Chapter XXXII: Conclusion: Of the Matters Here Related (6)

He states it still more clearly in _Lib. de Spectaculis, cap. 4_: “When we, having gone into the water, confess the Christian faith upon the words of his law, we testify with our mouth, that we have renounced the devil, his pomp, and his angels.”

And that this may be practiced and maintained in truth, he gives, to the candidates for baptism this instruction (_Lib. de Baptismo, cap. 20_): “Those who are to be baptized, must supplicate with much praying, fasting, bending of the knee, and watching, confessing all their former sins, so that they may show forth John’s baptism.” “They were baptized,” says he, “confessing their sins.” Matt. 3:6.

Then he shows what baptism is, and what it signifies; from which we can clearly see that at least in his estimation infant-baptism was not authorized. He says: “The washing of water is a seal of the faith; which faith begins with, and is known by the penitence of the believer. We are not washed, in order that we may cease to sin; but because we have ceased, and are washed in heart, for this is the first immersion of him that hears.”[95] _Lib. de Pœnitentia, cap. 6._ Also, _J. du Bois, Seckerheyd van, etc._, printed A. D. 1648, _page 47_.

[95] Tertullian here speaks of repentance and regeneration, showing
how that the heart must be changed and cleansed with the “_washing
of water by the word_,” and then says: “for this is the first
immersion (_indoopinge_) of him that hears,” by which he evidently
means to show that this spiritual change of the heart is _first_ in
importance. Karl Tauchnitz in his Dutch--German Dictionary gives
the definition of _Indoopen: Einweihen_, to consecrate or initiate,
of which baptism is also a signification. In this sense we might
say: This is the first baptism, or the first consecration, or the
most important work of him that hears, or of him that would be
saved.--_The Publishers._

If you wish to learn still more of the views of Tertullian concerning baptism as instituted by Christ, read _lib. de Præscript, adversus Hæreticos, cap. 36_, cited by _H. Montanus, in Nietigh., page 23_, and by _J. du Bois_ (although he misinterprets this passage), _Contra Montanum, page 44_, where Tertullian writes thus: “Well, then, ye who would inquire more fully into the matter of your salvation, take a view of the apostolic churches, in which the chairs of the apostles are still occupied by their successors, and where their own authentic epistles are still read, sounding their voices, and calling up their very forms. If Achaia is near you, there is Corinth; are you not far from Macedonia, there is Philippi, and there Thessalonica; can you come into Asia, there is Ephesus; but are you near Italy, there is Rome. Let us see, what she (namely the church there) has said, what she has taught, and in what she has agreed with the African churches. She recognizes one God, the Creator of all things, and Christ Jesus from the virgin Mary, the Son of God the Creator, and the resurrection of the flesh; she unites the law and the prophets with the evangelical and apostolical writings, and therefrom drinks this faith, which she seals with water, clothes with the Holy Ghost, feeds with the eucharist, or Lord’s Supper, and confirms by martyrdom; and receives no one contrary to this institution.” Thus far, _Tertullian_.

To this we say: “It is indeed true, that he here speaks against the errors of Valentinus, Marcion, and the like; but since this occasions him to say, that all the churches which he mentions, especially the one at Rome, in which the apostolic doctrine was still sounded at that time, sealed the faith, which he opposes to said errors, with water, and that they received no one contrary to this institution; any one can clearly see, that all the above named churches administered baptism at that time to adults, who could drink that faith from the evangelical and apostolical writings; and not this only, but could also partake of it by the use of the eucharist, and confirm it by martyrdom, which are things that children cannot do.” _Ergo._

TERTULLIAN’S VIEWS CONCERNING DIFFERENT OTHER MATTERS, ACCORDING TO THE ACCOUNT OF P. J. TWISCK.

“Tertullian,” says Twisck, “exhorts Christian women, in a book written to his wife, not to enter into marriage relations with the heathen, saying that it is impossible for them to live long in peace and friendship. He says: ‘What must the heathen husband think, when he sees, or hears it said that his wife kisses on the cheek the first Christian whom she happens to meet?’”

“Again, In a book on patience, when speaking of the apostates and of withdrawing from them, he says that patience governs all manner of salutary doctrines, and remarks: ‘What wonder then, that it also serves to repentance to those who are wont to come to the help of the apostate, whether it be man or wife, when separated one from another, nevertheless by such things as are lawful, to be led to maintain their widow or widowerhood. It is patience that waits for repentance, hopes for it and exhorts to it those who would yet at some time attain to salvation. How great the benefit it confers upon both--the one it preserves from adultery, the other it reforms.’[96] Again he says: ‘Do you think that it is hard for a Christian to suffer? He would rather die himself, than to kill others; and if you smite a Christian, he glories in it.’”

[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.’”

Then he shows how holy, divine, and blessed a thing it is, to have joined one’s self by baptism to the nobility of Christ, that is, to his church. It is truly wonderful, how affectionately, sweetly, and comfortingly he addresses them, saying: “You have now given in your names to the nobility of Christ, and have received the bridal torches, the desire for the kingdom of heaven, the good purpose, hope, etc.” And, _cap. 38_, he thus addresses the baptized: “Now the odor of salvation is on you, O ye enlightened! Gather you heavenly flowers, to make heavenly crowns of them. Now, now! the odor of the Holy Spirit smells sweetly on you. You have been at the gate of the King’s palace. Would to God, that you were already led before the King himself. The blossoms have now appeared on the trees; but, oh! that the fruit also were conceived!” _Jac. Mehrn. Baptism. Hist. on the third century, page 320._

How could it be possible that Cyril of Jerusalem should have taught differently concerning baptism, than the Anabaptists to-day teach, namely, that it must be accompanied by faith and repentance; seeing he, as has been shown, employs throughout such manner of speech as cannot be applied otherwise than to this baptism, and by no means to infant baptism.

For instance, in the first passage he admonishes the catechumens who had spent several years in voluptuousness, not to think it grievous, to do penance before baptism for forty days; which well accords with what was said to those who were not prepared for baptism. Matt. 3:7,8.

This he confirms in the five subsequent passages, using these arguments: That they must not neglect to repent, so that the grace of baptism may not be withheld from them. Again, that they would not have to hear it said to them, as the unprepared guest in the Gospel: ‘Friend, how camest thou in hither?’ Again, that they, being called to the marriage of the Lamb, might be found worthy. Again, that to this end they should hear the voice of the prophet, that saith: “Wash ye, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings.”

In the sixth passage he admonishes the newly baptized: As you have put off the old garments (that is, forsaken the old life) and put on those that are according to the Spirit (that is, put on a new life), you shall henceforth always walk in white garments, that is, henceforth you shall live a holy life and pay unto God your vows made unto him when you were baptized. This is certainly a scriptural exposition, and is not obscurely expressed in Cyril’s words.

We now come to the seventh or last passage, of which we shall say but little, as it contains not a single word which does not clearly indicate that he speaks of the baptism of the believers and penitent; for he there says to the baptized, that being enlightened they now had on them the odor of salvation, and admonishes them, to gather heavenly flowers with which to make heavenly crowns, adding this wish: “The blossoms have now appeared on the trees; but oh! that also the fruit were conceived!”

Any one with only a little understanding can easily see that these words of Cyril do not pertain to infants, and that he therefore does not speak to infants or of infant baptism, but is speaking to reasonable persons, and of the baptism that is administered to such. Moreover, from his having previously mentioned the catechumens, it is evident that it was customary at that time in the church where he was teacher, first to instruct the youth in the faith, and then, when they had accepted it, to baptize them upon confession of it. Without contradiction, it was a scriptural and holy custom, which proceeded not from human reason, like infant baptism, but from the mind of Christ and the understanding of the holy apostles. With this we take our leave from Cyril.

_A. D. 300._--Arnobius, an old teacher says (in _Psalms 146_): “You are not first baptized, and then apprehend the faith, and rejoice in it; but when you are about to be baptized, you state before the teacher your perfect willingness, and make your confession with your own mouth.” _P. J. Twisck, Chron., 3d book, page 82, col. 1, 2_, from _Grond. Bew., letter B_.

These words of Arnobius are very excellent, and show that at his time they did not first baptize, and then apprehend faith; but that the one to be baptized had to state his willingness before baptism, and then to make confession of faith with his own mouth. However, we shall speak more fully of Arnobius in the succeeding century.

_Same year as above._--It is recorded that at this time there were several persons who had separated from the catholic[99] (Roman) church, namely: Dadoes, Sabas, Adelphius, Hermas and Simeones, who were accused of heresy by the Roman church, and, among other things, were charged with holding erroneous views concerning the divine meat (that is, the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper), and of baptism (that is, infant baptism). As regards the divine meat they were charged with holding the opinion, that it neither profited nor injured; that is, that the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper had no intrinsic virtue or value; and of baptism it was said that they maintained, that those baptized were not benefited by baptism, but that fervent prayer alone must expel the indwelling Satan.

[99] Used in the sense of general.

Concerning these and other matters with which they were charged, whether justly or unjustly, see _Hist. Eccles. Tripart., lib. 7, cap. 11. S. Fr., Chron. Rom. Kett._, printed A. D. 1563, _fol. 96, letter E, under the name Eraclit. Epulius_.

Hence, when they said that those baptized were not benefited by baptism, they thereby sufficiently rejected infant-baptism, since the Roman church in general recognized no other than infant baptism. That this rejection of baptism, or deeming it useless, has respect to infant baptism, is clearly evident from what is added, namely, that they held that not baptism, but fervent prayer must expel the indwelling Satan; for those of the Roman church entertained the contrary view, namely, that Satan must certainly be expelled from the infants by baptism. However, we let every one judge for himself in this matter.

Jacob Mehrning in concluding the third century, says: “All these are beautiful reminders, which were administered to the catechumens before as well as after baptism, and which can certainly not have place with infants. And thus it has been shown in this, the third chapter, that in these three centuries infant baptism cannot be proven by a single consistent and authentic testimony from the fathers and church historians.” _Baptism. Hist., pp. 320 and 321._

But this is further elucidated by the remark of P. J. Twisck, who, quite at the close of the third century, says: “Although infant baptism had been originated by some individuals, or by the church (that is, the Roman), as they themselves state, there were, nevertheless, many who devoutly received baptism upon faith and with a penitent life.” _Chron., 3d book, conclusion, pages 83 and 84._

With this we close our account of baptism as practiced in the third century, and proceed to the martyrs who suffered during this same time for the truth and their upright faith.

AN ACCOUNT OF THE PIOUS MARTYRS AND WITNESSES OF JESUS CHRIST WHO SUFFERED IN THE THIRD CENTURY.

SUMMARY OF THE MARTYRS OF THE THIRD CENTURY.

[There never was a time in the church of Jesus Christ, in which so many and great tyrants arose to destroy and extirpate the people of God, as in this century; for scarcely had one ceased, when another began; excepting a short cessation under the Emperors Caracalla and Geta.

The principal ones of those who tyrannized over, and put to death, the believers, were Severus, Maximinus, Decius, Valerianus, Gallienus, and Aurelianus, who, though the world hailed them as “Gracious Emperors,” were in deed nothing less than unmerciful, cruel, and bloodthirsty tyrants.

Under Severus suffered: Rutulius, Manilius, Perpetua, Felicitas, Leonides, five godfearing disciples of Origen, and two of his female disciples, also Origen himself, and Basilides.

Under Maximinus suffered, in different meeting-places, several thousand Christians, besides about seventy others.

Under Decius suffered: Cointha, Apollonia, an old man called Julianus, with his companion Eunus, Amonaria, Mercuria, Dionysia, Heron, Ater, Isidoris, a youth of fifteen years, Nemesius, Babylas, the three youths, Urbanus, Philidianus, and Epilonius, also Maximus, Origenes.

Under Valerianus and Gallienus suffered: Dionysius, Fructuosus, Augurius, Eulogius, Marinus, the three peasants who sought heavenly crowns, namely, Priscus, Malchus, and Alexander, and also, Philippus, Privatus, Florentinus and Pontius.

Under Aurelian suffered, and were put to death: Privatus of Gevauldan, Mamas, a shepherd and Symphorianus.

Under Diocletian (in the preparatory period of his persecutions) were miserably put to death: The three brothers, Claudius, Asterius, and Neon; also Donuina, and Theonilla, Zenobius with his sister Zenobia, the three dear friends Tharacus, Probus and Andronicus. That all these suffered, and shed their blood for the name of Jesus Christ, is abundantly testified in the following account.]

The third century began with the fifth persecution of the Christians, hence we shall also begin with the same and show in what a distressing condition the church of God was during those times.

OF THE FIFTH PERSECUTION OF THE CHRISTIANS, UNDER THE EMPEROR L. SEPTIMUS SEVERUS, COMMENCED ABOUT THE YEAR 201.

Touching the cause which induced Severus to persecute and put to death the Christians, ancient authors differ. Some write that Severus was instigated to kill and persecute the Christians, in the tenth year of his reign, by Philip, the Governor of Egypt. Others think that in the time of Severus there were many cruel and bloodthirsty governors in the provinces of the Romans; as Lethus and Aquila, at Alexandria, in Egypt; Saturninus and Scapula, at Carthage, in Africa; Claudius Herminianus, in Cappadocia; Cecilius Capella, at Byzanthium; who, at Rome, as well as elsewhere, were most pernicious firebrands in these persecutions, inasmuch as they instigated the Emperor and the Roman Senate against the Christians, in order that through this means they might seize on the possessions of the Christians.

It is stated, that to this persecution and slaying of the Christians, contributed at that time, not a little, some jurists, who, through false interpretations of the Roman laws, or at least through their self-devised decrees, ruled nearly the whole Empire; as Emelius, Papinianus, Ulpianus, Paulus, Messius, Martianus, Ruftinus, Mauritianus, Tryphonius, Menander, Macer, Callistratus, Florentinus, Hermogenes, Saturminus, Modestinus, Furius and Anthianus.

It was one of these jurists, namely Ulpianus, one of the chief senators, next to Papianus, who hunted up and collected the bloody edicts of the former tyrants, in order that the Emperors, incited thereby, might institute new persecutions against the Christians. See concerning this, _A. Mell. Hist., fol. 52, col. 4_, from _Euseb., lib. 6, cap. 1, 2_, and _Chron. Hieron. Catal. in Origen_. Also, _Oros., lib. 7, cap. 11, 18_. Also, _Baron._, A. D. 204. Also, _Dio. Hist. Rom., lib. 51_. Also, _Tert. ad. Scap., cap. 1–3_, _Tertul. de Fuga, cap. 5, ex Libris Jurist._ Also, _Spart. Caracal. and Sever._ Also, _Lactant., lib. 5. Just., cap. 11, 12, 19._

Very credibly, however, is the cause of this persecution accounted for in the _Introduction to the Martyrs Mirror, Ed. 1631, fol. 38, col. 2, from Baronius_. The words are as follows: “In the year 201 was commenced the fifth persecution of the Christians, under the Emperor Severus, in the seventh year of his reign. It originated thus: The emperor having come forth victorious from a civil war, and the Christians having remained passive with regard to this, not manifesting any signs of joy by way of celebrating, hanging out of garlands, and other tokens of triumph, according to the manner of the heathen; the latter, out of envy, accused the Christians of despising and hating the Emperor; and the more so, because they would not swear by the Emperor’s fortune. Besides this, they reported of the Christians, that in their evening assemblies they extinguished the lights, and then allowed themselves improper intercourse with each other, and in this manner it came that every one hated the Christians.” _See in the above citations._ Others spread the report that the Christians were child-murderers and eaters of human flesh, that is, people who slew their children and ate them; also, that they honored the head of an ass as their god; worshiped the sun, and other like palpable and wicked falsehoods. Compare _J. Gys. Hist., fol. 18, col. 2, for the year 201, ex Tertullian ad Scapulam_ and in _Apol. Cypr. de Bono Pascient._ Also, _P. J. Twisck, Chron. 2d book, for the year 124, page 51, col. 2_.

However, though these false accusations were brought against the Christians, their death was nevertheless owing entirely to the testimony and confession of Jesus Christ--that he was the Son of God, and the Savior of the human family.

The most violent persecution of this time, according to Eusebius and Tertullian, was in Egypt and Africa. From Egypt the Christians were brought in great multitudes to Alexandria, where they were put to death in manifold ways, for the name of Christ. Among the principal martyrs of this time were the following:

RUTILIUS, AFTER MANY ESCAPES, TORN ASUNDER, AND THEN BURNT, FOR THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS CHRIST, ABOUT THE YEAR 210.

“Rutilius, the holy martyr,” says Tertullian, “after having so often escaped persecution by fleeing from one place to another, and having purchased his freedom, as he supposed, from the danger of death, and after having provided himself with all safe-conduct, and, feeling easy, and free from anxiety, was nevertheless unexpectedly apprehended, and brought before the President, yea, torn asunder with manifold torments, and then committed to the fire; and thus, thanking the mercy of God for it, he endured the suffering which he had sought to escape.” “This Rutilius was martyred somewhere in Africa,” writes _A. Mellinus, 1st book of the Hist., fol. 55, col. 1_, from _Tertullian. de Fuga, in Persecutione, cap. 5_, at the end.

MAVILUS, A PIOUS CHRISTIAN OF ADRUMELEN, TORN BY THE WILD BEASTS, AT CARTHAGE, ABOUT THE YEAR 201.

Tertullian writes a very candid admonition and warning concerning the impending wrath of God over all the persecutors of the Christians, to Scapula, the Governor of Carthage, who, having succeeded in the place of Vigellius Saturninus (who, on account of the persecution he had exercised against the Christians, had been struck with blindness, through the righteous judgment of God), also followed in his footsteps as regards cruelty. For at his accession to the Governorship, he immediately very cruelly sentenced Mavilus, a very pious Christian of Adrumelen, a city in Africa, to be torn by the beasts; who, though through a severe death, attained to a blessed end. Immediately after his death great plagues were sent by the Lord over the city of Carthage, where the Governor resided; as, great rains, high floods, terrible thunders, fiery signs in the air, etc. _Idem Ibidem, col. 3, ex Tertullian. ad Scapulam, cap. 3._

PERPETUA AND FELICITAS, OF TUBURBI IN MAURITANIA, AND OTHERS, VIOLENTLY PUT TO DEATH, FOR THE FAITH OF THE SON OF GOD, ABOUT THE YEAR 201.

Perpetua and Felicitas were two very pious and honorable Christian women, at Tuburbi, a city in Mauritania, a province of Africa. Both were very untimely apprehended, to suffer for the name of Christ, as Felicitas was very far advanced in pregnancy, and Perpetua had recently given birth to a child, which she was nursing. But this did not make them faint-hearted, nor so surprise them that they forsook Christ, nor did it prevent them from going on in the way of godliness; but they remained equally faithful disciples of Christ, and became steadfast martyrs.

According to the Roman laws, they waited with the pregnant woman, until she was delivered, before they sentenced her and put her to death. When the pains of labor seized her in prison, and she cried aloud for fear and anguish, the jailer said to her: “Thou art so much afraid and distressed now, and criest aloud for pain; how then wilt thou behave, when, to-morrow, or the day after, thou wilt be led to death?” Felicitas replied thus: “Now I suffer as a poor woman the punishment which God on account of sin has laid upon the female sex; but to-morrow I shall suffer as a Christian woman for the faith and the confession of Jesus Christ.” By these words she sufficiently indicated that she had firmly and immovably founded her faith upon Christ, who never forsakes his own, even though they be in the midst of the fire, and are consumed, God also specially strengthened her, that she might be able to endure her sufferings. With reference to this, Tertullian says: “Perpetua, the very strong and steadfast martyr, had a revelation or vision of the heavenly paradise, on the day of her suffering, in the which she saw none but her fellow-martyrs. And why no others? Because the fiery sword which guards the door of paradise gives way to none but those who die for Christ.”

In the meantime these two pious heroines of Jesus Christ were martyred, that is, they died a violent death, for the name of their Savior; for which they will afterwards be crowned with the unfading wreath of immortality, as a triumph over the foes they overcame, namely, the cruelties and pains of death.

The names of their fellow-martyrs are: Revocatus, Satyrus, Saturninus, and Serundulus. It is supposed that the last-mentioned one of these died in prison from extreme hardship, but that the others were all thrown before the wild beasts, such as, bulls, lions, bears, leopards, etc., to be torn by them. Thus these exchanged their dear lives for death, for Christ’s sake. _Idem., fol. 26, col. 3, 4, ex August. in Psal. 74, and de Tempore Barbarico, cap. 5, Beda Usuard. Ado Martirol. Rom. 7. Martii._ Also, _l. Pregnatis de Pen_. Also, _in Antiquo Lectionario_. Also, _Tertull. de anima, cap. 5_. That the dead bodies of the two aforementioned women were brought to Carthage, and were buried there is testified to by _Victor Uticensis, Pers. Vandal., lib. 1_.

LEONIDES, THE FATHER OF ORIGEN, BEHEADED AT ALEXANDRIA, IN EGYPT, FOR THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS CHRIST, ABOUT THE YEAR 202.

Leonides, the father of Origen, was, according to the testimony of Suidas, a bishop of the church of Christ, and also became a martyr, at Alexandria in Egypt. His imprisonment, suffering, and death occurred on this wise: When from nearly all the cities and villages of Egypt and Thebes, Christian champions, that is, martyrs, were brought, to fight and suffer for the name of Jesus Christ, Leonides was also one of those who were brought prisoners to Alexandria, the capital of Egypt.

When he had been imprisoned for some time, his son Origen, then but seventeen years old, sent him a very comforting letter, in which he exhorted him to constancy, writing, among other things: “Be strong in the Lord, my father, and endure valiantly the suffering which awaits thee. Let not regard for us induce thee to do otherwise.” He means to say: O father! do not grieve too much for thy wife, our dear mother, or for us, thy seven beloved children, of whom I am the oldest; or become so wavering, that through desire to usward thou shouldest forsake thy faithful God and Savior.” This was in brief the import of the letter which Origen wrote to his father. It acted as a healing medicine in the wounds of the sorrowful mind of his father, so that he resolved to patiently suffer death for the honor of his Savior. He was finally sentenced to be beheaded, and all his property was confiscated for the treasury of the Roman Empire. This happened in the time of Emperor Severus, about the year 201. Compare _Euseb., lib. 6, cap. 2_, with _Abr. Mell., 1st book of the Hist., fol. 57, col. 1, ex Hieron. Catal. in Orig._ Also, _P. J. Twisck, Chron., 2d book, for the year 195, page 51, col. 2_. Also, _Introduction to the Martyrs Mirror, edition 1631, fol. 38, col. 2_. Also, _Joh. Gys. Hist. Mart., edition 1657, fol. 3_.

FIVE OF THE DISCIPLES OF ORIGEN, NAMELY, PLUTARCH, HERACLIDES, HERO, AND TWO OTHER MEN, BOTH CALLED SERENUS, PUT TO DEATH FOR THE FAITH, AT ALEXANDRIA IN EGYPT, ABOUT THE YEAR 203.

At this time, Origen, though but eighteen years old, was a teacher of the faith, at Alexandria, in Egypt, where he taught with such excellence, not only to begin with Christ, but also to die with him, that many of his disciples laid down their lives for the truth of Christ. Among these are mentioned by name, Plutarch, Heraclides, Hero, and two other men, both called Serenus. Their suffering and death happened in this manner: Origen, the teacher of these pious people, was in the habit of going into the prison to the martyrs who suffered for the name of Jesus Christ, to strengthen them in the faith. Yea, even when they had already received their sentence of death, and were making their last defense, he stood by them, and, at parting, gave them the kiss of peace, as a token of his sincere love.

When Plutarch, his beloved disciple, was led forth to death, he, according to his custom, comforted him, for which the raging multitude would have killed him, had not divine Providence protected him. This having happened, Plutarch was put to death for the name of Jesus Christ, and died as a martyr.

After the death of Plutarch, the first of the two men named Serenus, was brought forth and burned. His faith, as is stated, was tried with fire, notwithstanding he was still a catechumen, that is, one who, though he had been instructed, had not yet received baptism.

The third of these martyrs is called Heraclides, and of him the same is stated that is recorded of Serenus, concerning his faith, namely, that he too was still under instruction, and had not yet been baptized, but was preparing for it. And thus he sealed his faith not with water, but with his blood. He was beheaded with the ax.

The fourth that was put to death for the same faith, was Hero, who is called a novice in the faith, that is one who had only lately accepted the faith with baptism. Having commended his soul into the hands of God, he was likewise beheaded with the ax.

Besides these four martyrs, there is mentioned a fifth, who was the second of the aforementioned men named Serenus. Refusing to apostatize, he, after many severe torments, was beheaded, like the lastmentioned two; and thus attained to a blessed end, together with his slain fellow-brethren. Compare _Euseb., lib. 6, cap. 4_, with _Abr. Mell., 1st book, fol. 57, col. 2, 3_. Also, _Joh. Gys. Hist., fol. 18, col. 3_, after Leonides, the father of Origen. Also, _Introduction, fol. 39, col. 1, from Eusebius_.

TWO FEMALE DISCIPLES OF ORIGEN, NAMELY, RHAIS AND MARCELLA, BURNED ALIVE AT ALEXANDRIA, FOR THE FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST, ABOUT THE YEAR 204.

Among the disciples of Origen, who became martyrs, there are also mentioned several women as faithful martyrs. However, we shall only refer to two of these, one called Rhais, the other Marcella, who suffered their faith and lives to be tried with fire, like gold that is refined.

Rhais was a catechumen, that is, one that was receiving instruction preparatory to baptism, and hence, had not yet sealed her faith with water; however, as Origen himself declares, she was baptized with fire, that is, burned alive.