# Summary Of Baptism In The Eleventh Century.

11th century (source section) · Historical source

Source: Martyrs’ Mirror. Original heading: SUMMARY OF BAPTISM IN THE ELEVENTH CENTURY.

Century of containing source section; exact event date not assigned

[In the beginning of the eleventh century, the
celebrated Anselm is introduced, who declares that
baptism is the “fulfilling of all righteousness;” that
the baptism of Christ is a “washing of water in the
word;” that every one, in his day, was baptized in
the name and the faith of God; that believers were
then baptized upon, or in the name of Christ; that
the adults had first to be instructed in the Christian
doctrine; that after baptism one must not again lay
the foundation of repentance from dead works,
Heb. 6:1–3; that believers are brought into the
church of Christ (understand, through baptism);
that the twelve Ephesian men (Acts 19) were rebaptized
by Paul.

Algerus speaks of the power and operation of
God in baptism; also, that the lasciviousness of the
flesh is quenched or washed off in or through baptism.

Buchard of Worms gives an excellent explanation
touching baptism, saying that the examinations in
the faith were for the purpose of ascertaining
whether the holy words of the faith confessed, were
rooted deeply in the heart of the candidate, and
whether he intended to continue steadfastly in the
faith.

Lanfrancus opposed infant baptism.

The testimony of Bruno and Berengarius against
infant baptism as well as against transubstantiation is
presented and amply commented on; the time when
they began their doctrine, and when they finished
the same; also their death.

A certain book of ceremonies by the ancient Beroldus
is introduced; what we read in it concerning
baptism: namely, of the first address made to the
novices at baptism, the way of wisdom and faith,
being presented to them.

An account of Ado Trevirensis, and to what he
admonished the candidates of his time; also, how he
baptized the believing woman Syranna and her son,
after previous instruction.

The last witness adduced about baptism is Juo of
Carnuto, who, besides various other matters, makes
this salutary and true declaration with regard to baptism:
“That the novices would confess the creed
before baptism; that they were then, while answering,
washed from the old wickedness; that their
baptism took place on the holy Easter Sabbath, and
that they were first instructed; that those who desired
baptism had to throw off, by prayers, the yoke
of the devil; that they were asked: Do you believe
250
on God,” etc. Thereupon it is noted what said
passages of Juo indicate. Finally it is shown that he
also opposed monachism, discrimination as regards
food. Conclusion.]

The thousandth year is finished; we have come
to the years that follow it; which time is called the
eleventh century. We will wander through it in our
thoughts, and investigate how it then stood with
the true church of God, whether the ordinances of
Christ, especially in the matter of baptism; and its
requirements, were rightly observed. In order to
begin and finish this aright, we will turn to some
of the ancient authors who wrote about the condition
of said matters, at that time, or, at least, who
subsequently made mention of what then occurred
with regard to religion.

About A. D. 1010, or, as Jacob Mehrning puts
it, “In the beginning of the eleventh century,” there
manifested himself, by various writings, the celebrated
and almost universally known Anselm, who,
having at one time, it seems, advocated infant baptism,
with divers forcible, yet human arguments,
now and also subsequently showed, that the opposite
belief had taken root in him; concerning which,
it is stated, that there have remained even to the
present day, several excellent things, which cannot
well be reconciled with infant baptism, yea, which,
when viewed with spiritual eyes, militate against it.
Of these we will present a few as examples, confident
that, if you judge impartially, you will concur
with us, or, at least, assent to it.151

In Bapt. Hist., page 582, from Cent. Magd. XI.,
cap. 4, of baptism, Anselm teaches on Matt. 3, that
baptism is necessary, and says: “Baptism is a fulfilling
of all righteousness; a man may be never so
righteous, pious, benevolent, abstemious, and chaste,
yet, it avails him nothing, if he lacks the grace of
holy baptism.”

It is evident that Anselm has regard here to what
Jesus Christ our Savior said to John, when the latter
refused to baptize him with water. “Suffer it to be
so now,” the Lord said, “for thus it becometh us
to fulfill all righteousness,” Matt. 3:15; which took
place, according to Luke 3:23, when Jesus began
to be about thirty years of age, and the people, who
came from Jerusalem, were baptized by John in
Jordan.

It having been observed then that Anselm has
regard to the baptism of Christ, and that Christ calls
it the fulfilling of all righteousness, it is manifest,
that he does not speak of infant baptism here, since
in the same no righteousness at all, much less, all
righteousness, can be fulfilled; which is the more
obvious, when he says, in the same place, that however
righteous, pious, benevolent, abstemious and
chaste one might be, it would avail him nothing, if
he lacked the grace of holy baptism: for, righteousness,
piety, etc., are not exercises or works of infants,
but only of intelligent, yea, of devout persons.

On the same page, Anselm, on Ephes. 5, says:
“The baptism of Christ is a washing of water in the
word; if you take away the water, it is no baptism;
if you take away the word, it is likewise no baptism.”

What else is indicated thereby, than that the
word of God cannot be separated from baptism?
which word of God, in baptism, does not consist
simply in this, that a few words of holy Scripture
are pronounced in or over baptism, or over those
who are baptized; but that the word of faith is
preached to the candidates, before and at baptism.
Mark 16:15,16; Rom. 10:8.

On page 583, num. 6, Anselm (Enarrat. in
Evang.) says: “That the Father was heard in a
voice; that the Holy Ghost descended in the form
of a dove; and that the Son, in his humanity, was
baptized; this clearly indicates the Holy Trinity, in
whose name and in the belief of which, every one
of us is baptized.”

Here he again has reference to the baptism of
Christ, concerning which the holy evangelists state,
that, when he, being about thirty years of age, was
baptized, the heavens were opened above him; that
the Holy Ghost descended like a dove upon him;
and that a voice came from heaven (or, from God,
his heavenly Father) saying: “This is my beloved
Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Matt. 3:16,17;
Mark 1:10,11; Luke 3:22.

All this, as has been stated above, can serve only
as a type of the baptism of the adult, intelligent, and
believing followers of Christ; which Anselm plainly
indicates, when he says: “In whose name and in
the belief of which, every one of us is baptized.”
Notice, when he says, “Every one of us,” etc., he
indicates each severally and all in general, namely,
all who belodged as members to the church of
Christ; so that, according to the language employed
by him, each and all among them were baptized, not
only in the name of the Holy Trinity, but also in or
upon the belief of the same.

On page 585, Anselm, on Rom. 6, says: “We
are baptized into the death of Christ, that we, believing
in his death, and following it, may live as
those who are dead; but since we, through baptism,
are dead to sin, we must not again live unto sin, so
that it is necessary again to die unto it; for, we are
baptized into the death, that is, in the likeness of the
death, of Christ; that, as he once died, and ever
lives, even so we, having once died to evil, should
ever live to the good; and, as a dead person can
sin no more; thus also we, if we have died with
Christ, shall not let ourselves be entangled again in
mortal sins.”

The sense of the words of Anselm is this: that we
must be careful, not to live in sin again after baptism,
since the former sins, in which we lived, have
died through baptism, and have been laid in the
grave as it were, through the death of Christ.
Hence, said words can only be applied to the baptism
of the believing and penitent, but in no wise to
251
the baptism of infants; because it is certain that the
things indicated as requisite for baptism cannot exist
in infants. For, how can baptism be, in infants, a
dying of their former sins, when they have never
lived in sin? How can they have their sins buried,
through baptism, into the death of Christ, who never
could nor need die unto sin?

Thus, Anselm, in the aforementioned passage,
speaks only of the baptism of the adult, intelligent,
and penitent Christians, who, having died unto their
former sins, had them buried through baptism into
the death of Christ, to rise to a new life.

Page 588, num. 6, Anselm writes on Matt. 3:
“The adults had first to be instructed in the Christian
doctrine.” S. Clement and others imposed upon
those who had lived in wickedness, and, becoming
converted, desired to be baptized, a fast of seven
days, and sometimes more, as a preparation; moreover,
a considerable time, before baptism was also
prescribed to the catechumens who were to be
baptized.

N. B. “Thus,” says the writer who has noted
this, “the light of the testimony of the truth shines
forth brightly in the midst of the darkness of
popery.”

We will not enlarge on what the writer has added
here, but turn to words of Anselm, which we cannot
view without plainly seeing that he treats of the
baptism of the believing and penitent; for, when he
speaks of the adults; of those who were first instructed
in the Christian doctrine; of those who,
having lived in wickedness, becoming converted;
of those who desired to be baptized; of the seven
days’ fast imposed upon them; of the considerable
time prescribed the catechumens who were to be
baptized, etc., it is clearly expressed thereby, that
the baptism of which he here speaks, is far different
from the baptism of infants, since these things can in
no wise be said of them.

On page 593, num. 5, D. Vicecomes quotes,
lib. 2, cap. 4, the following language of Anselm on
the words of Paul, Heb. 6:1–3: “We will not lay
again the foundation of repentance from dead works,
and of faith toward God, of baptism, of doctrine, etc.,
that is, the doctrine which was delivered to you in
the beginning.”

He explains the words of the apostle (Heb.
6:1–3), which, as every one knows, were written
to the believing Hebrew brethren, who, having accepted
Christ at the beginning of their faith, had
had the same sealed through baptism. They are
here exhorted to constancy in the faith accepted, and
that they should not return to the principles of the
Christian religion, upon which they had been baptized,
but must go on to the perfection of the same.
This is what Anselm, from said words, sought to
impress, in his time, upon his fellow-believers in the
faith, to the end, that they might observe their baptism
and the confession of the same, to the honor
of God, the edification of their neighbor, and the
salvation of their own souls.

On same page, Vicecomes, lib. 5, cap. 35, Anselm,
on Luke 2, says: “Even as Jesus, after the purification,
was brought into the temple, so those who
become believers, are brought into the church of
Christ.”

When he speaks of those who, becoming believers,
are brought into the church of Christ, he has
respect to such as, having been baptized upon faith,
are through this means, recognized and received as
members in the Christian church; for this is the purpose
for which this passage of Anselm is adduced in
Bapt. Hist.

As to the twelve Ephesian men, of whom we
read, Acts 19:1–5, who had been baptized with the
baptism of John, he asserts in his explanation on
Matt. 3, that they were re-baptized by Paul, assigning
as a reason of this, that the baptism of John
could not properly give remission of sins, because
the blood of Christ which blots out sin, had not then
been shed; again, because John, who was a forerunner
of Christ’s preaching, was also (according to
his explanation) a forerunner of baptism.

About A. D. 1024, close to, or a little after, the
time of Anselm, a place is given to one Algerus,
who, though writing somewhat obscurely on baptism,
gives so much light on the subject, that an impartial
Christian heart can readily decide from it,
that, in said matter, he followed the evangelical
truth, according to the doctrine of Christ and the
practice of his apostles; in proof of which we will
present a few examples.

In Bapt. Hist, page 583.—Algerus says (lib. 3,
de Euchar. cap. 3): “Who can regenerate a child
of the devil to a child of God, except God the Father?
Who can justify sinners, except he who died
for our sins? And, since every thing which is done in
baptism, is spiritual, who can perform it, except the
Holy Ghost?”

He tells in the above place, whence baptism has
its power, and whence its operations chiefly proceed;
and, certainly, he does not seek, find, or show it in
the water, as is done by many who, at the present
day, baptize infants, especially by the Romanists;
but he seeks, finds, and shows it in the operation
of God the Lord, whom he calls by the name of Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost. To God the Father he
ascribes, that he regenerates the candidate from a
child of the devil to a child of God. Of the Son he
states, that he, having died for our sins, justifies sinners
when they are baptized. Of the Holy Ghost he
says, that, since all that is done in baptism, is spiritual,
so all that is effected in baptism, is spiritually
performed by the Holy Ghost. Now, let every one
judge, without prejudice, whether such operations
can have place in infants, or in adults (when they
are baptized); and we are confident that the instant
reply will be, that not the former, but the latter, is
conformable to the truth.

Page 585, num. 9. Of the power and benefit of
baptism, Algerus says (lib. 3, de Euchar., cap. 4,):
“In order that the grace of God may abound over
us, it has reference, in the sacramental form
(namely, of baptism) not so much to worthiness
and respectability, as to their equal fitness; for, as
water quenches, cleanses and purifies, better than
all other liquids, even so baptism quenches the
lasciviousness of the flesh, and washes off the impurity
of sin, of actual sins as well as,” etc.

252

Here, again, several things are mentioned, which
are not applicable to infant baptism, but speak sufficiently
against it. For, in the first place, when it is
here said of the grace of God, that it has reference,
in the sacramental form (namely, of baptism) not so
much to the worthiness or respectability, namely,
of the persons to whom the sacramental form, or
baptism, may be administered, as to their equal
fitness; there is certainly indicated, in the candidates,
some fitness to which the grace of God has
regard; but what fitness can there be in the candidates,
to which the grace of God may have regard,
if it is not faith in Jesus Christ, true repentance,
obedience to God’s commandments, and such like
things as are requisite to baptism?

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:

“A. D. 1060, Bruno, Bishop of Angiers, and
Berengarius, his deacon, rejected infant baptism.”
See Guitmundus, Bishop of Avers, and Durandus,
Bishop of Luyck. These are their words: “Bruno,
Bishop of Angiers, and Berengarius of Tours, annul
the baptism of infants as much as is in their power;
so that they, discarding infant baptism, counsel men
to plunge themselves without fear into the deep
abyss of all manner of wickedness; saying that they
253
are not to be baptized, until they attain to years of
understanding.” Jac. Mehrn., Bapt. Hist., pp. 591,
592. H. Montan. Nietighd., pages 82, 83, from
Guitm. in Principio Dialogi de Veritate Eucharistiae.
Durand, in Epist. contra Brunon and Berengarium;
also, Baron., A. D. 1035, num. 1; also,
Alan., lib. 1, contra Hæretic. sui Temporis, pages
103, 104, 105.

It seems that the matter of the accusation of these
two men, Bruno and Berengarius, rose to such a
pitch, that they were subjected to an examination, in
order to ascertain the grounds of their faith, and to
judge them accordingly.

The author of an anonymous manuscript found in
the library of Baron Caraw. de Clepton., writes of
the examination of said Bruno, saying, that he himself
was present when Bruno, the defender of Berengarius,
was interrogated in regard to his faith; and
that they both, Bruno and Berengarius, said that infant
baptism was not necessary to salvation. See also
J. Mehrn., Bapt. Hist., page 685.

About A. D. 1068.—D. Vicecomes quotes from a
manuscript book of ceremonies, by Beroldus, which,
treating of certain religious ceremonies of that time,
makes mention also of baptism, and how it was administered
then among those of whom he writes.
But, to come to the matter; when, noting from this
book, the first address made to novices (whom he
terms children, according to the manner of Christ,
who also called his disciples children, John 21:5), he
says, that, the door having been opened, they were
thus addressed: “Enter, ye children, into the house
of God; hear your father (the teacher) teach you
the way of wisdom.” Bapt. Hist., page 592,
num. 3, Vicecom., lib. 2, cap. 43.

He then relates what occurred when the doors
were closed, and the novices were in the assembly;
how the bishop or teacher then delivered to them the
symbol, that is, the creed; and how he presented or
repeated to them the faith, according to the language
of the gospels, and then said: “Hear the faith: I
believe on God the Father.” Above page, Vicecom.,
lib. 3, cap. 14.

The other circumstances related there we pass by;
it suffices us to have seen that then the novices (before
they were baptized), were taught the way of
wisdom; that the faith was presented to them, and
that they were instructed in it, which are things that
cannot be done with infants, and, hence, prove, that
in the church where this practice was observed, infant
baptism was unknown, or, at least, was not
practiced there.

About A. D. 1076, or right after Beroldus, one
Ado, surnamed Trevirensis, a teacher of that time,
is introduced; of whom it is stated that, in administering
baptism, he admonished the candidates not
only in the knowledge of the faith, but also to the
practice of it, that is, to fast, to humble themselves.
Of these matters an instance is given, which is related
as follows in Bapt. Hist., page 593, num. 4:
“When a certain woman, called Syranna, became a
believer, he (Ado) thanked God for her, imposed a
fast upon her, and told her how she should humble
herself, and having thus instructed her, together with
her son, he baptized them.” Vicecom., lib. 3,
cap. 12.

A. D. 1090.—At this time lived and wrote, it is
stated, the teacher and historian Juo, surnamed Carnotensis,
from the place Carnuto, where he resided.
According to the testimony of ancient writers, he
opposed common popery in various points of doctrine,
teaching in such a manner concerning the only
Mediator, Christ Jesus, church-service, against monachism,
against the difference of meats, and of the
Supper, that the papists took offense thereat, and
considered him a seditious and schismatical person.

Note.—Juo Carnotensis makes some mention
also of the origin of infant baptism, how the same
arose in the Roman church. “The church,” he
says, “having now been sufficiently spread and
gathered among the Gentiles; in order that her
children, who departed this life before they had
attained to the years of understanding, might not
remain strangers to the communion of Christ, it was
desired to provide them with this medicine of salvation
(with baptism); and thus they were baptized
with the sacrament of faith.” Bapt. Hist., pp. 587,
588, from Cent. Magd. XI., cap. 6.

However, it is not our purpose to write here of all
these things; partly, because this, through default of
the authors, cannot be done circumstantially; and
partly, because we only intended to write something
of baptism, with regard to which we will also adduce
the testimony of Juo. What he may have
written concerning this subject, in other respects,
while he was yet unenlightened, we pass by, and
will only speak of that which he, when he had become
enlightened and had attained to knowledge,
wrote salutarily and correctly on this article.

Bapt. Hist., page 588, num. 6, Juo writes: “To
the hearers of the new life, the apostolic creed is delivered,
which they publicly confess before baptism.”
Ex Meginh. de Fide.

Page 590, num. 14, the following is quoted from
Juo: “During the answers to the threefold question,
the catechumen (that is, the novice who has learned
the faith) is washed from the filth of the old wickedness
(namely, through baptism), and puts on the
new man.”

Page 594, num. 7. D. Vicecomes (lib. 1, cap. 25)
quotes the following account from Juo: “Then those
who were to be baptized on the holy Easter Sabbath,
were led, in the fourth week of the forty days’ fast,
and on the fourth day of said week, to the church
(or, to the assembly), to be taught and examined in
the catechism (that is, in the instruction of the faith),
and further instructed, how they should fight against
spiritual wickedness; yet, their baptism was deferred
till holy Easter Sabbath.” Serm. de Sacram. Initiat.

Same page as above. “On that day, those who
desire baptism, come to the church (or, to the assembly),
that they may be received into the order
(or number) of the catechumens, and may throw off,
by holy prayers, the yoke of the devil.” D. Vicecom.,
lib. 2, cap. 30.

Page 595.—Juo (from August.) adduces these
words: “At the water of baptism, before we baptized
you, we asked: Do you believe on God the
Almighty?” D. Vicecom., lib. 4, cap. 7.

254

From these five passages of Juo it is evident, virtually
as well as from the circumstances, that he
treats of no other baptism than that which is accompanied
with instruction, faith, confession of the faith,
and observance of the same; in short, that he speaks
of a baptism which, as appears from his own words,
cannot well, yea, not at all, be reconciled with infant
baptism. For, in the first passage he makes mention
of a creed, which the candidates had to confess publicly
before baptism. In the second passage he
speaks of the answers which the catechumens gave
to the threefold question put to them before baptism;
and that they were then washed from the filth of the
old wickedness, and did put on the new man. In the
third passage he relates how those who were to be
baptized on the holy Easter Sabbath, were first examined
in the faith, and further instructed, in the
fourth week of the forty days’ fast. In the fourth
passage he says that on that day those who desired
baptism, came to the church or assembly, to be received
into the order or number of the catechumens,
and to pray. In the fifth passage he mentions what
the candidates were asked at the water of baptism,
namely, whether they believed on God, the Almighty.

All these are things that pertain only to the adult
and intelligent, and cannot be comprehended, much
less practiced by infants.

We will conclude this with the account of P. J.
Twisck, who, besides what he has mentioned concerning
baptism, briefly notices several other articles
which Juo taught contrary to the common belief of
the Roman church. He writes: “Juo, Bishop of
Carnuto, zealously taught of Christ, the only Mediator,
of church-service, against monachism, against
the difference of meats, and of the Supper.” Chron.,
page 416, col. 2, from Catal. Test., Tom. 2, fol. 346.

It is very probable, since we have never heard of
his having recanted, that this Juo, who began his
doctrine, or, at least, maintained it the most vigorously,
in the year 1090, continued therein to the
end, and thus concluded the eleventh century with
it. Hence, we will close here, and see which pious
witnesses of Jesus Christ suffered at this time.





---

Page: http://history.truechristian.church/stories/mm-summary-of-baptism-in-the-eleventh-century/

[Contribute a correction or addition](https://github.com/trueChristian/history.truechristian.church/issues/new?title=Correction%3A+Summary+Of+Baptism+In+The+Eleventh+Century.&body=%23%23+Page+or+topic%0ASummary+Of+Baptism+In+The+Eleventh+Century.%0A%0APage%3A+http%3A%2F%2Fhistory.truechristian.church%2Fstories%2Fmm-summary-of-baptism-in-the-eleventh-century%2F%0A%0ARecord%3A+mm-summary-of-baptism-in-the-eleventh-century%0A%0ADate+currently+shown%3A+11th+century+%28source+section%29%0A%0A%23%23+Correction+or+addition%0A%0A%0A%0A%23%23+Sources+and+evidence%0APlease+include+book%2Fpage+references%2C+archive+links%2C+or+first-hand+documentation.%0A%0A%0A%0A%23%23+Image+credit+%28if+applicable%29%0ACreator%2C+source%2C+and+permission+or+public-domain+basis.%0A%0A%0A%0ASubmitted+for+review%3B+this+issue+does+not+publish+changes+automatically.)