6. And this also,—looking at it from the opposite side of this discussion,—those disciples of our Lord themselves attained, upon whom, being previously baptized, the Holy Spirit at length came down on the day of Pentecost, descending from heaven indeed by the will of God, not of His own accord, but effused for this very office, and moreover upon each one of them.  Although these were already righteous, and, as we have said, had been baptized by the Lord’s baptism even as the apostles themselves, who nevertheless are found on the night on which He was apprehended to have all deserted Him. And even Peter himself, who boasted that he would persevere in his faith, and most obstinately resisted the prediction of the Lord Himself, yet at last denied Him, that by this means it might be shown to us, that whatever sins they had contracted in the meantime and in any manner, these same sins, by the faith in them subsequently attested as sincere, were without doubt put away by the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Nor, as I think, was it for any other reason that the apostles had charged those whom they addressed in the Holy Spirit, that they should be baptized in the name of Christ Jesus, except that the power of the name of Jesus invoked upon any man by baptism might afford to him who should be baptized no slight advantage for the attainment of salvation, as Peter relates in the Acts of the Apostles, saying: “For there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.”18    Acts iv. 12. As also the Apostle Paul unfolds, showing that God hath exalted our Lord Jesus, and “given Him a name, that it may be above every name, that in the name of Jesus all should bow the knee, of things heavenly and earthly, and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus is Lord in the glory of God the Father.” And he on whom, when he should be baptized, invocation should be made in the name of Jesus, although he might obtain baptism under some error, still would not be hindered from knowing the truth at some time or another, and correcting his error, and coming to the Church and to the bishop, and sincerely confessing our Jesus before men; so that then, when hands were laid upon him by the bishop, he might also receive the Holy Spirit, and he would not lose that former invocation of the name of Jesus. Which none of us may disallow, although this invocation, if it be standing bare and by itself, could not suffice for affording salvation, lest on this principle we should believe that even Gentiles and heretics, who abuse the name of Jesus, could attain unto salvation without the true and entire thing. Yet it is extremely useful to believe that this invocation of the name of Jesus, together with the correction of error and the acknowledgment of the belief of the truth, and with the putting away of all stain of past conversation, if rightly performed with the mystery of God among men of this kind, obtains a place which it would not have had, and finally, in the true faith and for the maintenance of the integrity of the sign, is no hindrance, when its supplement which had been wanting is added; and that it is consistent with good reason, with the authority of so many years, and so many churches and apostles and bishops; even as it is the very greatest disadvantage and damage to our most holy mother Church, now for the first time suddenly and without reason to rebel against former decisions after so long a series of so many ages. For not for any other reason Peter—who had already been baptized and had been asked what he thought of the Lord by the Lord Himself, and the truth of the revelation of the Father in heaven being bestowed on him had confessed that Christ was not only our Lord, but was the Son of the living God—was shown subsequently to have withstood the same Christ when He made announcement of His passion, and therefore was set forth as being called Satan. For no other reason except because it would come to pass that some, although varying in their own judgment, and somewhat halting in faith and doctrine, although they were baptized in the name of Jesus, yet, if they had been able to rescind their error in some interval of time, were not on that account cut off from salvation; but at any time that they had come to the right mind, obtained by repentance a sound hope of salvation, especially when they received the Holy Spirit, to be baptized by Whom is the duty of every man, they would have intended some such thing. Even as we do not apprehend that Peter in the Gospel suffered this alone, but all the disciples, to whom, though already baptized, the Lord afterwards says, that “all ye shall be offended in me,”19    Mark xiv. 27. all of whom, as we observe, having amended their faith, were baptized after the Lord’s resurrection with the Holy Spirit. So that not without reason we also in the present day may believe that men, amended from their former error, may be baptized in the Holy Spirit, who, although they were baptized with water in the name of the Lord, might have had a faith somewhat imperfect. Because it is of great importance whether a man is not baptized at all in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, or indeed whether in some respect he halts when he is baptized with the baptism of water, which is of less account provided that afterwards a sincere faith in the truth is evident in the baptism of the Spirit, which undoubtedly is of greater account.

VI. Quod etiam e contrario latere tractatus hujus sunt consecuti ipsi illi discipuli Domini nostri, super quos jampridem baptizatos postremo die Pentecostes 1189D supervenit Spiritus sanctus, voluntate Dei quidem, non sua sponte coelo lapsus, sed ad hoc ipsum munus effusum sedet super unumquemque eorum, cum justi jampridem, ut diximus, Baptismate Domini 1190A fuissent baptizati, sicut et ipsi Apostoli, qui tamen omnes Dominum nocte qua apprehensus est deseseruisse inveniuntur: et ille ipse qui gloriatus est perseveraturum se in sua fide Petrus et adversus ipsius Domini praedictum obstinatissime repugnavit, postremo tamen tum ipsum negavit; ut hac ratione ostenderetur nobis quae medio tempore quoquo modo contraxerant delicta, eadem haec in eis fide postmodum sincera per Baptisma Spiritus sancti non dubie esse dimissa. Nec ulla, ut puto, alia ex causa Apostoli his quos in Spiritu sancto alloquebantur, praeceperant ut in nomine Christi Jesu baptizarentur, nisi quia virtus nominis Jesu super quemcumque hominum Baptismate invocata, ad salutem assequendam non modicam praerogativam ei qui baptizaretur praestare posset, sicuti Petrus in 1190B Actis Apostolorum enarrat dicens: Nec enim aliud est nomen sub coelo quod datum est hominibus, in quo oportet salvos fieri nos (Act. IV, 12). Sicut etiam apostolus Paulus aperit ostendens quia Deus exaltavit Jesum Dominum nostrum, et donavit illi nomen ad hoc ut sit super omne nomen; ut in nomine Jesu omnes genua curvent coelestium et terrestrium et infernorum, et omnis lingua confiteatur quia Dominus est Jesus in gloria Patris (Philip. II, 9-11). Et ille in quo cum baptizaretur, invocatum esset in nomine Jesu, licet in aliquo errore consequeretur, tamen quandoque non prohiberetur rectum sapere, et errorem suum corrigere, et ad Ecclesiam et ad episcopum venire, et sinceriter confiteri Jesum nostrum coram hominibus; ut tunc cum ab episcopo ei manus 1190C imponeretur, etiam Spiritum sanctum acciperet, nec invocationem illam pristinam nominis Jesu amitteret, quam nemini nostrum licet damnare, quum haec nuda et singularis si in errore sit constituta, non posset ad salutem praestandam sufficere: ne hac ratione etiam Ethnicos et haereticos abutentes nomen Jesu, credamus ad salutem sine vera re atque integra posse pervenire. Quam tamen invocationem nominis Jesu correctione erroris et agnitione fidei veritatis, et abscisa omni labe praeteritae conversationis, mysterio Dei circa ejusmodi homines rite perpetratam, locum quem habitura non erat, obtinere, et postremo in fide recta et ad integritatem signi praestandam non obesse, supplemento ejus quod deerat accedente, perquam utile est credere, et tot annorum 1190D totque ecclesiarum itemque Apostolorum et episcoporum auctoritati cum bona ratione acquiescere: cum sit maximum incommodum ac dispendium sanctissimae matris Ecclesiae, adversus prisca consulta 1191A post tot saeculorum tantam seriem nunc primum repente ac sine ratione insurgere. Nec enim propter aliud Petrus qui jam fuerat baptizatus, et quid sentiret de Domino ab ipso Domino erat interrogatus, et veritate revelationis Patris coelestis in cum collocata, quod Dominus noster non solum Christus, verum etiam Filius Dei vivi esset confessus (Matth. XVI, 16), postmodum eidem Christo praedicanti de sua passione refragatus esse monstratus est, et propterea Satanas dici ostensus est (Ibid. v. 3); nisi quia futurum erat ut quidam, tametsi variantes in sententia propria et claudicantes aliquando in fide atque doctrina, cum in nomine Jesu baptizarentur, tamen si intervallo quodam temporis recorrigere id potuissent, non propterea a salute exciderent, sed 1191B quandoque resipuissent, integram spem salutis poenitendo obtinerent; praesertim cum Spiritum sanctum quo baptizari unusquisque hominum debet, acciperent, aliquid tale designassent; sicuti non solum Petrum hoc passum esse in Evangelio deprehendimus, verum universos quoque discipulos, quibus jam Baptizatis postea Dominus ait, quia vos omnes scandalizabimini in me (Marc. XIV, 27); qui omnes, ut animadvertimus, correcta fide sua post resurrectionem Domini in Spiritu sancto sunt baptizati: ut non immerito hodie quoque credamus homines correctos a pristino errore, in Spiritu sancto posse baptizari, qui cum aqua baptizarentur in nomine Domini aliquod scabram habuissent fidem; quoniam multum interest utrum in totum quis non sit baptizatus in nomine 1191C Domini nostri Jesu Christi, an vero in aliquo claudicet cum baptizatur Baptismate aquae, quod minus est, dummodo postea constet in veritate sincera fides in Baptismate spiritus, quod non dubie majus est.