torments, as well as exiled, a countless number, God, after many
plagues had been sent upon that country, awfully punished him: worms
and lice so gnawed his flesh that his whole body became putrified, one
member dropping off after another, so that he was buried piecemeal,
thus coming to a horrible and not less ignominious end--the evident
vengance of God for his tyranny against the Christians. Compare _P. J.
Twisck, Chron., 5th, book, pag. 166, col. 2_, with _Chron. Carionis,
lib. 3, fol. 29. Eccl. Caspar Hedio 3d, part, lib. 2, cap. 18–21, 25,
27, Chronol. Leonh. Krantz., lib. 3, fol. 87, 89. Paul. Merula, fol.
381, 382. Histor. Andr., fol. 180. Jan. Crespin, fol. 139._
NOTE.--It is stated that about this time, until the year 495, and
afterwards, there were made in different councils held in Africa five
hundred and five laws (called canons or rules), in which among other
things it was resolved by the Roman church: 1. “That the children of
the Donatists, (namely those Donatists who had renounced the doctrine
of Donatus) shall not be re-baptized.” 2. “That those who say that
a child is not to be baptized for the forgiveness of sins, etc., are
excommunicated.” 3, _Act. 23_. That the agitation about baptism should
be suppressed by military force.” _Seb. Franck, Chron. der Roomsche
Concilien, fol. 48, col. 2–4, etc._
NOTE.--From the third article it appears: 1. That at this time there
were people who stirred up agitation about baptism, that is, infant
baptism, for this was now practiced by the Roman church. 2. That these
people were suppressed by military assistance or force. What views,
besides this article, these people held, or in which manner they were
suppressed, we have not been able to ascertain; hence we let this
suffice.
THE BLOODY OPPRESSION OF THE BELIEVERS, WHICH, IT APPEARS, OCCURRED IN
THE TIME OF THE TEACHER, FULGENTIUS, A. D. 498.
It appears that at this time the persecution and marytyrization of
those who were baptized according to the ordinance of Christ was still
in progress; of which the godfearing teacher Fulgentius makes mention
to his contemporaries. _Bapt. Hist., 2d part, page 464, num. 12_, from
_D. Vicec., lib. 3, cap. 3_, from _Fulgentius, lib de fide ad petrum,
cap. 30_.
“Rest assured of this,” he writes, “and doubt not that those who,
for the name of Christ are baptized in their blood, without which no
man shall receive eternal life, that is, who has not previously been
converted from his sins through repentance and faith, and redeemed
through the sacrament of faith and repentance, that is, through
baptism.”
When Fulgentius here speaks of those who, for the name of Christ are
baptized in the blood, etc., he plainly indicates thereby, that blood
was shed then inasmuch as people were baptized with it as it were, that
is, such people as he speaks of further on, namely, “who are converted
through repentance and faith, and redeemed through the sacrament of
faith and repentance, that is, through baptism,” etc.
However, if to any one the above words of Fulgentius appear rather
too obscure for the purpose in view, we leave him to the free and
unrestrained enjoyment of his own judgment.
NOTE.--At this time, namely about the close of this century, those who
opposed infant baptism were so hated by the Roman church, that in a
certain council of Carthage, two persons, whose names we for certain
reasons omit, were condemned, because they had denied infant baptism.
_Bapt. Hist. 2d, part, page 436_, taken from the _9th chapter van de
Doop gebruyken der Roomsche Kerke, fol. 460_.
As to the persons themselves that were condemned, we commit them to
God, since our only aim is to show how exceedingly the aforementioned
doctrines were hated, and those who defended them, oppressed, yea,
condemned at that time. With this we conclude our account of the
martyrs of the fifth century.
AN ACCOUNT OF THE HOLY BAPTISM OF THE MARTYRS IN THE SIXTH CENTURY.
SUMMARY OF BAPTISM IN THE SIXTH CENTURY.
[Shortly after the beginning of this account, Alcimus is introduced who
declares that baptism was prefigured in the suffering of Christ; his
testimony, however, in regard to this, is reserved for another place.
Cassiodorus follows Alcimus, saying that in baptism believers are
regenerated to new creatures.
He is followed by Fortunatus, who speaks of the virtue and benefit
of baptism, saying that those who are regenerated by baptism, become
children of God.
People who indicate that infant baptism is not in accordance with the
holy Scriptures.
The council of Ilerda, in Spain, establishes various canons or rules
against the Anabaptists and those baptized by them; forbidding to eat
with them.
The council of Agathe decrees that all Jews who desire baptism must
first be instructed for eight months, with the catechumens. Confession
of faith preached to those desiring baptism (see margin as well as
column).
In the first council of Constantinople it is decreed that the Eunomians
and Montanists must first walk for a considerable length of time with
the church [brotherhood], hear the holy Scriptures, and shall then, if
found faithful, be baptized.
Of certain persons termed fanatics, who prevailed upon the imperial
councilors, to abolish infant baptism.
Justus Origelitanus says excellent things with regard to the nature and
efficacy of baptism.
One Peter, and his companion Zoroaras defend Anabaptism.
An account, from Gregory, of certain Jews, some of whom were baptized
on Easter, others on Whitsuntide, after previous instruction.
Vincentius shows that it was customary to renounce, before baptism, all
pomp, and the works of Satan.
Of the white robes put on the newly baptized, and the gifts it was
customary to present to them.
How Brunechildis, the daughter of Arthanagildus, was rebaptized.
Of Euthimius, who entertained some that had been baptized, forty days;
and how he admonished them.
Touching a certain prayer pronounced over the candidates, containing
very beautiful sentiments respecting the dignity and benefit of baptism.
It is held that Theophilus Alexandrinus differs from the Roman church,
in regard to holy baptism and the holy Supper.
The followers of Donatus again cited, and excused in various things.
Christian novices, before baptism, divided in two classes.
Statements with regard to the corruption of the writings of the
ancients; yet that on the subject of baptism authentic testimonies
still remain. With this we have abbreviated and concluded this century.]
Although in the sixth century, Roman darkness, as regards the
corruption of divine worship, began to arise more and more, and the
divine and evangelical truth necessarily had to sink out of sight at
times, inasmuch as the Roman Bishop and others, who held with him,
began, as it were, with the black smoke of manifold superstitions,
shamefully and lamentably to darken the bright and transparent commands
of Christ, as baptism, the holy Supper, the command not to swear, and
others; so that baptism on faith was converted into infant baptism, the
Lord’s Supper into a superstitious mass, the command not to swear, into
a permission to swear, and other articles also greatly corrupted; yet
in the meantime nevertheless, there were people, yea eminent persons,
and even such, at times, as (living in quiet as they did) were reckoned
to belong to the Roman church, through whom the aforesaid darkness was
illuminated, the superstitions removed, and the pure truth of the holy
Gospel brought to light as a brightly shining sun; inasmuch as they,
opposing infant baptism, recommended baptism upon faith; abolishing the
mass or transubstantiation, taught the simple Supper of Jesus Christ;
rejecting, according to the doctrine of Christ and James, oaths and
swearing, commanded the people not to use oaths, or to swear at all.
But it would require too much time to treat on, and show, all these
things; hence we shall follow the custom we adopted in the beginning,
and speak principally of baptism, showing briefly, by whom and in what
manner the same was practiced according to the rule of Christ and the
usage of his apostles, and confirmed by doctrine or example.
Alcimus writes (_lib. 1, de Orig. Mundi_) in the _6th Cent. Magdeburg.,
fol. 112_, concerning the doctrine of baptism: “That baptism is
prefigured in the suffering of Christ.” Thereupon follows a certain
verse from Alcimus, in which baptism is compared to the water which
flowed from Christ’s side, and to the blood of the martyrs; of which,
however, we will not speak further at present, as we intend to reserve
it for a place where it will be more to the purpose. Jacob Mehrning
also notices this verse in _Bapt. Hist., page 467_.
_A. D. 508._--Or at the time of the Emperor Anastasius, surnamed
Flavius Valerius, the highly enlightened and gifted Cassiodorus, is
stated to have lived and written, who says with regard to baptism (on
_Cant., cap. 7_), “that it is a divine fountain, in which believers are
regenerated to new creatures.” _J. M., Bapt. Hist., page 467._
What else is this, than what our Savior himself says (Mark 16:16), that
believers must be baptized; and (John 3:5), that one must be born again
of water and of the Spirit; which accords with the words of Paul (Tit.
3:5), where he calls baptism the washing of regeneration, because,
believers, when they are baptized, must forsake the old life, and be
regenerated into a new life. Rom. 6:4.
Cassiodorus, on _Cant., cap. 4_, teaches (_Bapt. Hist., page 468_),
That all believers shall (or must) be baptized. “There can be,” he
says, “no believer without the washing of baptism (that is, no true
believer, who can stand before God and his word, without baptism; for
he who commanded faith, also commanded baptism).
Again, in _cap. 7_: “No one can enter the church, who has not
previously been washed with the water of baptism, and made to drink of
the fountain of wholesome doctrine. This well agrees with the words
of the apostles, who thus testifies of himself and of the Corinthian
church: “For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body ... and
have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” 1 Cor. 12:13. By this,
the apostle (like Cassiodorus) indicates that all who are true members
of the church of Jesus Christ, must have communion in two things:
First, they must have been made one body with each other by baptism.
Secondly, they must have been made to drink into the Spirit, or the
doctrine of the divine word; which, as every intelligent person knows,
are things that cannot be complied with by infants, but only by adult
and intelligent persons.
Cassiodorus, on Ps. 23 (_page 469_), says: “The water of refreshing is
the washing of baptism, in which divine gifts are poured upon the souls
that have become barren through the withering influence of sin, that
they may bring forth good fruits.”
Again: “The souls of the elect (or of the baptized) have, in baptism,
forsaken the corruption of the old man, and are renewed in Christ.”
Again: “As the people (of Israel) were preserved by the Red Sea, in
which Pharaoh perished, even so, the church of the heathen, has been
redeemed, through baptism, from the bondage of the devil, and brought
into the true promised land, the liberty of the Gospel; and thus she
(that is the church of the heathen) who was formerly a handmaid of
iniquity, has now become the friend of Christ, and been washed, through
baptism, from the filth of sin.”
Beloved reader, attentively consider the last three passages of
Cassiodorus, and you shall find that they, in every particular,
indicate that the baptism of which he speaks, is not at all infant
baptism, but such a baptism as Christ commanded to be administered upon
faith; for, when he says, in the first passage, that in (or through)
the water of baptism, divine gifts are poured upon the souls that
have become barren through the withering influence of sin, that they
may bring forth good fruits, he certainly thereby indicates that he
speaks of such candidates as had previously become barren through the
withering influence of sin, and to whom gifts were now imparted in
(or through) baptism (namely, by God, for the strengthening of their
faith), that they might bring forth good fruits, which, as every one
knows, can be done by none but adult and virtuous persons. By the
second passage, in which he says, that the souls of the elect (or of
the baptized) have forsaken, in baptism, the corruption of the old man,
and are renewed in Christ, he again indicates that the persons of whom
he speaks, had lived, before baptism, in the corruption of the old man,
wherefore it was necessary for them to forsake it in baptism, and, by a
pious life, to be renewed henceforth in Christ; but how this applies to
infants, may be judged.
We now come to the third passage, in which he speaks of the passage of
the people of Israel through the Red Sea. He compares the Israelites to
those who, having been converted from heathenism, were baptized; the
Red Sea, by which the people of Israel were delivered, he compares to
baptism, through which those who had been converted from heathenism,
had obtained their redemption, according to the soul, depending on the
merits of Jesus Christ; Pharaoh, who was drowned with his people in the
Red Sea, he compares to the bondage of the devil, from which believers
are redeemed in baptism, through the grace of the Son of God; the
entrance of Israel into the land of Canaan, he compares to the entrance
of believing, baptized Christians into the true promised land--the
liberty of the Gospel. Finally he says, in the same passage: “Thus she
who was formerly a handmaid of iniquity, has now become a friend of
Christ, and been washed from the filth of sin.”
All these things militate so clearly against infant baptism, and
confirm baptism upon faith, according to the ordinance of Christ,
that it seems unnecessary to me, to add anything further respecting
Cassiodorus. The impartial will judge aright.
_About A. D. 515._--Or properly after Cassiodorus, is placed, in the
History of the Holy Baptism, the wise, but as it appears, excessively
accused Fortunatus; from whose writings the author of said history
adduces several passages, respecting which he makes the following
annotation in the margin: “All the preceding commendations must be
understood as referring solely to the true baptism of Christ, which is
received as he has ordained it, and which consists in the word, Spirit,
and water, and is obtained in (or upon) faith; and not as relating to
any self-invented infant baptism.”
He then shows, page 468 in his account, what Fortunatus himself
writes concerning it, saying: “Of the virtue and benefit of baptism,
Fortunatus teaches (_lib. 10 in Expos. Orat. Dom._): Man, when
regenerated by baptism, becomes a child of God, who previously, through
transgression, belonged to his enemy, and was lost.” “Man, before
baptism,” he further says, “is described as being carnal, but after
baptism, as being spiritual.”
In a letter of the orientals to Symmachus, it is written: “Christ our
Savior has taken away, on the cross, our handwriting, that we might
henceforward, after the washing of regeneration (that is, baptism) be
no longer subject to the sins of our wickedness.”
These passages pertain only to adults, or at least to such as are
possessed of understanding, but in no wise to those who have attained
to neither years nor understanding; for it certainly means something,
to be regenerated by baptism, yea, to be made a child of God, which
Fortunatus, in the first instance, so expressly confesses.
Touching the regeneration of water and the Spirit, Christ did not
command it to the unintelligent, but to a master of Israel, John 3:5;
and of those who had put on Christ, through baptism, the apostle says:
that by faith they became the children of God. Gal. 3:26,27.
Thus also it is a matter of moment, to be carnal before baptism, and
spiritual after baptism, which he nevertheless adds: For, beloved
reader, what is it to be carnal, but to live after the lusts of the
flesh? This, says our author, is done before baptism; hence it is also
evident that he speaks of a baptism before the reception of which one
can live after the flesh.
What, on the other hand, is it to be spiritual, but to live after the
inclination of the spirit? that is, according to the rule which agrees
with the spirit, and the word of God; but this, he states, is done
after baptism; hence it follows that the baptism of which he treats,
is of such a nature, that he who has received it, can live after the
Spirit.
But how can these two things, namely, to live after the flesh before
baptism, and after the Spirit after baptism, apply to infants, of this
he that has experience may judge.
That which is written to Symmachus, in the letter of the orientals,
is of the same nature; for there it is said of regenerated baptized
persons that after the washing of regeneration, that is, after
baptism, they are no longer subject to the sins of wickedness; which
sufficiently indicates that he speaks of such people as are subject,
before baptism, that is, before they are baptized, to the sins of
wickedness, but from which they are freed after baptism, through the
grace of God and a holy purpose. Certainly, infants differ widely from
this.
_A. D. 520._--That at this time, and thence forward, there were
persons who not only taught baptism upon faith as ordained by
Christ, but who also, now and then, opposed infant baptism; this is
unanimously maintained by the well-tried Jacob Mehrning, scholar of
the holy Scriptures, and the very learned Montanus, in these words:
“Nevertheless, as truth cannot remain suppressed, some were found,
in the course of time, who, seeing that infant baptism did not accord
with the holy Scriptures, dared candidly confess this. Of such there
were many. A. D. 520, and from that time forward in this century, for
several years in succession, as may clearly be gathered from the fourth
canon of the council of Gerunda, in Spain, held the aforementioned
year, in which it was decreed concerning catechumens, that they should
be baptized on Easter and on Whitsuntide; but in case of feebleness or
sickness, also on other days. From _Cent. Magdeb., Cent. 6, cap. 9, de
Synodi_.
For, that those who were born of Christian parents, and had been
brought up from their youth, in the Christian religion, were reckoned
among the catechumens, is evident from the example of Ambrose, and
his brother, Satyrus, sons of the Christian parents Symmachus and
Marcellina, as may be seen in the oration of Ambrose, on the death of
Satyrus; and it is further confirmed by the example of Theodosius,
Ambrose, Jerome, Basil, M. Augustine himself, his natural son
Adeodatus, and Alipius; who though born of Christian parents, as
already stated, were nevertheless reckoned among the catechumens, till
the day after previous instruction, they were baptized. _Bapt. Hist.,
page 480. H. Mont. Nietigh., pages 79, 80._
Perhaps some one may think, in which of the preceding words is infant
baptism spoken against? which is nevertheless so distinctly asserted
by Jacob Mehrning and H. Montanus. We reply, that they do not express
it in formal words, but indicate it by the circumstances which they
adduce. For, when they, in the first place, speak of the fourth canon
of the council of Gerunda, in Spain, in which it was decreed that
catechumens should be baptized on Easter and on Whitsuntide, they
thereby indicate that the baptism of new-born infants cannot have
been practiced there, because infants are born not only on Easter and
Whitsuntide, but throughout the whole year; and in another place it
is stated that not only no catechumens, but no one else, should be
baptized at any other time than Easter and Whitsuntide.
In the second place, when they declare that by the catechumens here
spoken of, there are to be understood not only such youths, or
scholars, as were of heathen descent, but also those born of Christian
parents, as is proved by the example of Ambrose, Satyrus, &c., it shows
that many Christians, at that time, left their children unbaptized till
they, after sufficient instruction, as was given to the catechumens,
were baptized of their own accord, on either of the two feasts, Easter
or Whitsuntide.
Sebastian Franck calls the catechumens, of whom the aforementioned
council speaks, scholars of the faith, and relates the decree of said
council, as well as the time when the same was held, on this wise:
“The council of Gerunda, held in the seventh year of King Theodoric,
passed, among nine decrees, also this: That the catechumens, that
is, the scholars in the faith, should be baptized only on Easter and
Whitsuntide, except imminent death should require it otherwise.”
_Chron. Rom. Council., fol. 73, col. 1._
_About A. D. 525._--Or in the 15th year of Theodoric, King of France,
those of the Roman church again found themselves in great embarrassment
with regard to the so-called Anabaptists. The matter rose to such a
pitch that it was thought well to assemble a council against them, as
had been done by Pope Felix, A. D. 487, at Rome. Accordingly, about
A. D. 525, the second council against the Anabaptists was convened,
not at Rome, as the first, but at Ilerda, in Spain; to which there
assembled, as was usually the case, many of the bitterest papistic
bishops--in order to extirpate, or at least check, the heresy, as it
was called--who made a number of rules and laws, not only against
the Anabaptists, but also against those who, having separated from
the Roman church, had been rebaptized by them; of which rules, among
others, the following are noted:
_Canon 9._ “Concerning those who through transgression have been
rebaptized, and have fallen without necessity, it is our will, that
the statutes of the Nicene synod be observed respecting them, which
are considered to have been passed for such offenders: that they shall
pray for seven years among the catechumens, and two years among the
catholics, and then,” &c.
_Canon 14._ “Godly believers shall not eat with the rebaptized”. _Bapt.
Hist., pages 477, 478_, from _the 6th Cent. Magd,. cap. 9, fol. 240, ex
Decret. Synod, Ilerdensis_.
The 13th canon of this synod, also given in the same place, we suspect,
has been misquoted; however, as it does not apply here, we leave it in
its own merit.
That the 14th canon, however, which speaks only of the rebaptized,
concerns the so-called Anabaptists, appears from the annotation of
Sebastian Franck, of Wordens, in _part 3_ of his _Chronijk, fol. 73,
col. 1_, who translates this canon thus: “The clergy and believers
shall not partake of meals with the Anabaptists.”
From this it can be seen in what detestation, yea, abhorrence, the
so-called Anabaptists in the time past, were held by the Romanists,
inasmuch as they were not considered worthy to eat with, even as once
the Samaritans, publicans, and sinners had been regarded by the Jews.
We will not investigate minutely, whether the so-called Anabaptists
of that time held the same views, in regard to every article, with
those who, at the present day, are designated by that name; nor will
we, if perhaps in some points they did not teach aright, or were not
fully enlightened, defend, much less, praise them; it suffices us, that
they, besides other good and wholesome articles, mentioned by us in
another place, held this in common with the Anabaptists of the present
day, namely: _That they did not approve of the baptism which by the
Romanists is administered to infants, but rejected it_, so that they
baptized, or, at least, baptized aright at first, those who, having
come to adult years, embraced their faith.
It also is praiseworthy in them, that they, notwithstanding the
anathema of the Pope and the councils, yea, regardless of persecution,
suffering, and death, as shall be shown in the proper place, maintained
and manfully defended their views. We know of nothing further that we
could say of them, from authentic writers, but will commend them, as
well as ourselves, to God and his grace. As regards the manner in which
they were proceeded against, in subsequent times, as well as how they
conducted themselves herein, we shall show in the proper time and place.
_About A. D. 530._--D. Joseph Vicecomes, in his treatise records
(_Bapt. Hist., page 482_), the following testimonies from the sixth
century.
Of the decree of the Christians, at Agathe, about A. D. 530, he says,
_lib. 3, cap. 1_: “The council of Agathe, _cap. 13_, says: It is
the will of all the church, that on the eighth day before Easter,
the confession of faith be preached publicly in the church to those
desiring baptism.”[118]