Newport daily independent., 1902-06-10
SERMON ON BAPTISM
 BY REV. L. H. RICHARDSON.
Reviewed by Rev. c. c. Cline.
CONTINUED FROM JUNE 9.)

i. MosHEIM's CHURCH HISTORY says, 'sThe sacrament of baptism was administered in this, the first century by an immersion of the whole body in the baptismal font. Vol. 1, p. 46.
 2. ScHAFF's CHURCH HISTORY says, ''The usual form of the act was inn mersion as is plain from the original meaning of the Greek baptizein and baptisina. Vol. 1, p. 122.
 3. NEANDER's CHURCH HISTORY says, 'iThe usual form of submersion at baptism, practiced by the Jews, was passed over to the Gentile Chris tians." Up. 161.
 4. DEAN STANLEY says, England lays less stress on it's retention of what is undoubtedly the primitive apostolical, and was till the 18th cen- tnry the universal mode of baptism in Christendom.n
 5. voN DoELLINGER's CHURCH HISTORY, p. 294, says, Baptism by immersion continued to be the pre- vailing practice of the church as late as the 14th centuryp
 6. DR. BLoUNT, an eminent Epis- copa1ian says, "The innovation of af- fusion, or pouring water on the bap- tized, afterward began in the Latin church, (the Roman Catholic) and has become the general western usage"
 7. DR. STUART says, ''It will be seen for all this that christians began somewhat early to defect from the ancient practice of immersing. ."- p. 175.
 8. BISHOP KENRIcK, speaking of the prevalence of infant baptism says "Hence the necessity of receding from the mode of immersion became still more frequent, since the tender infant oftentimes could not be i'm mersed without peril to it's life. The cases thus multiplying, the more solemn method fell gradually into disuse, until it was in most places, en- tirely superseded.o
 The immersion of healthy children was the rule in John Wesley's times, for when he was arrested ill Georgia in 1729 for violating certain laws, one of the charges made against him was his refusal to "sprinkle" healthy child on demand of it's mother. MT. Wesley was willing to immerse it, but would not sprinkle it unless it's mother would say it was sick. If Methodist ministers now would con fine their sprinkling to sick people in imitation of the founder of Methodism they would not only be better Metho dists, but decidedly more apostolic in their practice.
 g, DEAN STANLEY, in his article on baptism says, "The substitution of sprinkling for immersion is a greater change even than that which the Roman Catholic church has made in administering the sacrament of the Lords Supper in the bread without the wine. For that was a change which did not affect the thing that was signifed; whereas the change from immersion to sprinkling has set aside the larger part of apostolic lan- guage regarding baptism, and has al- tered the very meaning of the word" -pp. 50, 61.
 Men are to be pitied who will con- tend for sprinkling upon the baseless claims that either the New Testament church practiced it or that the word baptize ever meant to sprinkle. Let us see how and when sprinkling was introduced.
 10. BONNER, in his ''History of the Popes" says, tBaptism by immersion was undoubtedly the apostolic prac tice, and it was never dispensed with by the church except in cases of sick ness or when sufficient quantity of water could not be had. Tn both these cases, baptism by aspersion or sprink- ling was allowed, but in no other. "- Vol. 1, p. 176.
 II. DR. SCHAFF answers the when and how thus: "The question now arises, when and how came the mode of pouring and sprinkling to take the place of immersion and emersion as a rule? The change was gradual and confined to the Western or Roman Catholic churches. The Roman church as we have seen, backed by the au- thority of Thomas Acquinas, "the l ro- L-