Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

landmarkbaptist.org
from landmarkbaptist.org More from this publisher
09.02.2013 Views

Though the charge that the Albigenses rejected marriage, baptism and the supper, has been refuted in page 119, refuting the same charge against them under the name Paulicians, the reader will notice that these charges are, incidentally, farther refuted in the following. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of them: “The statement that they rejected marriage, often made by Roman Catholics, has probably no other foundation in fact than that they denied marriage as a sacrament; and many other statements of their doctrines must be received at least with suspicion, as coming from prejudiced and implacable opponents.” f265 Alanus, speaking of the Albigenses, says: “They rejected infant baptism. … It does not appear that they rejected either of the sacraments.” f266 Collier says: “They refused to own infant baptism.” f266 Brockett says: “Nothing is said by Hoveden of their rejection of the sacraments of baptism and the eucharist, which would certainly have been mentioned by so careful a writer as Hoveden, had it existed. Indeed, his strongest objection to them was their refusal to take an oath.” f266 Favin, a historian, is quoted as saying: “The Albigenses do esteem the baptizing of infants superstitious.” Izam, the Troubadour, a Dominican persecutor of these heretics, says: “They admitted another baptism.” f267 Chassanion is quoted as saying: “I cannot deny that the Albigenses, for the greater part, were opposed to infant baptism; the truth is, they did not reject the sacraments as useless, but only as unnecessary to infants.” They had no Campbellism in them. As Armitage observes: “They rejected the Romish church and esteemed the New Testament above all its traditions and ceremonies. They did not take oaths, nor believe in baptismal regeneration; but they were ascetic and pure in their lives; they also exalted celibacy.” f268 Their encouraging celibacy, as they believed in marriage, was probably for the reason that Paul encouraged it temporarily, be-cause of persecution being harder to endure in families than when single. f269 As refusing to take oaths was a practice of many of these ancient Baptists, I here stop to say: While that matter with Baptists is a matter of little importance, yet I believe they were, probably, nearer right than we are; for, while by “swear not at all” our Savior alluded to only profanity, yet, as Archbishop Whately observes, I believe that men who will tell a lie will swear one as readily, once the penalty is out of the way; hence, instead of taking oath annex the penalty of swearing a lie to telling it in court. In church government the Albigenses were Baptists. A historian says: “Their bards or pastors were every one of them heads of their churches, but they acted

on nothing without the consent of the people and the clergy,” i.e., the ministers who had charge of no church. “Deacons expounded the gospels, distributed the Lord’s supper, baptized, and sometimes had the oversight of churches, visited the sick and took care of the temporalities of the church.” Chr. Schmidt says: “Their ritual and ecclesiastical organization were exceedingly simple.” f270 This was so much the case that the Romish church, not seeing any church in so simple an organization, thought they had no churches, and Prof. Schmidt has, thereby, been mislead into the same conclusion. In Chap. XI — noticing them as Paulicians — they are clearly proved to have been, in church government, Baptist. The Albigenses were pure in their lives and a zealous people in good works. Carl Schmidt says of them: “Their severe moral demands made impression because the example of their preachers corresponded with their words. … In a short time the Albigenses had congregations with schools and charitable institutions of their own. … The Roman Catholic church, so far as it still could be said to exist in the country, had become an object of contempt and derision. This state of affairs, of course, caused great alarm in Rome.” f271 Thus, “the Albigensian heresy,” as Lord Macaulay observes, brought about the civilization, the literature, the national existence … of the most opulent and enlightened part of the great European family.” f272

Though the charge that the Albigenses rejected marriage, baptism and the<br />

supper, has been refuted in page 119, refuting the same charge against them<br />

under the name Paulicians, the reader will notice that these charges are,<br />

incidentally, farther refuted in the following. The Encyclopedia Britannica says<br />

of them:<br />

“The statement that they rejected marriage, often made by Roman Catholics,<br />

has probably no other foundation in fact than that they denied marriage as a<br />

sacrament; and many other statements of their doctrines must be received at<br />

least with suspicion, as coming from prejudiced and implacable opponents.”<br />

f265<br />

Alanus, speaking of the Albigenses, says: “They rejected infant baptism. … It<br />

does not appear that they rejected either of the sacraments.” f266 Collier says:<br />

“They refused to own infant baptism.” f266 Brockett says: “Nothing is said by<br />

Hoveden of their rejection of the sacraments of baptism and the eucharist,<br />

which would certainly have been mentioned by so careful a writer as<br />

Hoveden, had it existed. Indeed, his strongest objection to them was their<br />

refusal to take an oath.” f266<br />

Favin, a historian, is quoted as saying: “The Albigenses do esteem the<br />

baptizing of infants superstitious.” Izam, the Troubadour, a Dominican<br />

persecutor of these heretics, says: “They admitted another baptism.” f267<br />

Chassanion is quoted as saying:<br />

“I cannot deny that the Albigenses, for the greater part, were opposed to<br />

infant baptism; the truth is, they did not reject the sacraments as useless, but<br />

only as unnecessary to infants.”<br />

They had no Campbellism in them. As Armitage observes: “They rejected the<br />

Romish church and esteemed the New Testament above all its traditions and<br />

ceremonies. They did not take oaths, nor believe in baptismal regeneration; but<br />

they were ascetic and pure in their lives; they also exalted celibacy.” f268 Their<br />

encouraging celibacy, as they believed in marriage, was probably for the<br />

reason that Paul encouraged it temporarily, be-cause of persecution being<br />

harder to endure in families than when single. f269<br />

As refusing to take oaths was a practice of many of these ancient <strong>Baptist</strong>s, I<br />

here stop to say: While that matter with <strong>Baptist</strong>s is a matter of little<br />

importance, yet I believe they were, probably, nearer right than we are; for,<br />

while by “swear not at all” our Savior alluded to only profanity, yet, as<br />

Archbishop Whately observes, I believe that men who will tell a lie will swear<br />

one as readily, once the penalty is out of the way; hence, instead of taking oath<br />

annex the penalty of swearing a lie to telling it in court.<br />

In church government the Albigenses were <strong>Baptist</strong>s. A historian says: “Their<br />

bards or pastors were every one of them heads of their churches, but they acted

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!