Editor's note: There are three appendices in this section. - Jim Duvall
Baptist History Vindicated Appendix I THE TESTIMONY OF THE LIVING SCHOLARS OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND TO IMMERSION.
While I was in England, I had occasion to speak to a number of clergymen and other Church of England scholars on the subject of baptism. Their answers were given in such direct and usually in such unbiassed [sic] terms that I at once felt that I was in an entirely different atmosphere from that which I found in the Pedobaptist communions of America. My curiosity was excited and I determined to investigate. The result was as surprising to me as it was gratifying. It will be seen from this paper that I present the testimony of the foremost Hebrew and Greek professors of the Universities, together with the testimony of bishops and foremost preachers of the Church of England.
I. The Hebrew scholars. I asked the leading English University and College professors of Hebrew the following questions:
1. What is the literal or ordinary meaning of the Hebrew word tabhal which is translated in the Old Testament by the Greek word baptize?
2. Does any authorative Hebrew-English lexicon define the word by the words "to sprinkle" or "to pour?"
The answers were clear and explicit. Prof. S. R. Driver, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew in Oxford University, and perhaps the foremost Hebrew scholar in England, says:
Christ Church, Oxford, Aug. 31.
J. T. Christian, Esq., LL.D.
DEAR SIR: The word tabhal which is represented in the Septuagint by baptize in 2. Ki. v. 14 - it is more usually represented by bapto - means to immerse or dip; it is regularly rendered dip in the Auth. Version, Gen. xxxvii. 31, Lev. ix. 9, Ex. xii. 22, Ruth ii. 14, Rev. xiv.6, Josh. iii.15, 1 S. xiv.27, except once, Job ix.31, where it is rendered plunge, and the same rendering is adopted by Gesenius, and is in fact the meaning recognized by all authorities. The word does not mean to pour or sprinkle.
Believe me yours very truly,
S. R. DRIVER.
It will be remembered that Dr. Driver is the author of a great Hebrew lexicon which is now appearing from the Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Prof. John F. Steabing, of the University of London, says, in a letter to me, of this work: "The best Hebrew-English Lexicon is one by Brown, Briggs and Driver of which the first six parts have now been published." This work is also highly commended by Prof. W. H. Bennett, of New College, London. It will be seen therefore that this definition is in accord with the latest and most critical scholarship. The definition given in Brown, Driver and Briggs is: "Dip -- (NH id; Aram tebhal dip, bathe,) 1. trans. dip a thing in. 2. Intrans. dip (oneself), sq. be, 2 K. 14 in Jordan."
The Rev. Charles H. H. Wright is one of the Examiners in Hebrew of the University of London. He is a D.D. of Trinity College, Dublin; an M.A. of Exeter College and a Ph.D. of the University of Leipzig; Bampton Lecturer 1878 in the University of Oxford, Donnellan Lecturer in the University of Dublin 1880-81, etc. He says in his letter to me:
"(1). The Hebrew word for baptize (tabhal) unquestionably meant originally to dip, to bathe; and Jewish baptism was unquestionably by immersion.
"(2). No Hebrew lexicon would render tabhal by pour or sprinkle."
Prof. John F. Steabing, Washburn College, Oxford, and Examiner to the University of London, says:
"(1) The Hebrew word tabhal denotes 'to dip,' being usually followed by the prep. be (=in). Examples of this occur at Gen. 37.31. Lev. 4.9. 14. 51 (in blood), Num. 19.18 (in water), 1 S. 14. 27.
"The verb also occurs as an intransitive = 'to dip oneself' at 2 Kings 5. 14. The parallel phrase is vs. 10 and 12 being rahatz 'to wash in.'
"(2) As far as I know (though I have not any of my books with me) it is not translated 'to sprinkle' or 'to pour' in any authoritative Hebrew-English Dictionary."
Prof. William H. Bennett, M. A., Professor of Hebrew, New College, London, says:
"It is usually bapto, rarely baptizo, to which tabhal is rendered in the new Standard lexicon, Brown-Driver-Briggs, by dip, moisten, dip oneself; similarly in Seigfreid and Stade's lexicon. The root has the meaning 'dip' in Aramaic and in post-biblical Hebrew. In the latter it also means to take luncheon.
"No authoritative lexicon would give 'sprinkle' or 'pour' as equivalents to tabhal.
"Feurst indeed gives in his concordance 'rigere, tingere, perfumdere,' but I imagine these are to lead up to, and be interpreted by 'immergere' which he gives last in italics.
"I see that Young's Analytical Concordance gives 'moisten, besprinkle,' but the Concordance is scarcely an authority on points of Hebrew.
"I think Feurst means that tabhal by etymology and perhaps by original use meant pour or sprinkle; but in O. T. means to dip."
Rev. Laurence M. Simmons, B.A., LL.B., professor of Hebrew and Arabic in Owens College, Manchester, says:
"The Hebrew verb tabhal (T. B. L.) has the meaning of dip in, either active or reflective. I do not know any where it is defined 'to sprinkle' or 'to pour.'
The Rev. S. Leathes, D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Rabbinical Literature in Kings College, London, writes:
"I am without books of reference here, but as far as I remember there is no word in the Old Testament exactly answering to the New Testament baptizo because the act implied is peculiar to the N. and no certain Hebrew word is used to translate the Greek. The point must then be referred to the original about which I apprehend there can be little doubt as to the meaning and I don't think any Hebrew word meaning to sprinkle or pour would be used to translate the Greek." The Rev. D. W. Marks, the Goldsmed professor of Hebrew in University College, London, says that an entirely different Hebrew word means to sprinkle and refers to M. Josephs' English-Hebrew lexicon which defined tabhal simply "to dip."
Stronger testimony than this could not be presented on the meaning of the Hebrew word corresponding to the Greek baptizo? These are all Pedobaptist scholars, professors in the universities and colleges of England, and yet their definition of tabhal is quite as definite and unmistakable as any Baptist could desire.
II. The Greek scholars on baptizo. I asked eminent English professors of Greek the following questions:
1. What is the literal or ordinary meaning of the Greek word baptizo in classical Greek literature?
2. Is there an authoritative Greek-English lexicon which defines the word "to sprinkle" or "to pour?" I received answers as follows:
The Rev. H. Kynaston, D.D., Professor of Greek and Classical Literature, University of Durham, says: "The word baptizo means 'to dip, or sink' into water - not sprinkle, which is raino. I know of no lexicon which gives 'sprinkle' for baptizo."
Prof. G. C. Warr, M.A., Professor of Greek in Kings College, says: "Certainly the classical meaning of baptizo is to dip, not to sprinkle or to pour!"
Prof. John Stracham, M. A., Owens College, says: "You will find illustrations of the use of baptizo in Liddell & Scott's Greek Lexicon or in Stephanus' Thesaurus. It is not much used in Classical Greek. The Primary meaning is 'to dip' (under water) and its metaphorical was clearly come from that. I never to my knowledge met with the word in the literal sense of 'sprinkle,' and I doubt if it has any such meaning."
Prof. A. S. Wilkins, Litt. D., LL.D., Professor of Greek New Testament Criticism, Owens College, says: "I think there can be no doubt that the normal meaning of baptizo denotes 'put in,' 'to immerse.' You may fully trust the account of the use which you find in Thayer's edition of Grimm's Lexicon. I do not think that any lexicon of authority gives the literal meaning of 'to pour.'"
Prof. G. E. Marmdin, Esq., M. A., Examiner of Greek in the London University says: "I think you will find a perfectly correct account of the classical use of baptizo in Liddell & Scott's Lexicon. The word in classical writers means 'to dip,' and may imply to dip into water (or any thing else) or to dip completely under, so as to sink. In fact it has the same sense as the commoner word bapto, except it does not like bapto bear the acquired meaning 'to dye.'
"In regard to your second question, I do not know of any Greek-English lexicon which gives the meanings 'to sprinkle' or 'to pour' - If any does so, I should say it makes a mistake."
Prof. R. Y. Tyrrell, D.Litt., LL.D., M. A., Examiner of Greek in London University, says: "(1) Baptizo occurs in classical Greek only in the sense of 'drowned,' metaphorically, as 'drowned with an avalanche of questions,' 'soaked in wine.' (2) The word could not mean to 'sprinkle' or 'pour,' ouly to 'dip' or 'put under water.'"
It will be seen that the lexicons quoted by these professors are Liddell & Scott which defines the word "to dip in, or under water;" Stephanus, "mergo, immergo," "to merge, to immerse;" Thayer who defines the word: "I. (1) prop. to dip repeatedly, to immerse, submerge; (2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean wIth water; (3) metaph. to overwhelm. II. In the N. T. it is used particularly of the rite of sacred ablution, first instituted by John the Baptist, afterwards by Christ's command received by Christians and adjusted to the contents of their religion, viz., an immersion in water," &c.
But, as a closing testimony on this point, I present a letter from Prof. R. C. Jebb, Litt. D., Professor of Greek in the University of Cambridge and Trinity College. Dr. Jebb says: Springfield, Cambridge, Sep. 23, '98.
Rev. John T. Christian,
31 Bernard St., Russell Square,
London, W. C.Dear Sir: -
l. The ordinary meaning of baptizo in classical Greek is, as you may see in Liddell &, Scott's Lexicon, to "dip," "to put under water." The root of the verb baph is probably akin to bath, the root of bathus, "deep," bathos, "depth." The idea of submersion is thus inherent in it.2. I do not know whether there is any "authoritative Greek-English lexicon" which makes the word mean "sprinkle" or "pour." I can only say that such a meaning never belongs to the word in classical Greek.
Yours faithfully,
R. C. JEBB.
=========
[From Appendix, I, pp. 1-7.]
Baptist History Vindicated
Appendix II III. Bishops and other prominent preachers of the Church of England on the meaning of baptizo.
I asked the leading bishops and some other prominent clergymen the following questions:
1. What is the literal meaning of the Greek word baptize?
2 Was the word used by Christ and his Apostles in this literal sense?
3. About what date was sprinkling and pouring substituted for dipping in England, and the cause for that substitution?
4. What is the present attitude of the Church of England toward dipping? Are there any baptisteries in the churches of your diocese?
To these inquiries I received the following answers:
The Archbishop, Right Honorable and Most Reverend Frederick Temple, D. D., Primate of all England and Metropolitan, in reference to my "first three questions," referred me to "The Teachers' Prayer Book," by Bishop Barry, and to Bishop Harold Brown's article on "Baptism " in Smith's Dictionary. Bishop Barry, whose language the Archbishop of Canterbury indorses, gives this account of the origin of sprinkling: "The Rubric still directs the old practice of immersion as a rule, Affusion being permitted in cases of weakness of the child. The ancient form was undoubtedly that of immersion, generally a three-fold immersion (as directed in the old Sarum Manual and in the Prayer Book of 1549), which had a far closer accordance with the symbolism both of the burial and Resurrection, and of perfect cleansing of the whole man. This form accorded with the Eastern custom: for it the ancient Baptisteries were built. But from comparatively early times, especially in the West, from considerations of climate and convenience, and possibly for the avoidance of scandal, the Affusion of Water, originally supplementary to the immersion, became not unfrequent substitute for it; and has gradually come, in despite of old custom and the literal directions of the Rubric, to prevail almost universally." - P. 23B. B. M. 3408. aaa. 27.The above statement is explicit enough as to the fact that sprinkling was substituted for immersion. The other author to whom Dr. Temple refers is plain on the Scripture meaning of the word. Bishop Browne says: "The language of the New Testament and of the primitive fathers sufficiently points to immersion as the common mode of baptism. John the Baptist baptized in the river Jordan (Matthew 3). Jesus is represented as 'coming up out of the water,' ana bainon apo tou hundatos, after his baptism (Mark 1.10). Again, John is said to have baptized in AEnon because there was much water there (John iii. 23; see also Acts viii.36). The comparison of baptism to burying and rising up again (Romans vi.; Colossians ii.) has been already referred to as probably derived from the custom of immersion." - Smith's Bible Dictionary, vol. 1. Appendix, p. xciii. B. M. 3107. df. 5.Archbishop Temple concludes his letter to me as follows: "In answer to your fourth question I may say that there is in Lambeth Parish church a font in which baptism can be administered by immersion."
I had been led to ask in regard to baptisteries and fonts in churches on account of some important statements I had met with. I have found that there are hundreds of fonts throughout England sufficiently large for the immersion of infants, and that there are quite a number sufficiently large for the immersion of adults. The statement is put forth and confidently stated upon the highest Episcopal authority that the English fonts are much larger than the fonts of any other nation, since this nation held to immersion longer than any other. Those who may desire to follow this subject will find a very full discussion of it in the various volumes of the Archaeologia. It is, perhaps, sufficient for my present purpose to quote two short statements from altogether competent authorities. The first is F. A. Paley. He says: "It is, however, well known that ancient fonts were made large enough for the complete immersion of infants. Exceptions to this all but universal practice are very rare; one or two instances are quoted. in the Archaeology, Vol. Xl. p.123. . . . The violation of the same principle, arising from the unhappy custom of aspersion now prevalent in the English church, is one of the commonest and worst faults of modern usage." - Illustration of Baptismal Fonts, p. 31. B. M. 1265. c. 7. And Samuel Carte, speaking of the English Fonts, says: "Give me leave to observe, that antiently at least the font was large enough to admit of an adult person being dipped or immersed therein."
It is not a question of ancient fonts only, but the subject of immersion is a very live one in the Church of England at this moment. At least two of the most prominent Episcopal churches of England are building baptisteries sufficiently large to admit of the immersion of adults. I refer to Christ Church, Oxford, and Lambeth Parish Church, which is the church annexed to Lambeth Palace, the residence of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and to which the Archbishop referred in his letter quoted above. The history of the baptistery in the last mentioned church is a very interesting one. It is known that the late Archbishop Benson died very suddenly. One of his last wishes was that a baptistery should be placed in Lambeth church. The present clergyman, the Rev. I. Andrewes Reeve, with the approval of his bishop, has now about completed the undertaking. After Archbishop Temple had called my attention to this baptistery, I wrote Mr. Reeve and received from him a printed statement concerning the baptistery, and also a letter further explaining the enterprise and his own opinions concerning immersion. In this printed statement Mr. Reeve says: "I wish very much to have some lasting memorial of our late Archbishop Benson in Lambeth Parish church, where he was wont so frequently to worship. In thinking over what form the memorial should take, I remembered that on one occasion -- I believe it was the very last when he had worshiped with us - I had after service asked his opinion as to the best way of placing a font for adult baptisms in our baptistery. He was very much interested in the idea, and gave me several practical suggestions. So I desire now to choose this work as his memorial.
"The Prayer Book and the Bible seem definitely to assume that baptism should in ordinary cases be administered by immersion; and if any catechumen expressed a desire that the service should be performed, any clergyman, I presume, would be bound to comply with the request; and yet scarcely any of our churches possess a font-grave suitable to the action.
"Besides this, in our neighborhood there has been much earnest work in Mr. Spurgeon's Tabernacle' and in other Baptist chapels, and I find that many of those whom I meet in my ordinary parish work have a conscious conviction that baptism should be administered by immersion.
"Our own Bishop, to whom 1 have submitted my idea, cordially approves of it, and suggests that other clergymen would perhaps be glad to use our font-grave for any catechumens of their own who desired baptism by immersion. I should always cordially welcome such to our church and baptistery."
In his letter Mr. Reeve says: "I have always felt that baptism by immersion, which has been universally used in the Greek church, is the more correct way of administering that Holy Sacrament; and I felt that there should be somewhere in London a baptistery where adults as well as infants might be thus baptized." Mr. Reeve is careful to say that he "firmly believes that baptism by affusion is true baptism," but he thinks that immersion is the "better way." In conclusion he writes:
"The font-grave is now nearly ready; in a month or six weeks I hope it will be in place, when I should be glad to meet you at the church and show it to you." When I visited the church about the middle of September the font was still unfinished. It was protected so that the cement might dry; but I could see that it was ample enough for the adequate immersion of adults. "The font of stone in the ancient usual place" was large enough for the immersion of an infant, provided that it was "discreetly and warily" done. I take it, however, that the bason inside of the font was used for sprinkling.
If anything further were needed to impress the importance which is attached to the erection of the baptistery in Lambeth Parish church, which is supported by so many distinguished patrons, is the further fact that this enterprise is looked upon, not as a matter of local Interest only, but in some way touching the whole Church of England. For example, the Bishop of Rochester thought it of sufficient importance to write me: "But his Lordship thinks you may be interested to know that the rector of Lambeth has recently established a font for immersion in Lambeth Parish church."
While speaking of Mr. Spurgeon and this baptistery, I am reminded of an incident which was related to me by a gentleman who ought to know. When the Baptist General Meetings were held in Southampton Mr. Spurgeon was the guest of the Rev. Mr. Wilberforce, who was a son of the distinguished bishop of that name. One evening the rector invited some of the clergy to meet Mr. Spurgeon. After tea they concluded that they would rout the great Dissenter, and they set upon him right royally. The battle raged till two o'clock in the morning, when the disputation had taken such a turn that the clergy concluded that they had much the best of the argument. But Mr. Spurgeon rallied, and as a result of that night's discussion a fine baptistery was placed for the purposes of immersion in the principal parish church of Southampton.
Very recently a list of more than one hundred baptisteries in Episcopal churches in England was published in The Freemn. I have myself seen more than one such baptistery and a number of fonts large enough for the immersion of children. For example, I saw in the Cathedra1 of Chester two such fonts, one of which was of unusual size. There is a part of Canterbury Cathedral called the baptistery which was once used for the purpose of immersion; it is octagonal and united with the main building by a corridor. The well known Dean of Canterbury, Dr. Farrar, in a recent letter says that "boptizo means 'to dip' or 'submerge,'" and then adds that "the font at Canterbury would suffice for the immersion of an infant." As a matter of fact, it was placed there for that very purpose.
The large parish church of Canterbury had a very large and fine baptistery. The cathedral at York is said to have been built on the place where was formerly a pool or fountain, in which Paulinus baptized King Edwin, A. D. 627. When heathenism passed away and parish churches were erected, it became the custom to place in them large stone fonts or basins, not sufficient for the baptism of adults, but for the immersion of infants, many of which of considerable antiquity are still extant, of, a size which would be preposterous if only intended for sprinkling. There is one large enough for immersion to be seen at St. Brecan's Bed, of the workmanship of the sixth century. One can trace everywhere and in every period of time since the island was converted to Christianity, the historical monuments which proclaim immersion. The Baptists usually immersed their converts in the running streams, but in their secret places of worship they sometimes erected baptisteries. I saw two such baptisteries belonging to the times before the Civil Wars. The one was at Eythorne in Kent, hid away under a hedge fence, and only recently the rains washing away the earth have made known its existence. The other is at Hill Cliffe in Cheshire, which some claim belongs to a period which antedates the Reformation itself.
The Right Honorable and Right Reverend Mandell Creighton, D.D., D.C.L., LL.D., Bishop of London, Principal Dean of Canterbury and Dean of the Chapel Royal, the author of many books, is not only a very scholarly man, but is said to be the most influential churchman in England. I give his letter in full without comment. He writes: Fulham Palace, S. W., July, 26, 1898.
J. T. Christian, Esq:
DEAR SIR: - The Greek word baptize properly means to dip. Baptism in our Lord's time was performed in the open air, in a river or pond. Sprinkling was first allowed for sick people in bed, and in the middle of the third century was held to be equally valid. The Rubric in the prayer book recommends dipping, "If the child may well endure it, he shall dip him in the water; if the child is weak, it shall suffice to pour water on it." The coldness of our climate is the principal reason why sprinkling has become universal.
"I know of no baptistery in London where there is provision for immersing an adult; of course, an infant could be immersed."
Yours faithfully,
M. LONDON.
The Rt. Rev. John Sheepshankes, D.D., Bishop of Norwich, writes:
"The Prayer Book with its Rubrics shows the teaching of the church with regard to immersion. I have authorized the immersion of several adults."
The Rt. Rev. the Hon. Angustus Leege, D.D., the Bishop of Lichfield, referred me to two authorities which presented his views. The first is Wharton B. Mariott, M.A., whose article is found in Smith's Dictionary of Christian Antiquities. Mr. Mariott says; "Trip1e immersion, that is, thrice dipping the head while standing in the water, was the all but universal rule of the church in early times. Of this we find proof ill Africa, in Palestine, in Egypt, at Antioch and Constantinople, in Capadocia." - Vol. 1. p.161.
The other authority to whom Bishop Legge refers is Walter F. Hooke, D.D., in his Church Dictionary. Dr. Hooke says: "Baptein, to dip, and baptizein, to dip repeatedly, or thoroughly, to bathe." - p.75. He continues; "The place of baptism was at first unlimited, being some pond or lake, some spring or river, but always as near as possible to the place of public worship. Afterwards they had their baptisteries, or fonts, built at first near the church, then in the church-porch, and at the last in the church itself. There were many in other days who were desirous to be baptized in the river Jordan, out of reverence to the place where our Saviour himself had been baptized." - p. 76. And again: "In performing the ceremony of baptism the usual custom was to immerse and dip the whole body." Upon the introduction of sprinkling he is equally explicit. He says: "The custom of sprinkling children, which at first was allowed in case of weakness or sickness of the infant, has so far prevailed, that immersion at length is almost excluded. What principally tended to confirm the practice of affusion or sprinkling, was that several of our English divines, flying into Germany and Switzerland, during the bloody reign of Queen Mary, and returning home when Queen Elizabeth came to the crown, brought back with them a great zeal for the Protestant churches beyond [the] sea where they had been sheltered and received; and having observed that at Geneva, (Calvin lnstitutes. lib, iv. c. 15.) and some other places baptism administered by sprinkling, they thought they could not do the Church of England a greater piece of service than by introducing a practice dictated by so great an oracle as Calvin. This together with the coldness of our western climate, was what contributed to banish entirely the practice of dipping infants in the font." - p. 79.
The Rt. Rev. Earnest R. Wilberforce, Bishop of Chichester, refers me to Bishop Browne, whom I have already quoted, and to Blunt's Dictionary of Doctrinal and Historical Theology. Blunt says: "From all which illustrations we may gather the meaning of a thorough cleansing, as by immersion or washing, and not by mere affusion and sprinkling a few drops of water. The bathing of Naaman and Judith was by immersion; cups and dishes were not cleansed by a few drops of water, but by a thorough washing; and the comparison of our Lord's suffering to baptism is intended to show how thorough and overwhelming, as it were, was their nature. Hence, as might be supposed, the primitive mode of baptism was by immersion, as we learn by the clear testimony of holy Scripture and of the fathers. Thus John baptized in AEnon, near Salim (John iii. 23), 'because there was much water there,' and Christ after baptism 'ascended out of the water.' We cannot doubt in these cases that there was an immersion, for it is shown from the Baptist's reasons for baptizing in AEnon, and Christ's ascending from the waters of Jordan. St. Paul's language, however, is more explicit; he speaks of our being buried with Christ in Baptism (Rom vi. 4; Col. ii.12) , and with the same illustration in view that Christians die with Christ, and are raised with him (Rom. 6. 11. Col. ii. 20, iii. 3), are immersed in the baptismal water, and arise from it as our Lord from his burial in the tomb." - p. 75.
The Bishop of Chichester also refers me to Bingham. Joseph Bingham is quite clear on this point. He says: "The antients thought that immersion, or burying under water, did more lively represent the death and burial and resurrection, as well as our death unto sin, and rising again unto righteousness; and the divesting or unclothing the person to be Baptized did also represent the putting off the body of sin, in order to put on the new man, which is created in righteousness and true holiness. For which reason they observed the way of baptizing all persons naked and divested, by a total immersion under water, except in some particular cases of great exigence, wherein they allowed of sprinkling, as in the case of clinic baptism, or where there was a scarcity of water." - Antiquities of the Christian Church, Book XI., chapter xi., sect. I. Bingham further says: "As this was the original Apostolic practice, so it continued to be the universal practice of the church for many ages, upon the same symbolical reasons as it was first used by the Apostles."
The Rt. Rev. Henry Bickersteth, D.D., Bishop of Exeter, and author of that beautiful poem, "Yesterday, To-day and Forever," referred me to Harold Browne's book, and his chaplain suggested I might find the bishop's opinion in his Practical Commentary on the Holy Bible. On Matt. 8:7-12 Bishop Bickersteth says: "The Jews were accustomed to this rite from the habit of thus receiving proselytes. It was administered in the daytime by immersion, whole families, including infants, being baptized together; and while standing in the water, the proselytes were instructed in certain portions of the law."
In the poem, "Yesterday, To-day and Forever," referred to above, Bishop Bickersteth beautifully illustrates the classical use of baptize. Aratus, describing the setting of the constellation Cephes in latitude sixty-nine or seventy degrees, calls it baptizing or plunging his upper parts into the sea; and, "also if the sun baptizes himself without a cloud into the western sea." These expressions are often found in the poets. Bickersteth says:
"The sun,
Who climbing the meridian steep of heaven,
Shone with a monarch's glory, till he dipp'd
His footsteps in the ruddy western waves."
And again:
"It was golden eventide. The sun
Was sinking through the roseate clouds to rest Beneath the western waves."
He speaks thus of the work of the Baptist:
"Jerusalem
Hurried to Jordan. 'Ah what deeds of wrong
Lips, counted by their fellows as pure as babes,
Flung then upon startled winds! What filth
Was wash'd away from penitential hearts
In that baptismal stream."
Of the baptism of Jesus he says:
"John, abash'd,
Shrank from the suit he urged. But he refused
Refusal. And, as from the shallow ford
Returning, on the bank he knelt in prayer."
The poet also throws light on the much disputed passage, Rev. 19:13: "And he was clothed in a vesture dipped in blood." He says:
"Who knows not
The loves of David and young Jonathan,
When in unwitting rivalry of hearts
The son of Jesse won a nobler wreath
Than garlands pluck'd in war and dipp'd in blood."
In another passage he expressly refers to this passage:
"The Lord of hosts,
Apparell'd in a vesture dipp'd in blood."
John the Baptist said that Christ when he came, would baptize the wicked in the fires of hell. Bickersteth, in the "Millennial Sabbath," catches the spirit of this when he describes how God utterly ruined some of the fallen angels:
"He hurled them down
Like meteors through the lurid vault, and fix'd
Their adamantine fetters to a rock
Of adamant, submerged, not consumed, Beneath the lake of fire."
And the wicked sank -
"Still down, still ever down, from deep to deep"
Into the outer darkness, till at last
The fiery gulf received them, and they plunged
Beneath Gehennah's sulphureous waves
In the abyss of ever enduring woe."
This poet also gives us a significant exposition of the "baptism of suffering:"
"The Sun
Of Righteousness, with healing in his wings,
Has risen upon a world weary of night:
Most glorious, when emergent from the flood
That from far Lebanon to Kadesh roll'd
Its waves of fire baptismal, Zion rose
In perfect beauty."============
[From Appendix, II, pp. 7-19.]
Baptist History Vindicated
Appendix III
This statement, of course, clearly points to the act of Baptism by immersion.
The Rt. Rev. Charles John Ellicott, D.D., Bishop of Glouster, is well known to all. He writes: "Excuse a. very busy man only answering question 4. The other questions you will be able to answer yourself through Prof. Thayer's edition of Grimm's Lexicon of the New Testament, and Bingham's Antiquities. As to question 4, the Church of England would not, I believe, refuse immersion if asked for." Without requoting Thayer and Bingham, I shall present the Bishop's own words as taken from his New Testament Commentary. On Matthew 3:1, he says: "The baptism was, as the name implied, an immersion, and commonly, though not necessarily, in running water." On the baptism of the Holy Spirit, Matt. 3:11, he says: "As heard and understood at the time, the baptism of the Holy Ghost would imply that the souls baptized would be plunged, as it were, in that creative and informing Spirit which was the source of hope and holiness and wisdom." And in the parallel passage, Acts 1:5, vol. 1, p. 2, he also says: "Now they were told that their spirits were to be as fully baptized, i,.e., plunged into the power of the divine Spirit, as their bodies had been plunged into the waters of the Jordan."
In the passage Mark 7:1-4, which is largely used as a proof text for sprinkling, the washing of pots, etc., Bishop Ellicott says: "The Greek verb differs from that of the previous verse, and implies the washing or immersion (the verb is that from which our word 'baptize' comes to us) of the whole body, as the former does of part. The idea on which the practice rested was not one of cleanliness or health, but of arrogant exclusiveness, fastening on the thought of ceremonial purity. They might have come, in the crowd of the market, into passing contact with a Gentile, and his touch was as defiling as a corpse. So, too, the washing of cups and the like was because they might have been touched by a heathen, and therefore impure lips."
On Acts 8:37, the baptism of the eunuch, Bishop Ellicott remarks: "The Greek preposition might mean simply 'unto' the water, but the universality or immersion in toe practice of the early church supports the English version. The eunuch would lay aside his garments, descend chest deep into the water, and be plunged under it 'in the name of the Lord Jesus' - the only formula recognized in the Acts." (Com. vol. 2, p. 54)
He also declares that the immersion of the jailer, Acts 16:27-34, was perfectly possible. His words are: "A public prison was likely enough to contain a bath or pool of some kind, where the former (immersion) would be feasible." (Ellicott, Com., vol. 2, p. 109.)
Bishop Ellicott further says: "Jewish ablutions . . . had nothing in common with the figurative act which portrayed through immersion the complete disappearance of the old nature, and by emerging again, the beginning of a totally new life." (Life of Christ, p. 110.)
The Rt. Rev. Randall Thomas Davidson, D.D., is Bishop of Winchester. He is a great favorite with the Queen and is said to owe his appointment to her influence. The Queen recently bestowed on him the distinguished honor "Prelate of the order of the Garter." The Bishop thanked me for my letter and referred me to some authorities already quoted. "As to the position of the Church of England in the matter," says he, "the Bishop thinks that it is sufficiently defined by the two rubrics in the Prayer Book, 'The Ministration of public Baptism of Infants.'" "In answer to your last enquiry," the Bishop continues, "at least one important church in this Diocese possesses a font for the immersion of adults."
Dr. W. Boyd Carpenter, Bishop of Rippon, in "The Great Charter of Christ," p. 155, says: "The old heathen held his right arm aloft out of the baptismal water, refusing to consecrate to holier uses the arm which had struck down his foes, and which should do so again. He at least declined to pretend to accept Christ's complete sovereignty over him. But many baptized Christians keep up the show of faith in Christ, and yet break the law which Christ consecrated by His sanction."
The Rt. Rev. George Rodney Eden, D.D., Bishop of Wakefield, referred me to a long list of authorities. I shall quote such as have not been already given. For the meaning of the word he refers me to Sophocles' Lexicon. Sophocles defines the word "to dip, to immerse, to sink." He then remarks: "There is no evidence that Luke and Paul and the other writers of the New Testament put upon this verb meanings not recognized by the Greeks."
Singular enough the next two writers to whom the Bishop of Wakefield refers are the two well-known Baptists, D. B. Ford, Studies on the Baptismal Question, and T. J. Conant, Baptizein. Dr. Conant says: "From the preceding example it appears, that the ground idea expressed in this word is 'to put in or under the water, (or other penetrable substance), so as to entirely immerse or submerge;' that this act is always expressed in the literal application of the word, and is the basis of its metaphorical uses. This ground idea is expressed in English, in the various connections where the word occurs, by the terms (synonymous in this ground element) to immerse, immerge, submerge, to dip, to plunge, to imbathe, to whelm."
The only authority that he suggests as favorable to "affusion" is "The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles." It is significant that the New Testament is not quoted as favorable to sprinkling. The Bishop calls my attention to the Baptistery in Cranabrook, Kent, "as a good example." The Rector of that church says that the baptistery was built in 1720. The Bishop concludes: "Our fonts are large enough for dipping infants and if adults demanded It, arrangements would be made for their immersion."
The Rev. John Percival, D.D., Bishop of Hereford, endorses the meaning of the word as laid down in Grimm which we have already seen (in Thayer) means to dip.
The Rt. Rev. John Wogan Festing, D.D., Bishop of St. Albans, refers me to Wall's History of Infant Baptism and to Dr. Gibson on the Thirty Nine Articles. Dr. Wall says: "Their general and ordinary way was to baptize by immersion, or dipping the person, whether it were an infant, or grown man or woman, into the water. This is so plain and clear by an infinite number of passages, that, as one cannot but pity the weak endeavours of such Paedobaptists as would maintain the negative of it, so also we ought to disown and show a dislike of the profane scoffs which some people give to the English anti-Paedobaptists merely for their use of dipping. "
And Dr. G. S. Gibson, whom the Bishop endorses, in the only place in which he refers to the act of baptism, quotes with approval the words of the late scholarly Bishop Lightfoot, which are as follows: Baptism is the grave of the old man (Col. 2:12), and the birth of the new. As he sinks beneath the baptismal waters, the believer buries there all his corrupt affections and past sins; as he emerges thence, he rises regenerate, quickened to new hopes and a new life. . . . Thus baptism is an image of his participation both in the death and in the resurrection of Christ." "It is obvious," the Bishop adds, "how much the dramatic impression of baptism and its representative force is increased where immersion is the method employed." Vol. 2, p. 622, note.
The Rev. William Alexander, D.D., LL.D., D.C.L., Archbishop of Armagh, writes as follows: EAGLE LODGE, WOODALL, LINCOLNSHIRE.
August 1. 1898.
John T. Christian, LL.D., London:
My Dear Sir: - I am not well and away from my books, so I will attempt to say but little. I cannot produce offhand at what date sprinkling (or pouring) was substituted for immersion. I take it that the substitution came from our colder climate very much. Yet even the rubric in our Service for the Public Baptism of infants supposes dipping to be the ordinary practice, and this must be the attitude of the Church of England and Ireland (theoretically) towards Baptism.
In my present See there is no Baptistery, but when my clergy have adults to baptize, I always instruct them to find out if immersion is desired and in that case to prepare a font or a laver, which is easily done, though not of stately structure. The symbolism of Rom. vi. is, of course, much more strikingly brought out by immersion.
Yours Most Truly, WILLIAM, Armagh.
The Rt. Rev. J. C. Ryle, D.D., Bishop of Liverpool, writes: "I do not think there are any baptisteries in my Diocese, though I remember there were some in the county of Suffolk when I had a church there. If an adult person wishes to be baptized by immersion, the clergyman ought to make provision for it." In his book on Baptism, pp. 10, 11, Bishop Ryle has given us a clear statement of the attitude of the Church of England toward immersion. He said: "The Baptismal service expressly sanctions 'dipping' in the most plain terms. To say, as many Baptists do, that the Church of England is opposed to baptism by immersion is a melancholy proof of the ignorance in which many Dissenters live. Thousands, I am afraid, find fault with the Prayer-book without ever having examined its contents. If anyone wishes to be baptized by 'dipping' in the Church of England, let him understand that the parish clergyman is just as' ready to dip him as the Baptist and that 'immersion' may be had in Church as well as in Chapel."
The Right Rev. J. Wordsworth, D.D., who is a son of the distinguished poet of that name, referred me to the Greek lexicons and to Wall on Infant Baptism which we have already quoted and found to be so favorable to immersion.
The Right Rev. B. F. Westcott, D.D., the distinguished author and scholar and Bishop of Durham, endorses the definition of Thayer in his lexicon that baptizo means to dip and says: "The mind of the Church of England is clearly expressed in the Rubrics of the Service; and there is, I think, a growing desire to restore immersion, especially in the case of adults. 1 am not aware that there is any permanent provision for the immersion of adults in this Diocese - most of the fonts are for the immersion of infants -- but I have heard of temporary provisions being made."
The Right Rev. John Owen, D.D., Bishop of St. David's, writes: "I will only add that several churches of this Diocese have baptisteries and that adult candidates are baptised by immersion when they desire it." Not only in the Diocese of Bishop Owen but throughout Wales in many of the parish churches there are baptisteries. I know that in the important church of St. John. Cardiff, where Canon E. T. Thompson, M.A., D.D., is Vickar. This baptistery was erected when alterations were made in the church in 1892 at the request of the Vickar. ============== [From Baptist History Vindicated, Appendix, III, pp. 19-25.]
Baptist History Vindicated Index
Baptist History Homepage