Anonymous Treatise on Re-baptism.

 to

 A Treatise on Re-Baptism by an Anonymous Writer. That They Who Have Once Been Washed in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, Ought Not to Be Re-Baptized

 1. I observe that it has been asked among the brethren what course ought specially to be adopted towards the persons of those who, although baptized i

 2. To such, then, as approach to a discussion of saving and modern, that is, of spiritual and evangelical baptism, there occurs first of all the annou

 3. And to these things thou perchance, who art bringing in some novelty, mayest immediately and impatiently reply, as thou art wont, that the Lord sai

 4. And this being found to be so, what thinkest thou, my brother? If a man be not baptized by a bishop, so as even at once to have the imposition of h

 5. And if this be so, and the occurrence of any of these things cannot deprive a man who believes, of salvation, thou thyself also affirmest that the

 6. And this also,—looking at it from the opposite side of this discussion,—those disciples of our Lord themselves attained, upon whom, being previousl

 7. Neither must you esteem what our Lord said as being contrary to this treatment: “Go ye, teach the nations baptize them in the name of the Father,

 8. But these things thou wilt, as thou art wont, contradict, by objecting to us, that when they baptized, the disciples were baptized perfectly, and r

 9. By which things, and by many deeds of this kind tending to His glory, it appeared to follow as a consequence, that in whatever manner the Jews thin

 10. Besides, what wilt thou say of those who are in many cases baptized by bishops of very bad character, who yet at length, when God so wills it, con

 11. And what wilt thou determine against the person of him who hears the word, and haply taken up in the name of Christ, has at once confessed, and ha

 12. Wherefore the whole of this discussion must be considered, that it may be made clearer. For the invocation of the name of Jesus can only be an adv

 13. For any one of us will hold it necessary, that whatever is the last thing to be found in a man in this respect, is that whereby he must be judged,

 14. And even to this point the whole of that heretical baptism may be amended, after the intervention of some space of time, if a man should survive a

 15. And since we seem to have divided all spiritual baptism in a threefold manner, let us come also to the proof of the statement proposed, that we ma

 16. But since the first part of this argument seems to be unfolded, we ought to touch on its subsequent part, on account of the heretics because it i

 17. Moreover, if a man of this sort should again return to thee, thou wilt assuredly hesitate whether he may have baptism or no and yet it will behov

 18. And the Spirit, indeed, continues to this day invisible to men, as the Lord says, “The Spirit breathes where He will and thou knowest not whence

 19. I think that we have fully followed out the announcement of John the Baptist, whence we began our discourse, when he said to the Jews, “I indeed b

9. By which things, and by many deeds of this kind tending to His glory, it appeared to follow as a consequence, that in whatever manner the Jews think about Christ, and although they do not believe concerning Jesus Christ our Lord, that even they themselves thought that such and so great a one would without any death endure to eternity, and would possess the kingdom of Israel, and of the whole world for ever; and that it should not be destroyed. Whence, moreover, the Jews dared to seize Him by force, and anoint Him for the kingdom, which indeed He was compelled to evade; and therefore His disciples thought that in no other way would He bestow upon them eternal life, except He Himself had first continued this temporal life into that eternal one in His own experience. In fine, when they were passing through Galilee, Jesus said to them, “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill Him; and after three days He shall rise again.”24    Mark ix. 30. and they were greatly grieved, because, as we have said, they had formed a very different notion previously in their minds and hearts. And again, this also was the speech of the Jews, in contradiction against Him, when He taught them of Himself, and announced future things to them, and they said, “We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever:  and how sayest thou that the Son of man must be lifted up?”25    John xii. 34. And so there was this same presumption concerning Christ in the mind of the disciples, even as Peter himself, the leader and chief of the apostles, broke forth into that expression of his own incredulity. For when he, together with the others, had been asked by the Lord what he thought about Him, that is, whom he thought Him to be, and had first of all confessed the truth, saying that He was the Christ the Son of the living God, and therefore was judged blessed by Him because he had arrived at this truth, not after the flesh, but by the revelation of the heavenly Father; yet this same Peter, when Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders, and priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after the third day rise again from the dead; nevertheless that true confessor of Christ, after a few days, taking Him aside, began to rebuke Him, saying, “Be propitious to Thyself: this shall not be;”26    Matt. xvi. 22. so that on that account he deserved to hear from the Lord, “Get thee behind me, Satan;27    [Isa. xiv. 12. The sin of Lucifer had, very possibly, been this of rebelling against the Incarnation and the introduction thereby of an order of beings higher than himself.  Hence our Lord recognised in Peter’s words the voice of the old adversary, and called him “Satan.” A premonition of his lapse.] thou art an offence unto me, because he savoured not the things which are of God, but those things which are of men.” Which rebuke against Peter became more and more apparent when the Lord was apprehended, and, frightened by the damsel, he said, “I know not what thou sayest, neither know I thee;”28    Matt. xxvi. 70. and again when, using an oath, he said this same thing; and for the third time, cursing and swearing, he affirmed that he knew not the man, and not once, but frequently, denied Him.29    [It has been profoundly felt, that, as the Church of Rome in her early rectitude (Rom. i. 8) reflected Peter’s confession, so in her lapse (Rom. xi. 20, 21) she reflects this terrible rebuke. If she was once identified with Peter’s Rock, so now, alas! with Peter’s Satan.] And this disposition, because it was to continue to him even to the Lord’s passion, was long before made manifest by the Lord, that we also might not be ignorant of it. Again, after the Lord’s resurrection, one of His disciples, Cleopas, when he was, according to the error of all his fellow-disciples, sorrowfully telling what had happened to the Lord Himself, as if to some unknown person, spoke thus, saying of Jesus the Nazarene, “who was a prophet mighty in deed and in word before God and all the people; how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death, and fastened Him to the cross. But we trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed Israel.”30    Luke xxiv. 20, 21. And in addition to these things, all the disciples also judged the declaration of the women who had seen the Lord after the resurrection to be idle tales; and some of themselves, when they had seen Him, believed not, but doubted; and they who were not then present believed not at all until they had been subsequently by the Lord Himself in all ways rebuked and reproached; because His death had so offended them that they thought that He had not risen again, who they had believed ought not to have died, because contrary to their belief He had died once. And thus, as far as concerns the disciples themselves, they are found to have had a faith neither sound nor perfect in such matters as we have referred to; and what is much more serious, they moreover baptized others, as it is written in the Gospel according to John.

IX. Quibus rebus et hujusmodi compluribus factis ad claritatem ejus pertinentibus consequens esse videbatur ut quemadmodum Judaei de Christo 1193A sentiunt, quod tamen de Jesu Christo Domino nostro non credunt, ut etiam ipsi existimarent, ut talis et tantus nulla obita morte in aeternum perseveret, et regnum Israel et totius orbis in perpetuum quod non corriperetur possideret. Unde etiam Judaei ausi fuerunt eum rapere et in regnum unguere: quod quidem necesse habuit ille superfugere: ac propterea discipuli ejus arbitrabantur quod nulla alia ratione vitam aeternam his praestaturus esset, nisi primum ipse vitam hanc temporalem cum illa aeterna in se ipso continuasset. Denique cum conversarentur in Galilaea, dixit eis Jesus: Incipit Filius hominis tradi in manus hominum, et interficient eum, et post triduum resurget (Marc. IX, 30). Et contristati sunt nimis, quia, sicuti 1193B diximus, longe diversum prius animis ac mente conceperant. Denique hic fuit etiam Judaeorum sermo contradictionis adversus eum, cum se ipse quidem doceret eos et futura annuntiaret; illi autem dicerent: Nos audivimus a lege quia Christus manet in aeternum: et quomodo tu dicis quia exaltari oportet filium hominis (Joan. XII, 34)? Itaque fuit discipulorum eadem haec praesumptio de Christo, prorumpente in istum sermonem incredulitatis suae Petro ipso duce ac principe Apostolorum. Cum enim a Domino simul cum caeteris fuisset interrogatus quidnam sentiret de ipso, id est quem esse eum existimaret; et primo veritatem confessus fuisset, dicens esse eum Christum Filium Dei vivi (Matth. XVI, 16 et seq.); et propterea beatus ab illo judicatus esset quod hoc non 1193C carnaliter, sed per Patris coelestis revelationem assecutus esset: idem tamen, ubit coepit Jesus ostendere discipulis suis quia oporteret eum Hierosolymam ire, et multa pati a senioribus et sacerdotibus et scribis, et interfici et post diem tertium resurgere; nihilominus ille verus Christi confessor post pauculos dies assumpto eo coepit illum corripere dicens: Propitius sis tibi, non erit istud (Ibid. 22, 23); ita ut propterea audire a Domino commeruerit, Vade post me, Satanas, scandalum mihi es; ob hoc quod non saperet ea quae sunt Dei, sed ea quae sunt hominum. Quae increpatio adversus Petrum magis magisque eluxit apprehenso Domino, cum a muliercula conterritus diceret: (Matth. XXVI, 70 et seq.) Nescio quid dicas, neque novi te. Et iterum cum hoc idem 1193D diceret addhibito jurejurando, et tertio devotans et jurans affirmaret, quoniam non nosset hominem, 1194A et non semel, sed saepius eum negasset: quod consilium ei quoniam usque ad passionem Domini perseveraturum erat, multo prius a Domino palam factum est, ut nos quoque id non ignoremus. Denique post resurrectionem Domini unus e discipulis ejus Cleopas, cum esset moestus secundum errorem omnium condiscipulorum suorum, ipsi Domino tamquam alicui ignoto referens quod contigerat, sic locutus est dicens de Jesu Nazareno, qui fuit propheta potens in factis et dictis in conspectu Dei et universi populi, quomodo hunc tradiderunt sacerdotes et principes nostri in damnationem mortis et cruci eum fixerunt: nos autem sperabamus quod ipse erat redempturus Israel (Luc. XXIV). Juxta quae, omnes quoque discipuli asseverationem quoque mulierum 1194B quae post resurrectionem viderant Dominum, judicaverunt deliramenta; et quidam ipsorum viso eo non crediderunt, sed dubitaverunt; quique tunc non interfuerunt omnino non crediderunt, nisi postmodum ab ipso Domino omnibus modis fuissent objurgati atque increpati: quoniam mors eos ita offenderat, ut putarent eum non resurrexisse, quem crediderant mori non debuisse; quia contra opinionem ipsorum semel mortuus fuisset. Itaque quod ad ipsos discipulos pertinet, neque integram neque perfectam fidem habuisse his modis quibus retulimus inveniuntur; et quod multo gravius est, sicut in Evangelio cata Joannem scriptum est, etiam alios baptizabant (Joan., III, 22).