8. It is applied by Lucian to an object wet or sprinkled on all sides with spray by rapid motion through water at rest. άgo negizλvÇóμevov. Lucian, V. H. 1. 31. Here surely is no flowing of water over an object.

9. Like xadaipo, it has a medical use to cleanse or purgeἰατροὶ πικρὰν πικροῖς κλύζουσι φάρμακοις χολήν. Plut.-Physicians purge out bitter bile by bitter medicines. Indeed its medical use gave birth to our English word clyster.

10. All lexicographers of any note sustain my use of the word, e. g. Stephens, Scapula, Damm, Hedericus, Ernesti, Passow, Schneider, etc. etc. Hence it is plain that assertions more contrary to fact than Mr. Carson's criticism on me cannot be made, even if I were to say that Mr. Carson criticises from imagination, and not from a knowledge of the language in translating dog water or avog fire. And whatever Mr. Carson's talents, they cannot enable his character as an accurate scholar long to survive such criticisms as he has here given.

In like manner when I say that Josephus uses pántions to denote the rite of baptism, Mr. Carson denies it, and says, "The ἡ βάπτισις is the immersing-βαπτισμός is the rite of immersion.” And yet it must be notorious to any one who has ever read the Fathers, that they do not hesitate to use ẞánrious to denote the rite, in opposition to xarádvois, the act of immersing, as in Sozomen, μια καταδύσει ἐπτιελεῖν τὴν θείαν βάπτισιν. “Το per form the sacred baptism by one immersion."

Many of Mr. Carson's assertions as to tingo, pánto, kovw, and vinto, are of the same kind. Indeed I do not remember that I ever read a writer so many of whose most positive assertions were so totally at war with facts. But success in such an assault on facts is hopeless. The highest talents are entirely unequal to such a war.

§ 63. General view of Patristic uses of ßantico.

But enough has been said to show the entire incorrectness of Mr. Carson's theory of the Patristic uses of ßanticw. I shall therefore conclude this part of the subject by a brief general view of what that usage is.

1. Of course I need not say that they sometimes use the word in the sense to immerse any thing in water, or to denote the state of any thing that sinks in the water or is overflowed by it. And also that from this are derived metaphorical uses to denote immersion in sorrow, ignorance, darkness, sin, pollution,

afflictions, and misery. All this I have before noticed at large. See §§ 3 and 4, and 10 and 28.

2. To wash, implying an effort to cleanse, but not including the effect. In this sense they use it as a translation of the Heb. 77, just as they use Louw. In this case fúrrioμa is taken in connection with κάθαρσις or καθαρισμός; thus, commenting on Is. 1: 16, "Wash you, make you clean," Basil, to denote the idea of washing, uses fanrioua, and to denote purification, he uses xádugais. So in the Apostolic Constitutions we find washings and purifications expressed in the same way.

3. To cleanse or purify by washing, i. e. to wash, including the effect.

But

4. To purify in the most generic sense, either by water, or by truth, or by atonement and expiation, or by trials, or by mourning and sorrow. After what has been said there is no need to offer any proof of the real existence of this sense. here it is peculiarly important to bear in mind the distinction between sacrificial purification, or expiation, and moral purification, or sanctification, to which I have so often referred. For without a clear apprehension of it, much of the language of the Fathers cannot be understood.

5. βαπτισμός and βάπτισμα by synechdoche denote means of purification, e. g. water, blood, fire, oil, air, etc.

6. Pánrioua is also used to denote, comprehensively, a system designed to effect purification in various ways, e. g. Bánrioμα Μωϋσέως, oι νομικὸν or 'Ιουδαϊκόν which Chrysoston interchanges as synonymous with καθάρσιον 'Ιουδαϊκὸν, to denote not an act, nor one rite merely, but a complex system, involving and comprehending various kinds and modes of purification. So Basil says of the Jewish baptism, it recognised a difference of sins, not forgiving all; it required various sacrifices, it made minute regulations as to purity, it separated the polluted and unclean for a time, it observed times and seasons. In all this he is plainly illustrating a system of purification involving many parts, but having one great end, i. e. to purify, either by expiatory sacrifices, or in some other way. So too, the baptism of John or of Christ is often used in like manner to denote a system of purification.

7. They also used it to denote, comprehensively, the actual processes involved in conferring absolution; e. g. if exorcism, divesting of all clothing, immersion, unction, and robing in white, the pronunciation of certain words, and a benediction,

were supposed to be involved in conferring a legal and valid absolution, then the term fázioua was comprehensively used to include all these processes. Any part of the process that purified was also called by the same name. So Origen speaks of baptizing, i. e. purifying with oil. And the Apostolic Constitutions speak of unction as a type of spiritual baptism, i. e. spiritual purification.

8. The result or effect of these processes they also denote by the word baptism or purification, i. e. absolution, remission of sins. It is in this sense that Zonaras, in his Lexicon, defines baptism as being the remission of sins by water and the Spirit. This remission of sins was effected, in their view, not by any energy of the water in itself, but by some mysterious, sanctifying power given to it when the Spirit brooded upon it at the creation, or when Christ was baptized in it, or when the bishop or priest consecrated it, operating in concurrence with the energy of the Holy Spirit, who, according to a divine constitution, diffused and exerted his mighty energies in and through the water. In this way, in their view, was effected the baptism of the Holy Ghost; and the superiority of the baptism of Christ to that of John lay in the fact that John used the simple fluid water, but in that of Christ, a compound fluid, so to speak, was employed, composed of sanctified water, and the influence of the Holy Spirit. On no topic is the eloquence of Chrysostom so fervid, as when he unfolds the purifying, nay, regenerating powers of this semi-material, semi-spiritual compound. As quick as the ocean extinguishes a spark that falls into it, so soon does this mighty compound extinguish the sins of the sinner that falls into it, and makes him pure as the angels and brilliant as the sunbeams of heaven. To symbolize this spotless whiteness of the soul thus miraculously and suddenly obtained, the baptized person was robed in purest white His being stripped perfectly naked before was designed to give to the miraculous energies of the fluid full scope to penetrate every part of body and soul. And in the opinion of some of the Fathers, these waters also had a miraculous power even to heal bodily disease, of which they give us some examples, as true, no doubt, as all other of the lying wonders of that age of fraud and delusion. The word baptize, used in this sense, denoted not merely a transient act, but a permanent and abiding moral change effected by the rite. The soul was conceived of as invested in a robe of spotless purity. Hence baptism is likened to spiritual robes, and the Fa

thers speak of putting on the baptism of Christ, and of preserving their baptism unspotted. Origen preferred the baptism of blood to that of water and the Spirit, because few keep this unspotted till death, but the purity gained by the baptism of a bloody death is polluted no more. The leading idea in this usage of the word is a permanent state or character of purity, and not the act of immersion at all. Indeed, what sense is there in such an expression as keeping the act of immersion unspotted till death? The act is soon over, and all possibility of polluting or making it pure is passed by. And yet Mr. Carson again and again asserts that baptism always denotes the mode of an act, and nothing else.

9. The word baptism is also used as the appropriated name of the rite of Christian Baptism. In this case it approximates in its use, towards a proper name, or a technical term, i. e. the attention of the mind is abstracted from the meaning of the word, though it is in fact significant and is fixed upon the rite for which it stands. So the words Fowler, Fisher, Coffin, White, Black, Green, etc. are in fact significant, and yet when appropriated as names of individuals and families, the attention of the mind is withdrawn from their meaning and fixed upon those whom they represent. In this case the things predicated of these persons have no reference to the meaning of their names, but to their own personal qualities and relations which these names recall. So in speaking of Baptism, though the word signifies purification, the object often is merely to call to mind a given Christian rite. And what would seem to be incongruous uses, if referred to the sense merely, are not so if referred to the rite; e. g. to speak of the ' blackness of Mr. White, or of the whiteness of Mr. Green, or of Mr. Fisher as a hunter, or Mr. Coffin as a physician, would be verbally incongruous, but not in the nature of things. So to speak of the purification of baptism would not be tautology, but would denote the purification effected by the rite bearing that name.

10. Finally, the Fathers gave the name baptism to any transaction regarded by them either as typifying baptism or producing similar effects; e. g. when Elisha raised the axe out of the water by throwing in a stick, Ambrose regards it as a baptism, because as the axe was immersed in the water, so was the sinner in sin-and as the stick raised the axe out of the water, so does baptism, i. e. remission of sins, raise a sinner out of his

sins. The stick, according to him, is of course a type of the cross of Christ. So when Moses, by throwing in the branches of a tree, made the bitter waters of Marah sweet, Ambrose regards it as another kind of baptism, because as the branches made bitter waters sweet, so does baptism make sweet the bitterness of the human heart. Origen regards the passage of Elijah over Jordan, as he was taken up in a chariot of fire, as a wonderful baptism, because he thus passed over Jordan and went to heaven; and baptism does something like this for the pardoned soul. Passing through the Red Sea was a baptism, because it purified the Israelites and drowned Pharaoh by immersion, just as the rite of baptism purifies Christians and leaves Satan and the old man immersed and strangled in the baptismal pool. The flood was a baptism, because it purified and saved Noah and his family-and also purified the world—and immersed and strangled the enemies of God-just as the rite of baptism purifies all who come by it, into the ark, i. e. the church-and as the waters of the flood immersed, strangled and purged off the wicked, so will an eternal baptism of fire purge out the wicked from the kingdom of God. They are the chaff to be burnt up with unquenchable fire, when the Redeemer thoroughly purges his floor.

Hence, in the days of the Fathers, the narrow view that Banrico means only to immerse had no being. The great idea before their minds was purification or absolution. This they applied to means of purification, or a system of purification, or to the processes involved in being purified, or to the supposed result of these processes, or to the rites viewed as an ordinance of Christ, or to any supposed or real typical transaction producing what they deemed similar effects.

§ 64. General View applied.

By thus throwing off the shackles of arbitrary canons and leaving the mind perfectly free to watch the actual evolution of the facts of language in the writings of the fathers, we find ourselves enabled to solve without difficulty all their various modes of expression. For example when Photius says ai roɛiç ἀναδύσεις καὶ καταδύσεις τοῦ βάπτισματος θανατὸν καὶ ἀνάστασιν σημαίνουσιν, we see at once that βάπτισμα refers to the rite of absolution, and áráðvois and xaráðvors to acts involved in it. Thus "the three immersions and emersions of the rite of purification (or absolution) symbolize death and resurrection."