Part 26

[96] The foregoing quotation from Tertullian is ambiguous in the Holland language and appears to have been so also in the original. Dr. Karl Ad. Heinrich Kellner, Prof, of Theol. at Heidelsheim, in his German translation of the “Complete Works of Tertullian” renders this passage as follows, which he says he holds as the correct rendering: “What wonder then that it (patience) also unites itself with repentance and is, aside from separation in the marriage relation, the usual means of relief for the apostate--this, however, only for the reason that we, whether it be for the man, or whether it be for the wife, in widowhood may hope for constancy. It is patience that waits for salvation with those who in their own time would seek repentance, that longs for it and prays for it. How great a benefit it works for both! The one it preserves from adultery, the other it purifies.”--_The Publishers._

“Again, ‘As the religion of others does not concern us, and neither profits nor harms us; therefore, it does not become any one religion to force itself upon another, since it must be accepted voluntarily, and not by coercion, for what is required is the offering of a willing mind.’” (This agrees with Ex. 25, 35 and 36. _Chr. Leonh., lib. 1. Seb. Fr. in the Arke fol. 174. Stand der Religie, lib. 4. Grond. Bew. letter B. Menn. Sym. Doop. C., fol. 8. Th. Imbroek, fol. 28._)

“Again, Tertullian (in his fourth book against Marcion) quoting the words of Christ: _This is my body_, that is, a figure of my body, says: ‘It would not have been a figure, had his body not been real; for a phantasm, or mere illusion, cannot have a figure or shadow?’ With this he means to prove that Christ had a real body; and what he here calls a figure, he, in the fifth book, calls a sacrament, with the express words: ‘The bread and the cup.’ Still more clearly he says in the first book: ‘Neither did he despise or reject the bread, by which he represented or typified his body.’

“He says: ‘These words of Christ: _This is my body_, we must understand as though Christ had said: This is the sign and figure of my body.’ I pass over Dionysius Alexandrinus, and Paulinus, who both treat in the same manner of the above sacrament.’” _Tertul. Apolog., cap. 39. Euseb. lib. 6 and 9. Daniel Saut., lib. 1, cap. 6._

“Again, Tertullian says: ‘We must not seek the faith from the persons, but prove the persons by the faith.’” _De Præscript., lib. 4. P. J. Twisck, Chron. 2d book, page 53, col. 1, 2._

NOTE.--Tertullian taught at this time: “We have the apostles for authors, who established nothing according to their own inclination, but faithfully taught the nations that which they had received from God.” _Lib. 1. Præscript._

He writes further, that “all churches are apostolic churches, though they may have been founded long after the time of the apostles, if they have but kinship with the doctrine.” _Lib. 1. Præsc._ See _Samuel Veltius, in the Geslacht-register der Roomscher Successie, second edition, 1649 pages 115, 116_.

Tertullian says among other things: “The emperors would have believed in Christ, if the world had not prevented them; for they could not become Christians, because they had to serve the world, and carry on war.” See, _Grondelijke Verklaringe Danielis ende Johannis_, printed at _Harlem, 1635, on Tertullian_.

Vicecomes, in his first book on baptism, chap. 1, notes the following testimony from Tertullian (_lib. 1, cap. 4._): “There is no difference between those whom John baptized in Jordan and those Peter baptized in the Tiber.” With this he intends to prove that in the first days of Christianity there were neither baptismal fonts nor churches. _J. M., Baptism. Hist., page 275._

Again says Tertullian: “Thus, when we go into the water of baptism, we justly confess our sins and the Christian faith.” _Vicecom., lib. 4, cap. 7, and J. M., Baptism. Hist., page 277._

These last two passages from Tertullian we have adduced over and above what was necessary, but they are not useless, since they confirm what we have said above about baptism; for by the first the superstition which was wont to be connected with the water, the baptismal font, and the church in which baptism was administered, is removed, or at least (_per consequentiam_) controverted; and the second states that it is proper to confess our sins, and the Christian faith, at baptism. And therewith he proves that it is not proper to be baptized without confessing one’s sins, and the Christian faith. What has been said is sufficient for the intelligent. With this we take our leave of Tertullian.

_A. D. 224._--Leonilla, a Christian grandmother, had three grandsons, Sosyphus, Cleosyphus, and Melosyphus. She begged Romigius that he would instruct the three lads in the Christian faith, and then baptize them. This was done in a godly manner. _P. J. Twisck, Chron. for the year 224, 3d book, page 60, col. 1, from Grond. Bew., letter B._ Also, _Kort verhæl van den loop der werelt_, printed 1611, _page 47_.

From this it will be seen, that at that time and place Christians were not in the habit of having their children or grandchildren baptized, unless these had reached riper years, and been instructed in the faith, which, when they confessed it, they were baptized upon. This should be borne in mind.

_A. D. 231._--At this time there flourished as a writer the celebrated Origen, surnamed Adamantius, who, treating on baptism, writes thus (_Homil. 6, super. Ezechidem_) on Ezekiel, 16:4: ”‘Neither wast thou washed in water to supple thee,’ etc.: We, who have received the grace of baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, are washed unto salvation. Simon was washed, and when he had received baptism, continued with Philip; but not being washed unto salvation, he was condemned by him who through the Holy Ghost said to him: ‘Thy money perish with thee.’ It is a matter of great importance that he who is washed, be washed unto salvation.

“Be very heedful of this, ye catechumens, or learners, and prepare yourselves by what is told you while you are yet under instruction and unbaptized; and then come to the washing of water, and be washed unto salvation. But be not washed as some, who are washed, but not unto salvation; like those who receive the water, but not the Holy Ghost.

“He that is washed unto salvation, receives the water and the Holy Ghost.

“Because Simon was not washed unto salvation, he received the water, and not the Holy Ghost; for he thought he could purchase the gift of the Holy Ghost with money, wherein he was not washed unto salvation.

“That which we now read as having been spoken at Jerusalem, is addressed to every sinful soul that seems to believe.” Also, _H. Mont. Nietigh., pp. 36, 37_.

The above words of Origen indicate the manner of baptism which prevailed in his time, namely, that the candidates for baptism were first catechumens, that is, learners, who were instructed in the faith, and had to prepare themselves to this end, before they were baptized. For, when he says: “Be very heedful of this, ye catechumens, or learners, and prepare yourselves by what is told you while you are yet under instruction and unbaptized; and then come to the washing of water,” etc., what else is meant by it, than that it confirms what John required of those who came to him to be baptized, saying: “Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance,” Matt. 3:8; that is, prepare yourselves by a true reformation of life, so that you may receive baptism worthily.

Then, on the words, Ezek. 16:5: “But thou wast cast out in the open field,” etc., he (Origen) comments thus: “If we sin again after the washing of regeneration, we are cast away, according to the word of God, in the day that we are born: such are frequently found, who, after they have been washed by the washing of regeneration, do not bring forth fruits meet for repentance; nor do they live up to the mystery of baptism, with more fear than they had while they were yet catechumens, or learners; or with more love than they exercised when they were still hearers of the word; or with holier deeds than they performed before. Beloved, observe what is said in the text: ‘Thou wast cast out in the open field, for the wickedness of thy soul, in the day that thou wast born.’” _H. Mont._, same page as above.

By these words he confirms the import of his former declaration, namely, “That those who are to be baptized, must first be catechumens, or learners, and, being baptized, they must be truly regenerated;” and thus he calls baptism “the washing of regeneration,” even as Paul, Tit. 3:5.

Moreover, he complains that those who were washed by the washing of regeneration, did not bring forth fruits meet for repentance. By this he certainly means to say, that the baptized person must be truly converted, and bring forth good fruits. But how can he be converted, that is, turn from his error, who never has erred? And how can it be demanded of him to bring forth good fruits, who cannot be accused of ever having brought forth bad fruits? Hence it is evident that he does not say this with reference to the baptism of infants, since these, having never erred, or brought forth bad fruits, cannot, through baptism, be required to turn from error, and bring forth better fruits than they have brought forth before.

That such baptism, accompanied with the mortifying of the flesh, and resurrection unto a new life, is taught and commended by Origen, is clearly expressed in his comments on Rom. 6:3: “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?” where he says: “But it seems to me that the apostle in this chapter does not prefix even the words: ‘_Know ye not_’ without a purpose. He thereby proves that at that time, that is, in the days of the apostles, it was not as it is now, that those who were baptized, received only the outward figure of the mysteries, but that also the power and intent of the same was imparted to them, and this to those who understood it, and had been instructed concerning it: that those who are baptized, are baptized into the death of Christ, and buried with him by baptism; and that those who are baptized must walk in newness of life, even as Christ rose from the dead, through the glory of the Father.” Also, _H. Mont. page 37_.

This is certainly expressing plainly and unequivocally, of what baptism he is treating,[97] namely, of such a baptism, of which the power and intent was imparted to those who understood it; by which they were buried into the death; by which they were raised, to walk in newness of life, etc., all of which are things that cannot be comprehended, much less undertaken and carried out, by infants. In this manner he speaks also in other places, as, for instance, in _Homilia 5, 4th and 5th chapters of the book Joshua_. Again, _Homil. 9, 8th and 9th chapters; Homil. 15, 11th chap._ Also, _Homil. 7, 15th chap. of the book of Judges. B. Hist. p. 291._

[97] At this time Origen taught that we must appeal to the Holy Scriptures; for without these no credence can be given to what we say. On _Jeremiah, Homil. 1._ See, _Samuel Veltius, in Geslacht-register der, etc., page 115_.

NOTICE CONCERNING THE WRITINGS OF ORIGEN WITH REFERENCE TO BAPTISM.

There are a few passages, namely, _Homil. 8_, on the 12th and 13th chapters of Leviticus; _Homil. 14_, on the 2d chap, of Luke; _Comment._ on the 6th chap. of the Epistle to the Romans, from which some who at this day uphold infant baptism suppose they can draw something to show that Origen was not a stranger to their views, but that he sanctioned them. But various eminent writers deny, yea, completely refute this, it being proven that these passages do not belong to Origen, but to Ruffinus, the priest at Aquileia, who, it is stated, more than one hundred and fifty years after Origen’s time translated the works of the latter from the Greek into Latin, adding from his own, that is, out of his own mind the abovementioned passages, and, on the other hand, leaving out other matters. To this explanation we assent. See _Ruffinus’ prefatory and concluding remarks on Origen’s Commentary to the Epistle to the Romans_. Also, _Erasmus’ account of the life of Origen_, prefaced to the works of the latter, according to _J. Mehrn., Bapt. Hist., pp. 283 and 291_. Also, _H. Mont. Nietigheyd van den Kinder-doop, pages 29–34, and 42, 43_.

Besides this, various gross errors have of old been imputed to Origen, as, for instance, that he believed, that the evil spirits would ultimately be saved. However, he himself desires this in a certain letter written to those of Alexandria, in which he complains of the shamelessness of his adversaries, who dared in his life time to defame him with slanders which not even an insane man would utter. What, then, must have been the treatment his writings received after his death!

“We may plainly see,” says Jacob Mehrning, “from what we still have of the writings of Origen, that many ignorant and grossly erring spirits have sought to palm off to the simple-minded, their own whims under the name of this eminent man, who by Jerome (in _Prefatione ante Ezechidem_) is called the second master of the church after the apostles.” _Bapt. Hist. pp. 288 and 289._ Also, _H. Mont. Nietigh., pages 35, 36_.

TOUCHING DIFFERENT POINTS OF THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGEN, ACCORDING TO THE ACCOUNT OF P. J. TWISCK.

_A. D. 231._--“Origen, a man who abounds in spiritual allegories, and who practiced himself what he taught others, as church history testifies of him, began at this time to write his books, and says to the catechumens: ‘Repent, that ye may receive baptism for the remission of sins.’ Also: ‘He that has resolved to come and be baptized, but is not willing to forsake his evil practices and habits, but continues in his former condition, does not come to baptism in the proper way.’ With reference to this, you may read, _George Vicelius_, in his _Form en Aenteekening, en Welke Gestalte en form de Kerk duysent jaer stond, fol. 127_.

“Again: Origen was appointed by Demetrius, at Alexandria, catechist, that is, teacher of the pupils of the faith, which office was filled before him (after the apostles) by Plautinus and Clement. Of his pupils, Plutarch, Serenus, Heraclides, Heron, and a woman, were martyred for Christ, before they were baptized, thus obtaining the baptism of fire.

“After Origen, Heracles, and after Heracles, Dionysius had charge at Alexandria of the schools of the catechumens, that is, of those who received instruction in the Christian doctrine, preparatory to baptism.

“Again: Origen says, that no one should be persecuted for his faith, and that he who would live according to the Gospel must not drive or compel his brother to an oath, nor swear such an one himself, though it be demanded of him.

“Again: On Matt. 23 he says: The Lord reprehends those teachers who not only do not practice what they teach, but also, tyrannously and unmercifully, without considering the strength of their hearers, lay upon them burdens greater than they can bear, namely, forbid them to marry, and over and above what is expedient, would constrain them to an impossible chastity.

“Again: He says that it is altogether a letter that killeth, that John should be understood literally and carnally. Hence he insists strongly upon it, that the natural eating of Christ’s body avails nothing, and that it must therefore be spiritually understood and eaten. _Euseb., lib. 6. Chron. Seb. Frank, fol. 101. Leonh., lib. 1. Joh. Anast., fol. 313._

“Again: In his 12th, 15th, and 18th Homily on the Book of Joshua, Origen writes thus: ‘If the natural war of Joshua and his people were not a figure and antitype of the spiritual war of Christ and the Christians, the apostles, as peace-proclaimers, would never have accepted, nor sanctioned the reading of the books of Joshua, in the heavenly Jerusalem of the peaceful church and the peace-loving children of God.’ And he further proves by many arguments, that Christ, the Prince of Peace, teaches peace, and not war; and that we are not to fight with external, but only with spiritual weapons, against the devil, the world, flesh, sin, and death.

“Again: Speaking of the destruction of Ai, and the extermination of the king and the people, he says: ‘By this we must not understand that the saints, at this day in the new Testament, may shed blood, and kill with the natural sword: these and like events are full of mysteries.’ He explains further, that we must utterly destroy Ai, that is, the kingdom of darkness and sin, through the spiritual Joshua, Christ Jesus. Col. 1; Eph. 6.

“Again: Origin (_Homil. in Mattheo 7_) says: ‘The text in Luke 22, about buying a sword, is pernicious (namely, for the wicked) if understood literally, and not allegorically: for he that should regard the letter, and not understand the will and intent of God, but sell his garment, and buy a sword, would understand the word of Christ contrary to his will.’

“Again: In the book against Celsus the Second, he says that ‘war has been abolished by the only God.’

“Again: Of antichrist he says, from 2 Thess. 2, that he sitteth in the temple of God, and, a little further on, he says: ‘Antichrist assumes merely the name of Christ, but does not do his works; nor does he teach the words of truth. Christ is the truth; antichrist is the spurious truth. He shows himself here, as though he were Christ and the word of God, but is nevertheless the abomination of desolation.’” _P. J. Twisck, Chron. 3d book, p. 61_, from _Chron. Seb. Fr., fol. 65, 78. Hieron. Zauch., fol. 56. Joh. Heyden Næmb., fol. 226, 227._

_A. D. 251._--It is recorded that at this time, Virian, Marcellinus, and Justin, learned men, in the reign of Emperor Decius, conferred with one another about matters concerning the Christians, and were well pleased with this holy religion; and hearing that Christian believers were baptized, they sent for a teacher[98] called Justin, and asked him to baptize them.

[98] The author employs the word _priest_; but priest is derived from the word _presbyter_, that is, elder. We say teacher.

Justin rejoiced that such learned men wished to take upon themselves the yoke of Christ. He began to instruct them, and then had water brought, and baptized them on confession of their faith. _P. J. Twisck, Chron. 3d book, page 68, col. 2_, from _Wicel. in Choro Sanctorum, Grond. Bew., letter B_.

_A. D. 253._--For this year, we read in ancient authors, that Pancratius, the son of the believing Clionius, was baptized at Mount Celius, when he was fifteen years old, after he had been under instruction twenty days. Compare this with _P. J. Twisck, Chron. 3d book, page 71, col. 1_, from _Wicel. Grond. Bew., letter B. Leonh., lib. 1_.

Touching the circumstances of this matter, that is, of Dionysius, who traveled with him, and the bishop Cornelius who baptized him, to whom some have erroneously ascribed another office, we leave it in its own merit and mention it no further. It suffices us that it is evident from this, that at that time the believers did not have their children baptized, till they, having attained to understanding and riper years, themselves desired to be baptized on their faith.

_Same year as above._--Basilla, an honorable and discreet maiden, at Rome, in the reign of Emperor Galien, learned the Christian faith from the eunuch Protus, and Hiacynthus, and was also baptized by the abovementioned bishop Cornelius. _Grond. Bew. van den Doop_, printed 1581, _letter B., ij_.

_A. D. 257._--Pontus, the son of Marcus, a Christian, was orally instructed in the Christian religion, by the bishop, or teacher, Pontian, and then baptized. _P. J. Twisck, Chron. 3d book, p. 73, col. 1_, from _Grond. Bew., letter B. Chron. Mich., fol. 163_. Also, _Loop der Werelt, by F. H. H._, printed 1611, _page 47_.

Here notice again that the aforementioned Pontus was not of Jewish or heathenish, but of Christian descent; for he is called the son of Marcus, a Christian; from which, as in the case of Pancratius, it appears that the Christians suffered their children to grow up unbaptized, till they attained to the years of understanding.

_A. D. 264._--At Rome, under the Emperors Valerian and Galien, Nemesius and some others catechised; and, according to the custom of the church, when they had held a fast, he baptized all who believed. _P. J. Twisck, Chron. 3d book, p. 57, col. 1_; word for word.

NOTE.--In the tract, _Grondig Bewijs, en onder-rechting van den Doop_, printed A. D. 1581, _letter B., ij.; ex Codice Mariano_, the name Nemesius is not put in the nominative, but in the accusative (objective) case; so that in this place it seems that Nemesius was not the one who baptized, but one of those who were baptized.

_About A. D. 290._--The above cited examples of those who were baptized on their faith, after having been instructed, are confirmed by various teachings of Cyril of Jerusalem, who then showed how those who were baptized should conduct themselves before as well as after baptism. Jacob Mehrning introduces him about the end of this century, or about A. D. 290, and adduces from his writings various passages which apply in no wise to infant baptism, but very appropriately to the baptism which is administered upon faith and repentance.

In _Baptism Hist., pages 317_ and _318_, he has this annotation (_cap. 8, ibid._): “Cyril himself exhorts some catechumens who before had spent several years in sensuality and lewdness, that they should not think it grievous to do penance for forty days, saying: ‘Beloved, forsake that which is present, and believe in the things to come. So many years you have spent, and served the world in vain; will you not, then, begin, and for the sake of your souls, abstain for forty days?”’

“In _Baptism Hist., page 318_, we read (_Cyril in Catech. 2, Mijstag._): ‘Repent, O man, and the grace of baptism shall not be with held from thee.’”

“Again: Cyril strenuously exhorts such newly planted ones unto godliness, so that when they go to receive baptism, they will not be rejected, like the guest spoken of in the gospel, who did not have on a wedding garment. Therefore he says: ‘Far be it, that any of those who have given in their names for baptism, and have been entered on the lists, should hear: Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment?’” From _Vicecom., lib. 2, cap. 12, on Cyril_.

“Again he says (_Cyril in Catech. 3, Mijstag_): ‘Begin to wash your garments by repentance, that, being called to the marriage of the Lamb, you may be found worthy.’”

“Again (_Baptism. Hist., page 319, Cyril Catech. 1, Mijstag_): ‘Say to those who are to be baptized: Hear the voice of the prophet that saith: Wash ye, make you clean; put away from your souls the evils of your doings before mine eyes; that the assembly of the angels may call unto you: Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered.’”

“Again _cap. 6_ (_Vicec._), Cyril admonishes the newly baptized: ‘As you have put off the old garments, and put on those that are according to the Spirit, you shall henceforth always walk in white garments.’ By this we do not mean to say that it is necessary for you always to have on white garments, but that you are to clothe yourselves in such garments as are white, bright, and spiritual before God. And in _cap. 10_, he says: ‘Would to God, that we could all of a truth say: My soul is joyful in the Lord; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, and with the robe of gladness.’”