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

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 baptize you with water unto repentance; but He who cometh after me is greater than I, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.”63    Luke iii. 16. Moreover, I think also that we have not unsuitably set in order the teaching of the Apostle John, who says that “three bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood; and these three are one.”64    1 John v. 8. [It is noteworthy that he quotes the Latin formula, and not that (εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν) of the Greek. Now, the Latin, repeating (in verse 8) the formula (hi tres unum sunt) which belongs to the dubious protasis, is so far evidence that such a verse existed in the old Greek. It is important that the Latin is not conformed to the received formula of the apodosis, “the three agree in one.”] And, unless I am mistaken, we have also explained what our Lord says: “John indeed baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.”65    Acts i. 5. Moreover, I think that we have given no weak reason as the cause of the custom. Let us have a care, although we do that in a subsequent place, that none may think that we are stirring up the present debate on a single article; although this custom even alone ought, among men who have the fear of God, and are lowly, to maintain a chief place.

XIX. Puto nos plene exsecutos praedicationem Baptistae Joannis, unde sermonem sumus exorsi, qui dixit ad Judaeos: Ego quidem vos baptizo aqua in poenitentiam. Qui autem post me venit fortior me est, cujus ego non sum dignus solvere corrigiam calceamenti. Ipse vos baptizabit in Spiritu sancto et igni (Luc. III, 16). Arbitror autem et apostoli Joannis doctrinam nos non inepte disposuisse, qui ait quia tres testimonium perhibent, spiritus et aqua et sanguis, et isti 1204Btres unum sunt (I. Joan. V, 8). Nisi fallor autem, etiam illud explanavimus quod Dominus noster ait: Joannes quidem baptizavit aqua, vos autem baptizabimini in Spiritu sancto (Act. I, 5). Praeterea existimo nos non infirmam rationem reddidisse consuetudinis causam. Tueamur tamen, etsi posteriore loco id facimus, ne qui putet nos unico articulo praesentem altercationem suscitare. Quamquam haec consuetudo etiam sola deberet apud homines timorem Dei habentes et humiles, praecipuum locum obtinere.