Chapter XIV.—Of Paul’s Assertion, that He Had Not Been Sent to Baptize.

But they roll back an objection from that apostle himself, in that he said, “For Christ sent me not to baptize;”144    1 Cor. i. 17. as if by this argument baptism were done away!  For if so, why did he baptize Gaius, and Crispus, and the house of Stephanas?145    1 Cor. i. 14, 16. However, even if Christ had not sent him to baptize, yet He had given other apostles the precept to baptize. But these words were written to the Corinthians in regard of the circumstances of that particular time; seeing that schisms and dissensions were agitated among them, while one attributes everything to Paul, another to Apollos.146    1 Cor. i. 11, 12; iii. 3, 4. For which reason the “peace-making”147    Matt. v. 9; referred to in de Patien. c. ii. apostle, for fear he should seem to claim all gifts for himself, says that he had been sent “not to baptize, but to preach.” For preaching is the prior thing, baptizing the posterior.  Therefore the preaching came first: but I think baptizing withal was lawful to him to whom preaching was.

CAPUT 14. Sed et de ipso apostolo revolvunt, quod dixerit, Non enim me ad tinguendum Christus misit, quasi hoc argumento baptismus adimatur. cur ergo tint Gaium et Crispum et Stephanae domum? quanquam etsi non eum miserat Christus ad tinguendum, attamen aliis apostolis praeceperat tinguere. verum haec pro condicione tunc temporis ad Corinthios scripta sunt, quoniam schismata inter illos et dissensiones movebantur dum alius Paulo se deputet, alius Apollo. propter quod pacificus apostolus, ne sibi omnia defendere videretur, non ad tinguenduxn se missum ait sed ad praedicandum. nam et prius est praedicare, posterius tinguere si prius praedicatum. puto autem licuit et tinguere cui licuit et praedicare.