Bye Paths in Baptist History JJ Goadby Part 4 Opposition to infant baptism
Jim Curran to Baptist Church History
Bye Paths in Baptist History JJ Goadby Part 4 Opposition to infant baptism
We recently looked at in part three at the passage in Bye-Paths where the Romanist Augustine (Austin in many records and not to be confused with Augustine of Hippo) had confronted the Welsh Baptists. One of the primary issues was in the observance of Baptism. The Romanists tended to use whatever method was handy at this point but primarily used sprinkling. As we saw Austin would actually concede to probably what he considered custom and immersed. But there were much greater issues. One was that the Romanists used a trine immersion- baptizing three times (incorrect both in mode and method- Christ was only buried once) The other two issued intertwined through time were purpose and subject. Because the Romanists believed that baptism was salvational they also changed the subject to that of infants.
Goadby notes “Perhaps the mode of baptism would have been the only question raised by the words of Bede, if D’Anvers had not pointed out that, in the translation of Bede’s account given by Pabyan, the second condition of agreement laid down by Austin to the Welsh was this : “That ye given Christendom to children” D’Anvers therefore concluded that Austin wished to force infant baptism upon the Welsh, and this was evidently Fabyan’s opinion. Many writers since the days of D’Anvers have followed in his wake ; but, in our judgment, none have succeeded in making more than probable the early Baptist reputation of the Welsh people at the time of the brave old Deynoch and the imperious and bigoted Austin.”
“The fourth trace we have in English history of the opposition of the people to infant baptism, is in The Law of Ina. Towards the close of the Seventh Century, Ina, a Saxon prince, endeavoured to settle the baptism question in a very summary manner. He enacted a law by which all infants, within thirty days of their birth, should be baptized. For any violation of this enactment the penalties were unusually severe. A fine of £30 in our money ($3550 today figuring from Goadby’s calculation in his time) was imposed upon the parents who did not comply; and in the event of the child dying unbaptized, their whole personal estate was forfeited. People who had thus to be compelled to have their infants baptized were no great sticklers for its observance.
The three following centuries were religiously as dreary in England as in other countries. They have been rightly called “the dark ages.” During this period of gloom, Europe had still its own witnesses to the truth. Passing under different names—Paulicians, Vaudois or Waldenses, Albigenses, Beren-garians, Arnoldists—these godly men kept alive some glimmer of light amidst all this darkness. There were many among them who were opponents of infant baptism. About the Eleventh Century they rapidly multiplied on the Continent, and in the following century came over to England in great numbers. We discover them by Lanfranc’s Opposition to the English Waldenses. The simplicity of their lives (so different from the pomp and corruption of the Romish clergy of that period), and the purity of their doctrine, led to the rapid increase of their adherents in all parts of the country. Not only were their sentiments warmly adopted by the humbler classes, but also by many of the nobility and gentry of the chief towns and villages. The priests became alarmed, and preyed on the fears of William the Conqueror. It was presently enacted by that energetic Sovereign “that those who denied the Pope should not trade with his subjects.” Nor was this all. The able and zealous Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, sought to check the progress of their opinions by publishing a book in opposition to the views held by Berengar and the Waldenses. In this treatise he roundly asserts that these sectaries, “by denying infant-baptism, oppose the general doctrine and universal consent of the Church.” It is not on record, so far as we know, that these Waldenses or Berengarians, suffered any direct persecution from William the Conqueror and Lanfranc, although it is hardly probable that the act of William was allowed to remain a dead letter, or that Lanfranc contented himself with hurling words at their heads, if he had it in his power to use harder weapons.”
(As a note- The fact that such laws were written indicates that there was opposition to infant baptism and indeed more than just isolated occurrences)
Joseph Jackson Goadby. Bye-paths in Baptist history (Kindle Locations 251-279).
Recent Comments