I, let the reading public be charitable to its imperfections, and may the Lord of Truth bless his l100th mission!. This over-worship of the Father has placed them on a level. If read carefully, these Fathers will shed much light on the faith and practice of the early Christians.
Sonlt' of the "Apostolic Fathers", so-called - (as for txampJe Clement, of Rome, Hermas, 1 gnatlus :U1d PoJyc且rp) have not so little to say. From the best available evidence.ヤ it appears that 日ngefr0111 the latter part (near the end) of the first century to the latter part of the second century (.e. second. Does not this language of Barnafxls ck>aTI } for his view of the act in baptism 11and a150. for the ql1alification of a suiLlhl日sl1bject for the rite?.
But the facts of the case do not seem to be correct to say that Jl1stin even remotely refers to the practice of baptism in the case of infants. BlI some of the advocates of infant baptism tell LIS that Tertullian's opposition to the practice was not able to arrest him; In some cases, these cerl'l11onis obscured the original threshold of baptism.
Before leaving Tertl 111ian, the reader should be reminded that he was the first of the Church Fathers to conclusively mention infant baptism. Let us see, in the next place, some of the teachings of Httpolytus, who, though his history is Roman, is himself nevertheless a Greek. Cyprian is the first of the Church Fathers to celebrate infant baptism, and by referring to his 58th Epistle (p.353, vol.
Now, a very cursory reading, even of Cyprian's letter to Fidus, will reveal the reason for his strong advocacy of infant baptism. In his case, as in the case of all the early supporters of the practice, its importance was great. That infant baptism did not arise until the late second or early third century, A.D.
34;baptismal regeneration" and the idea of the consequent necessity of baptism for salvation. It arose, like the practice of 01 b Jordan, join me in the joyons chorus, and I app with me, and stir the wat 巴rsrhytbmicaHy, as in the moves of the dance; for your me. Philip Scbaff, who published in 1885 a history of baptism concerning thi日' 'f'e:-uhing of The Twelve,' as it is called, refers to thピIllanuscri pt as The Old巴stChurch I I ， l I 1ual, " all talking about his intピrndl1(、ed.and ¥'strictけ evaluations， h(.' Sa)勺・'1'11<'calling this unusual attention to a <111<川、 1ll0USbook with less than ten small eights.is obviollS. Post.Apostolic ng巴 froll1tht， destr山 tiOllof J erusalem (A. D. 70)， to the middle of the 1st century the darkest, that is, less of known in Church History. The Didache claims no Apostolic authority; it is simply the summary of what the reputed author learned from personal instruction or oral trajectories to be the teaching of Apostles, and what he sincerely believed himself.け. These writings have bridged the gap between the apostles and the church fathers from the end of the first to the middle. In treating what the Church Fathers say on the subject of baptism11 in the early centuries as subsequent to the age and inspired writings of the apostles, it will be appropriate to introduce a few extracts from this remarkable contemporaneous work. Baptize in the name of the Father after first giving all previous instructions (about the way of life and the way of death). But before baptism the baptizer and the candidate for baptism fast, and any other who can; and tOl1 will command him that is to be baptized to fast one or two days before." After quoting and translating the Didache on. the sl1bject of Baptism, Dr. 34;Baptisl1l will take place after I，rcced instruction in the Way of Lif巴， and the ¥¥'d) of Death. Didact in favor of pouring or sprinkling, certainly ilユllolVsniks immersion except in a case of most peculiar rigid necessity ‑ a necessity which is practically beyond the qlles. . For under what sort of circumstances do we suppose one would be placed wbo could not get a sufficient quantity of water, running. One is an entirely different and similar act from the other, and the tour should not be done by 1Zecessity, because otlzeγ(tlle b吋tizing) is impossible. 61 With this difference in the use of battizo and ekc!zeo in the Didac!te ll1 can be compared what is obtained everywhere between the same two Greek words as used in the Greek of the New Testament. The word battz切 is invariably used in the New Testament when referring to the ordinance of baptism, while the word el?c!zeo, for pOllr, is never so used. Like the New Testament, therefore, the Doctrine of the Twelve, on the one hand, does not recognize infant baptism; on the other hand, his directions concerning baptism are so great as to show that in the use of And to express the latter action, battizo, the only word used in the New Testament to denote what is done in baptism, is set aside, and the word ekc !leo was not foreseen. is used. BAPTIST BOOK . CONCERN ，THE ANTE‑NICENE FATHERS ON BAPTISM
