as little, power, to bind or to loose, than the priests of the Old
Testament had, to pronounce the lepers clean or unclean. The words of
the priest made them neither clean nor unclean, but simply indicated
who, according to the law of Moses, was leprous or not leprous; so now
the bishop, according to the law of Christ, pronounces, whose sins are
retained, and whose are forgiven.
“Again, he also maintains that all days should be esteemed alike, and
that men should constantly keep Easter and Sabbath.
“He would likewise have that men should fast daily, ‘for, what avails
it,’ says he, ‘if you carry around an empty stomach, for two or three
days, and then overload it? Daily you must hunger, and daily you must
eat; you must fast so as not to injure the body, but to subdue and
break the desires.’
“Again: ‘The Roman church is not to be esteemed more highly than the
church of the whole world, whether of France, or of Britannia, etc. But
to worship one Christ, and to have one Ruler, or teacher, of the truth,
this constitutes a church.’ _Chron. Fra., fol. 65, 86._
“Again, of Antichrist he says: ‘And do we not know that the coming of
antichrist is nigh at hand? He shall sit in the temple of God, that is
to say, in Jerusalem, or in the church, as I apprehend with more truth.
Antichrist shall war against the heathen and overcome them.’
“Again: ‘While man lives here, he may be justified, but after death he
has no more opportunity to do good works, though some controvert this,
saying that men may increase or decrease even after they have died.
While we are in this present life, we may help one another by prayer or
deeds; but when we come before the judgment seat of God, neither Job,
nor Daniel, nor Noah, can pray for any one; then every one must bear
his own burden.’ _Valent. Vanius, fol. 112._
“Again, Jerome says: ‘He that is spiritual never persecutes him that
is carnal. I have learned from the command of the apostles, to avoid
a heretic, but not to burn him. Christ came not to smite, but to be
smitten. He that is smitten, follows Christ; but he that smites,
follows antichrist.’
“‘Again, the Lord commanded his apostles that they should first
instruct and teach all nations, and then baptize those instructed, in
the sacrament of faith; for it is not possible for the body to receive
the sacrament of baptism, unless the soul have previously received the
true faith.’” _P. J. Twisck, Chron., 4th book, page 129._
That also in Thessalia infant baptism was not much practiced at this
time, A. D. 390, is shown by Socrates, _Bapt. Hist., p. 363, book 5,
chap. 21_, with these words: “Besides, I also know of another custom in
Thessalia, namely, that there they baptize only on Easter days; hence
nearly all, few excepted, die without baptism.” See also, _H. Montan.
Nietigheyd, page 71_.
But some one may ask: With what words is it expressed in the passage
cited, that also in Thessalia infant baptism was not much practiced
in A. D. 390, which the writer so confidently asserts. I answer:
He expresses two reasons whereby he proves it; in the first place,
because, as he says, It was the custom there, to baptize only on Easter
days, which indicates that said baptism was not, as Cyprian and his
followers had commanded, administered to newborn infants, for these
were not born just on Easter days, and, hence, could not be baptized
on Easter days, from which it follows that the custom of baptizing on
Easter days, was not instituted for newborn infants, but for adult
persons, who could prepare themselves for that time. In the second
place, when he says, That therefore nearly all, few excepted, died
without baptism, it is certainly obvious from this, that all who died
without baptism, had not been baptized in their infancy, and that,
consequently, many persons were found at this time, who allowed their
children to remain unbaptized.
_A. D. 391._--It is stated that Augustine (notwithstanding he
afterwards became infected with the doctrine of infant baptism), though
born of a Christian mother, and the descendant of Christian ancestors,
was not baptized before he was in his thirtieth year, (_Nauclerus, book
14, Generat._, says, in his thirty-third year, by bishop Ambrose, at
Milan, on Easter.)
Jacob Mehrning and H. Montanus thus relate this, namely, that Monica,
Augustine’s mother, who, though born of Christian parents, was not
baptized until she had reached adult years, likewise did not have her
son Augustine baptized in his infancy; but that he was baptized when he
was already thirty-three, others say, thirty, years old. It is true,
we read, say they, that, having become a youth, and fallen very sick,
he desired to be baptized; and also, that his mother was engaged then
in preparing him for baptism. But when he suddenly recovered from his
sickness, his baptism was deferred. Augustine was at that time of such
an age, that if he had been baptized, it would really not have been
infant baptism, but a baptism which might have been counted with the
baptism of adults, had it sprung from a voluntary resolution, for it
should have been connected, as Augustine himself declares with his
faith and the confession of the name of Christ, which cannot be the
case in the baptism of infants.
Augustine there also relates why his mother at that time deferred his
baptism, namely, because she, foreseeing the many and great billows
of temptation which would roll over his head in his youthful years,
feared that the guilt of his sins, after the washing of baptism, would
be the greater and more dangerous, which he himself and the whole
family, with the exception of his father, then believed. He also tells
us, that there were others, too, at that time, who put off or omitted
the baptism of their children, from such considerations. _Bapt. Hist.,
pages_ 363, 364. _H. Montan. Nietigh., pages 71, 72._
It appears, moreover, that on that occasion not only Augustine was
baptized upon the confession of his faith, but also his son Adeodatus,
and his friend Alipius, concerning which we find this notice. _Bapt.
Hist., page 444_, Augustine, bishop of Hippon, in Africa, when he was
thirty-three years old, was baptized at Milan, by bishop Ambrose,
together with Alipius, and Adeodatus, his natural son, who was fifteen
years old at the time. Of this, _Augustine_, in the _9th book, 6th
chap._, of his _Confessions_, says: “When the time had come, that I was
to have my name entered on the register of the candidates for baptism,
I left the country, and again journeyed to Milan. My dear friend
Alipius desired to be baptized with me. Alipius, who was qualified
for it, on account of his humility, and the dominion he had over his
body, so that in case of emergency, he would have traveled barefoot in
winter through the snow in Italy, accompanied me. We took with us the
child (that is, the youth) Adeodatus, begotten by me in sin. Thou, O
Lord, didst form him well, according to both soul and body. He was now
about fifteen years old, and excelled many worthy and learned men.” A
little further on, he says: “We have made him our equal, O Lord, in the
reception of thy grace, in order to be further trained up in thy law
and school; _we are baptized_, and the care of our old life has been
taken away from us. I could not be satisfied in those days, with the
wonderful sweetness which I experienced in the contemplation of the
mysteriousness of thy counsel, O Lord, with regard to the salvation of
the human race. O how I wept, amidst songs of praise. The tears ran
down my cheeks.” Thus far, Augustine.
NOTE. _A. D. 392._--The Apollinarians, who derived their origin from
Apollinaris, denied that Christ adopted his humanity from the virgin
Mary, saying that the word became flesh. _P. J. Twisck, Chron., 4th
book, page 130_, from _Tripart., lib. 9. Vincent. Hist., cap. 44. Zeg.,
fol. 189._
_A. D. 393._--Valentinian, or Valens, the son of Christian parents
(Valentinian and Justina), was induced to journey to Milan, to be
baptized by Ambrose, but was treacherously murdered on the way by one
Arbogastes. _H. Montan., page 70_, from _Socrat., lib. 4, cap. 9, 26_.
H. Montanus, however, erroneously, fixes the date of this occurrence
about A. D. 380.
My dear friends, is it not a sad thing, that this man, namely
Augustine, who thus defended baptism upon faith, yea confirmed it with
his own example, and the example of his son Adeodatus, and his friend
Alipius, whom he had admonished thereto, should ultimately fall so far
as to admit, yea to become a defender of infant baptism! Surely, it
is a lamentable matter. For, no one can deny, that in the beginning
right after his baptism, he was exceedingly zealous in defense of the
true baptism, which is received with a penitent heart; but, that in
the course of time he apostatized to infant baptism, can likewise not
be denied by any lover of truth. Still, the example of Augustine, his
son Adeodatus, and his friend Alipius, serves to confirm our faith,
inasmuch as we see that in Augustine’s time the principal Christians
allowed their children to remain unbaptized, until they were grown up
and, of their own accord desired baptism; for, thus did Monica with her
son Augustine, and Augustine with his son Adeodatus, and his friend
Alipius, which is a clear proof of the matter in question, namely, that
not infant baptism, but baptism upon faith, was practiced among the
chief Christians.
THE CONVERSION OF EUVODIUS, WHO FROM A WORLDLY WARRIOR BECAME A SOLDIER
OF CHRIST, IN THE TIME OF AUGUSTINE.
In the _8th chapter_ of the _9th book_ of his _Confessions_, Augustine,
after speaking of his own baptism, makes the following confession to
the Lord, in regard to the baptism of Euvodius: “Thou, O Lord, who
causest those that are of the same mind, to dwell in one house, hast
joined to us a companion, a young nobleman, called Euvodius, a native
of our city. He, who, when following war, commanded the legions of
the Empire, was, before us, converted unto thee, and baptized, and,
having abandoned secular war, has betaken himself to thy war. We were
together; together we had one will to serve thee, and considered in
what place we might best do this.” These are his own words, which we
read at the place indicated above, and from them we may see how the
church increased at that time--not through the addition of infants, but
through the conversion and baptism of adult and rational persons. With
this we leave Augustine, and the baptism of his companion Euvodius.
_About A. D. 397._--About A. D. 397, it is stated that Epiphanius,[111]
who subsequently became bishop of Cyprus, was baptized, together with
his sister, as it appears, in the presence of his friend and spiritual
father Lucian. Of this, D. Vicecomes gives the following account, from
Simon Metaphrastes, _Bapt. Hist., page 578. Vicecom., lib. 1, cap. 30_:
“When the Gospel had been read, the bishop, after the baptism, went
and commanded Epiphanius and his sister to go in, and with them also
Lucian, who became Epiphanius’ spiritual father in holy baptism.
[111] P. J. Twisck places this Epiphanius in the year 377, but this
may be a typographical error; the figure 7 having been substituted
for the figure 9.
In _Bapt. Hist., page 580, lib. 5, cap. 34_, Metaphrastes writes of
Epiphanius, that immediately upon receiving the doctrine and baptism,
the latter, together with an hundred and eight other persons, received
the holy Supper, from Bishop Stephen.
NOTE.--In the time of Arcadius and Honorius, about A. D. 397, it was
resolved, at Toledo, among other things: “That if any one, after
baptism, engages in war, though he have committed nothing special in
the war, he shall never be ordained a deacon. _Seb. Franck, Chron. Rom.
Concil., fol. 73, col. 1_.
As to the person who baptized Epiphanius and his sister, as well as
administered the Supper to them, we pass by; it suffices us, that this
mode of baptism still obtained at that time and in the church where
this took place; and that persons were found who administered it,
as well as such who were willing to have it administered unto them.
Notwithstanding infant baptism had already made great inroads at that
time into many places, this baptism was nevertheless administered to
persons born of Christian parents, as has been sufficiently shown
previously.
_A. D. 400._--About this time there flourished, as a writer, the
aforementioned Epiphanius, who, by his writings, has shed much light
on the subject of baptism, it being sufficiently apparent from all the
circumstances relating to him, that he held sound views with regard
to the same. Of this, Jacob Mehrning and H. Montanus have given the
following account: “Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamina, in Cyprus, A. D.
400, or thereabouts, in speaking of baptism, which he frequently does
in his writings, always speak of it in such a manner that it does not
include infants; and although occasion often presents itself to him,
to speak of infant baptism, yet he never does so; from which we may
readily conclude that he did not esteem it much, or that in his time,
it was not yet customary in that island.” In Auchoratus he says: “You
must not admit every one who is instructed in the faith and desires to
come to holy baptism, to this ordinance, simply because he has told
your children, that he believes in the Lord; but he must also, with
express words, even as the church, our common mother, ours as well
as yours, has received it, learn and say: ‘I believe in one God, the
Father, the Almighty,’ etc.”
Again, in another place (_Contra Haereses, lib. 1_, _Tom. 1, Haeresi
8_): “This great circumcision, baptism, circumcises us from sin, and
seals us in the name of God.” _Bapt. Hist., page 366. Nietigh., page
74._
When, therefore, Epiphanius, in the first passage, says: “You must
not admit every one who is instructed in the faith, and desires to
come to baptism, to this ordinance,” and then adds that he must also
confess, saying: “I believe,” he plainly indicates that such baptism
can certainly not be administered to infants, because they are not
only unable to confess the faith, but have not even the capability or
qualification to believe, upon which faith and confession alone he
admits baptism.
When, in the second passage, he says: “This great circumcision,
baptism, circumcises us from sin,” he does not mean to say thereby, as
our opponents at this day assert, that baptism has come in the place
of circumcision, so that, even as in the time of the Old Testament,
the male infants were circumcised, so now, in the time of the New
Testament, the infants must be baptized. O no! for this appears by
no means. But he says that baptism is a great circumcision, which
circumcises us from sin, which certainly does not apply to infants,
that have never sinned, and, consequently, cannot be circumcised from
their sins by baptism. With this we leave the views of Epiphanius on
the subject of baptism, and proceed to what is related of his reproving
image worship, according to the account of P. J. Twisck. “Epiphanius,”
he says, “an ancient teacher, flourished in this time, who greatly
opposed the worshiping of images, of Mary, or of any other creature.
He said: ‘Beloved children, be mindful not to bring any images in the
church, or to erect them over the graves of the saints; but bear God
constantly in your hearts.’”
Once, when he went into a Christian church, and observed a painted
curtain at the door, bearing the picture of Christ or of some saint,
he tore it down, because it was contrary to Scripture, and advised the
sexton to bury the corpse of some poor person in it; and when he had
sent another curtain in its place, he commanded that they should no
more hang up curtains like the former, in the church, “Which,” said he,
“is contrary to our religion and faith.” _P. J. Twisck, Chron., 4th
book, page 119, col. 2_, and _page 120, col. 1_, from _Socrat., lib. 6.
Tripart., lib. 10. Leonh., lib. 2. Chron. Seb. Franck, 135. Tob. Fabr.,
fol. 66, 67. Fransch. Ala., fol. 22. Dani. Saut., lib. 1._
NOTE.--In regard to his teaching against image worship, see _Samuel
Veltius_, in _Geslacht-register, page 120_. Epiphanius taught at this
time that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are to be worshiped, but
that no one should worship Mary, or any other woman, or human being,
since this honor belongs to God alone, and must not be accorded even
to angels. Again, that the women should not say: We honor the queen of
heaven. _Tom. 2. Haeres., lib. 3. Haeres. 79_, in _Geslacht-register,
page 29_.
Concluding the fourth century, as also we will do, P. J. Twisck says:
“Baptism was administered twice a year, at Easter and at Pentecost,
and this, to a great extent is still done to adult believers and
catechumens.” _Chron., page 134._
NOTE.--Besides this, that the true order of the baptism of Jesus
Christ was practiced in this century by the orthodox believers, many
who belonged to the Roman church deferred (though erring in other
matters) the baptism of their children till they came to adult years,
as is evident, for instance, in the case of Constantine the Great,
whom Helena, his Christian mother, kept from baptism, but afterwards
admonished to it; of Theodosius, who, being born of Christian parents,
was baptized at Milan, upon his faith; of Valens who was mentioned
above. With regard to the baptism of Constantine, see _Rom. Adelaer_,
edition 1642, _page 211_, from _Eusebius and Socrat_. Of the baptism
of Theodosius, see tract _van den loop der Wereldt_, printed 1611, in
the article on baptism; also _De gantsch Klare en Grondige Bewijsinge,
nopende het doopsel_.
AN ACCOUNT OF THOSE WHO SUFFERED IN THE FOURTH CENTURY.
SUMMARY OF THE MARTYRS OF THE FOURTH CENTURY.
[This lamentable time commenced with the Tenth General Persecution,
instituted by Diocletian, and prosecuted by Maximian, his associate;
which caused a very severe and distressing state of affairs, with
respect to the violence as well as the long duration of the persecution.
In order to proceed systematically, we have presented separately each
year with its respective martyrs. In the first year of this persecution
Anthimus and many others at Nicomedia; Phileas, Cassianus; Eulalia and
Eucratis, aged virgins, laid down their lives for the evangelical truth.
In the second year, Euplius, Pancratius, a youth of fourteen years;
Justus; Felix of Thibaris; the two brothers, Primus and Felicianus,
suffered martyrdom.
In the third year: Apphianus, Ulpianus, Aedesius, Agathopius and
Theodulus; Julitta of Iconia; forty youths, laid down their lives.
In the fourth year Sylvanus, Januarius, Sosius, Proculus, Pelagia,
Theonas, Cyrenia, and Juliana, were martyred.
In the fifth year Theodosia, a virgin of Tyre, Pamphilius, a friend of
Eusebius, at Cesarea, were put to death.
In the sixth year Ennathas, a virgin from the city of Scythopolis;
Catharina of Alexandria, suffered death.
In the seventh year Ares, Promus, and Elias, at Askalon; Peter
Abselamus; the three sisters, Biblis, Aquilina, and Fortunata, poured
out their blood.
In the eighth year two sisters from Antioch; Irene, with her two
sisters, Peter Nilus and P. Mythius; forty who were beheaded;
Martionilla, Euphratesia, seven brothers, and others were compelled to
die.
In the ninth year Lucian, elder at Antioch, Peter, Faustus, Didius,
and Ammonius, Anysia, a girl of Thessalonica, and Demetrius, suffered
death.
In the tenth year Eugenius Auxentius, Maodatius, and many others were
put to death.
Then follow two other persecutions, one under Lucinius, the other under
Julian, which are called the eleventh and the twelfth persecutions.
Under Lucinius suffered: Basileus, Ammon; the two brothers, Donatian
and Rogatian, of whom the one was baptized, and the other not.
Under Julian were slain: John and Paul, who opposed war; and some were
killed under the Emperor Valens.
After these details we conclude the account of this century.]
* * * * *
_A. D. 301._--“At this time,” writes P. J. Twisck, “the persecution
was very severe; for when the Emperor, namely, Diocletian would divert
himself in the theatre, the whole multitude of the people called to
him ten times, that the Christians should not be tolerated, and twelve
times, that they should be exterminated.” _Chron., 4th book, p. 85,
col. 1_, from _Merul., fol. 237. Leonh. lib. 1_.
In the preceding century, in the year 284, we mentioned, in connection
with the beginning of the reign of Diocletian, the first bloody edict,
issued by this Emperor against the pious and steadfast Christians, upon
which followed the death of some of them, as may be seen in the cases
of Claudius, Asterius, Neon, Zenobius, and the pious Christian women,
Nuina, Theonilla, Zenobia, sister of the aforementioned Zenobius, etc.,
most of whom died at Tarsus, in Cilicia, the birth-place of the apostle
Paul, for the testimony of Jesus, their Savior. This continued from the
aforesaid year until the close of that century, as we have related in
the proper place.
But in the same place we have also made mention of a second edict by
the same Emperor, which, about nineteen years afterwards, was followed
by the most violent persecution of the Christians. Of this we promised
to speak more fully, and now purpose to do so, having come to the
very time in which commenced this, the severest and most grievous
persecution, which is called the tenth.
OF THE TENTH GENERAL PERSECUTION OF THE CHRISTIANS, UNDER DIOCLETIAN,
COMMENCED A. D. 302.
Various eminent writers have made mention of this awful and lamentable
deed of the Emperor Diocletian, and they cannot sufficiently wonder
at two things: In the first place, that any one who is at all a
human being could commit such great cruelties on his fellow-men, as
Diocletian inflicted upon the Christians. In the second place, that
the Christians, frail men, as they were, could endure all this, and
not only this, but that many of them, from love to Jesus Christ, and
because of the certain hope of their reward, manifested great joy in
their sufferings. We shall first speak of the former, and then of the
latter as follows.
THE CAUSE AND SEVERITY OF THIS PERSECUTION, ACCORDING TO THE ACCOUNT OF
P. J. TWISCK, FROM VARIOUS ANCIENT AND CELEBRATED AUTHORS.
These two Emperors (namely, Diocletian and Maximian) jointly governed
the empire, in harmony and constancy, and remained undivided. However,
when they had reigned about ten years, they took counsel together, and
resolved to exterminate the Christians, because the discord of religion
caused great dissensions, both in the households and in the Roman
Empire.
“The apostate Christians played the part of instigators and firebrands
in the raising of this persecution, holding out to the Emperors the
hope, that the Christians could be exterminated. The persecution which
ensued thereupon, is considered the most grievous.”
Then he writes: “But the enemies of the truth took the occasion to
incite the Emperor Diocletian against the Christians, from a certain
conflagration in the city of Nicomedia--at that time the place
where the Emperors were wont to reside--by which the palace of the
Emperor was totally destroyed. With this calamity they charged the
Christians. The Emperor, enraged beyond measure on this account, easily
believed the slanderers, thinking he had sufficient reason for it.
He accordingly, in the nineteenth year of his reign, which coincides
with A. D. 302, issued a public decree (as was done in the days of
Antiochus), that every one, in every place, should sacrifice to the
gods of the Emperors; and that he who should refuse to do so, should
be punished with death; also, that the churches or meeting-places, and
the books, of the Christians should be utterly destroyed. Yea, there
was scarcely a large city in the empire, in which not daily a hundred
Christians, or thereabouts, were slain. It is also recorded that in
one month seventeen thousand Christians were put to death in different
parts of the empire, so that the blood which was shed colored red many
rivers. Some were hanged, others beheaded, some burned, and some sunk
by whole shiploads in the depths of the sea.”