An Account of the Holy Baptism in the Thirteenth Century

[The thirteenth century begins with the thirteenth and last Centuria, with which the Magdeburg Centuriators closed their Ecclesiastical History; and it is, as it were, a mournful farewell song, because of the pitiful desolation the Pope of Rome brought upon the worship of God. Several Roman superstitions are mentioned, which were commanded as solemnly as the Word of God, and are called the baptism of necessity, the baptism by women, by heretics, and so on; also, how to baptize a child that is in danger of death.

Some strange passages from Thomas Aquinas concerning infant baptism; added to these, the decree of the bishops of Nemansa on how to deal with a child about whom there may be doubt whether it was baptized rightly; also the formula of words the priest is to use over the child. An explanation that all this was done to win respect for infant baptism among the common people.

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

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

The ancient Waldenses appear again, in the year 1218, and, though excommunicated by the pope in the bull of the Lord's Supper, declare against the swearing of oaths, the taking of the life of evildoers, the faith of the Roman church, ungodly priests, and the pope.

A detailed account that these people, in the year 1230, were so numerous that a man traveling from his own country to Milan could lodge every night with someone of his own persuasion.

The increase of the Waldenses in France and Flanders is stated again for the year 1238.

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

Thirty-eight years afterward, namely, in the year 1280, it is shown that their doctrine had reached not only Lombardy, but even Sicily; several articles of their doctrine are described in full.

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

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

Conclusion, being Jacob Mehrning's reply to Mellinus concerning baptism.]

This is the century, writes Jacob Mehrning, with which the Magdeburg Centuriators closed their church history, and so on. Concerning this time they write in the preface as follows: “This is the disastrous time in which the Roman pope raised his might to the highest in the churches of the West, and the Turk his power in the East; and then the divine and pure doctrine was most abominably corrupted in every respect.

Indeed, the ground of doctrine, and all outward ceremonies, as well as all points of doctrine — all of these, without exception, the Pope of Rome would have under his control; and from this such blindness and darkness arose among men that nearly all of them took the yoke upon themselves, submitting whatever they said or wrote with more fear to the judgment of the pope than to that of God Himself, or of His church. Rules were established by which all disputed articles were to be decided and judged; namely, the corrupted writings of the fathers, and the decrees or resolutions of councils. The Word of God lost its honor, dignity and credit altogether; indeed, from then on it was accepted only so far as the opinion of the fathers and the councils allowed. Moreover, the Word of God was no longer explained from the Holy Scriptures, but according to the notions of their own imagination, and so on. Besides this, too much was conceded to the heathen subtleties of Aristotle; indeed, with such folly that the obscure writings of this heathen were brought into the schools, carried into the pulpit, and mixed with the articles of faith, and so on. Jac. Mehrn. Bapt. Hist., page 717, from Cent. Magd. 13, chapter 13. [n422-1]

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

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

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

The same purpose is served by what is brought forward in Cent. Magd. 13, chapter 6, folio 242, from the above-mentioned synodal book of the bishops of Nemansa: “But,” they say, “if a child, in a case of necessity, has been baptized by a layman according to the form prescribed, we command that the said child, if it survives, be brought as soon as possible to the priest, who shall carefully examine how it was baptized; and if he finds that the prescribed form was not rightly observed, he shall baptize the child (again) according to the form of the church. But if he doubts whether it was rightly baptized or not — since perhaps the baptizer did not properly consider the words he spoke in baptism, or because the bystanders did not agree about this, or because there is no certainty whether it was baptized or not — the priest shall baptize it with these words: ‘If you are baptized, I do not baptize you again; but if you are not baptized, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ In such doubtful cases, however, one witness is enough when more cannot be had.” Bapt. Hist., page 728.

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