<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Baptist History, Heritage & Distinctives – The Waldenses – Baptist Peculiarity Four – Continued – Part 8 of the Series<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n By this we learn that the Waldenses regarded infant baptism and baptismal salvation as a leading feature of Antichrist; it is, therefore, certain that they only baptized such as professed to be real saints, or children of God. We have the testimony of Evervinus, a Catholic writer of the twelfth century, that the ancient Waldenses rejected infant baptism. He wrote a letter to St. Bernard concerning the Waldenses about Cologne, in which he represents them as follows: \u201cThus they make void the priesthood of the church, and. condemn the sacraments besides baptism only; and this only in those who are come to age, who, they say, are baptized by Christ himself, whosoever be the minister of the sacraments. They do not believe infant baptism; alleging that place of the Gospel, whosoever shall believe and he baptized, shall be saved.\u201d (Allix\u2019s Churches of the Piedmont p.157)<\/p>\n\n\n\n But enough on this point; it is a point fully proved that the ancient Waldenses baptized, only those who professed to be true believers, or those who professed to be dead to sin. But did they immerse, or bury in baptism, their converts? It is conceded by historians that immersion was the prevailing practice of all denominations which professed Christianity down to the thirteenth century. The exceptions to this practice were, that in cases of sickness the Catholics performed what has been called \u201cclinic baptism\u201d by effusion; but they did not plead Scripture authority for this departure from apostolic practice; they only pleaded necessity. But as the Waldenses adhered to the Scriptures, rejecting all the traditions of men, they did not adopt this innovation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And, according to their doctrine, there was no necessity for clinic baptism; for they rejected baptismal salvation, which gave rise to the custom of the baptism of the sick to save them from the torments of hell. It is admitted by candid historians and learned Pedobaptists that sprinkling or pouring is a Romish tradition, and as the Waldenses regarded these traditions with abhorrence, they, therefore, rejected the traditions of sprinkling and pouring instead of baptism. Even those societies which adopted the practice of infant baptism continued the ancient practice of immersion; for they immersed their infants, mostly with three dips.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dr. Wall, the celebrated Pedobaptist historian, speaking of the introduction of pouring and sprinkling, remarks: “And though the English received not this custom till after the decay of popery, yet they have since received it from such neighboring nations as had begun it in the times of the Pope’s power. But all other Christians in the world, who never owned the Pope’s usurped power, do, and ever did, dip their infants in the ordinary use.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Again, in speaking of the administration of baptism among the ancients. Dr. Wall says: “Their general and ordinary way was to baptize by immersion, or dipping the person, whether it were an infant or grown man or woman, into the water\u2026\u2026.\u201d (History of Infant Baptism, Vol. 1, p. 706<\/p>\n\n\n\n Peculiarity Four Continues on Tuesday, February 25<\/p>\n\n\n\n Presented by Thomas E. Kresal from: \u201cBaptist Succession\u201d by D.B. Ray, 1871 Edition, pg. 358-59<\/p>\n\n\n\n