The Second Part
Chapter VII
Wherein there is an Account of some Eminent Witness that hath been born Against Infant-Baptism from First to Last. The first, we shall mention, is that excellent testimony Tertullian bore against it, upon the first appearance of it in the third Century; in his Book De Baptisms, c. 18. Wherein he disswades [sic] from the practice, by such like Arguments as these, viz.
First, From the mistake of Scripture usually brought to enforce it, which was afterwards called the Scripture-Canon for Baptism, viz. Matthew 19.14. Suffer little Children to come to me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of Heaven, &c.
It is true, saith he, the Lord saith, Do not forbid them to come to me. Let them come therefore when they grow elder, when they learn, when they are taught why they come; let them be made Christians when they can know Christ.
Secondly, From the weightiness of the Ordinance, which ought not to be trifled with: for, saith he, they that do understand the weight of Baptism, will rather fear the attaining it, than be deferring it.
Thirdly, From the sinfulness of such a practice: so rashly, saith he, to give such Holy
things to Dogs, and to cast such Pearls before Swine, and so headily to partake of other mens sins.Fourthly, from the absurdity of it, To refuse to commit Earthly and Secular things to their trust by reasons of their incapacity and yet to commit to, and intrust them with Heavenly and Spiritual things.
Fifthly, From the folly of Exposing of Witnesses, who by death may not only frustrate their Promises, but be disappointed through the evil disposition of them they so largely undertake for, Mag. Cent. 3. c. 6. p. 125.
Sixthly, From the consideration that the Adult were the only proper Subjects of Baptism; because, saith he, Fasting, Confession, Prayer, Profession, Renouncing the Devil and his works, is called for from them. Coron. Mil. 124.
Secondly, The Witness born by the Donatists. The Second we shall mention, is the Witness that the Novatians and Donatists gave against it.
Donatus, a Learned man in Africa, taught that they should baptize non Children but only those that believed and desired it. Sebast. Frank. Chron. fol. 76.
That the Followers of Donatus were all one with the Anabaptists, denying baptism to children,
admitting the believers only thereto, who desired the same; and that none ought to be forced to any Belief. Twisk. Chron. l. 6. p. 201.Austin's third and fourth Books against the Donatists, do demonstrate, that they denied Infants-Baptism; wherein he manageth the Argument for Infants-Baptism against them with great zeal, enforcing it by several Arguments; but especially from Apostolical Tradition, and cursing with great bitterness they that should not embrace it.
And therefore Osiander, in his Epist. Cent. 16. p. 175. saith, that our modern Anabaptists were the same with the Donatists of old.
And Fuller in his Ecclesiastical History , l. 5. p. 225. saith, That the Anabaptists are the Donatists new dipt.
Bullinger saith, The Donatists and the then Anabaptists held the same Opinions, Lib. 5. fol. p. 16, 222, Of Baptism.
And in farther confirmation thereof, Pope Innocent I, the first Instituter and Imposer of Infants-Baptism, did banish this People (called Cathari) out of Rome, as Socrates, l. 7. c. 9. We put the Donatists and Novatians together, because they did so well agree in Principle [though of different Regions; the Donatists in Africa, the Novatians in Italy] as Cryspin's French Hist. p. 17. _out of Albaspinaus upon Optat. Milevitanus Observant. 20] telleth us, saying, That they hold together in the following things, viz.
First, For purity of Church-Members, by asserting, that none ought to be admitted into Churches, but such as were visibly true Believers, and real Saints.
Secondly, For the purity of Church-Discipline, as the Application of church-Censures, and keeping out such as had Apostatized or scandalously sinned.Thirdly, They both agreed in asserting the Power, Rights, and Priviledges [sic] of particular Churches, against Antichristian incroachments of Presbyters, Bishops and Synods.
Fourthly, That they baptized again those whose first Baptism they had ground to doubt.
Eckbertus and Emerieus, two great opposers of the Waldenses, for denying denying Baptistm to Children (as afterwards you'l find) do assert, That the new Cathari or Puritans (which they called the Waldenses) do conform to the Doctrines and Manners of the old Cathari, viz. the Novatians.
And Paul Perin in his History of the Waldenses, tells, That the Fratricelli, or little Brethren, another name given to the Waldenses, were time out of mind in Italy and Dalmatia; and were the Offspring of the Novatians, persecuted and driven from Rome about 400; and who for their purity in communion, were also called Cathari.
And as for Cassander's Reason in his Epistle to the D. of Cleve, why the Donatists did not disown Infants-Baptism, mentioned also by Mr. Cobbett, I conceive hath no weight at all in it; viz. because the 6th Council of Carthage decreed, That all that returned from the Donatists, should be received into the Catholick Churcch without Rebaptization, though baptized in Infancy; which is but a supposition at best, that they might be baptized in Infancy, or
they might not, and can signifie nothing against all the former Evidence.Object. But the Novatians and Donatists were by Popes and Councils adjudged and dealt with as hereticks.
Answ. So were the Waldenses, as you'l hear anon more; and so have been the Christians in all Ages; therefore all that have been so censured, ought not so to be esteemed; Paul himself tells us, That in the way they called Heresy, so worshipped he the God of his Fathers. And indeed what part of the purest Gospel-way and worship has escaped this Censure?
Neither doth it follow, if Christians should err, or mistake themselves in some things, that therefore they must be rejected as Hereticks in others.
I could enumerate several gross Errors and Mistakes of Austin himself (their great oppose) as they are recorded amongst his Navi; must he therefore be esteemed an Heretick?
But as to the Novatians and Donatists (so as much one in Principle and Practice) however adjudged by Popes and Councils, I cannot find they were other than a very Holy People, especially the Novatians, whose great Crime was, that they press'd after purity in Worship, and to separate, as you. Have heard, from Anti-christian defilement, and therefore called Puritans, or Cathari; concerning whom, Socrates, Scholasticism speaks so honourably, and so largely vindicates from the Calumnies cast upon
On them, defending them to be a holy, zealous, sincere, faithful people.
Thirdly, The Witness born by the Ancient Britains. The next we shall mention, is that Witness we find born by the Old Britains, (of whose Antiquity and Purity in Christianity, you have a more particular Account in the following History) who having, as you will find received the Christian Doctrine and Worship from the Apostles times, did entirely keep thereto, cleaving to the Scriptures, utterly renouncing all Romish Traditions and Superstitions; especially the Remains of them, that after the Roman and Saxon Invasions, inhabited Wales: to whom Austin the Monk, the Legate of Pope Gregory, about the year 604. Did address in two Assemblies, that he procured upon the Borders of Wales, to engage them, as he had done many of the Saxons, to embrace the Romish Rites, especially in Christning Children, and keeping Easter; But inasmuch as they utterly refused to be seduced by him therein, he not only threatened their ruine, but accomplished the same in a short time after.
Concerning which, Mr. Fox in his Martyrology. p. 153, 154. Part 1 tells us, that Austin having charged them to preach with him to
the English, and that they should among themselves form certain Rites and Usages in their Churches; especially for keeping their Easter-Tide, and Baptizing after the manner of Rome; and for which he quotes Bede, Polichron, Huntingdon, Jornalenses, and Jeff. Monmouth, and Fabian, Part 5. c. 119, &c. Fabian expresseth himself Fol. 125. Part 5. viz. Then he said to them, since you will not assent to my Hosts generally, assent you to me, especially in three things; The first is, That you keep Easter in due form and time as it is Ordained. The second, that you give Christendom to Children. And the Third, that you preach to the Saxons, as I have exhorted you: And all the other debate I shall suffer you to amend and reform amongst your selves: But, saith he, they would not thereof. To whom Austin spake and said, that if they would not take peace with their Brethren, they should receive war with their Enemies. And if they disdained to Preach with them the way of Life to the English Nation, they should suffer by their hands the revenge of Death; and which Austin accomplisheth accordingly, by bringing the Saxons upon them, to their utter ruine; as you will hear afterwards at large. And thereupon, saith Fabian, that Faith that had endured in Britain for near 400 years, became near extinct through all the Land.And that the Churches in Britain did oppose the Baptizing of Infants, and assert and practice that of believers, is farther manifest by the following Arguments.
Because, as you'l find in the History, that they received the Scriptures, the Christian Faith, Doctrine, and Discipline from the Apostles and Asiatick Churches, who had no such thing as the Baptizing of Infants amongst them, as you have largely heard.2. Because it appears they so fully prized, and faithfully adhered to the Scriptures, both for Doctrine and Discipline, wherein no such thing is to be found, as also you have understood, and as is confest.
3. Because they did so vehemently reject humane Traditions in the Worship of God, especially all Roman Innovations, Rites, and Ceremonies; this, as before, undeniably appearing to come from Romes [sic] Ordination and Imposition.
4. Because Constantine the Great, the Son of Constance, and the Famous Helena, (both eminent Christians) born in Britain, in the year 305. was not baptized till he was aged as before; a clear proof, that the Christians in Britain, in those days did not baptize their Children.
5. Because of the Correspondency and Unity that they were betwixt the French Christains, after called the Waldenses, and them; who had Colledges like them, communicated in the Ministry with them, both in Preaching and Baptizing, viz. Germanus and Lupus, two famous French-men, sent for to help against the Pelagian Heresie; who were not only useful and serviceable to suppress that Error, but were instrumental to convert many, and did baptize great Multitudes amongst them, upon Confession
of Faith, in the River Allin, near Chaster.And lastly, Another Argument why they did not baptize Children in Britain, because Austin himself, the Romish Emissary, was himself so raw and ignorant of the Rite, when he came first in Britain, as appears by that Question, which he almongst others, writ from thence to Pope Gregory, to be resolved in, viz. How long the baptizing of a Child might be deferr'd (there being no danger of death)? in his tenth Interrogatory, Ex Decreto Greg, lib. 1. Concil. tom.2.
Fourthly, Some Witness Born by Several Eminent Persons in Several Ages Against Infants-Baptism That in the Fourth Century, Dadoes, Sabas, Adalphius, and Simonis, eminent Learned men, were accused of Heresie by the Romish Church; and amongst other things, they were charged to have an ill opinion of the Sacrament of the Altar, and of Infants-Baptism.
Eccles. Hist. Tripart. L. 7. C. 11. Sebast. Frank. Chron. Rom. Hereticks. Printed, anno 1568. fol. 96.
Vincentium Victor did oppose Austin in the point of Infants-Baptism. Austin. l. .3. c. 14 De Anima. Vicecomes l. 2. c. 1Cresconius did also oppose Austin in the point of Infants-Baptism, and did maintain a Re-Baptization of those that were baptized by Hereticks or Unbelievers; and that there was no true Baptism, but that which was administered after Faith. Jacob Morning. Bapt. Hist. p. 416.
Faustus Regiensis, a Bishop in France, taught, that personal and actual desire ws requisite in every one that was to be baptized. Morning. Bapt. Hist. p. 425.
Albanas, a zealous godly Minister in that Sixth Century, was put to death for baptizing of Believers, though baptized in Infancy or by Hereticks. Sebast. Frank. fol. 136. col. 3. Baronius Annal. 413. Numb. 6. Twisk. Chron. l. 5. p. 149.
In the year 538, in the time of Justinus and Justinianns, there were a sort of people called Swerwers, who had perswaded, and by Reason convinced the Emperial Council and Servants, that they should lay aside Childrens Baptism; against whom and their Doctrine, the said Emperors did oppose themselves. Jacob Morning, p. 487. Out of Rulicius.
Rulicius, p. 249, and Glanaus, p. 627. Concerning the aforesaid Swerwers say, That at that time there were risen a strange people called Swerwers, who were honest and godly
Teachers, and Christians, that from the example of Christ's Baptism did reprove the evil Custom of Childrens-Baptism, that like an inundation was then broken in; who had by Reason convinced the Emperial Council to leave of Childrens-Baptism.Nicephorus, l. 17. C. 9. Saith, That in the year 550. One Peter, Bishop of Apamen, and Zorsarus, a Monk in Syria, did maintain and defend the point of Dipping, Rebaptization, or Weder-dipping. Magd. Cent. 6. c. 5. p. 305. Twisk, Chron. in the year 586.
Adrianns Bishop of Corinth, who flourished under the Emporer Maurice, in the seventh Century, did publicky oppose Infants-Baptism, insomuch as he would neither baptize them himself, nor suffer them to be baptized by others, but wholly denied Baptism to them; wherefore he was accused by Gregorius Magnus Bishop of Rome, to Jo. Bishop of Larissa, as appears by Gregories Letter to the said John; in which, among others things, he complains against the said Adrian, that he turned away young Children from Baptism, and let them die without it: For which they proceeded against him as a great Transgressor and Blasphemer. Magd. Cent. 6. p. 655. Morning, Hist. Bapt. p. 496. Montannus, [sic] p. 80. Dutch Martyrol. p. 204.
Sebastin Frank, fol. 74. saith, That about the year 610. Childrens-Baptism was held in many places of little esteem, by the Learned endeavors of Adrianns and others; therefore
the Popes see themselves to uphold it; and particularly at the Council of Bracerens, An. 610, it was Ordained, Concluded, and Published, that young Children must be baptized; as being necessary to Salvation, upon penalty of Damnation. Jocob Morning, p. 546. Dutch Martyr. p. 204.In Lower Saxony one Birinius, an eminent Learned man, professed Instruction to be necessary before Baptism. Bed. L. 4. C. 16. And that without it, Baptism ought not to be administered to high or low. Bede, l. 4. c. 16, & l. 3. c. 7. Dutch Martyrol. p. 205.
About the year 670. Christ's Baptism after the preaching of Faith in the right manner, was practiced in Egypt, and in such esteem, that some in other Lands did restore the Christian Religion according to their example, who in this point differed so much from the Church of Rome, and who were therefore called the beginners of the Christian Religion; which make Jacob Pamelius upon Tertullian, say in these words, That the beginners of Christian Religion, who had separated themselves from the Romish Church, had placed Religion upon its first Apostolical Foundation, in teaching Faith before Baptism, as owned by the Egyprian divines. Joseph Vicecomes, l. 2. c. 3. Pamelius upon Tertullian. Dutch Martyrol. Cent. 7.
Hinchmarus, Bishop of Laudum in France, in the 9th Century, renounced Childrens-Baptism, and refused any more to baptize any of them; so that they grew up without Baptism, yea, many died without it: Upon which he was accused by the Bishop of Rhemes, who sharply writes to him after this manner; Though thou knowest that except a man be born of Water and the Spirit, &c. yet thou hast forbidden the baptizing of Children, although they upon the point of death, hazarding thereby their damnation; whereas it is written, That the Son of man came no to destroy a Soul, but to save it: And hast also contradicted the Decree of the African Council (viz. the Milevitan Canon by P. Innocent) which I have heretofore signified to thee by writing; therefore leave off such an abominable Doctrine of refusing Baptism to Children; leave off dividing the Church of God by such a Schism; cut not thy self off by cleaving to thy own opinion, and for which he and his Diocese were accused in the Synod of Accinicus in France, in these words; Ne Missascelebrarent, aut Infantes baptizarent, aut Paenitentes absolverent, aut Mortuos sepelirent; That they neither celebrated Mass, baptized Children, absolved the Penitents, or buried the Dead. Bib. Patrum, Tom. 9. Part. 2. p. 137. Magd. Cent. 9. C. 4. p. 40, 41, 43. Dutch Martyrol. p. 244. Part 1.In the 9th Century, one Gilbertus, a Learned man, heretofore of another mind, opposed the Pope and Romish Church upon the point of Baptism; for in general it is by them taught,
that upon pain of Salvation, it is necessary to baptize young Children although they be not regenerated, nor cannot desire it; which nevertheless is required in those that are baptized, Matthew 28. In opposition thereto, he therefore taught, that Baptism only accompanied Salvation to those that are regenerated, and did desire the same; which he considered as the chief means with the Grace of God, to attain Salvation; yet nevertheless denied not Salvation to a Believer, through the Grace of God, though he had not attained Baptism, an opportunity being wanting to him; though concluding it very necessary and desirable to every Believer to obey Christ therein. Magd. Cent. 10. c. 4. Morninig Hist. Bapt. p. 567. Dutch Martyrol. p. 267.Smaragdus, heretofore a defender, now an opposer of Infants-Baptism, writing of the Power, Life, and Practice of Baptism, upon Matthew 28, saith, That they first were to teach, and then to baptize with water after teaching. Dutch Martyrol. p. 263.
Heribertus, and Lifonius, and Stephanus, with eleven Christians more, were burnt at Orleans in France, for opposing Childrens-Baptism. Vignier. Eccles. Hist. Anno. 1022. And Abraham Mellin. fol. 381. Glabar. Hist. l. 3. c. 8.
At Gostar, in the time of H[enry] 3. Emperor, several were put to death for opposing Infants-Baptism, under the name of Manichees. Abraham Mellin. Hom. 8. fol. 422.
Peter Abalardus, a Learned man, a great impugner of Infants-Baptism, Imprisoned and Martyred in Rome. Abraham Mellin. l. 2. p. 425.At Parenza in Italy, many who opposed Pado-baptism, and other Articles of the Roman Church, were condemned, and suffered Death. Baron. Annals, t. 11. Annno 1095. Abr. Mellin. fol. 395.
Gerardus Sagerellus, for opposing the Rom. church, in holding against the Doctrines of Infants-Baptism, were burnt at Parma. Abraham Mellin. p. 470. col. 3. Balaus, Cent. 4. c. 30.
Dulcinus of Novaria, with his Wife Margaretha, for holding the doctrine of the Waldenses, were cruelly tortured and burnt at Novaria in Lumbardy. Leon. Krentz Chron. Prat. De Haref. Tit Dulcin. Ex Bernardo Lutzenburg. Twisk Chron. l. 14. Anno 1308. p. 649. Hen. Boxh. fol. 26.
By the Decree of Alphonfus, five men and three women were burnt at Troyes in Campaign, An. 1200. Belgick Chron. An. 1067. p. 189.
Nineteen person were condemned, and burnt, witnessing against Paedo-baptism in the Bishoprick of Tholouse, Vignier. Anno. 1232. Eccles. Hist.
At Marseilles in France, four Monks which were converted from the Romish Religion, were by P. John 22. Burnt for opposing Paedo-baptism. Abraham Mellin. l. 2. fol. 480.
At Creme in Austria, in the Bishoprick of Fassan, many of the Waldenses were burnt for opposing Paedobaptism. An. 1315. Trithem. Chron. An. 1315. p. 211. Hen. Boxh. fol. 27.A pious woman named Peronne, of Aubiton in Flanders, was burnt in the profession of this Faith, witnesssing against Paedo-baptism, in the year 1373.
Dutch Martyrol. Part 2. fol. 497. At Mompelier in France, was burnt in the year 1417. Katherine van Thaw, a Pious Matron, witnessing to the same Truth. Dutch Martyrol. p. 405.
At Ausburgh in Germany, an. 1517. was burnt Hans Koch and Leonard Maister; as also the Learned Michael Satler at Herb. In Germany; and Leonard Keyser in Byren, all witnessing to the Waldensian Faith in opposing Paedo-baptism, the same year. Jacob Morning. p. 748.
Felix Mantz, a faithful Servant of Christ, owning the same Faith, was drowned at Zurick, An. 1527. Dutch Martyrol. 213, p. 9.
Leonard Skooner, a Baptist-Teacher, was beheaded at Rottenburg in Germany, and 70 more of the same perswasion, were at the same place put to death, An. 1527. Dutch Martyrol. l. 2. p. 91.
Jo. Wouteriz, a Prisoner at Dort, 1572. was by the Scout required to be burnt for departing from the Faith, being baptized again, contrary to the Emperor's Edict; which he denied, saying, he never baptized but one
after Faith; for the Baptism of Children he held for no Baptism. Old Dutch Book of Martyrs, p. 629.This Instance is misplaced, being put into Cent. 6. p. 114. which belongs to Cent. 16.
Christian Gastinger at Inglstad, opposed Infants-Baptism, and was put to Death for the same, at Berne, Anno. 1586. Dutch Martyrol. Part. 2. p. 16.
p. 237
Fifthly, The Witness born[e] by the Waldenses. The next we shall produce, is the most eminent Testimony that was born[e] by the Waldenses, those French Christians, who are so famous in Story, for the defence of the Gospel, against Antichristian Usurpations, that the Learned Usher, in his Book of the State and Succession of the Christian Church, doth trace its succession through them in a distinction from, and opposition to that of the Papacy, the Romish Church; and who, amongst other of Christ's Ordinances (that they defended and witnessed to, to Death, and Banishment, and Bonds) that of Baptizing Believers, in opposition to that of Infants, was, you'l find by plentiful Evidence, none of the least.
Leaving the History of this Famous People, as to the Names they are known by in Story, their Original, Growth, Excellency, and Suffering, till the Conclusion, we proceed to demonstrate to you what witness they gave unto this great Truth, in the Particulars following, viz. 1. In their publick Confession of Faith2. In the particular witness that some of their principle men bare thereto.
3. In the more general Witness born by the body of the People, as appears by Decrees of Councils, the Decretal Epistles, and General Edicts given forth against the whole Party for the same.
4. In the Footsteps that we find thereof in the several countries, where they have heretofore Imprinted the same
The First is the Witness we find hereof in their publick confessions of Faith, viz. In their Ancient Confession of Faith, bearing Date 1120. Artic. 13. They say, We acknowledge no other Sacraments but Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. P. Perin, 87.
And in Article 28, of another confession: That God doth not only instruct us by his Word, but he also Ordained certain Sacraments to be joined with it, as a means to unite us unto, and to make us partakers of his Benefits, and that there are only two of them belonging in Common to all Members of the Church under the New Testament, viz. Baptism and the Supper of the Lord, Morland. B. 1. C. 4. p. 67. And in another very ancient Confession of Faith, Art. 7. We do believe that in the Sacrament of Baptism, Water is the Visible and external Sign which represents unto us that (which by the Invisible virtue of god operating) is within us viz. The Renovation of the Spirit, and the mortification of our Members in Jesus Christ6, by which also we a r received into the holy Congregation of the People of God, there protesting and declaring openly our Faith and Amendment of Life, p. Perin. p. 89.
Vignier, in his Ecclesiastical History, saith, They expressly declare to receive the Canon of the Old and New Testament, and to reject all Doctrines which have not their foundations in it, or are in any thing contrary to it. Therefore all the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome they condemn and abominate; saying, she is a Den of Thieves, and the Apocalptical Harlot, Usher, p. 374.And in their Ancient Confession, artic. 11. We esteem for an abomination, and as Antichristian, all humane Inventions, as a trouble and prejudice to the Liberty of the Spirit; and in their Ancient Catechism, you have these further Principles about Tradition and Humane Inventions, as you find them in P. Perin. De. Doct. De Vaud. Liv. 1, p. 168, 169. When Humane Traditions are observed for Gods Ordinances, then is he worshipped in vain, as the Prophet Isaiah affirmeth, c. 19. And our Saviour himself alledgeth, Matthew 15. And which is done when Grace is attributed to the External Ceremonies, and Persons enjoyned to partake of Sacraments without Faith and Truth.
But the Lord chargeth his to take heed of such false Prophets, to separate, avoid, and withdraw from them, Matthew 16.6 to 13. Psalm 26.5. 2Corinthians 6.14. Revelation 18. And, ----------
In their Ancient Treatise concerning Antichrist, Writ 1120,; They say, That he attributes the regeneration of the Holy spirit unto the dead outward work, baptizing Children into that Faith, and teaching, that thereby Baptism and Regen'ration must be had, grounding therein all his Christianity, which is against the Holy spirit. P. Perin. l. 3. p. 267.
The Second is the Witness we find born hereto by several of their most eminent men. The first we begin with is the famous Beringarius of Turain in Anjou, one of their Barbs, as Morland.
Who in the 11 Century did so eminently and learnedly oppose Transubstantiation, and other Popish Innovations; and for which he was persecuted for about 30 years, and no less than five Popes, viz. Leo IX, Nic. II, Alex. II, Greg. VII. And prosecuted by five desperate Persecutors, viz. Guitmund, Algerius, Fulbertus, Heldibrand, after Greg. VII and Lunifrank Archbishop of Canterbury; and Sentenced in no less than four councils, as the Magdeburgs tell us, viz. the first Lateran, the Vercellans, the Thurene, and second Lateran as Cent. 11, p. 454, 456, 457.
Who with his Witness against the Real Presence, doth also testifie against that other of Baptizing of Children.
The Magdeburg. Cent. 11, c. 5. p. 240. Tell us, That Beringarius did in the time of Leo the IX, about the year 1049. Publickly maintain his Heresies, which they set down to be denying Transubstantiation, and Baptism to little one;
under five Heads, which Launifrank Archbishop of Canterbury, in his book called Scinrillaris, answers at large; and as to that of his denying Infants-Baptism, he answers, by saying, He doth thereby oppose the general Doctrines and Universal Consent of the Church, p. 243.Cassander, in his Epistle to the Duke of Cleve, saith, That Guitmund Bishop of Averse, doth affirm, That with the Real Presence in the Eucharist, he did deny Baptism to little ones; though not the latter so publickly as the former; knowing (as he saith) that the Ears of the worst of men would not brook that blasphemy.
In the Bibliotheca Patrum, Printed at Paris, p. 432. It is recorded, That Durandus Bishop of Leodienses, hearing that Henry I. King of France, had called a Council to suppress the Heretics of Brunno Bishop of Anjou, and Beringarius of Teurionensis, writes a large Epistle to him to this purpose; first to applaud his wisdom in the calling of that Council to suppress those pernicious Doctrines of the old Heresies now modernly revived, which had filled all Ears through France and Germany.
Then, secondly, mentions the same to be, first, the affirming the Eucharist to be not the Real Body, but a Shadow and Figure rather of the Body of Christ: And secondly, the denying, and as much as in them lay, the destroying the Baptism of Infants.
Then Thirdly, Shews the necessity of the Councils severity against them; especially against the Bishop Brunno, whose influence, in his Capacity, might be of so evil Consequence,
and therefore adviseth, that they should not be suffered so much as to speak in the Council: and lastly, endeavours to confute the said Opinions, viz. the first, from several Authorities of the Ancients, as Leo, Ambrose, Hillary, Cyril, Basil; and the second, concerning Infants-Baptism; from a single Quotation out of Austin, against the Donatists, l. 4. Which Epistle you have at large in the Bibl. Patr.Mr. Clark in his Martyrology, tells us, That God raised up Beringarius, who boldly and faithfully preached, and witnessed to the Truth against the Romish errors; whereupon the Gospellers were called Beringarians, for about 100 years after.
Matth. Paris saith, That Beringarius had drawn all France, Italy and England to his Opinion, 1087.
Dr. Usher tells us in the Succession of the Church, p. 252. out of Thuanus, That Bruno the Archbishop of Tryers, did expel several of the Beringarian Sect, that had spread his Doctrine in several of those Belgick Countries, and that several of them, upon Examination, did say, That baptism did not profit Children to Salvation, as (saith he) the Authors of the Acts of Bruno (found in the Lord Carew's Library of Clapton) doth testifie.
But as to Beringarius, it is objected and said, That he did recant and revoke his Opinion; as appears by the Recantation it self Recorded by Gratian.
To which I answer in the words of a Learned man expres'd in Crispin's French History. fol. 21. That if he did through frailty recant and
deny the Truth, it was no other than Peter did before him, who yet repented of that evil; and so did Beringarius too.And write against his own Recantation, for violently extorted from him, for most conclude, he lived some time after, and died in his former Profession, a man of great worth and goodness, as his Epitaph by his Scholar Heldebert, Bishop of Tryers discovers, mentioned by Malmsbury, p. 114.
Vi vere sapient, & parte beatus ab omni,The second eminent Witness we meet with amongst the Waldenses, was the famous Peter Bruis of Tholouse, another of their renowned Barbes, who publickly and most successfully preached the gospel in that City, and the Provinces round about it, for about 20 years; who for his opposing the doctrines of the Church of Rome, was apprehended, imprisoned, and burnt in the Fields of St. Giles near Tholouse, about the year 1136. Whose Doctrines and Positions, for which he suffered, we have recorded by the Magdeb. Cent. 12. 843. and L. Osiander, Cent 12. 262. And
Qui Carlos Anima, Corpore ditat Humum.
Post oabtum vivam fecum, fecum requiescam,
Nec sciat melior sors mea forte sue.He was a Man [who] was blest on every part;
The Earth hath his body, the Heavens his Heart.
My wish shall be that at that my end,
My soul may rest with this my Friend.
amongst which, we find these about Baptism; First, That Infants are neither to be saved, nor to be baptized by the Faith of another, all being to be baptized, and expect to be saved by their own proper Faith.Secondly, That Baptism without proper Faith saves not.
These two Positions, saith Osiander (the Lytheran) have no Error in them, the Papists, being rather to be condemned, who deny Infants to have proper Faith.
Thirdly, That little Children that are under age and without understanding, that are brought to Baptism, are not saved thereby.
Fourthly, That those that are baptized in their Infancy, after they are come to understanding, are to be baptized again, and which is not to be esteemed Rebaptization, but right Baptism.
These two, saith Osiander, are heretical and Anabaptistical. Cent. 12. L. 3. p. 262.
All which, with his Assertions about Transubstantiation, Worshipping of Images, Purgatory, &c. are distinctly and at large answered by Peter Cluniensis; whereof the Magdeburgs do give a particular account; And also you have the said Peter (writing to three Bishops in France about this time) saying, That neither Temples nor Altars are made by these People, neither are Crosses worshipped, but rather broken and trodden under foot; the Mass is esteemed an abomination, and that the benefits of the Living did not profit the Dead, &c. And that this Heresie of the Petro-Brussians was received in Gallia Narbonensis, complaining that the
People, were re-baptized, the Churches, Altars, and Crosses prophaned; Flesh eaten in Lent, yea, upon Good-Friday it self.This Peter Bruis was supposed to have written the Treatise of Antichrist, whereof you have some account in the History; and so eminent and worthy a person, that for many years the Waldenses were called Peto-Brusians.
The next we shall mention, is the famous Arnoldus, or rather the Arnoldeses, there being three of that Name. The first, viz., Arnoldus of Brixia, was in the second Lateran Council with Peter Bruis, Censure for the Heresie of rejecting Infants-Baptism, Church-Buildings and the Adoration of the Cross. Prid. Introduct. to Hist. Latin Councils, p. 23.
The said Arnoldus was in the year 1155. as saith Usher out of Gerhohus, at Rome put to death, being first hanged, then his Body burnt, and his Ashes flung into Tyber, lest the People of Rome following his Doctrine, should adore him.
Another eminent man of this Name, (and one of the Waldensian Barbs also) whom Eckbertus, as Usher tells us, p. 292. calls the Arch-Cathari or Puritans, was with two of his Associates, viz. Marsillyus and Theodoricus, who with him managed a publick Dispute at Cologne, against one Eckbertus, were burnt, Arnold, and eight more of his Disciples at Cologne, August 2. 1163. And Theodoricus and Marsullyus afterwards at Bunnae near Cologne. Eckbertus saith, That the principal Argument they brought against Infants-Baptism, was Christ's Commission,
Matthew 28. 19. Mark 16. 15, 16.We read also of another Arnold, who in the time of Honorius II. 1124. Was burnt at Rome, for witnessing against the Pride, Pomp, and Luxury of the Priests, as Prid. In his Introduction, and Baronius in his Annals, 1124. Balaus saith he was an English-man.
The Waldensian Sect were also called Arnoldists, as Bishop Usher, and P. Pirin [Perrin] tell us after their Names. Another eminent Person we meet with, witnessing to this great Truth, was one Henricus, a great Friend and Colleague of P. Bruis's, whose Doctrines and Positions are also recorded by the Magdeburgs, under eleven Heads; the first whereof was denying Baptism to Children, Cent. 12. 843. Which Bernard at large endeavours to answer and confute; telling us, that Infants are to be baptized upon the Faith of the Church.
The same Bernard in his Epistle to Heldesonsus, Earl of St. Giles, saith, The Henerici (for so they called his Followers) did deny Holy-dayes, Sacraments, Churches and Priests, complaining that the Children of Christians were excluded the Life of Christ, whilst they denied them the Grace of Baptism, and not suffered them to partake of Grace and Salvation thereby.
Cassander, in his Epistle before his book of Baptism, saith, that Peter Bruis, and Henry his Disciple and Colleague, were great Propogators [sic] of the Error of denying Baptism to little ones, affirming that it did only belong to the Adult.
Thirdly, in the Witness born[e] not only by some particular men, but by the body of the People, as appeareth by Decrees of Councils, Decretal Epistles, and Edicts given forth against them, as well as the Testimony of many Learned Writers. Dr. Usher, out of the Fragments of the History of Aquitain, written by P. Pithao, p. 81, 82. tells us, That in the time of Robert King of France, that they of Aquitain and Tholouse, (principal places of the Waldenses) did deny Baptism (for so they called denying Baptism to little ones) the Sign of the Cross, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, and other Rites of the Church, and many of them were Sentenced by Council, and burnt.
Dr. Usher also tells us out of Papir. Masson, in his French Annals, that fourteen Citizens of Orleans, in the Reign of King Robert, were convicted of the same Heresie, for denying Baptismal Grace, and the Real Presence, and were all burnt alive; and that the Names of three of the chief of them were Herbert, Lisius and Stephen.
Dr. Usher tells us, that in the time of the Emperor Henry II. 1017. many of this Sect
[249]
were about Millan fined and banished, as he tells us, Autonius in his History, 2 Tit. 15. chap. 23. Informeth.And also out of Radulph. Ard. Homil. tells us, That in Germany, under the Reign of Henry IV. about 1054. several of this people, whom they called the Manchean Sect (and the reason of it you will understand afterwards) did inhabit the Countyrey [sic] of Aganensis, who denied Baptism, and the Sacrament of the Altar.
Pope Leo IX. in his Decretal Epistle to the Bishop of Aquitain (a principal place of their abode) about the year 1050. Commandeth, that young Children should be Baptized, because of Original sin.
Pope Gregory VII. decreed, 1070. That those young Children whose Parents are absent or unknown, should according to the Tradition of the Fathers be baptized. Bernard, abbot of Clararael, in the twelfth Century, in his 66th Sermon on Canticles, complained, That the Cathari did deride them, because they baptized Infants, and prayed for the dead, and sserted Prgatory; and that the Soul as soon as it is departed out fo the Body, went to Salvation or Damnation.
Eckbertius, a great Doctor about the same time, in his Sermon against the Cathari, saith, that they say concerning the baptizing of Children, that through their incapacity is nothing profited them to Salvation; and that Baptism ought to be deferred till they come to years of disccretion, and that then only they ought to be baptized, when they can with their own mouths make a profession of Faith, and
desire it, and which he largely enbdeavours to confuse in that Sermon, Bib. Pat. Tom. 2 fol. 99, 106.Erbrardus, another great Doctor of this time, saith, That the Cathari do deny Baptism to Children, because they want understanding; and therefore spends his sixth Chapter to confute them; the title of which is, Children which cannot speak ought to be baptized; and concludes thus: By this therefore we find that we ought to call little ones to Faith by Baptism. Bib. Pat. Tom. 4. p. 1108.
Ermengendus, another great writer of this Age, in his book, Contra Waldenses, proves Infants-Baptism (which he saith they deny) by two Scriptures, namely, Matthew 19. 14. Suffer little Children to come to me, &c. And I Corinthians 15. Baptized for the dead: Whence he thus reasons; If they of old baptized the living for the dead, for their Eternal Salvation, though they neither received it, nor were capable thereof; how much more doth the Faith of the Gossips avail for spiritual Grace and Salvation, in the baptizing the persons of the little ones themselves. Bib. Pat. Tom. 4.
Dr. Usher in his foresaid Book of the Succession of the Church, p. 292. tells us out of Decretal. l. 5. Tit. 6.c. 10. That Pope Alexander the Third, in the Turonensian Synod, held 1163. touching the Albigensians, made the following Canon, viz.
To damn that Heresies that had so infected as a Canker, all those parts about Gascogne, requiring the Clergy of every sort, to give their utmost diligence to detect and suppress it, and to
require all upon penalty of Excommunication, not only to refuse harbouring of them, but to avoid all Civil Communion and Converse with them; and if taken by any Catholick Princes, that they be Imprisoned, and their Goods and Estates confiscated.And in as much as multitudes under pretence of sojourning together in one Mansion-house (which was very much the Custom of the Waldenses to do) do under that colour carry on their Errors in such Co-habitations, that all such Conventicles should diligently be searched out; and if found, to be proceeded with by Canonical severity.
And further the said Dr. Usher tells us out of Hoveden's Annals, fol. 319. That the said Pope Alexander III. did in the year 1176. the better to extirpate the Albigenses, send a Cardinal and three Bishops, as commissioned Inquisitors against them, under the names of the Cridentes, Lyonists, Patrinos, bonhomes, or Manachees (of the reason of which Names you will understand afterwards) with a Creed to put to them, for the better discovering of them; in which these following are some of the Articles, viz. We believe we cannot be saved except we eat the Body of Christ, and which is not so, except Consecrated in a Church by a Priest; We believe that none are saved except they are baptized; and that children are saved by Baptism, and that Baptism is to be performed by a Priest in the Church. Hoved. Annals. 319. 6.
In the same year Pope Alexander calls another Gallacian Council, to convince and condemn the Albigensian heresie.
In the third Canon, Whereof they say they do convince and judge them of Heresie for denying Baptism to Children, or that they are to be saved thereby; urging Arguments from Christ's dying for all, and from the circumstances of Infants of old, for their baptizing; and affirming, that the Faith of the Gossips is sufficient to baptize upon, &c. which you have at large in the Book of Decretals.Two years after, as saith Mat. Paris. viz. 1178. Cardinal Chrysogninus is sent Inquisitor to suppress the Hereticks about Tholouse, that had evil Sentiments about the Sacraments; in which Inquisition many of them were persecuted, and amongst the rest Roger d'Bordres.
Also the same Pope Alexander III. in the year 1179. In the general Lateran Council condemns the Waldensian or Catharian Heresie; and in Canon 27. Anathematizeth the Catrari, &c. dwelling in Gascogne, Albi, and ither [other] parts about Tholouse; and amongst the rest of their Heresies, for denying Baptism to Children, and for their contempt of all the Sacraments, Decret.
Favin, in his History of Navarre, p. 290. saith That the Albegois do esteem the baptizing of Infants superstitious.
In the year 1181. P. Lucius held his general Council at Verone, in the time of Fred. I. Wherein the Albigensian Sect and Heresie were damned, and anathematized under the names of Cathari, Patrini, Humiliati, poor people of Lyons, Arnoldists, for daring to Preach without apostolical approbation, or Missian publickly or privately, and for teaching otherwise about the
Eucharist, Baptism, Confession, Marriage, and other Sacraments of the Church, than the Church of Rome preacheth and observeth, Decr. Lib. 5. Tit. 6. De Heret. c. 11. p. 126. confirmed by Urban. III. 1185. Coelestin. 3. 1192. In. 3. 1200. As Favin Hist. p. 290.Pope Innocent the Third, 1199. Writes his Decretal Epistle to the Bishop of Arles (the principal City in Provence) respecting the Albigensian Sect, to which Baronius in his annals, writes this Preamble; and which is also express'd by Spondanus in his Eptiome, 981. 1199. Viz. Amongst the Arlatenses were Hereticks (saith he) who excluded Infants from Baptism, counting them uncapable of that Heavenly Priviledge: Therefore did innocent write this excellent Epistle to the Archbishop of Arles, to confute and confound them; which he recites at large (at it is also found both in Gratian, and the Book of the Decretals).
Wherein having given many Arguments to enforce the baptizing of Infants, he makes this Decree, viz. That since Baptism is come in the room of Circumcision, therefore not alone the elder, but also the Young Children, which of themselves neither believe nor understand, shall be baptized, and in their Baptism Original sin shall be forgiven them.
And then after the Epistle, Baronius adds, This Innocent wrote in a time of great immergency [sic] concerning the Sacrament of Baptism , which saith he, the poor people of Lyons, those Albigensian Anabaptists did deny.
After this he sent a great number of Friars in imitation of the Albigensian Barbes, to go up and down those Countries, to preach and dispute amongst them; Dominicus Benedict, and Francis being in the head of them. Then after them many Legates, and Inquisitors upon Inquisitors; after them a Crusado of Armed men, which he supplied from time to time from all Parts, and continued a bloody War against them all his days; but yet could neither vanquish nor suppress them; who, by the help of strong Allies, the Kings of England and Spain, Earl of Tholouse and Foix, were enabled in a defensive way to maintain the War against his mighty Armies that came against them, a hundred thousand at a time; and by which means, as Dr. Usher observes, p. 266. That as the persecution about Stephen, by that dispersion, proved much for the furtherance of the Gospel in other parts of the world; so was it here; for those that were not so fit for the War, went up and down with more freedom into most Parts of Europe. Insomuch that Aeneas Selvius, afterward Pope Pius II. in his sixteenth Chap. confesseth in these words, Nec ullis vel Romanorum Pontificum Decretis, vel Christianorum armis deleri potnisse. That neither the Decrees of Popes, nor Armies of Christians could extirpate.Having produced to you so much Evidence to this Point, I conceive it not unseasonable before I proceed farther, to present to you what I meet with from Mr. Baxter upon it; who
In his plain Scripture-proof, p. 157. is pleased to tell us, That for his part, he cannot find
in his small reading, that any one Divine, or party of men, did certainly oppose or deny Infants-Baptism, for many hundred years after Christ.And again, p. 261. That the World may now see what a Cause you put such a face upon, when you cannot bring the least proof, so much as of one man (much less Societies, and least of all godly Societies) that did once oppose or deny Infants-Baptism from the Apostles days, till about Luther's time.
And yet farther, p. 266. I am fully satisfied that you cannot shew me any Society (I think not one man) that ever opened their mouth against Baptism of Infants till about 200 years ago; or thereabouts; which confirms me much, that it is from the Apostles time, or else some one would have been found as an opposer of it.
Though with what Evidence and Truth these confident assertions, and severe Reflections are made (in respect to what hath, and is farther to be said hereto) is recommended to his own, and the consideration of the impartial Reader.
And Mr. Cobbet in p. 200. saith, That the Doctrine of Paedobaptism was never ex professo, opposed by any Orthodox Church or Christian in time of old, as far as I can learn.
Lastly, From the Footsteps we find of this Truth, and the Sufferers for the same in several Countries and Places, where the Waldenses had heretofore Imprinted it, as appeareth by the following Instances. From what we meet with in Germany, where (by what you will find hereafter) the Waldenses were so conversant; that their itinerant Ministers could travel through the whole Empire, and lie every night at a Friend's House. Du Plessis in his Mystery of Iniquity, p. 403, saith, They are spread abroad in Germany and France, as that their Footsteps are to be discerned throughout the course of History.
In which Countrey [sic] we find, yea, and in most parts thereof multitudes of this perswasion, down to this very time; as may appear not only by the Suffers already mentioned; but by the oppositions made against those perswasions, both by the Popish Party, as by the Protestants also; witness not only the writings of the Papists, viz. Baronius, Cassander, Eckius, Gretzerus in contradiction and enmity thereof; but the several Canons of the Council of Trent, and the Catechism of Pope Pius Quintus, respecting that of Infants-Baptism, printed and annexed with the same Dectretals to be read in
every Parish. As also the cruel and bloody Edicts of the Emperors Charles the 5th &c.But by the several Disputations, Writings and Oppositions made by the Protestant party also; yea, and that from those that were called chief of the Reformation, viz. by Regius at Ausburg, about 1516. Luther in Saxony, 1522. Micarius in Thuringia, 1525. Zwinglius in Zwitzerland, 1529. Brentius in Swevea, 1530. Calvin in Geneva, 1537. Junius about Limburg and Heidelburg, 1570. and Multitude of Anabaptists in Basil, Ulme, Ausburg; against whom Oecolampadius disputed, 1527, & 1529. As Clark in his Lives, and their respective Works manifests. Besides the cruel and very bloody Edicts made by the Protestants against them.
Whereby it is evident that had a being in those parts before Luther's time; for it cannot rationally be supposed, that they should all of a sudden be so spred [sic] over so great a Territory as the upper Germany, and therefore cannot be concluded to be other than the Remains and offspring of those that the Waldenses had instructed in those times. As the Belgick Anabaptists do with one mouth assert and maintain.
And in further confirmation hereof, we shall give you some more instances of the Sufferings of these Waldensian Christians, both in the Upper and Lower Germany, for their opposing Infants-Baptism, viz.
In the year 1105. several were banished out of the Bishoprick of Tryers for opposing Paedobaptism
Twisk Chron. l. 12. Anno 1105. Hen. Montanus. P. 83. Merning. P. 592. In the year 1182. Many of the Waldensian Faith suffered death in Flanders under the Earl Philip Elzates, for opposing Paedobaptism.
Jo. Andriesz. Histor. of Antiq. Twisk Chron. l. 12. Anno. 1182. p. 489. In the year 1200. many of the Waldenses, who opposed the Church of Rome in the business of Infants-Baptism, were burnt in Germany, by Condadus van Morpurgh.
Abraham Bzov. Tom. 13. Baron. Annals, Anno. 1232. In the year 1230. many of the Waldenses suffered death in the bibhoprick of Tryers, for opposing Paedobaptism.
Twisk Chron. l. 13. p. 546. col. 2. In the year 1315. many Christians were burnt at Stire in Austria, witnessing to the Waldensian Faith.
Abraham Mellin, l. 2. fol. 479. col. 4. In the year 1390. There were 36 Citizens of Mentz burnt at Bingen for owning the Doctrine of the Waldenses.
Matth. Flac. Illyr. Catac. Telt. In the same year 1390. there were 443 persons put to death in Pomerania, witnessing to the Doctrine of the Waldenses.
Dutch Martyrol. Part 2. fol. 497. In the year 1421. Many of the Waldensian Faith were burnt at Danaw in Germany.
Vignier Ecclestical. Hist. Anno 1421. In the year 1457. At Eychester in Germany, many of the Waldensian Christians were put to death.
Vatik[?] Chr. par. 4. l. 15. upon 1457. P. 829.
[Continued here.]
================
A Treatise of Baptism Index
Baptist History Homepage