the celebrated teacher and Bishop Adrian, and stated, from a certain
letter sent by Gregory the Great to John, bishop of Larissa, that
Adrian was accused of having refused baptism to infants. But it seems
it did not stop at said accusation, but that they, to all appearance,
proceeded further and more severely and cruelly against him; for the
above was imputed to him for a crime or a heinous sin. Hence he was
criminally proceeded against, which criminal punishment sometimes
related to property, but most frequently it was of a corporal, or
capital nature.
Moreover, though said punishment was ordained for great crimes and
criminals, yet in the case of Adrian, we can perceive, it was founded
on nothing but his disregard and rejection of infant baptism, as
appears from the sequel of Gregory’s letter to John, which reads thus:
“Pursuant to the chapter of criminal matters, a charge was preferred
against Bishop Adrian, or brought against him by way of punishment,
concerning the children which, by his orders, had been kept from
baptism, and died in darkness, unbaptized (or unwashed) from the filth
of sin.” Compare with the account in _Bapt. Hist., page 546_.
If any one should object that said chapter of criminal matters, was
not comprehensive and rigorous enough, and that therefore, Adrian was
probably not really punished corporally or with death, by virtue of the
same, with such a one we do not feel inclined to dispute. It suffices
us, to have learned, on the one hand, that this teacher Adrian, did
not hesitate, even though he should incur severe penalty, to speak
against infant baptism, yea, what is still more, to reject infants
from baptism, and to let them die unbaptized, as being under the grace
of God; and on the other hand, that those of the Roman church were
exceedingly dissatisfied with this, yea, to such a degree, that the
chapter of criminal matters was opened and, apparently by form of
sentence, set before this good man, either to send him (after preceding
excommunication) into banishment, or to strip him of his property, or
to punish him corporally or capitally. But whether said sentence was
actually executed on him, is not clearly expressed; hence we commit the
truth of the matter to God.
In the meantime, there appears what we have said before, namely,
that the Pope or the Roman church did not hesitate, not only to
anathematize, as had formerly been customary, their opposers,
especially those who spoke against infant baptism, but to proceed
against them criminally or by way of corporal punishment. This was done
with the said teacher Adrian, concerning whose departure we have a good
hope, whether he died a natural or a violent death. The Lord knows his
own, and shall in the hereafter not leave them unrewarded, who have
suffered for testifying to his truth, and opposing error.
NOTICE CONCERNING THE FOLLOWING MARTYRS NOTED BY P. J. TWISCK FOR THE
YEARS 614 AND 628, AND RECORDED BY US.
We have not been able to obtain certain or clear information as regards
the confession of faith of the martyred persons of whom we shall
presently speak; hence we dare not reckon them all indiscriminately
among the true and orthodox confessors of the true faith; the more
especially, as the sword of persecution then came upon all who bore
the Christian name (as had before, yea, frequently, been the case), in
places where such persecutions occurred. Persons were also not examined
so very closely with regard to this or that controverted point of the
faith (I speak of those who were apprehended by the heathen), for these
were things of which the persecutors knew nothing, while it was quite
different with those who fell into the hands of the papists mentioned
above. The people were simply asked whether they would sacrifice to the
idols, renounce Christ, etc. Hence the reason, that in the confession
of the martyrs who suffered among the heathen, but little is said
regarding controverted matters of faith which are now discussed among
Christians; but this is discussed more fully elsewhere.
The negligence of the writers of those times, the absence of the art of
printing, and the violence of persecution, which caused people to flee
and roam about, are also no small cause why so little can be adduced
concerning the confessions of the martyrs. This has been more fully
explained in our account of baptism.
Therefore we hold, according to the judgment and nature of love, that
among the martyrs of whom we shall speak, there were, if not all, at
least some, who viewed the matter aright, and whose martyrdom had for
its foundation a good confession; but to accept them altogether, or to
enter deeper and more fully into the matter, we do not deem advisable,
for reasons already mentioned.
In order, then, to present the matter in the briefest and simplest
manner, we shall follow the account of P. J. Twisck, as being a summary
of what the ancients have recorded concerning it.
OF MANY CHRISTIANS WHO WERE APPREHENDED BY THE LONGOBARDS, AND PUT TO
DEATH BY THEM, BECAUSE, IN HONOR OF THE IDOLS, THEY REFUSED TO EAT FOOD
OFFERED TO IDOLS. A. D. 614.
“The Longobards,” says Twisck, “apprehended many Christians, and sought
to compel them, to eat meat which they had offered to their idols; and
when they refused, they put them to death. They also put to death four
hundred who would not worship their gods.” _Chron., page 216, col. 1._
As to what might be adduced concerning the confession of faith of these
slain persons, and how far we accept them as martyrs, see the foregoing
notice.
OF THE SUFFERINGS OF THE CHRISTIANS IN PERSIA, AND HOW AFTERWARDS MANY
OF THEM WERE DELIVERED FROM IMPRISONMENT, A. D. 628.
Continuing in his account, the above mentioned author finally speaks
of the year 628, for which, in the beginning, he records these words:
“About this time, the Christians had to suffer much also in Persia.”
He then relates that the Emperor Heraclius, having come into Persia,
liberated many of the imprisoned Christians; the number, however,
of those who suffered, as well as of those who were delivered from
imprisonment, is not expressed, and hence we can add no further
explanation. _Chron., page 221_, from _Hist. Eccl. Hedio., lib. 5, cap.
18_ and _19_.
All explanation further necessary, concerning the imprisonment and
the sufferings of said Christians in Persia, and how far they are
recognized by us, must be looked for in the preceding notice.
OF EIGHT SEVERE PERSECUTIONS INSTITUTED AGAINST CHRISTIAN BELIEVERS,
FROM A. D. 622 TO THE CLOSE OF THIS CENTURY.
It behooves us to record here, that from A. D. 622, to the close of
this century, various other persecutions and severe oppressions were
instituted against those who were called Christian believers, among
whom, to all appearance, there were here and there, some who died upon
a pure confession of faith; of which persecutions and oppressions of
the Christian believers, among others, eight are enumerated, which we
will briefly extract from A. Mellinus. Having spoken of the chronology
of the Turks or Mohammedans, he proceeds to the year 622, and says:
1. “In Italy a new persecution arose against the Christians who resided
there, under the Arian King of the Longobards.
2. “In France also some (namely, Christian believers) were made martyrs.
3. “Constantine, the son of Heraclius, having reigned four months,
and Heracleonas six months, Constant, the son of Constantine, became
Emperor, and reigned for twenty-seven years. He followed in the
footsteps of his grandfather Heraclius, in espousing the cause of
the Monothelites, and for the sake of this sect carried on a severe
persecution (namely, against those Christians who held different views).
4. “In the twenty-eight years during which said three Emperors reigned,
the Arabians or Saracens conquered many countries and cities, and put
to death a countless number of Christians (namely, of those who lived
under said reign). There was also considerable commotion in France
and England (understand, on account of the Christian religion). He
afterwards says:
5. “But in France, during the seventeen years of his reign several were
put to death as martyrs.”
After this, he speaks of the persecutions which, during the
twenty-seven years comprising the reign of Justinian II., and the time
of Leontius and Tiberius Apsimarus, arose against the Christians,
through the Longobards as well as the Saracens. Finally he says:
“Also in France, 6. in England, 7. in Germany, and in Spain 8. many
became martyrs at this time.” _A. Mell., 2nd book, fol. 303, col. 1, 2._
What has been remarked concerning the martyrdom of those slain in
the years 614 and 628, applies also to the eight persecutions just
mentioned; hence, see the above mentioned notice.
FURTHER OBSERVATIONS TOUCHING THE ABOVE MENTIONED MARTYRS.
Here we are compelled to leave our account of the martyrs of this
century, since the ancient writers have left us no further information
respecting this matter; at least we have not found anything more that
would shed light on the subject. However, it will be sufficient for the
defense of the cross-bearing church of the Anabaptists and defenseless
Christians; for, though among the great number of martyrs that have
been noticed by us there are found but few open professors of the
faith, but this diminishes neither the respectability nor the verity
of said cross-bearing church; since already in our account of baptism
throughout this century various, yea, many, professors of said faith
have been presented, to prevent and oppose whom divers means were
frequently resorted to. See the account of baptism for the years 610,
682, 699, etc.
Moreover, it seems hardly possible that all those who were, in such
great numbers, it appears, designated Anabaptists, in the fifth
century, and against whom bloody decrees were ordained, A. D. 413,
should all have been slain and exterminated so that none were left
remaining. This, we say, seems hardly possible, since even in the
severest persecutions the persecuted, especially if their number is
great, cannot be spied out so closely as to make it impossible for
any to escape, or that not one or the other will be able to conceal
himself. This being the case, those remaining (for it can scarcely be
otherwise) allowed the living faith which was in them, to manifest and
work out its power, in order to implant in the people of that age, but
especially, in their children and descendants, the belief and doctrine
which they themselves professed, and for the sake of which they had
imperiled their lives, escaping death however, through the grace of God.
It certainly appears that in the following (sixth) century there were
again people of such belief and doctrine; and not only that, but such
as to honor Christ their Savior, did not hesitate, as true martyrs, to
pour out their blood like water. Concerning this, both with respect to
the confession and the martyrdom, our observations on the sixth century
may be referred.
Is it a matter of surprise, then, that we hold it for certain, that
the seventh century also was not destitute of persons who, having
professed a good confession of faith, had to taste death thereupon?
Certainly, we have no reason to doubt it; or the ancients must not have
well instructed their cotemporaries and descendants, or there must have
been no persecutions in this century. As regards the former, the very
nature of love will lead us to believe otherwise; while the latter has
already been sufficiently refuted, seeing we have shown that various
persecutions occurred during that time. We will now conclude, since
our object has been sufficiently explained above; besides, many of the
confessors and martyrs noted for this century, will bear testimony to
it.
AN ACCOUNT OF THE HOLY BAPTISM IN THE EIGHTH CENTURY.
SUMMARY OF BAPTISM IN THE EIGHTH CENTURY.
[The example of Lutgerus (adduced in the last year of the preceding
century) is rehearsed, by way of introduction, in the beginning of
this; to which is added an account of Herinigild, who was baptized by
Leander, after previous instruction:
Germanus, a father at Constantinople, states that it was customary to
make confession of sins before baptism.
Bede the presbyter treats of the baptism of the apostles; of the
baptism of the Angles who were baptized in the Rhine and Swalbe; of
the catechumens, to whom, before baptism, the confession of faith was
delivered; of four things which do not apply to infant baptism; of
Paulinus, the teacher at York, and how he baptized Eadfrid and Offrid,
the sons of Edwin; that there can be no baptism without water and the
word; that all believers must be baptized; that the bread of the holy
Supper is a figure of the body of Christ; which latter is further
explained in the margin.
Amalarius Fortunatus states that the newly planted or, newly baptized,
Christians were led to the church for eight days; he admonishes the
candidates to fast for several days before baptism; and, in the margin,
it is stated that he taught against transubstantiation, etc.
The views of Antharitis, who refused baptism to the infants of the
Christians, are presented.
Of some among the Romanists, who held that fasting, reading, and
praying must be connected with baptism; that the teachers should first
baptize the men, and then the women; what prayer should be spoken over
the men and women to be baptized; that the baptized must kneel down and
pray to God, etc.
Wittikind becomes a catechumen, is instructed in the faith, and then
baptized together with Albion.
The baptism of the son of Carloman, and of his daughter Gisla; what we
think of it.
Albinus requires faith at baptism, that is, that baptism must be
received with faith; he also says that with baptism there are connected
three visible and three invisible things; of which the visible are:
1. the body of the candidate; 2. the baptizer; 3. the water; and the
invisible are: 1. the soul; 2. faith; 3. the Spirit of God; that
baptism without the invocation of the holy Trinity is void; that not
only the creed, but also the Lord’s prayer was said at baptism; that
examination in the faith took place at baptism; which custom, however,
according to Vicecomes, was abolished after infant baptism came into
vogue; that the factitious practices of the papists commenced when
baptism ceased to be administered to adults. Thereupon follows the
opinion of Jacob Mehrning, that about the year 800, infant baptism was
doubtful and hung by a thread.
Seb. Franck quotes the statement of Beatus Rhenanus (from Turtullian),
saying that according to the usage of the ancients, the adults were
baptized with the washing of regeneration; which is also confirmed by
the testimony of Polydorus.
The conclusion taken from P. J. Twisck, is to the effect, that the
ancient custom of baptizing adult, believing and penitent persons,
seems to have still obtained in some measure, even with the general
church. Conclusion for this century.]
* * * * *
As in winter the sun does not always, but only at times, send down
his bright beams upon the earth, even though he has risen above the
horizon, and even reached the meridian, so it was also in the eighth
century, with the true faith, and the baptism which is administered
upon faith. For although the light of the holy Gospel had at that time
risen in the hearts of many pious persons, so that they apprehended
the faith, and, in token of it, were baptized thereupon, yet, there
were but few who exhibited to mankind, by their writings, the bright
splendor of the evangelical truth; at least this is true, that but
very little has come down to the present generation. Nevertheless, we
have met with enough to prove that this dark age also was not entirely
destitute of persons who shone forth as flaming torches in the midnight
of papal error, and shed abroad the radiance of God’s truth, especially
in the matter of baptism. To prove this will not be difficult for us;
hence we begin.
_A. D. 701._--For the last year of the preceding century, that is, for
A. D. 700, we showed that Lutgerus and Libuga, two Christian parents,
left their son Lutgerus unbaptized till he, having accepted the faith,
was baptized of his own accord. This occurred in France, at the time
referred to, and it is also stated that the same year, in Spain,
Herinigild, having attained to the faith through the instruction of
Leander, was baptized; besides various other persons, both before and
at that time, as the chronicles show.
From this it clearly follows that the people who held this belief must
have existed also in the beginning of this century, since a religion
that has once obtained a footing, cannot well be abolished in a year
or two, especially if it is spread over different countries, and
is zealously advocated, which latter, as has been shown, the true
believers did. Hence we shall proceed to the persons who held this
belief and whose names are mentioned in this century.
_A. D. 716._--_Bapt. Hist., page 534_, D. Vicecomes (_lib. 3, cap. 5_),
quotes from Germanus, a father at Constantinople, who lived in the time
of Leo Isauricus, that it was still customary then, to make confession
of sins before baptism.
He speaks here of a general custom observed at that time in the East,
in the Greek churches; which custom consisted in this, that confession
of sins was made before baptism; which, as every one can judge, could
not be done by infants, but only by adult persons.
If any one should object here, that this related only to the
intelligent, but that infants were baptized, though they did not make
such confession, we reply that this does not appear at all, nay, that
the contrary follows clearly, since the custom spoken of was a general
one, binding for all who were to be baptized; and as infants could not
follow this custom, it is incontrovertible, that they were not admitted
to the baptism which required it.
_From A. D. 724 to 736._--At this time there was conspicuous in the
kingdom of England, Bede,[129] surnamed the Presbyter, who, having at
one time maintained the Roman superstitions, and among these, infant
baptism, now openly declared to hold different views in many points.
Touching baptism, he is stated to have declared the following (_Bapt.
Hist., page 532_, on Acts 19): “All who came to the apostles to be
baptized, were first instructed and taught by them; and having been
instructed and taught concerning baptism, they were baptized, by virtue
of the apostolic office.” Compare with Mark 16:16.
[129] Venerable Bede.--_Transl._
_Page 533_, D. Vicecomes (_lib. 1, cap. 5_) quotes the following
testimonies from Bede. He writes: “Bede says that the Angles were
baptized in the Rhine and in the Swalbe.” Regarding the manner, compare
this with Matt. 3:6: “And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing
their sins.” Again: “And John also was baptizing in Enon, near to
Salim, because there was much water there: and they came and were
baptized” John 3:23. This mode of baptism, as we have shown elsewhere,
was not administered to infants, but only to adult and intelligent
persons; nay, it is shown there, that this could not be otherwise.
Bede, in his exposition on the book of Esdras (_D. Vicecomes, lib.
2, cap. 3_), writes, “To the hearers of the new life (that is, the
catechumens) we deliver the confession of faith as laid down by the
twelve apostles.”
From the circumstance mentioned here, that the confession of faith was
delivered to the catechumens, namely, that they might learn it, and be
baptized thereupon, it appears that at the time and place of which he
speaks, no such haste was made to have infants baptized, as had been
done previously, and as was also done subsequently, by those of the
Roman church. For these catechumens were certainly not baptized in
their infancy, or presented for baptism by their parents; but, in order
to be truly baptized, they first learned the catechism, which was the
instruction in the faith of the Christians in those times; and in order
that they might be perfectly instructed therein, the whole confession
of faith was delivered to them, before they were baptized.
_Bede_ (_lib. 3, cap. 3_), on Hebr. 6, further says: “The separation
from the Egyptians signifies the separation from sin, which those
who are to be baptized (must) profess ... as Saint Peter has said,
Acts 2: ‘Repent, and be baptized every one of you, in the name of
Jesus Christ our Lord;’ as though he would say: Depart from Egypt; go
through the Red Sea. Moreover, in the epistle to the Hebrews, there is
mentioned _before baptism_, repentance from dead works; but what else
is repentance from dead works, than a being slain unto sin, that we may
live unto God in holiness?” Here four things are mentioned which do
not apply to the baptism of infants. 1. The separation from sin, which
those who were to be baptized, must confess. 2. Peter’s exhortation,
Acts 2: “Repent,” etc., which was not spoken to infants, but to
intelligent, penitent sinners. 3. The passage of Paul, from the epistle
to the Hebrews, chap. 6, verse 2, where before baptism repentance from
dead works is mentioned. 4. Bede’s exposition of said passage: “What is
repentance from dead works, but a dying unto sin, that we may live unto
God in holiness?”
I feel confident that even our opponents will concur with us in saying
that the conditions which Bede here joins to baptism, do not relate to
infants, and, hence, cannot be applied to the baptism of infants.
_Bede_ (_in lib. 2, Hist. Anglic._), writes of Paulinus, the teacher at
York: He preached the word of God from that time on for six years, and
there believed and were baptized as many as were ordained (or destined)
to eternal life, etc.; among whom there were Offrid and Eadfrid, the
sons of King Edwin, who were both born to him in the misery of his
exile, and were both taken out of this life while yet in their white
garments.”
This is a noble example of Paulinus, who preached the word of God to
the people, before he baptized them; nor is it less remarkable, that
those who _believed_ were _baptized_, and that the sons of Edwin,
though exiles, yet the scions of a great race, having accepted the
faith, humbled themselves to baptism. It was to be lamented, however,
that these two youths, who might long have been lights and ensamples
in the church, were taken out of this life so suddenly, even while
they yet had on their white garments, which it was customary to wear
immediately after baptism, as a sign of purity.
In the mean time we must rejoice that even in those benighted times, so
much light of the faith shone forth, that not only some of the common
people, but also the children of the great were enlightened by it, so
that they willingly bowed themselves under the yoke of Christ, through
baptism.
Bede, on John 4, says: “Take away the water, and there is no baptism;
take away the word of God, and there is also no baptism.” _Bapt. Hist.,
p. 505._
By this he indicates that the water cannot be separated from the word,
neither the word from the water; that is, that the doctrine cannot
stand without baptism, and baptism not without the doctrine; thus his
meaning is, that both doctrine and baptism must go together. But how
this applies to infant baptism, in which the word is separated from the
water, or the doctrine from the baptism, any one that has understanding
can judge.
That all believers must be baptized, Bede teaches in his exposition
of Job 1: “Through the obedience of faith all believers must come to
baptism,” and on chap. 2 he says: “No one is worthy to enter into the
kingdom of God, unless he is born again of water and of the Spirit.”
In the first sentence he indicates that the believers must come to
baptism; of others he makes no mention; even as Philip said to the
Ethiopian: “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” Acts
8:37.
In the second sentence he speaks of the regeneration of water and of
the Spirit; concerning which Christ spoke to Nicodemus, who was not
an infant, but a man of years, yea, a master in Israel. John 3:1,10.
Hence, it can or should be sufficiently understood, what kind of a
baptism it is of which he speaks in said place, namely, such a baptism
as belongs not to children, but to the reasonable and regenerated.