Summary Of Baptism In The Eleventh Century.

In the second place, when it is averred in said passage, “that baptism quenches the lasciviousness of the flesh, and washes off the impurity of sin, of actual sin as well as,” etc., it is evident, again, that he treats of such a baptism and of such candidates, wherein lasciviousness of the flesh, impurity of sin, yea, actual sins, etc., can be washed off; for, otherwise he would contradict himself. But what kind of persons these are, in whom such sins can have place, and who need to be washed from them, whether infants or adult persons are meant thereby, the intelligent may judge.

About A. D. 1042.—Or almost in the middle of the eleventh century, Buchard of Worms (in Germany) flourished, who makes mention, among other things, of the examinations in the faith, to which it was customary, either in his time or before, to subject the candidates, at baptism. Concerning this, D. Vicecomes (lib. 2, cap. 28), in his allegations respecting baptism in the eleventh century, gives the following account, which is also found in Bapt. Hist., page 592, num. 1: “Buchard of Worms (lib. 6, de Sacram. Eccles.) says: ‘The examinations are for the purpose of ascertaining whether he (the candidate), after renouncing Satan, has the holy words of the faith confessed, deeply rooted in his heart, and intends to continue steadfastly in the faith.’ ”

This is certainly plain language concerning baptism upon faith and the confession of the same, according to the institution of Christ, and the example of the apostles and the first apostolical church; hence we need add not a word of explanation, and will therefore proceed to others who, in or about that time, taught the same doctrine, and, as much as lay in their ability, confirmed it in their deeds.

A. D. 1051.—This is the year in which the learned Lanfrancus, who also showed himself opposed to infant baptism, and dissuaded from it, is introduced by the writers. See P. J. Twisck, Chron., page 383, col. 1, from Guitmundus, and Sebastian Franck, fol. 58.

A. D. 1060.—Two eminent, learned, and well-meaning persons, who were greatly celebrated on account of their great learning and boldness, at this time displayed their greatest strength in rejecting infant baptism and other articles of the Roman church. One of these was Bruno, Bishop of Angiers in France; the other, Berengarius, his deacon. They had begun to teach said doctrine as early as the year 1035, and continued therein for many years, yea, Berengarius, besides the article against transubstantiation, maintained it, as the chronicles show, until the year 1079.

But, in order to sum up all this briefly, we will present what is recorded, concerning this matter, in the Introduction to the Martyrs Mirror, page 48, col. 2, we read: “In A. D. 1035, Berengarius, archdeacon of Angiers, in France, together with Bruno, the Bishop of said city, began to teach against transubstantiation and infant baptism. Their doctrine immediately spread throughout all France and Germany. Against it, Pope Leo IX. held, A. D. 1050, two Synods, one at Rome, the other at Versailles (Baron., A. D. 1050, num. 1), in which the doctrine of these two men was condemned.

Afterwards, when Berengarius did not cease to promulgate his doctrine, another synod was held, A. D. 1055, at Tours in France (Baron., A. D. 1055, num. 4), in which Berengarius feigned repentance; but as soon as Hildebrand, who afterwards became Pope, had gone away, he again maintained his doctrine.

“Afterwards, Pope Nicholas II. held a Synod (Baron., A. D. 1059, num. 3, 4), and summoned Berengarius before it, who, for the second time, either from fear or human weakness, pretended to recant, burning the writings of Johannes Scotus, from which he had derived his views respecting transubstantiation; but seeing immediately opportunity again, he returned to his old belief; and composed different writings concerning it, against which some others have written.

“Subsequently, Hildebrand, who had now become Pope, and was called Gregory VII., held a synod in Rome, A. D. 1079, where, as Baronius, who judges as a Romanist and papist, says, Berengarius, again renounced his doctrine. But how true this is, we leave to God.

“It is evident,” says the author to the Introduction, “that he maintained this doctrine for forty-four years, and filled Germany and France with it; from which it can be inferred, that the same, even as it had itself proceeded from previously existing writings, in its turn left many disciples.” Introd., page 48, col. 2, and 49, col. 1.

But though the doctrine of Bruno and Berengarius commenced in the year 1035 and ended about A. D. 1079, as far as these two persons are concerned (for, otherwise it is a doctrine that began with Christ and will end only at the end of the world), yet, said doctrine displayed its greatest power, through these two persons, and encountered the most opposition, about the year 1060, as appears from the account of Jac. Mehrning and H. Montanus, who unanimously state the following: