Summary Of Baptism In The Thirteenth Century.

[The thirteenth century is commenced with the thirteenth and last Centuria, with which the Magdeburg Centuriators have concluded their Ecclesiastical History; which is, as it were, a mournful farewell air, on account of the lamentable desolation caused 289 by the Pope of Rome, in the worship of God. Several Roman superstitions mentioned, which were commanded as solemnly as the word of God, and are called the baptism of necessity, the baptism by women, heretics, etc.; also, how to baptize a child that is in danger of death.

Some strange passages from Thomas Aquinas, touching infant baptism; added decree of the bishops of Nemansa, as to how to deal with a child, concerning which there may be doubt of its having been baptized aright; also the formula of words to be used by the priest over the child. Explanation that all this was done to gain respect for infant baptism, among the common people.

Of the true baptism, and how God, in the midst of these storms, preserved his church.

The followers of the doctrine of Peter Bruis and Henry of Toulouse, who, in many respects, concurred in the belief of the Anabaptists of the present day, increase to such an extent, A. D. 1206, that in the provinces of Languedoc, Narbonne, Gascony, but few people were found who did not adhere to their doctrine; also the three articles of their doctrine against the Roman church.

The ancient Waldenses again appear, A. D. 1218, and, though excommunicated by the Pope in the bull of the Lord’s Supper, declare against the swearing of oaths, taking the life of evil-doers, the faith of the Roman church, ungodly priests, the Pope.

Circumstantial account, that these people, A. D. 1230, were so numerous, that one traveling from his country to Milan, could lodge every night with one of his persuasion.

The increase of the Waldenses in France and Flanders, is again stated for, A. D. 1238.

Statement, for 1242, that they not only confessed their belief with the mouth, but also suffered for it.

Thirty-eight years after, namely, A. D. 1280, it is shown, that their doctrine had penetrated not only into Lombardy, but even into Sicily; several articles of their doctrine described in full.

Their increase in various countries of Christendom is again shown, for the year 1284, as a proof that notwithstanding the persecutions raised against them, they did not diminish.

A certain doctrine of Alexander, namely: that baptism must be administered on confession of faith; whereupon the Waldenses and Albigenses are introduced once more, for the last time, and it is stated that they considered infant baptism of no virtue.

Conclusion, being Jacob Mehrning’s reply to Mellinus, respecting baptism.]

This is the century, writes Jacob Mehrning, with which the Magdeburg Centuriators have closed their church history, etc. Concerning this time they write in the preface as follows: “This is the calamitous time, in which the Roman Pope exalted his might to the highest, in the occidental churches, and the Turk his power, in the Orient; where, then, the divine and pure doctrine became most abominably adulterated in every respect.

Yea, the ground of doctrine, and all external ceremonies, as well as all points of doctrine,—all these, without reservation, the Pope of Rome would have under his control; in consequence of which such a blindness and darkness arose among men, that almost all of them took upon them the yoke, submitting whatever they spoke or wrote, with more fear to the judgment of the Pope, than of God himself, or of his church. Rules were established, by which all controverted articles were to be decided and judged; namely, the corrupted writings of the fathers, and the decrees or resolutions of councils. The word of God entirely lost its honor, dignity and credit; yea, it was thenceforth accepted only as far as the opinion of the fathers and councils allowed. Moreover, the word of God was no longer expounded from the Holy Scriptures, but according to the apprehension of their own imagination, etc. Besides, too much concession was made to the heathen subtleties of Aristotle; yea, with such folly, that the obscure writings of this heathen were introduced into the schools, brought into the pulpit, and mixed with the articles of faith, etc. Jac. Mehrn. Bapt. Hist., p. 717, from Cent. Magd. XIII, chap. 13.

As regards infant baptism, because the same was much contradicted, yea, utterly rejected, at this time, by the Waldenses and Albigenses, those of the Roman church, in order to provide for this, and to maintain it, ordained various things, called baptism of necessity (private baptism), baptism by women, baptism by heretics.

The Madgeburg Centuriators quote the following (chap. 6, fol. 242) from a synodal book, written jointly by some bishops, at Nemansa, A. D. 1251: “We command, that an infant, just born and in peril of death, so that it can not be brought to the priest, be baptized by the men present, whether in warm or in cold water, but with no other liquid, and this in a wooden, stone or other vessel. But if there be no men present, let the women who are there baptize the child, or even the father or the mother, in case there be no one else present, to baptize the child.” Bapt. Hist., pp. 727, 728.

By these and similar means the Romanists at this time, sought to maintain the credit of infant baptism, which was greatly opposed; to which end tended also the words of Aquinas, which are as follows: “The proper administrator of baptism shall be a priest, whose province it is by virtue of his office, to baptize; but in cases of necessity, not only a chaplain, but also a layman, or a woman, yea, even a heathen or a heretic may baptize, if he only observes the form of the church, and purposes to do what the church does. But if a person, from necessity, is baptized by such an one, he indeed receives the sacrament, so that he need not be baptized again; but he does not receive the grace of baptism, because he is considered as not having been baptized aright.” Thom. Aquin. de Art., Fid., chap. 14, in Bapt. Hist., p. 725.

In the same direction tends what is adduced in Cent. Magd., XIII., chap. 6, fol. 242, from the above mentioned synodal book of the bishops of Nemansa: “But,” say they, “if a child, in case of 290 necessity, has been baptized by a layman, according to the form prescribed, we command, that said child, if it survives, be brought as soon as possible to the priest, who shall diligently examine how it was baptized; and if he find that the form prescribed was not observed aright, he shall baptize the child (again), according to the form of the church. But if he doubt whether it was rightly baptized, or not, since perhaps the baptizer did not properly consider the words which he spoke in baptism, or because the bystanders were not agreed in this, or because there is no certainty whether it was baptized or not, the priest shall baptize it with these words: ‘If thou art baptized, I baptize thee not again; but if thou art not baptized, I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ In such doubtful cases, however, one witness is sufficient when more can not be had.” Bapt. Hist., p. 728.

Who does not see that the Roman church, when infant baptism was contradicted, endeavored by these and similar absurdities, to make it appear to the common people as though infant baptism were absolutely necessary to salvation, yea, so necessary that rather than neglect it for want of a priest, even women, yea, heathen and heretics whom they otherwise were accustomed to burn, might baptize the infants if they only observed the form of baptism employed by the church. Oh strange theology! Merely to maintain the error of infant baptism, many other errors were maintained.