The Synod of Aix, 1585 [1485], says, Pouring or dipping, according as the use of the Church is; and orders, that the pouring of the water be not done with the hand, but with a ladle [or vessel] kept in the font for that purpose.", This account of the Synods I have out of Bochell. Decret. Eccl. Gallicana, lib. 2, de Baptismo.

From France it spread (but not till a good while after) into Italy, Germany, Spain, &c. and last of all into England.

For Italy, I have shewn already, that dipping was the more ordinary custom at the year 1260 [1160]; by what degrees it altered, is not worth the while to search. In 200 years' time the other became the ordinary way."

-

In Germany, Walafridus Strabo, 850, Rupertus, 1120, and several others, do so speak of baptism, as that it appears by their words, that dipping of infants was the general custom, except of such as were sick, &c. and must be baptized in haste. But the Council of Cologne, under Herman, in the year 1536 [1436], speaks of it more indifferently: -"The child is thrice either dipped, or wetted with the water," &c. And fifteen years after [451] the Agenda of the Church of Mentz, published by Sebastian, do recommend and prefer the latter: "Then let the priest take the child in his left arm; and holding him over the font, let him, with his right hand, three several times, take water out of the font, and pour it on the child's head, ita quod aqua tingat caput et scapulas, so as that the water may wet its head and shoulders." Then they' give a note to this purpose: That immersion, once or thrice, or pouring of water, may be used, and have been used in the church; and that this variety does not alter the nature of baptism; and that a man shall do ill to break the custom of his church for either of them. But they add, that it is better, if the Church will allow, to use pouring on of water; for suppose, say they, the priest be old and feeble, or have the palsy in his hands, or the weather be very cold, the child very infirm,

or be too big to be dipt in the font, then it is much fitter to use affusion of the water. Then they bring the instance of the apostles baptizing 3000 at a time; the instance of St. Lawrence, that I spoke of before, and the story (which I suppose is forged) of Chlodoveus, baptized in that fashion by Remigius; and say, "That, therefore there may not be one way for the sick, and another for the healthy; one for children, and another for bigger persons, it is better that the minister of this sacrament do keep the safest way, which is, to pour water thrice, unless the custom be to the contrary.'

In England there seems to have been some priests so early as the year 816 [716], that attempted to bring in the use of baptism by affusion in the public administration; for Spelman recites a canon of a Council in that year: "Let the priests know, that when they administer holy baptism, they must not pour the water on the head of the infants; but they must always be dipt in the font ; as the Son of God gave his own example to all believers when he was thrice dipt in the waters of Jordan, so it is necessary by order to be kept and used."

Lynwood, who was Dean of the Arches in the time of Henry V. 1422 [1522], and wrote the best account of our English constitutions, having spoken of the manner of baptizing infants by dipping, adds this note:"But this is not to be accounted to be of the necessity [or essence] of baptism, but it may be given also by pouring or sprinkling; and this holds especially where the custom of the church allows it." It is to be noted, that France had, as I shewed just now, before this time, admitted of the way of pouring water; and Lynwood had lived in France under Henry V. of England, who was king there.

Some do prove from Wickliff [1280], that it was held indifferent in England in his time, whether dip

* Concil. Anglicana, tom. 1, p. 331, Synod. apud Celecyth. sub Walfredo.

+ Constit. lib. 3, cap. de Bapt.

ping or pouring were used; because he says at one place, *Nor is it material whether they be dipped, once or thrice, or water be poured on their heads; but it must be done according to the custom of the place where one dwells." But we ought to take the whole context as it lies in his book. He had been speaking of the necessity of baptism to salvation, from that text, John iii. 5, and then adds, "Et ordinavit ecclesia quod quælibet persona fidelis in necessitatis articulo poterit baptizari [I. baptizare] . . . . . . Nec refert," &c. And the Church has ordained, that, in a case of necessity, any person that is fidele [or that is himself baptizedj may give baptism, &c. . 'Nor is it material whether they be dipped,' &c. Such words do not suppose any other way than dipping used ordinarily; but only in a juncture of necessity, or

fear of the infant's death.

The offices or liturgies for public baptism in the Church of England, did all along, so far as I can learn, enjoin dipping, without any mention of pouring or sprinkling. The Manuale ad usum Sarum, printed in 1530 [1430], the twenty-first of Henry VIII. orders thus for public baptisms:-" Then let the priest take the child, and, having asked the name, baptize him, by dipping him in the water thrice," &c. And John Frith, writing in the year 1533 [1433], a Treatise of Baptism, calls the outward part of it the "plunging down in the water, and lifting up again;" which he often mentions, without ever mentioning pouring or sprinkling.

In the Common Prayer Book, printed in 1549 [1449], the second of King Edward VI. the order stands thus: "Shall dip it in the water thrice, &c. so it be discreetly and warily done, saying, N. I baptize thee," &c. But this order adds, "And if the child be weak, it shall suffice to pour water upon it, saying the foresaid words." Afterward, the books do leave out the word thrice, and do say, "Shall dip it

* Trialog. lib. 4, c. 11.

in the water, so it he discreetly," &c. Which alteration, I suppose, was made in the sixth of Edward VI. [1452], for then there was a new edition of the book, with some light alterations; and from thence it stood unaltered, as to this matter, to the fourteenth of Charles II. [1562].

From this time of King Edward, Mr. Walker * (who has taken the most pains in tracing this matter) derives the beginning of the alteration of the general custom; he says, that" dipping was at this time the more usual, but sprinkling was sometimes used; which, within the time of half a century (meaning from 1550 [1450] to 1600) prevailed to be the more general (as it is now almost the only) way of baptizing."

But it is not probable that, in so short a reign as that of King Edward, who died in 1553 [1453], the custom could receive any great alteration; customs in which the whole body of the people is concerned alter but slowly, when they do alter.

And in Queen Mary's time, the custom of dipping seems to have continued; for Watson, the popish Bishop of Lincoln, did, on the year 1558 [1458], which was the last of Queen Mary, publish a volume of Sermons about the sacraments; in the fourth of which he says, "Though the ancient tradition of the Church has been, from the beginning, to dip the child three times, &c. yet that is not of such necessity; but that, if it be but once dipped in the water, it is sufficient. Yea, and in time of great peril and necessity, if the water be but poured on the head, it will suffice." A sign, that pouring was not, in queen Mary's time, used but in case of necessity.

But there are apparent reasons why that custom should alter during Queen Elizabeth's reign.

The latitude given in the Liturgy, which could have but little effect in the short time of King Edward's reign, might, during the long reign of this queen, produce an alteration proportionably greater;-it being

* Doctrine of Baptisms, c. 10, p. 147.

allowed to weak children (though strong enough to be brought to church) to be baptized by affusion ;many fond ladies and gentlewomen first; and then, by degrees, the common people would obtain the favour of the priest to have their children pass for weak children, too tender to endure dipping in the water; especially (as Mr. Walker observes)" if some instance really were, or were but fancied or framed, of some child's taking hurt by it."

*

And another thing that had a greater influence than this, was, That many of our English divines and other people had, during Queen Mary's bloody reign, fled into Germany, Switzerland, &c. and coming back in Queen Elizabeth's time, they brought with them a great love to the customs of those Protestant churches wherein they had sojourned; — and especially the authority of Calvin, and the rules which he had established at Geneva, had a mighty influence on a great number of our people about that time. Now Calvin had not only given his dictate in his Institutions, that "the difference is of no moment, whether he that is baptized be dipt all over; and if so, whether thrice or once, or whether he be only wetted with the water poured on him." But he had also drawn up, for the use of his church at Geneva [1436] (and afterwards published [1445] to the world) a † Form of administering the Sacraments; where, when he comes to order the act of baptizing, he words it thus: "Then the minister of baptism pours water on the infants, saying, I baptize thee," &c. There had been, as I said, some Synods in some dioceses of France, that had spoken of affusion without mentioning immersion at all, that being the common practice; but for an office or liturgy of any church, this is, I believe, the first in the world that prescribes affusion absolutely. Then Musculus had determined, "As for dipping of the infant,

* Lib. 4, cap. 15, § 19.

+ Tractat. Theolog. Catechismus, p. 57, ed. Bezæ, 1576. Loci Commun, de Baptismo, p. 481.