Brief Summary Of Baptism In This Century.

At the close of the third century the eminent Arnobius was introduced, and inasmuch as his life extended from one century into the other we refer to him again here in the beginning of the fourth century. He speaks of the virtue and benefit of baptism, as may be seen in the proper place.

Fusca and the handmaid Maura were baptized after previous instruction.

At this time (in the time of Sylvester) there existed such sects as were afterwards called Waldenses, Anabaptists, etc.

One Donatus was called an Anabaptist, and his followers, Anabaptists.

Athanasius, while yet a child, indicated, with other children, that at Alexandria they baptized upon confession of faith.

In Canon 12, 13, 15, of the Council of Nice several good things are established with regard to baptism.

Athanasius, having become a man, teaches wholesome doctrine, not only with respect to baptism, but also in regard to other matters of religion.

Soon after him comes Marius Victorinus, who joins together faith, confession, and baptism.

Then appears Hilarius, who wrote very appropriately on baptism, and also opposes antichrist, images, and traditions.

Monica, the mother of Augustine, was baptized in adult years, though she was born of Christian parents.

In the Council of Neocesarea, the candidates for baptism, the baptizing of pregnant women, Christ’s baptism, etc., were discussed.

Again sects appear, who were like the Baptists.

St. Martin was instructed from his twelfth to his eighteenth year, and then baptized. He strongly opposed war.

Ambrose was baptized in adult years, at Milan, though his parents were Christians. He advanced sound views on baptism, against war, of the sacrament, etc.

Ephrem, Gregory of Nyssa, the Councils of Laodicea and Elibertum, and also Optatus Milevitanus, give correct views on baptism.

Gregory of Nazianzus, born of Christian parents, was already in his twentieth year when he was baptized. Nectarius was baptized in adult years. Basil, the son of a Christian, and Eubulus, consulted together, and were baptized on their faith, at Jerusalem. Posthumanius made a glorious confession at his baptism. John Crysostom was suffered by his parents, though they were Christians, to remain unbaptized, not receiving baptism until he was twenty-one years old. Also, his views respecting baptism; his teaching against war, confession, etc.

Jerome, also born of Christian parents, was baptized at Syridon, when he was thirty years old.

Augustine, Adeolatus, Alipius, Euodius, Epiphanius, with his sister, all baptized upon faith. Conclusion of baptism in the fourth century.

That the holy order of the baptism of Jesus Christ was practiced also in the fourth century, appears from various teachings and examples of the fathers, from which, we shall present only a few, but such as are certain and genuine testimonies.

A. D. 301.—At the close of the preceding century, for A. D. 300, we introduced the eminent Arnobius, and showed that, speaking of baptism, he says: “That the candidates for baptism, when they are baptized, state before the minister their perfect willingness, and make their confession with their own lips.”

This Arnobius follows us also in the beginning of this century, namely through the years 301, 302, 303, 304; and having not abandoned his previous 149 views regarding this matter, he confirms them with the following testimonies.

Speaking against the tenets of the Romanists, who ordain consecrated, or, properly speaking, exorcised water for baptism, he writes thus (in Psalm 74): “It is written: Thou breakest the heads of the dragons in the waters; that is,” says he, “the heads of the dragons in baptism;” but by saying, in the waters, he means to signify that the same baptism can be administered in all kinds of waters, as, in rivers, lakes, wells, baths, seas, etc. In these the head of the dragon, that is Satan, is broken in all waters. Jacob Mehrn. Bapt. Hist., page 323.

Of the virtue and benefit of baptism he teaches as follows, Psalm 32, where the Psalmist says: “In the floods of great waters they shall not come nigh unto him,” upon which he remarks: “that men, by the true water of baptism, draw nigh to God, who is a refuge from the fear of Satan that encompasses us.” Jacob Mehrn., page 324.

Again, Psalm 32, he says: “Man is redeemed; no angel, nor any other creature, but man alone praises his mercy, says the Lord, whose sins he forgives in baptism.” Jacob Mehrn., page 325.

Although these words of Arnobius are somewhat obscure, yet they contain light enough, to emit rays of divine truth concerning the matter of baptism. For when in the first place he says, that the head of the dragon is broken in baptism (by dragon meaning Satan), he certainly indicates thereby, that he speaks of persons who, having attained maturer years, become subject to the assaults of Satan, and that these, in baptism, break the head of the dragon, that is, Satan, by means of the true faith, through Christ; hence he does not speak of children—who are ignorant of the assaults of Satan—and, consequently, not of infant baptism.

Secondly, when he says that men, by the true water of baptism, draw nigh to God, he certainly indicates that he speaks of men who have departed from God through disobedience, consequently, of persons who have arrived at the years of discretion; and not of infants; for how can any one draw nigh to God by baptism, who has not departed from him? Infants have not departed from God through disobedience; hence they cannot draw nigh to him by baptism.

Thirdly, when he speaks of man, who praises the mercy of the Lord, and whose sins the Lord forgives in baptism, he certainly indicates that he speaks of men who are capable of praising the mercy of the Lord, namely, men possessing understanding, and who have sinned; for only he that has sinned can have his sins forgiven; but with infants, who have never sinned, no forgiveness can take place, and consequently, no baptism for the remission of sins. By this the obscure words of Arnobius became clear.

NOTE.—P. J. Twisck records, for the year 306, that Constantine the Great, the son of the believing Helena, was baptized in Jordan, in the sixty-fifth year of his age, after having been instructed (Chron. 4th book, page 89, col. 1); from which it is apparent, that at that time Christians left their children unbaptized, in order that they themselves might believe and be baptized.

A. D. 308.—Fusca, the pious maiden, conceived a desire for the Christian faith when she was quite young, and, having manifested this desire to the servant-maid, Mauro, who also felt an inward drawing towards Christ, they were thoroughly instructed in the Christian faith at Ravenna, by the teacher Hermola, and baptized. P. J. Twisck, Chron. 4th book, page 90, col. 1, from Grond. Bew., letter B, Leonh., lib. 2.

A. D. 315.—It is stated that already in the time of Sylvester, there was taught and maintained the same doctrine which was afterwards maintained by countless numbers of the baptistic Waldenses, yea, that those churches which in the 11th, 12th, 13th, and in subsequent centuries were styled Waldenses Albigenses, and lastly, Mennonites, or Anabaptists, had existed already at that time, and indeed, long before. Of this a certain celebrated author among the Romanists bitterly complains, in a very old book, saying: “These heretics (the people mentioned above) have always had many sects among them; but of all that ever existed, none was more pernicious to the church of God (understand the Roman church) than the Poor of Lyons (the Waldenses or Anabaptists), and this for three reasons: In the first place, because of their antiquity; some asserting that they existed already in the days of Sylvester, others referring them even to the time of the apostles.” Jac. Mehrn., page 615.

In another place Jacob Mehrning writes thus about the abovementioned people: “This is not a new sect that originated only at that time (that is, in the time of Waldus); for the papistic writers themselves confess that they existed already in the time of Pope Sylvester, nay, long before him, even in the time of the apostles.” B. H., page 670.

In another place he writes that Flaccius has also recorded the same, from an ancient papistic book, namely, that they existed from the time of Sylvester, yea, from the time of the apostles; and that Thuanus, though he compares them to another people, states that their doctrine has continued through many centuries.” Page 682.

The time of the reign of Sylvester, who was the first pope of this name, and on the register of the Roman bishops the 34th, is fixed in the year 315. See P. J. Twisck, Chron., 4th book, p. 93, col. 1, from Platina, fol. 63. Fasc. Temp., fol. 99, Hist. Georg., lib. 1, Fr. Ala., fol. 22, Chron. Seb. Fr., fol. 13.

A. D. 317.—Donatus, an over-learned bishop at Carthage,101 who had many adherents in Africa, taught among other things: “That the preaching of the divine word and the administration of the 150 sacraments by an ungodly minister, were of no avail. They (his followers) held that the church of Christ existed only among them, and hence, they rebaptized all who wished to adopt their religion, saying that the heretics, or the Pope, had no Christian church, and consequently, no baptism, inasmuch as there was only one God, one faith, one Gospel, one church, and one baptism. ‘They, like the Anabaptists, also held,’ says Franck, ‘that no children, even in the extremity of death, should be baptized, but only believing adults who desired it.’ ”

When he was imprisoned he upbraided Augustine, saying that no one ought to be imprisoned on account of his faith, God had given man his free will, to believe as he chose. Concerning all this, see, P. J. Twisck Chron., 4th book, p. 93, col. 2, and page 94, col. 1, from Merula, fol. 255. Zeg., fol. 79. Seb. Franck, Chron. van de Roomsche Ketters, letter D., fol. 76, printed A. D. 1563.

As regards Donatus, if it be true that he erred in some things, or failed in some matter of faith, we will not defend him therein; however, this much is certain, that owing to the absence of his writings, we have no other information concerning him, than that which comes to us through the mouth and hand of his adversaries.

Concerning this, P. J. Twisck, in a certain place, expresses his regret, saying, that in his Chronijk, for the year 410, he wrote something derogatory to his followers, before he had been properly informed regarding it; which he afterwards, for the year 417, refutes and explains more clearly by quoting from Bullinger: “That the followers of Donatus were similar to the Anabaptists (whom he calls Baptists); that they taught, that no one ought to be compelled to do good or to accept the faith.” Again: “that every heretic should be left to follow his particular faith without restraint or compulsion.”

On this account, P. J. Twisck, in the same place, relates from another author, that it is quite probable that these people were burdened with many unjust accusations. “It would be desirable,” writes he, “to have in our possession their writings, teachings, and deeds; for if it be the case, that they were in all respects like the Anabaptists, and would compel no one in matters of faith, then it is sufficiently apparent, that they are unjustly charged by other writers, with tyranny. I have given this a place here, because the year 410 was already arranged when this reached me.” Thus far, P. J. Twisck, Chron., 5th book, page 147, col. 2, from H. Bulling. Contra Anbapt., lib. 5, fol. 216, 222.

NOTE.—We accept of the writings of Donatus only that which is good and true; for the rest we assume no responsibility.

About A. D. 318.—It appears that when Athanasius was yet a boy, at Alexandria also, baptism was not administered otherwise than upon confession of faith; at least, that it was not customary to baptize infants, is evident from the following circumstances of a certain occurrence related by Ruffinus and Zozomenus: “When the day of the martyr Peter was celebrated at Alexandria, by the Bishop Alexander, and he, after the solemn service was over, was awaiting his assistants, or pupils to dine with him, he observed in the distance some children playing on the sea shore, who, very probably, not for the first time were imitating the bishop and those things which are generally done in church. But when he observed the children more attentively, he noticed that they were performing some mysterious things. Astonished at this, he summoned his assistants to him, and showed them what he had seen from a distance. Then he commanded them to seize the children and bring them to him. When they came, he asked them, what they had been playing, and what and how they had been doing? They, as was natural for their years, at first were frightened, and denied the matter, but afterwards related it just as it had taken place, and confessed that they, through Athanasius, who in this game had imitated the Bishop, had baptized some catechumens, that is, boys who had not been baptized. Alexander then inquired of those who they said had been baptized, what questions had been put to them, and what they had answered; likewise interrogating him who had put the questions; and found that all was in accordance with the manner of our religion. Jac. Mehrn., 2d part, pp. 356, 357, from Nicephor., lib. 8, cap. 44. Also, H. Montan. Nietigh., pp. 64, 65, from Ruffin. Eccl. Hist. 1, cap. 14. Zozom. Eccl. Hist., lib. 3, cap. 16.

From these circumstances it is evident that infant baptism was not customary there. First, when we take into consideration the conduct of these boys, we see that in the Christian church at Alexandria the usual mode of baptizing at that time was this, namely: that the Bishop, or whoever administered baptism, first interrogated the candidates for baptism, and then, after they had answered him, they were baptized.

Secondly, if we consider the boys themselves, who apparently were ten or twelve years old, which probability is increased by the fact that Ruffinus (as H. Montanus shows), calls them catechumens, that is, such as were being instructed in the faith, which is plainly indicated by their performance, since they were able to imitate in every particular such important services. These boys are nevertheless called unbaptized, wherefore Athanasius, though by way of play, baptized them.

Moreover, that these boys were born of Christian parents, appears in various ways, as, for instance, in this, that they diligently attended the Christian assemblies, for without this they could never have represented so completely in all its particulars, the baptism practiced in the church. Likewise, in the fact that Alexander and his assistants (as the account further sets forth), enjoined the parents of these boys, who before were unbaptized, but had now been thus baptized, to bring them up in that vocation, namely, in the Christian religion, which certainly would not have been done, had their parents been heathen and not Christians. It is also stated that this was done with invocation and confession of God’s holy name, which certainly would not have been the case with heathen, who worshiped either no god, or many gods.

As to what Alexander held of this performance, we leave it to its own merits; it suffices us to have 151 shown that at that time the Christians at Alexandria suffered their children to remain unbaptized; inasmuch as they were first instructed, and then baptized upon confession of their faith, which, as has been shown, is clearly indicated by the course of the aforementioned boys.

A. D. 333.—It is recorded that in the first great council at Nice, held against Arius, and various innovations in the church, it was resolved among other things:

“Canon 21. The Paulianists and Photinians shall be rebaptized.”

“Canon 12. If any apostatize under persecution, without having been tormented, and sincerely repent, they shall be put among the catechumens for five years, and after two more years, shall be reinstated among the faithful, with prayer.”

“Canon 13. But they who, for the sake of the confession of the faith, have relinquished the military profession and again return to it, shall do penance for thirteen years, and then be received again; however, if they truly repent, the bishop is authorized to mitigate the term of penance, provided he sees that their repentance is fruitful and devout.”

“Canon 15. Concerning the catechumens who have apostatized, it is decided, that they shall be excluded from the prayers of the catechumens who have not apostatized, for three years, and at the end of that time be received back again.” Jac. Mehrn., pages 352, 353, ex Concil. Nicen. Secund. Ruffin.

This is the great Council which is extolled as orthodox and Christian by nearly all so-called Christians. Be this as it may, we see no reason to praise it so highly, seeing that we must honor the precepts of God’s holy word alone, whereas the rules of that council were made by fallible men. Yet, so far as these men have laid down precepts that accord with the precepts of God’s holy word, or, at least, do not militate against them, so far we accept, or, at least, do not oppose them.102

When it is said, in Canon 21, that the Paulianists and Photinians shall be rebaptized, it establishes, that, according to the Holy Scriptures, not every baptism is a genuine or true baptism, and that consequently there is but one baptism which can in truth be called genuine, namely, that baptism which is administered by the true church, and upon the true faith. This is also established at this day by the Anabaptists, and regarded as a precept from the holy word of God.

It is also said in the 15th Canon concerning the catechumens, that if they have fallen, they shall be excluded three years from the prayers of those catechumens who have not fallen. This is an indication of the carefulness exercised by that assembly, to admit to baptism, according to the doctrine of the holy Gospel, no unprepared catechumens before they had truly repented after their fall.

The 12th Canon, speaking of the penance to be performed by those who, under persecution, had apostatized without having been tormented; and the 13th Canon, treating of the very great and long penance to be endured by those, who, after having become Christians, had resumed the military profession, and thus become apostates; these precepts we say, militate neither against the holy Scriptures, nor against the views of the Anabaptists, but sufficiently confirm them both.

NOTE.—It is recorded that at this time pseudo-apostles taught that the church of Rome was rejected of God, and that it was not his church, but Babylon, and the whore mentioned in the Apocalypse, who rides the beast with the seven heads; and that we therefore do not owe obedience to the Pope; that under the New Testament we are in no wise bound to give tithes to the priests; that all manner of swearing is unlawful; that a consecrated church is not better to pray in than a pigsty. Seb. Fr. Chron., fol. 120, col. 3.

A. D. 335.—At this time, Athanasius vigorously maintained the cause of such as had been baptized according to order of Christ, against those who, it seems, asserted that baptism might take place without previous instruction, or confession of faith. He says (Serm. 3., Contra Arian.): “Our Savior did not simply command to baptize, but first said, teach, and then, baptize; so that true faith may proceed from the doctrine, and then baptism be perfected with faith.” P. J. Twisck, Chron., 4th book, page 99, col. 2; from Grond. Bew., letter A. Jac. Mehrn., Bapt. Hist., 2d Part, page 370.

NOTE.—At this time Athanasius taught that it is the duty of every Christian, to read the holy Scriptures, on the 6th chap. Eph. Again, he prohibited the practice of making a likeness of God for the purpose of worshiping him thereby, etc., as being an unlawful thing. Contr. Gent. Sam. Veltius, in the Geslacht-register, page 118.

Notice concerning several writings attributed to Athanasius.—The pedobaptists, prone to bring forward everything that seems in any wise to favor their views, were wont to adduce the 114th and the 124th question of a certain book called, Various Questions of Holy Scripture, attributed to Athanasius. But in answer to this we say: that said book is not the work of Athanasius, but of some other author who wrote subsequently to him; as in his 23d question he cites Athanasius as one having lived before him, saying: “This is the testimony of the great Athanasius, a man who was mighty in the divine Scriptures; but we, who are enlightened by him.” Moreover, that book contains many opinions foreign to Athanasius, as shown by the Centuriatores Magdenburgenses, Cent. 4, cap. 10, p. 1032. See also, H. Montan. Nietigh., p. 69, and J. M., Bapt. Hist., pages 360, 361.

NOTE.—A. D. 320. Lactantius Firmianus taught at this time: 1. “That the sacrifices of the Christian are, a good life, purity, and good works. 2. That there is no religion in a place where there are images. Lib. 2, of the Divine Instruction. Also, Sam. Veltius, in the Geslacht-register,. pp. 116, 117. 3. He taught against compulsion of conscience, and 152 revenge, as appears from the following. He writes to the Emperor Constantine (5th book, chap. 20): “The more the religion of God is suppressed, the more it breaks forth and grows; hence they should employ reasoning and admonition; it is not necessary to proceed with violence. For religion admits of no compulsion; persuasive words can do more to promote the cause than blows.” Again (5th book, chap. 21) he writes: “We Christians do not desire that any one should serve God, the Creator of all, against his will; neither are we angry if he does not serve him; for we trust his Majesty, who can as easily avenge himself against those who despise him, as he does the vexations and injuries inflicted upon his servants. Therefore, when we suffer such shameful things, we say not one word against it, but commit all vengeance to God; not doing as those who would be regarded protectors of their gods, and very cruelly assail those who do not worship them.” Korte ontschuldiging, by P. V. K., edition of 1643, page 47, from Religions Vryheydt, 2d part, p. 10.

About A. D. 340.—Marius Victorius writes in the fifth book against Arius: “Every one that is baptized, and says he believes, and accepts the faith, receives the Spirit of truth, that is, the holy Ghost, and is made holier by him.” J. Mehrn., Bapt. Hist., page 325. I find in authentic writers, no other account of baptism by this Marius, so that this seems to be the only thing he has written about baptism, and from this, too, it is obvious that he must have been a stranger to infant baptism, seeing he joins together confession, faith, and baptism, in the one that is to be baptized.

A. D. 350.—About this time Hilarius attained to the faith in Jesus Christ, and having been baptized upon this faith, he proceeded to defend the truth which he had received and accepted, and, for the strengthening of the faith he had adopted, and that he might live according to the same, he prayed to God (lib. 12 de Trinit.) as follows: “Dear God, preserve my faith and the testimony of my conscience, that I may ever keep that which I confessed in the sacrament of my regeneration, when I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; namely, that I worship thee, O God our Father, and thy Son with thee, and that the Holy Spirit, that proceeds from thee, may be awakened.”

Again Vicecomes (lib. 2, cap. 27) quotes from Hilarius, on the 15th chapter of Matt. the following: “They that come to baptism confess first, that they believe in the Son of God, and in his suffering and resurrection; and this confession is made or pronounced at the sacrament of baptism.”

Again, Hilarius writes (vol. 2, de Trinitate): “The Lord has commanded to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; that is, upon the confession of the Author (that is, him who in the beginning created all things), and the First-born, and the Free Gift (that is, the Son and the Holy Ghost).” Jac. Mehrn. Bapt., Histor., 2d part, pages 371, 372.