Part 43

_A. D. 487._--Many now, from time to time, separated from the Roman church, rejecting her superstitions and invented ordinances of worship, and desiring to have no fellowship with the mystery of wickedness, which just then began greatly to rise among the Romanists, so that not only many of the common people, but also, it appears, some eminent clerical and learned persons, separated themselves from the Roman religion in such a manner, that they, in token of this, were baptized upon faith, by those who were called heretics or Anabaptists, notwithstanding they had been baptized in their youth by the Romanists. In order to prevent this, the Pope or Bishop of Rome, whose name was Felix, made the most strenuous efforts,[115] convoking for this end, A. D. 487, a synod or council, in the city of Rome; concerning which the following account is given in _Bapt. Hist., page 442_, from _Centuræ Magdeburgenses, fol. 538_: “In a synod held at Rome, A. D. 487, by Pope Felix, who had learned that in Africa, some ecclesiastics, priests, and bishops had been rebaptized together with numbers of the common people, it was decreed:

[115] The pope and the councils had commenced making such efforts, it appears, already A. D. 470, seventeen years earlier; for at that time Anabaptism was condemned at Rome, as has been shown.

“1. If those that have been rebaptized are grievously sorry, and desire to do penance, they shall be received kindly, and, as usual, by the priests.

“2. The priests and ecclesiastics that have fallen, and been baptized with the baptism of heretics, shall do penance to the end of their life.

“3. Other ecclesiastics, as monks, nuns, and seculars, who have fallen, and been rebaptized, shall remain three years among the catechumens, and seven years among the penitents; shall not offer for the space of two years, but pray among the seculars; however, if they be overtaken by death during this time, the bishop, or a priest shall absolve them.

“4. Those who have been baptized or rebaptized by heretics, shall not be permitted to receive any ecclesiastical office, but must be content (that is, if they return) with being received into the number of the Catholics.”

All these articles--the fourth one we have passed over as irrelevant--sufficiently indicate that those who were then called Anabaptists must have increased greatly and commanded no small respect, since not only the common people, but also (as the second and third article declare) priests, ecclesiastics, and other clerical persons, as monks, nuns, etc., though baptized in youth, were rebaptized, that is, baptized upon faith; which is the more evident from the fact that the Pope considered the matter of sufficient importance, to convoke, in order to weaken the so-called Anabaptists and maintain the Roman church, a public synod or council, and publish laws and rules against them. Also P. J. Twisck makes mention of this, in his _Chron., 5th book, page 167, col. 2_, fixing, however, the date of this occurrence on the year 483, which is four years earlier than in _Bapt. History_.

He says: “Felix III., the fiftieth Pope of Rome, ordained that the churches should be consecrated by the bishops, and that annual wakes or church-masses--real bacchanals--should be celebrated. In his time it was also decreed in a council, that persons baptized by heretics, or rebaptized, should not be received into any ecclesiastical order. Said council also had under consideration those who had been rebaptized in Africa, and desired to do penance; as well as, what should be done with the bishops, priests, monks, and nuns, who had been rebaptized.” From _Platina, fol. 91_. _Fasc. Temp., fol. 112. Hist. Georg., lib. 3._

_A. D. 494._--At this time flourished Primasius; he explains 1 Tim. 6:12, where the apostle says: “Thou hast professed a good profession before many witnesses,” as having reference to baptism. See _Bapt. Hist., page 483_, from _Joseph Vicecomes, lib. 5, cap. 37_.

But, beloved reader, how can this passage apply to baptism, or be interpreted with reference to it, unless we understand that the good profession of which the apostle speaks, is attributed to the candidates for baptism; so that, as Timothy (of whom he says this) professed a good profession before many witnesses, even so must yet at this day all who are to be baptized, profess a good profession before many witnesses. But new-born infants cannot do this; hence, the baptism of which Primasius here speaks, does not relate to infants.

Afterwards, in his first book on John’s Revelation, he says: “He is arrayed in a white robe, who is clothed with Christ, and is strong in the faith which worketh by love; but as many of you as have been baptized, have put on Christ.” Gal. 3:27. _Bapt. Hist., page 408._

Nowhere in the holy Scriptures, are infants enjoined to put on Christ; but this is throughout and without exception said to believers. See Rom. 13:14; Gal 3:27; Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10. These epistles were written and sent only to believers. But to remove all doubt, Primasius himself explains what he understands by this putting on of Christ, by adding: “and is strong in the faith.” This is certainly not anything that children can do; hence the baptism which he applies to such as he speaks of is not the baptism of infants.

NOTE.--At this time mention is made, in a certain African council, of certain people, as being agitators with regard to baptism, and how they should be suppressed. Compare _Seb. Franck, Chron. Rom., Conc., fol. 48, col. 4_, with our remarks in the account of the martyrs of the fifth century, on the year 497.

_A. D. 498._--It is stated that at this time there lived and wrote, the excellent teacher, Fulgentius, who, writing, among other things on baptism says (_lib. de fide, ad Petrum, cap. 30_): “Rest assured of this, and doubt not in anywise.” Continuing he says: “That no man can receive eternal life, who has not previously been converted from his sins through repentance and faith, and through the sacrament of faith and repentance been redeemed, that is, through baptism; this is absolutely necessary for adults, namely that they repent of their sins, understand the common faith, according to the truth, and receive the sacrament of baptism (upon it).”

This is the only testimony of Fulgentius, respecting baptism, which we have been able to find; from which we can draw no other conclusion than that he esteemed baptism upon faith very highly, yea, that this, and no other, was considered true baptism by him; for when he speaks of baptism, he connects it with faith and repentance, and, hence, calls it a sacrament of faith and repentance, adding that it is necessary for adults. How could one speak more clearly and plainly of the true Christian and apostolical baptism, which is peculiar to believers and penitents. We will, therefore, let the matter rest, as having been sufficiently explained by Fulgentius.

NOTE.--It appears that the doctrine of baptism upon faith had at this time, A. D. 498, made its way even to the papal chair, which, however, we do not recognize. _Bapt. Hist., page 463_, Pope Leo I., in his epistle, declaims with great warmth against the Bishops of Sicily, Campania, Samnia, and Picena, because they baptized not only on Easter and Whitsuntide, but also on Epiphany and other holidays. Observe: this is utterly opposed to infant baptism, as we have shown elsewhere. On page 464, Pope Leo (_Serm. 1, de natia Dom., cap. 4_) thus exhorts those who had been baptized: “Remain steadfast in the faith which you have confessed before many witnesses, and in which you are regenerated.” Again, Leo writes (_Epist. 4, ad Episcob., in Sicilia, cap. 6_): “You plainly see that two reasons must be observed, in which the elect (that is, believers) are to be baptized.”

See, beloved reader, such is the power of truth, that even the mouth of the liar, yea, of antichrist, must confess it. But though Pope Leo confessed this, other popes declared those who confessed the same, heretics, yea, cursed, persecuted, and killed them, as shall be shown in the proper place.

At this time Fulgentius taught that the holy Scriptures contained all that was necessary for salvation--food for children, as well as for adults. _S. Veltius, Geschlacht-register, 1649, page 123._

_A. D. 500._--P. J. Twisck, in the conclusion of his account of the fifth century, complains of the desolation, both in civil and spiritual affairs, occasioned chiefly by the power of the Pope of Rome, saying: “In this time, and still longer, through the desolation caused in the lands by the invasion of many different armies, and by other destroyers, as well as through immorality and heresies, the best people and chiefest authors perished, piety and learning diminished, and whatever of good remained, became for the most part corrupted. For although the baptism of adults was still administered, and church history from the time of Christ up to about this period, does not in the least, as far as I know, mention infant baptism, the latter nevertheless, according to other writers, more and more lifts up its head, and this with papal pollution, is confirmed by a decree, and considered not necessary to salvation.” _Chron., 5th book, page 174._

From this we may gather the reason why at times so few orthodox and good writers are found, and, hence, how it comes that in those early days, there was sometimes, for a long period, only one, or a few, who openly maintained baptism upon faith, and other wholesome articles of faith, of which we will not speak further now.

The statement, that church history, from the time of Christ up to about this time (A. D. 500), does not in the least mention infant baptism, gives rise to the grave suspicion, that the authors which appear to have written long before the year 500, were interpolated by some of their descendants who maintained infant baptism. A few instances of this kind we have already given, respecting the writings of Dionysius the Areopagite, Justin, Origen, and others.

But be this as it may, posterity must make the best of the aforesaid writings, as we also must now do; and, according to their account, infant baptism obtained at this time, and long before, in many of the (Roman) churches, though many kept aloof from it, so that even with them, it was not generally adopted until about the year 900, yea, almost to the year 1000, as we hope to show in the proper place, and as may be seen in various prominent authors.

In the mean time we have shown (which suffices us) that the fifth century was not without men who, opposing infant baptism, maintained baptism upon faith, according to the teaching of Christ, and confirmed it by doctrine and example.

NOTE.--It is stated that about A. D. 500, Clodovius and his people were baptized upon faith, or the confession of the same, by Remigius, Bishop of Rheins. _Bapt. Hist., page 435._ But he did not show himself a Christian in every respect, which we would not commend. Moreover, his two sons were baptized before his conversion as Blondus writes (_lib. 3, decade 1_, also _Bapt. Hist., page 436_), notwithstanding their mother, Clotildis was a godly, Christian woman, as is stated in _Bapt. Hist., page 435_. From this it appears that at that time, even among the Romanists, it was not a general custom to baptize infants, but that some permitted their children to attain to the years of understanding, before they were baptized; however in other places, in the Roman dominion, infant baptism was strictly observed. In the mean time the true Christians kept quiet, and practiced baptism upon faith, as has been sufficiently shown.

AN ACCOUNT OF THOSE WHO SUFFERED IN THE FIFTH CENTURY.

SUMMARY OF THE MARTYRS OF THE FIFTH CENTURY.

[First of all, mention is made of the tyrants who in the beginning of this century tyrannized over the defenseless lambs of Christ; among them are mentioned Isdigerdis, and his son Geroranes.

The bloody edict issued by the two Emperors, Honorius and Theodosius, against the so-called Anabaptists, is adduced, according to different versions, and explained.

The couplet of Prosperus, which proclaims to the candidates for baptism, that their baptism must be perfected by martyrdom, is explained.

Albanus, a pious teacher at Mentz,[116] and others, martyred.

[116] Or Mayance.

The threatenings of the Nestorian Emperor, Theodosius, against the upright teacher, Cyril of Alexandria.

The tyranny of Theodosius, Bishop of Jerusalem, against many upright people, especially towards a pious teacher of the church of Christ, whom he first caused to be scourged, and then beheaded.

Benjamin, a deacon, after suffering many torments, put to death with a knotty stick, in Persia.

The cruelty of Honoricus, the Arian King, towards certain bishops and elders who would not swear an oath, described at large, as also his destruction.

Thereupon it is shown in the margin, that about this time, in different councils held in Africa, there were made five hundred and five laws, some of them relating to infant baptism; the agitation about baptism, suppression of the same, etc.

The bloody oppression of the believers, which, it appears, occurred in the time of Fulgentius.

Two persons who denied infant baptism, condemned in a certain council at Carthage (as is shown in the margin); but we commit them to God. With this we conclude the fifth century.]

We now come to fulfill the promise we repeatedly made in the Account of Baptism in the Fifth Century, namely, that we would show that of those who were baptized according to the ordinance of Christ, and of those who defended them and their views, a number had to lose their lives on this account; and that others, who escaped death, were severely persecuted or had to suffer corporal punishment. In order to show this properly, we shall first notice the tyrants of this time, and their tyranny; and then the persons who through this tyranny were oppressed and suffered unto blood.

TOUCHING THE TYRANTS OF THIS TIME, AND THEIR TYRANNY, ACCORDING TO THE ACCOUNT CONTAINED IN THE FIFTH BOOK OF THE ONDERGANG DER TYRANNEN, FOR THE YEAR 401, PAGE 135, COL. 2.

Among all the cruel bloodhounds, and persecutors of the Christians may well be counted Isdigerdis and his son, Geroranes, who not only flayed and roasted the Christians alive, but also split reeds, and bound them, with the cut side inwards, tightly around the naked bodies of the martyrs, whom they then drew out by force, thus shockingly lacerating the bodies of the Christians. They also confined the steadfast martyrs, naked, in cells, bound them hand and foot, and then chased in a great number of rats, which, impelled by hunger, gnawed their bodies, and, in the course of time, entirely devoured them. Nevertheless, they could not, through these and similar cruelties, force many Christians to a denial of their Redeemer. All this is related in order to convey an idea of the cruel tyranny which was at this time practiced against the Christians. Compare with _Chron. Leonh., lib. 2. Will Baudart. Denckw., lib. 5. Hist. Joh. Wega, lib. 4, cap. 3. Theodoret., lib. 5, cap. 39_.

THE BLOODY EDICT ISSUED, A. D. 413, AGAINST THE SO-CALLED ANABAPTISTS, BY THE TWO EASTERN EMPERORS, THEODOSIUS AND HONORIUS.

In order to give a thorough account of this bloody edict, and this in the best possible manner, we shall present the different versions which we have found of it, word for word, and then state our own views in regard to the matter.

FIRST VERSION, ACCORDING TO THE ACCOUNT OF SEBASTIAN FRANCK, IN HIS CHRONIJK, 1563, FOL. 136, COL. 3.

“The most important matter in this transaction” he writes, “is the imperial code, which contains _cap. 1, lib. 2_, an edict issued by the Emperors Theodosius and Honorius, which reads thus: “If any minister of the Christian church is found guilty of having rebaptized any one, he, together with the person thus rebaptized, provided the latter is proved to be of such an age as to understand the crime, shall be put to death.”

SECOND VERSION, ACCORDING TO THE ANNOTATION OF MARTIN BELLIUS, IN THE TRACT, VAN DE KETTERS, EN OF MAN DE SELVE SAL VERVOLGEN, DEDICATED TO CHRISTOPHER, DUKE OF WURTEMBERG, PAGE 53.

“Since we must speak,” he writes, “of that imperial code, we will relate the following, namely, about the law contained in the first codex prohibiting rebaptism. Joined to the other, it reads thus:

_The Emperors, Honorius and Theodosius, to A. A. Antonius, the magistrate_:

If information is obtained that any one has rebaptized a servant of the Catholic [general] religion, he shall be put to death, together with the latter, who has committed a punishable crime, provided he is of an age admitting of the capability, to commit such (and has been instructed concerning the matter).”

THE ABOVE EDICT, ACCORDING TO THE ANNALS OF CARDINAL CESAR BARONIUS, IN HIS CHRONICLES, A. D. 413, NUMBER 6.

In that year, he writes, the Emperor Theodosius issued an edict against the Anabaptists, commanding that they should be put to death.

This was subsequently also quoted by the inquisitor of Leeuwærden, in his controversy with Jacques d’Auchi, in the year 1558. See _register of the 2d book, on the name Jacques_. Also, _Introduction, fol. 47, col. 2_.

These several versions of the edict of Honorius and Theodosius unanimously indicate three things: 1. That at that time, A. D. 413, there were people who were called Anabaptists. 2. That on account of this matter of rebaptizing, these people were exceedingly hated by the world, especially by the great. 3. It is shown how they were hated, namely, unto death, so that the command was given, that they should be punished with death. However, intelligent people well know, that Christ, our Savior predicted long before, that such things would befall his disciples and followers. Matt. 10:22; 24:9; Mark 13:9; Luke 21:12; John 15:19; 16:2.

Moreover, that the aforementioned people, against whom said edict was issued, were not strange, unknown, erring spirits, but such people as are also in our day styled Anabaptists; this not only the inquisitor of Leeuwærden, A. D. 1558, readily admitted, as has been shown in the proper place, but all the particulars of the last mentioned authors make it almost as clear as the sun at midday, that this is the general opinion of the Romanists. Nay, it appears that the edict of Honorius and Theodosius was carried into execution, not only A. D. 413, and in some of the subsequent years, but that it was no small cause of the last great persecution of the Anabaptists, which began about A. D. 1524, through the strong urging of the Papists, especially of their clergy, who, to all appearance, by it induced the Emperor, Charles V., to renew said edict against the Anabaptists of their time, as being an identical people, and of the same faith, with those who lived in the time of Honorius and Theodosius. At least, that many papistic magistrates put to death innumerable pious Anabaptist Christians, by virtue of said ancient edict of A. D. 413, appears with such certainty from various authors, that it cannot, with truth, be denied. Compare _Seb. Franck, fol. 136, col. 3_, with _Martin Bellius, page 53_.

Now the couplet of Prosperus was verified, namely, that baptism did indeed sanctify the true candidate in some measure, but that all this was perfected by the crown of martyrdom. This was afterwards rendered in German, by Jacob Mehrning, thus:

“_Was heylligs bringt die Tauffe schon: Solchs gants erfuellet der Martrer chron._”[117]

[117] In English this may be rendered thus:

“Sanctify, baptism will indeed; But the martyr’s crown doth all complete.”

_Bapt. Hist., 2d part, page 413, ex Prosp. in Epigramm._

He means to say, that those who were then baptized, had to expect martyrdom. We shall therefore show what persons suffered at this time for the testimony of Jesus Christ, either by virtue of the abovementioned edict, or otherwise.

ALBANUS, A PIOUS TEACHER AT MENTZ, WITH OTHERS, MARTYRED FOR THE FAITH, A. D. 424.

In A. D. 424, eleven years after the Emperors Honorius and Theodosius had issued their bloody edict against the so-called Anabaptists, a pious teacher, who, intending to spread abroad the name of Jesus Christ, and promulgate the doctrines of the holy Gospel, had come to Mentz, was lamentably slain; as were also some others. Besides other authors, P. J. Twisck describes this, with these words: “When Albanus preached Christ at Mentz, he was martyred, together with others.” _Chron., 5th book, page 149, col. 2_, from _Hist. Andr. 143_.

THE SEVERE THREATENINGS OF THE NESTORIAN EMPEROR THEODOSIUS, AGAINST THE FAITHFUL TEACHER, CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA, BECAUSE THE LATTER WOULD NOT ACCEPT THE NESTORIAN ERRORS, A. D. 429.

The Emperor Theodosius, not content with having, together with his co-emperor, Honorius, A. D. 413, threatened the aforesaid Anabaptists with death, seems to have finally been seduced so far as to endeavor to compel the orthodox believers to assent to the very absurd errors of the Nestorians. Among others, he intended to compel, as one of the chief opponents of said errors, Cyril of Alexandria, the purity and uprightness of whose faith was very conspicuous. He threatened him with a certain edict (apparently with severe punishment), if he would not desist from his views, or at least accept the doctrine of Nestorius. Of this we find the following account in the _Chronijk van den Ondergang der Tyrannen_: “Cyril, a celebrated teacher, strenuously opposed the heresy of Nestorius; but as the Emperor Theodosius, who, in many respects is greatly praised, was somewhat infected with the doctrine of Nestorius, he sent Cyril an edict, severely threatening him, if he would not assent to the doctrine of Nestorius. _Fifth book, pag. 151, col. 21_, from _Merula, fol. 352_.

THE TYRANNY OF THEODOSIUS, BISHOP OF JERUSALEM, TOWARD MANY UPRIGHT PEOPLE, BUT IN PARTICULAR, TOWARD A PIOUS TEACHER OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, WHO WAS FIRST SCOURGED AND THEN BEHEADED, A. D. 453.

Not only the Emperor Theodosius, who was a secular judge, but also one Theodosius, Bishop of Jerusalem, who ought to have been a spiritual judge, yea, a shepherd and leader of the flock of Jesus Christ, caused no small disturbance among the orthodox, well-meaning, and beloved friends of God.

Of Theodosius, the secular Judge and Emperor, we have already spoken; we now speak of Theodosius of Jerusalem, who, though only the administration of the spiritual law was committed to him, nevertheless, showed himself not less of a tyrant than the former, oppressing on account of their obedience to God, not only the souls and consciences of men, but also their bodies, even unto death. With regard to this, ancient writers furnish us among others, with the following example: That he had a certain pious minister of the church of Christ scourged and beheaded, and after his body had been dragged through the city, he caused it to be thrown before the dogs; simply because the latter, together with other pious Christians, opposed his wickedness. Compare _Merulae Tract, fol. 370_, with _P. J. Twisck, chron. 5th, book, pag. 160, col 1_.

BENJAMIN, A DEACON OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, AFTER SUFFERING MANY TORMENTS FOR THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS, PUT TO DEATH WITH A KNOTTY STICK IN PERSIA, A. D. 456.