BACKSLIDING BACKSLIDING against the laws of his country, and a pardon | stre after riches, attended with extreme diffidence were tendered him on certain terms while under of future events, making a person rob himself of sentence of death, which pardon he madly rejects the necessary comforts of life, for fear of dimi from disaffection with the terms, it might be said, nishing his riches. See COVETOUSNESS and MISER. the man dies, because he rejected the offered par- AVERSION, hatred, or dislike. Dr. Watts don, whereas the real ground of his condemna- and others oppose aversion to desire. When we tion is his previous crime. The same holds in look, say they, upon an object as good, it excites the case of sinners under the Gospel. Their desire; but when we look upon an object as evil, voluntary rejection of proffered mercy greatly it awakens what we call aversion or avoidance. ilustrates the deep-rooted depravity of their hearts, But Lord Kaimes observes that aversion is opand in the same proportion displays the justice posed to affection, and not to desire. We have of God in their punishment. See Dwight's an affection to one person, we have an aversion to Theology, vol. ii. serm. 56. Janeway's Letters on another; the former disposes us to do good, the the Atonement. Beman on the Atonement. Mur- latter to do ill. dock's Sermon on the Atonement. Review of AUDIENTES, an order of catechumens in Mardork in Christian Adrocate, vol. v.-B.] the primitive Christian church. They were so ATTRIBUTES OF GOD are the several called from their being admitted to hear sermons quities or perfections of the Divine nature. and the Scriptures read in the church; but they Se distinguish them into the negative and po- were not allowed to be present at the prayers. sitive or affirmative. The negative are such as AUGSBURGH, or AUGUSTAN CONremove from him whatever is imperfect in crea-FESSION, a celebrated confession of faith drawn tures: such are infinity, immutability, immor-up by Luther and Melancthon on behalf of tality, &c. The positive are such as assert some themselves and other ancient reformers, and preperection in God which is in and of himself, and sented in 1550 to the emperor Charles V. at the which in the creatures, in any measure, is from diet of Augusta, or Augsburgh, in the name of bum. This distinction is now mostly discarded. the evangelic body. This confession contains Some distinguish them into absolute and relative: twenty-eight chapters, of which the greatest part abute ones are such as agree with the essence is employed in representing with perspicuity and of God; as Jehovah, Jah, &c.: relative ones are truth the religious opinions of the Protestants, has agree with him in time, with some re- and the rest in pointing out the errors and abuses spet to his creatures, as Creator, Governor, Pre- that occasioned their separation from the church rver, Redeemer, &c. But the more commonly of Rome. The leading doctrines of this confesreceived distinction of the attributes of God, is sion are, the true and essential divinity of the into communicable and incommunicable ones. Son of God; his substitution and vicarious saThe communicable ones are those of which there crifice; and the necessity, freedom, and efficacy Se resemblance in men; as goodness, holi- of Divine grace. A civil war followed this diet ne, wisdom, &c. the incommunicable ones are that lasted upwards of twenty years, but which such as there is no appearance or shadow of in only spread the new opinions, instead of extirpaman; as independence, immutability, immensity, ting them. an eternity. See those different articles in this work; and Bates, Charnock, Abernethy, and Surivon the Divine Perfections. AUGUSTINS, a religious order, who observed the rule of St. Augustin, prescribed them by pope Alexander IV. in 1256. This rule was ATTRITION. The casuists of the church to have all things in common; the rich who enof Rome have made a distinction between a per-ter among them to sell their possessions, and tead an imperfect contrition. The latter they give them to the poor; to employ the first part all attrition; which is the lowest degree of re- of the morning in labouring with their hands, is ftare, or a sorrow for sin arising from a sense and the rest in reading: when they go abroad, to of size, or any temporal inconvenience attend-go always two in company; never to eat but in ng the conmission of it, or merely from fear of their monastery, &c. tashment due to it, without any resolution 657 no more: in consequence of which doctrue, they teach that, after a wicked and flagicourse of life, a man may be reconciled to t and his sins forgiven on his death-bed, by e wa sing them to the priest with this imperfect three of sorrow and repentance. This distincton was settled by the council of Trent. It jesertag, however, be easily shown that the mere borrow for sin because of its consequences, and se on account of its evil nature, is no more acot be to God than hypocrisy itself can be. AVARICE is an immoderate love to and de AUSTERITY, a state of rigid mortification. It is distinguished from severity and rigour thus: Austerity, relates to the manner of living; severity to the manner of thinking; rigour to the manner of punishing. To austerity is opposed effeminacy; to severity, relaxation; to rigour, clemency. A hermit is austere in his life; a casuist severe in his application of religion or law; a judge rigorous in his sentences. AUTOCEPHALI BISHOPS. This denomination was given to such bishops in the primitive church as were exempted from the jurisdiction of others. BACKBITING. See DETRACTION and BACKSLIDING, the act of turning from the duty. It may be considered as partial B. slide with the whole bent of their will; as rolun tary, when applied to those who, after professing to know the truth, wilfully turn from it, and live in the practice of sin; as final, when the mind is La ajal to trup believers, who do not back-given up to judicial hardness, as in the case of BAPTISM Judas. Partial backsliding must be distinguished from hypocrisy, as the former may exist where there are gracious intentions on the whole; but the latter is a studied profession of appearing to be what we are not. BAPTISM not, however, essential to salvation; for mere par ticipation of sacraments cannot qualify men for heaven: many have real grace, and are consequently in a salvable state, before they were bap tized: besides, to suppose it essential is to put it in the place of that which it signifies. Baptism has been supposed by many learned persons to have had its origin from the Jewish church; in which, they maintain, it was the practice, long before Christ's time, to baptize proselytes or converts to their faith, as part of the ceremony of their admission. "It is strange to me," says Dr. Doddridge, "that any should doubt of this, when it is plain from express passages in the Jewish law, that no Jew who had lived like a Gentile for one day could be restored to the communion of this church without it. Compare Numb. xix. 19 and 20, and many other precepts relating to ceremonial pollutions, in which it may be seen, that the Jews were rendered incapable of appearing before God in the tabernacle or temple, till they were washed either by bathing or sprinkling." Others, however, insist that the Jewish proselyte baptism is not by far so ancient; and that John the Baptist was the first adminis trator of baptism among the Jews. The causes of backsliding are-the cares of the world; improper connexions; inattention to secret or closet duties; self-conceit and dependence; indulgence; listening to and parleying with temptations. A backsliding state is manifested by indifference to prayer and self-examination; trifling or unprofitable conversation; neglect of public ordinances; shunning the people of God; associating with the world; thinking lightly of sin; neglect of the Bible; and often by gross immorality. The consequences of this awful state are-loss of character; loss of comfort; loss of usefulness; and, as long as any remain in this state, a loss of a well-grounded hope of future happiness. To avoid this state, or recover from it, we should beware of the first appearance of sin; be much in prayer; attend the ordinances; and unite with the people of God. We should consider the awful instances of apostacy, as Saul, Judas, Demas, &c.; the many warnings we have of it, Matt. xxiv. 13. Heb. x. 38. Luke ix. 62; how it grieves the Holy Spirit; and how wretched it makes us; above all things, our dependence should be on God, that we may always be directed by his Spirit, and kept by his power. See APOSTACY. BANGORIAN CONTROVERSY, so called from Bangor, or the bishop thereof. Bishop Hoadley, the bishop of that diocese, preaching before George I., asserted the supreme authority of Christ, as king in his own kingdom; and that he had not delegated his power, like temporal law-John's baptism was a preparatory rite, referring givers during their absence from their kingdom, the subjects to Christ, who was about to confer to any persons, as his vicegerents or deputies. on them spiritual blessings, Matt. iii. 11. John's This important sermon may be seen reprinted in baptism was confined to the Jews; but the the Liverpool Theological Repository, vol. v. p. Christian was common to Jews and Gentiles, 301. In 1717, he also published his Preservative, Matt. iii. 5. 7. xxviii. 19. It does not appear in which he advanced some positions contrary to that John had any formula of administration; temporal and spiritual tyranny, and in behalf of but the Christian baptism has, viz. "In the the civil and religious liberties of mankind: upon name," &c. The baptism of John was the conwhich he was violently opposed, accused, and per-cluding scene of the legal dispensation, and, in secuted, by the advocates for church power; but fact, part of it; and to be considered as one of he was defended and supported by the civil pow-those "divers washings" among the Jews; for ers, and his abilities and meekness gained him the plaudits of many. The baptism of John, and that of our Saviour and his apostles, have been supposed to be the same; because they agree, it is said, in their subjects, form, and end. But it must be observed, that though there be an agreement in some particulars, yet there is not in all. The immediate institutor of John's baptism was God the Father, John 1. 33; but the immediate institutor of the Christian baptism was Christ, Matt. xxviii. 19. he did not attempt to make any alteration in the Jewish religion, nor did the persons he baptized BANIANS, a religious sect in the empire of cease to be members of the Jewish church on acthe Mogul, who believe a Metempsychosis; and count of their baptism: but Christian baptism is will therefore eat no living creature, nor kill even the regular entrance into, and is a part of, the noxious animals, but endeavour to release them evangelical dispensation, Gal. iii. 27. It does not when in the hands of others. The name Banian appear from the inspired narrative (however prois sometimes extended to all the idolators of India,bable from inferential reasoning), that any but as contradistinguished from the Mahometans. BAPTISM, the ceremony of washing, or the application of water to a person, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, by which he is initiated into the visible church. Baptism exhibits to us the blessings of pardon, salvation through Jesus Christ, union to and communion with him, the out-pouring of the Spirit, regeneration, and sanctification. From baptism results the obligation of repentance, love to Christ, and perpetual devotedness to his praise. Baptisin does not constitute a visible subject, but only recognizes one. Ministers only have a right to administer it, and have a negative voice in opposition to all claims. It is an ordinance binding on all who have been given up to God in it; and to be perpetuated to the end of the world. It is John himself was engaged as operator in his baptism; whereas Christ himself baptized none; but his disciples, by his authority, and in his name. John iv. 2. Baptism has been the subject of long and sharp controversy, both as it respects the subject and the mode. To state all that has been said on both sides would be impossible in a work of this kind. An abstract, however, of the chief arguments, I think it my duty to present to the reader, in order that he may judge for himself. As to the subject. The ANTIPÆDOBAPTISTS hold the belief that adults only are proper subjects, because Christ's commission to baptize appears to them to restrict this ordinance to such only as BAPTISM are taught, or made disciples; and that, consequently infants, who cannot be thus taught, are to be excluded It does not appear, say they, that the apostles, in executing Christ's commission, ever baptized any but those who were first instructed in the Christian faith, and professed their belief of it. They contend that infants can reerive no benefit from it, are not capable of faith and repentance, which are to be considered as pre-requisites. As to the mode. BAPTISM They observe that the meaning of the word Bart signifies immersion or dipping only; that John baptized in Jordan; that he chose a place where there was much water; that Jesus came up out of the water; that Philip and the eunuch went down both into the water. That the terms washing, purifying, burying in baptism, so often mentioned in Scripture, allude to this mode; that Emersion only was the practice of the apostles and the first Christians; and that it was only kad aside from the love of novelty, and the cold-years, ever pretended to say it was unlawful to ness of our climate. These positions, they think are so clear from Scripture, and the history of the church, that they stand in need of but little argument to support them. Further, they also sist that all positive institutions depend entirely um the will and declaration of the institutor, and that, therefore, reasoning by analogy from previous abrogated rites, is to be rejected, and the express command of Christ respecting baptism ought to be our rule. PÆDOBAPTISTS. That infants are to be received into the church, and as such baptized, is also inferred from the following passages of Scripture: Gen. xvii. Isa. xliv. 3. Matt xix. 13. Luke ix. 47, 48. Mark ix. 14. Acts ii. 38, 39. Rom. xi. 17, 21. 1 Cor. vii. 14. Though there are no express examples in the New Testament of Christ and his apostles baptizing infants, yet this is no proof that they were excluded. Jesus Christ actually blessed little children; and it would be hard to believe that such received his blessing, and yet were not to be members of the Gospel church. If Christ received them, and would have us receive them in his name, how can it be reconciled to keep them out of the visible church? Besides, if children were not to be baptized, it would have been expressly forbidden. None of the Jews had any apprehension of the rejection of infants, which they must have had, if infants had been rejected. As whole households were baptized, it is probable there were children among them. From the year 400 to 1150, no society of men, in all that period of 750 baptize infants; and still nearer the time of our Saviour, there appears to have been scarcely any one that so much as advised the delay of infant baptism. Irenæus, who lived in the second century, and was well acquainted with Polycarp, who was John's disciple, declares expressly that the church learned from the apostles to baptize children. Origen, in the third century, affirmed that the custom of baptizing infants was received from Christ and his apostles. Cyprian, and a council of ministers (held about the year 254), no less than sixtysix in number, unanimously agreed that children The Paylobaptists, however, are of a different might be baptized as soon as they were born. rizon. As to the subject, they believe that quali- Ambrose, who wrote about 274 years from the fed adults who have not been baptized before apostles, declares that the baptism of infants had are certainly proper subjects; but, then, they think been the practice of the apostles themselves, and a that infants are not to be excluded. They of the church, till that time. The catholic believe that, as the Abrahamic and the Christian church every where declared, says Chrysostom, ewenants are the same, Gen. xvii. 7. Heb. viii. in the fifth century, that infants should be bap12; that as children were admitted under the tized; And Augustin affirmed that he never fr; and that as baptism is now a scal, sign, heard nor read of any Christian, catholic, or er confirmation of this covenant, infants have as sectarian, but who always held that infants were great a right to it as the children had a right to to be baptized. They further believe, that there the seal of circumcision under the law, Acts i. 39. needed no mention in the New Testament of reRom. iv. 11. That if children are not to be ceiving infants into the church, as it had been ptized because there is no positive command once appointed and never repealed. The dictates a, for the same reason women should not come of nature, also, in parental feelings; the verdict the Lord's Supper; we should not keep the of reason in favour of privileges; the evidence in first day of the week, nor attend public worship, favour of children being sharers of the seals of fe none of these are expressly commanded; that grace, in common with their parents, for the space 1 ant baptism had been a human invention, of 4000 years; and especially the language of prowald it have been so universal in the first phecy, in reference to the children of the Gospel rears, and yet no record left when it was in-church, make it very probable that they were not trahaxsi, nor any dispute or controversy about to be rejected. So far from confining it to adults Some bring it to these two ideas: 1. That it must be remembered that there is not a single d de constitute in the Jewish church, the instance recorded in the New Testament in mbership of infants, and admitted them to it which the descendants of Christian parents were regious ordinance, Gen. xvii. Gal. iii. 14, baptized in adult years. 17 2 That this right of infants to church embership was never taken away. This being var case, infants must be received, because God has Ltd it; and, since infants must be received, e be either without baptism or with it: but The received without baptism, therefore ant trust, of necessity, be baptized. Hence, schar, that under the Gospel, infants are still 4sure exactly in the same relation to God and ch, in which they were originally placed der the former dispensation. That infants are not proper subjects for baptism because they cannot profess faith and repentance, they deny. This objection falls with as much weight upon the institution of circumcision as infant baptism; since they are as capable, or are as fit subjects for the one as the other. It is generally acknowledged, that, if infants die (and a great part of the human race do die in infancy,) they are saved: if this be the case, then, why refuse them the sign in infancy, if they are capable of enjoying the thing signified? "Why," says Dr. Owen, is it the will of God that unbelievers | the Spirit, pouring must be the mode of adminisshould not be baptized? It is because, not grant-tration; for that is the Scriptural term most ing them the grace he will not grant them the commonly and properly used for the communicasign. If God, therefore, denies the sign to the tion of divine influences. There is no object infant seed of believers, it must be because he de- whatever in all the New Testament so frequently nies them the grace of it; and then all the chil- and so explicitly signified by baptism as these dren of believing parents (upon these principles) divine influences. Matt. iii. 11. Mark i. 8, 10. dying in their infancy, must, without hope, be Luke iii. 16 to 22. John i. 33. Acts i. 5. ii. 38, eternally damned. I do not say that all must be 39. viii. 12, 17. xi. 15, 16. The term sprinkling, so who are not baptized; but all must be so whom also, is made use of in reference to the act of puGod would not have baptized." Something is rifying, Isa. lii. 15. Heb. ix. 13, 14. Ezek. xxxvi. said of baptism, it is observed, that cannot agree 25, and therefore cannot be inapplicable to bap to infants: faith goes before baptism; and, as tismal purification. But it is observed that John none but adults are capable of believing, so no baptized in Jordan: to this it is replied, to infer others are capable of baptism; but it is replied, if always a plunging of the whole body in water infants must not be baptized because something from this word, would, in many instances, be is said of baptism that does not agree to infants, false and absurd: the same Greek preposition Mark xvi. 16, then infants must not be saved, is used when it is said they should be baptized because something is said of salvation that does with fire; while few will assert that they should not agree to infants, Mark xvi. 16. As none be plunged into it. The apostle, speaking of but adults are capable of believing, so, by the ar- Christ, says, he came not () by water only, but gument of the Baptists, none but adults are capa-(v) by water and blood. There the same word ble of salvation: for he that believeth not shall be damned. But Christ, it is said, set an example of adult baptism. True; but he was baptized in honour to John's ministry, and to conform himself to what he appointed to his followers; for which last reason he drank of the sacramental cup: but this is rather an argument for the Pædobaptists than against them; since it plainly shows, as Doddridge observes, that baptism may be administered to those who are not capable of all the purposes for which it was designed; since Jesus Christ, not being a sinner, could not be capable of that faith and repentance which are said to be necessary to this ordi nance. As to the mode. is translated by, and with justice and propriety, for we know no good sense in which we could say he came in water. It has been remarked, that is more than a hundred times, in the New Testament, rendered "at," and in a hundred and fifty others it is translated with. If it be rendered so here, "John baptized at Jordan," or with the water of Jordan, there is no proof from thence that he plunged his disciples in it. It is urged that John's choosing a place where there was much water is a certain proof of immersion. To which it is answered, that as there went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, that by choo ing a place where there were many streams or riv lets, it would be much more expeditiously perform ed by pouring; and that it seems in the nature of things highly improbable that John should have baptized this vast multitude by immersion, to say nothing of the indecency of both sexes being bap tized together. They believe that the word B signifies to dip or plunge; but that the terms, which is only a derivative of BT, and consequently must be somewhat less in its signification, should be invariably used in the New Testament to ex- Jesus, it is said, came up out of the water; but press plunging, is not so clear. It is therefore this is said to be no proof of his being immersed, doubted whether dipping be the only meaning, as the Greek term a often signifies from; for and whether Christ absolutely enjoined immer-instance, "who hath warned you to flee from," sion, and that it is his positive will that no other not out of, "the wrath to come," with many should be used. As the word STC is used for others which might be mentioned. the various ablutions among the Jews, such as Again: it is said that Philip and the eunuch sprinkling, pouring, &c. Heb. ix. 10; for the went down both into the water. To this it is custom of washing before meals, and the washing answered that here is no proof of immersion; for of household furniture, pots, &c.; it is evident if the expression of their going down into the from hence that it does not express the manner water necessarily includes dipping, then Phili of doing, whether by immersion or affusion, but was dipped as well as the eunuch. The prepe only the thing done, that is, washing, or the appli-sition () translated into, often signifies no mor cation of water in one form or other. Dr. Owen than to or unto. See Matt, xv. 24. Rom. x. 1 observes, that it no where signifies to dip but as Acts xxviii. 14. Matt. xvii. 27. iii. 11. So that denoting a mode of and in order to washing or from all these circumstances, it cannot be conclu cleansing; and, according to others, the mode of ded that there was a single person of all the b use is only the ceremonial part of a positive in- tized who went into the water ankle deep. stitute; just as in the supper of the Lord, the to the apostle's expression, "buried with him i time of the day, the number and posture of com- baptism," they think it has no force; and that municants, the quality and quantity of bread does not allude to any custom of dipping, an and wine, are circumstances not accounted es- more than our baptismal crucifixion and deat sential by any party of Christians. As to the has any such reference. It is not the sign h Hebrew word Tabal, it is considered as a generic the thing signified that is here alluded to. term; that its radical, primary, and proper mean-Christ was buried, and rose again to a heaver ing is to tinge, to dye, to wet, or the like: which life, so we by baptism signify that we are cut primary design is effected by different modes of from the life of sin, that we may rise again t application. If in baptism also there is an ex-new life of faith and love. A pressive emblem of the descending influence of To conclude this article, it is observed agai BAPTISM BARDESANISTS the mode of immersion, that, as it carries with it [ture the term Baptism is used as referring to the too much of the appearance of a burdensome rite work of the Spirit on the heart, Matt. iii. 11.; also f the Gospel dispensation; that as it is too into the sufferings of Christ, Matt. xx. 22; and to cent for so solemn an ordinance; as it has a so much of the Gospel as John the Baptist taught tendency to agitate the spirits, often rendering the his disciples, Acts xviii. 25. Fabject unfit for the exercise of proper thoughts and affections, and, indeed, utterly incapable of them; as in many cases the immersion of the body would in all probability be instant death; as in other situations it would be impracticable for want of a sufficient quantity of water, it cannot be considered as necessary to the ordinance of baptism. See Gale, Robinson, Stennett, Gill, and Booth, es Antipadobaptism; and Wall, Henry, Bradary, Bostwick, Towgood, Addington, Williams, Elarde, Miller, Erans, &c. on the other side. BAPTISM OF THE DEAD, a custom which anciently prevailed among some people in Africa, of giving baptism to the dead. The third ncil of Carthage speaks of it as a thing that rant Christians are fond of: Gregory NaCan also takes notice of the same superstitious on. The practice seems to be grounded on a an idea, that, when men had neglected to receive tism in their lifetime, some compensation might The Baptists subsist under two denominations, wade for this default by receiving it after death. viz. the Particular, or Calvinistical, and the BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD, a practice General, or Arminian. Their modes of church erly in use, when a person dying without government and worship are the same as those of 44m, another was baptized in his stead; thus the Independents; in the exercise of which they posing that God would accept the baptism of are protected, in common with other dissenters, by We proxy, as though it had been administered to the act of toleration. Some of both denominations principal. Chrysostom says, this was prac-allow of mixed communion; by which it is und among the Marcionites with a great deal of derstood that those who have not been baptized by diculous ceremony, which he thus describes:- immersion, on the profession of their faith, may After any catechumen was dead, they had a sit down at the Lord's table with those who have ng man under the bed of the deceased: then, been thus baptized. Others, however, disallow it, ng to the dead man, they asked him whether supposing that such have not been actually bapwould receive baptism: and he making no an- tized at all. See FREE COMMUNION. , the other answered for him, and said he d be baptized in his stead; and so they bapd the living for the dead." If it can be proved me think it can) that this practice was as arty as the days of the apostle Paul, it might The Baptists in America and in the East and ably form a solution of those remarkable West Indies are chiefly Calvinists, and hold ocde in 1 Cor. xv. 29: "If the dead rise not at casional fellowship with the Particular Baptist a what shall they do who are baptized for the churches in England. Those in Scotland, having The allusion of the apostle to this prac-imbibed a considerable part of the principles of ty, however, is rejected by soine, and especially Messrs. Glass and Sandeman, have no commuDr. Doddridge, who thinks it too early: he nion with the other. They have liberally conparaphrases the passage: "Such are our tributed, however, towards the translation of the es and hopes as Christians, else, if it were not Scriptures into the Bengalee language, which what should they do who are baptized in token some of the Baptist brethren are now accomplishher embracing the Christian faith, in the rooming in the East. See Rippon's Baptist Register, dead, who are just fallen in the cause of vol. i. p. 172-175; Adams's View of Religions, n but are yet supported by a succession of article Baptists; Erans's Sketch of Religious onverts, who immediately offer themselves Denominations. BAPTISTS, a denomination of Christians who maintain that baptism is to be administered by immersion, and not by sprinkling. See BAPTISM. Although there were several Baptists among the Albigenses, Waldenses, and the followers of Wickliffe, it does not appear that they were formed into any stability until the time of Menno, about the year 1536. See ANABAPTISTS and MENNONITES. About 1644 they began to make a considerable figure in England, and spread themselves into several separate congregations. They separated from the Independents about the year 1638, and set up for themselves under the pastoral care of Mr. Jesse; and, having renounced their former baptism, they sent over one of their number to be immersed by one of the Dutch Anabaptists of Amsterdam, that he might be qualified to baptize his friends in England after the same manner. Some of them observe the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath, apprehending the law that enjoined it not to have been repealed by Christ. up their places, as ranks of soldiers that BAPTISTERY, the place in which the cerence to the combat in the room of their com-mony of baptism is performed. In the ancient s who have just been slain in their sight?" church, it is said, it was generally a building Lay baptism we find to have been permitted by separate and distinct from the church. It conthe common prayer-books of king Edward sisted of an ante-room, where the adult persons to en Elizabeth, when an infant was in im- be baptized made their confession of faith; and ate danger of death, and a lawful minister an inner room, where the ceremony of baptism at he had. This was founded on a mis-was performed. Thus it continued to the sixth tion of the impossibility of salvation century, when the baptisteries began to be taken * the sacrament of baptism; but afterwards, into the church. they came to have clearer notions of the sats, it was unanimously resolved, in a conen held in 1575, that even private baptism in necessity was only to be administered by BAPTISM METAPHORICAL. In Scrip BARDESANISTS, a sect so denominated from their leader Bardesanes, a Syrian, of Edessa, in Mesopotamia, who lived in the second century. They believed that the actions of men depended altogether on fate, and that God himself is subject to necessity.-They denied the resurrection of |