what is material to this purpose in chapter 5.

The next to that was that anno 416 [316]: a synodical letter whereof I shall recite hereafter, in ch. 19.

* Vide Vossium de Baptismo, Disp. 15, art. 11, et lib. 6, capit. Car. Magni,

CHAPTER XVII.

OUT OF THE DECRETAL EPISTLES OF SIRICIUS AND INNOCENTIUS, BISHOPS OF ROME,

[Year after the Apostles 284.]

THERE never was a greater cheat and abuse put upon the church and the learned world, than that piece of forgery of the most ancient Decretal Epistles. The Papists themselves are now ashamed to hear them mentioned, except some few, whose want of all shame makes amends for their want of learning,

The history of them, in short, is this: The ancient bishops of Rome were frequently consulted by the country bishops and the bishops of the neighbouring churches, in cases of conscience, faith, or discipline. They wrote letters in answer to such questions as were put to them. Toward the latter end of the fourth century there began a custom of registering and preserving these letters in the archives of that church. This was in the following times found to be of great use; for these letters served the succeeding bishops for precedents, when their judg ment was desired in the like cases.

After many ages, it came into the mind of some of that church, to think how great pity it was that that custom of registering those letters had not began sooner for there were none extant in the registers that were earlier than about the time I mentioned.

The way that they took to make up that deficiency was such, as that the mention thereof must make a Christian blush, whenever credit of his religion is attacked by a heathen. Some among them, that had no regard to true or false, put in practice that foul artifice that is used by faithless and fabulous historians, who, when they would set forth the antiquities of their nation, and find no records nor race of kings so ancient as they could wish, do make, out of their own brain, histories of times, names of kings, accounts of wars and successions,

as far back as they please to feign; of which we see instances in the fabulous histories of the Romans, Britons, Scots, Ægyptians, Chinese, &c. This is scandalous, and hateful enough in secular histories; but in the concerns of religion, is the highest pitch of impiety and mischief.

Finding that their bishops of the first ages had none of these decretal epistles upon record, as many of the following ones had, they made some for them, and put them out under their names; and as there was a very corrupt state of that church at the time when these acts were forged, the authors of them failed not to make the ancient Popes say all that they had a mind they should have said; so that you shall there frequently find some bishop of Rome, of the primitive times, who was in reality an humble, poor, and persecuted bishop, strutting and vapouring about the supremacy of his see, and enacting many things that were really never heard in his time.

When any thing is discovered and made plain, we are apt to wonder that it was not discovered sooner. It was a time of great ignorance and barbarity when these forged epistles were put upon the world; and in the beginning of the Reformation, the Protestants were much puzzled with them. They saw plain enough that the corrupt doctrines and practices then received had no foundation in the Scripture, nor in the writings of the ancient Christians for several ages; but they knew not what to say to these epistles, many of which were dated in and nigh the times of the apostles, and yet had in them rank Popery. Those first bishops of all, Clement, Anaclet, Evarest, Alexander, Xystus, and the holy martyr Telesphorus, &c. did there all speak the language of Gregory the Seventh.

It is true that here and there one of the best learned and most free men among the Papists themselves, had before that time declared their objections against some of these epistles; for example, Cardinal Cusanus, after he had shewn by plain proofs that the Charter of Con