So writes our author: and the true meaning or result of all is, that the Holy Spirit, by his coming, sanctifies the persons in the use of those waters, or use of that services. Allowances must be made for something of oratorical flight and figure, contrived for ornament, and to make the more lively impression: it would be wrong to conceive, that every pool, pond, or river, in which any person happened to be baptized, contracted any abiding holiness from that time forwards, or that it was not left open to all common uses as before. It is evident that Tertullian, where he came to explain his notion, and, as it were, to correct his looser and less accurate expressions, did not suppose the waters to be so much as the medium, properly speaking, of sanctification; but he conceived the illapse of the Spirit upon the persons to come afterwards, when the washing was over, and done with'. I shall only note further, with respect to these passages of Tertullian, that it cannot be certainly concluded from them, that a formal prayer for the descent of the Holy Spirit was in use at that time: but from his saying that immediately after invocation of God, such descent followed, and from his adding afterwards, that in or by the benediction, the Spirit was called and invited, I look upon it as extremely probable', that the practice did then obtain, in the African churches, formally to pray for the descent of the Holy Ghost, either before the immersion or after, (upon the imposition of hands,) or perhaps both before and after.

Our next author is Origen, (about A. D. 240.) not that he directly says any thing of the descent of the Spirit in Baptism, or of any prayer made use of for that purpose: but he occasionally drops some things which may give light to the present question, His notion was, that the Holy Spirit, whose office it is to sanctify, operates not at all upon inanimate things, nor upon persons

recognoscens conquiescit, columbæ figura dilapsus in Dominum, ut natura, &c. Tertull. ibid. cap. viii. p. 227.

Eadem dispositione spiritalis effectus, terræ, id est, carni nostræ, emergenti de lavacro post vetera delicta, columba Sancti Spiritus advolat, pacem Dei adferens, emissa de cœlis, ubi Ecclesia est arca figurata. Tertull. ibid. cap. viii. p. 227.

r Restituitur homo Deo, ad similitudinem ejus qui retro ad imaginem Dei fuerat. Recipit enim illum Dei Spiritum, quem tunc de afflatu ejus acceperat, sed post amiserat per delic

tum. Non quod in aquis Spiritum Sanctum consequamur, sed in aqua emundati sub angelo, Spiritui Sancto præparamur. Ibid. cap. v. vi. p. 226, s Dehinc manus imponitur, per benedictionem advocans et invitans Spiritum Sanctum, cap. viii. p. 226, 227.

It might be, that upon a benediction formed in general terms, Christians might expect the illapse of the Spirit: but it appears more natural to think, from what Tertullian here says, that they directly and formally prayed for it.

of obdurate wickedness, but upon those only who are capable of receiving his sanctifying influences". Now from his saying that the Holy Spirit operates not on things inanimate, it must follow, that he thought not at that time of any descent of the Holy Ghost upon the waters of Baptism, but upon the persons only, those that were worthy. Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, in the decline of the fourth century, charged his doctrine with that consequence, and thereupon condemned it, as overturning the consecration of the waters of Baptism, supposed to be made by the coming of the Holy Ghost upon them. But it is certain that Origen did admit of a consecration of the water, though he might not perhaps explain it in the manner which Theophilus most approved of, 150 years after: and it is his constant doctrine, that the Baptism of the Spirit goes along with the outward washing, wherever there is no obstacle on the part of the recipient z. Nay, he scrupled not to admit, that the Spirit of God now moves upon the face of the waters of Baptism, alluding to Gen. i. 2; so that Origen could not be much out of the way upon this article: but this we may collect from him, that, properly speaking, the work of the Spirit in Baptism was upon the persons, when fitly qualified, rather than upon the outward element; and that the Spirit's coming upon the water, and other the like phrases, ought not to be too rigorously interpreted, but should be understood with due grains of allowance.

A late learned writer, apologizing for Origen, takes notice, that Chrysostom was very positive for the illapse of the Spirit on the outward symbols; a plain sign that he did not think Origen to be guilty of the error charged upon himb. I rather think, that Chrysostom understood the popular way of expressing the illapse of the Spirit, in the same qualified sense that Origen before did; and that was one reason why he would not come

u Vid. Origen. Tepì dрx. p. 62. edit. Bened. Conf. Huetii Origeniana, p. 46. Albertin. lib. ii. p. 357·

x Dicit (Origenes) Spiritum Sanctum non operari in ea quæ inanima sunt, nec ad irrationabilia pervenire: quod adserens, non recogitat aquas in Baptismate mysticas adventu Sancti Spiritus consecrari. Theoph. Alex. Lib. Paschal. i. p. 698. apud Hieronym. Opp. tom. iv. edit. Bened.

y Vid. Origen. in Johann. p. 124. edit. Huet. And compare what he says of the eucharistical consecration, (in Matt. p. 254.) where the reason is

the same. See also Albertinus, p. 358.

z Vid. Origen. in Matt. p. 391, 416. in Johann. p. 124, 125.

* Καὶ παλιγγενεσίας ὀνομαζόμενον λουτρὸν μετὰ ἀνακαινώσεως γινόμενον πνεύματος, τοῦ καὶ νῦν ἐπιφερομένου, ἐπειδὴ περὶ Θεοῦ ἐστιν, ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος, ἀλλ ̓ οὐ πᾶσι μετὰ τὸ ὕδωρ éyywoμévov. Ibid. p. 125.

Note, that the Latin version has obscured the sense of the passage, not observing, perhaps, the allusion to Genesis.

b Johnson, Unbloody Sacrifice, part i. p. 181. alias 186.

into the warm measures of Theophilus, Epiphanius, and other Eustathianse of that time, about the year 400. And whereas it is suggested by the same learned writerd, that a solemn consecration of things inanimate to holy uses, without supposing a formal illapse of the Spirit upon them, is a degrading account of a venerable mystery, and leaves no difference between the conseeration of a church and the consecration of baptismal water, &c. I must take leave to reply, that the conclusion is not just for in things so consecrated to holy uses, there will always be as much difference as there is between more and less sacred, according as the ends and uses are higher or lower, holier or less holy. The higher and holier the use is to which any thing is consecrated by proper ministers, so much the more worthy it is, and so much the nearer and more important relation it bears to God and religion; demanding thereupon so much the greater reverence and more awful regard.

St. Cyprian (A. D. 255.) speaks of a sacerdotal cleansing and sanctification of the baptismal water; which he supposes to be wrought by the Holy Spirite, and very frequently makes mention of it, up and down in his works. But he says nothing from whence one may certainly collect whether any formal prayer for the descent was then in use; neither does he explain in what sense the Holy Ghost was understood to sanctify the baptismal waters. Only, as he intimates over and over, that the end and use of sanctifying the water, was to convey spiritual graces to the persons coming to be baptized in it; and as it is certain that those spiritual graces could not reside in or upon the outward element, it is more than probable that he supposed the Spirit to rest where those spiritual effects rested, that is, upon the persons only and then the sanctifying of the waters can mean no more than the consecrating them to the uses of personal sanctification. The Spirit made use of them as a symbol, for conveying his graces ; and in that use consisted their relative holiness: but the Spirit dwells not properly upon them, but upon the persons baptized.

When we come down to the fourth century, there we find plainer evidences of formal prayers offered for the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the waters of Baptism. Cyril of Jerusalem

A short account of the odium raised against Origen may be seen in my Second Defence, vol. ii. p. 639, &c. and a larger in Huetius Orige

niana.

d Johnson, ibid. p. 182. alias 185. e Oportet ergo mundari et sanctifi

cari aquam prius a sacerdote, ut possit Baptismo suo peccata hominis qui baptizatur abluere. Quomodo autem mundare et sanctificare aquam potest, qui ipse immundus est, et apud quem Spiritus Sanctus non est ? Cyprian. Epist. lxx. p. 190.

(who wrote A. D. 348.) speaks to his catechumens thus f: "The "Holy Ghost is coming to seal your souls:-look not upon "the laver as common water, but to the spiritual grace bestowed "along with it. This common water, upon receiving the in"vocation of the Holy Spirit, and of Christ, and of the Father, "acquires a virtue of sanctification." It may be doubted whether Cyril here refers to the prayer of Consecration or to the form of Baptism: but it appears most probable, that he refers to the Consecration; as the Benedictine editor has endeavoured to prove at large, in his notes upon the place. What I have further to observe upon it is, that Cyril speaks of the water as receiving a sanctifying virtue. And what does he mean by it? He means what he had just before said, that the outward washing and the inward graces go together, and are both conferred at once upon the worthy receiver in the self-same act. The visible sign is connected, in certain effect, with the invisible grace; and both are applied, at the same instant, to the same man, jointly concurring to the same end and uses, This is the foundation of the common way of speaking, as if the Spirit and the water were physically united with each other; which is not strictly true in notion, but amounts to the same in moral effect,

Optatus, an African Bishop, (A. D. 368.) alluding to the name ixoùs, (a technical name of our Lord,) says; "This fish "(meaning Christ) is brought down upon the waters of the font, "in Baptism, by invocation h." I presume this refers to the Consecration prayer: and so it imports an expectance of, or petition for the divine presence of Christ, to sanctify the person baptized in the use of the appointed service.

St. Basil, of the same age, (A, D. 374.) speaks of the conjunction of water and the Spirit in Baptism; first observing, (in order to obviate mistakes or invidious constructions,) that the Church did not mean to prefer water before all other creatures ; much less to give it a share in the honours due to the Father and the Sonk: but he takes notice, that the water serves to make out

f Méλλei Tò пveûμa Tò aylov oppa yitew vμav Tas vɣás.μn is vdari λιτῷ πρόσεχε τῷ λουτρῷ, ἀλλὰ τῇ μετὰ τοῦ ὕδατος διδομένῃ πνευματικῇ χάριτι —τὸ λιτὸν ὕδωρ πνεύματος ἁγίου, καὶ Χριστοῦ, καὶ πατρὸς τὴν ἐπίκλησινλαβὸν δύναμιν. ἁγιότητος ἐπικτᾶται. Cyrill. Hierosol. Catech. iii, sect. 3. p. 40, 41,

8 Vid. Vossius Harmon. Evangel. lib. iii. cap. 4. p. 233. Opp. tom. vi.

h Hic est piscis qui in Baptismate,

per invocationem, fontalibus undis inseritur, &c. Optat. lib. iii. p. 61.

i See Bingham, Christian Antiq. b, xi. c. 1o. sect. i. p. 333. conf. 340.

* Καὶ εἰς ὕδωρ βαπτιζόμεθα, καὶ οὐ δήπου τὸ ὕδωρ πάσης ὁμοῦ τῆς κτίσεως προτιμήσομεν, ἢ καὶ αὐτῷ τῆς πατρὸς kai viov Tins μeradwooμev. Basil. de Spir. Sanct. cap. xv. p. 28. tom. iii. edit. Bened.

the symbol of a death unto sin, and the Spirit is the pledge or earnest of life: therefore water and the Spirit go together in that Sacrament. Then he adds, that as to the grace supposed to be in the water, it belongs not properly to the water, but is entirely owing to the presence of the Spirit". Presence how, and where? To the water, or to the persons? His next immediate words will decide the question; for he adds, in the language of St. Peter, that "Baptism is not the putting away the filth of "the flesh, but the stipulation of a good conscience towards "God"." The Spirit therefore, in his account, must rest upon the persons, to answer the end. He proceeds, soon after, to observe how much the Baptism of the Spirit is preferable to baptizing merely with water; and he takes notice, that there is a Baptism, as valuable as any, wherein no water at all is needful, namely, Baptism in one's own blood, as a martyr for the name of Christ. Then he closes up the article he was upon in these words: "Not that I say this, in order to disparage water-baptism, "but to baffle the reasonings of those who rise up against the Spirit, and who would blend things together which are not blended, and compare things together which admit not of com"parison."

66

I have laid these things together, as explanatory of what the ancient Fathers meant by joining the Spirit with the outward elements in the Sacraments, (for the reason is the same in both,) and as serving to clear up some of their other more dubious or less guarded expressions. Here, when an objection was raised by adversaries, grounded on nothing but words and names, this good Father then rejected with abhorrence any such mixture of the Spirit and the water, as the Catholics were maliciously charged with: and he declared they were ǎuiктa, not mixed with each other. At the same time, he insinuated the true meaning of all to be, that the Spirit and the water so far went

PAs the Catholics had argued justly for the divinity of the Holy Ghost, from our being baptized into the Spirit, and sanctified by the Spirit, the Macedonians, on the other hand, frowardly retorted, that we are baptized also eis vdwp, in, or into water, and sanctified by water; and therefore water would be divine, by that argument, as much as the Spirit. It was in reply to such impertinent cavils, that Basil took occasion to explain what concerned the water and what the Spirit in that Sacrament.