Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist
Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist
One of the Baptist martyrs, Dryzinger, in 1538, only three years after the craze, was examined as to whether he and his brethren approved of these vile proceedings. He answered: “They would not be Christians if they did.” Hans of Overdam, another martyr, complained of these false accusations of violence. He said: “We are daily belied by those who say that we defend our faith with the sword, as they of Munster did. The Almighty defend us from such abominations.” Young Dosie, a beautiful character, who was a prisoner to the Governor of Friesland, and endured cruel slaughter for his love to Christ, was asked by the governor’s wife if he and his brethren were not of the disgraceful people who took up the sword against magistrates. With the sweet innocence of a child he replied: “No, madam; those persons greatly erred. We consider it a devilish doctrine to resist the magistrates by the outward sword and violence. We would much rather suffer persecution and death at their hands and whatever is appointed us to suffer.’ All this is no more than Erasmus said of them in 1529: ‘The Anabaptists have seized no churches, have not conspired against the authorities, nor deprived any man of his estate and goods.’ They had no sturdier foe than Bullinger, yet he renders this verdict: ‘Say what we will of the Baptists, I see nothing in them but earnestness, and I hear nothing of them except that they will not take an oath, will not do any wrong, and aim to treat every man justly. In this, it seems to me, there is nothing out of the way.’ But Cornelius tells us plainly: ‘All these excesses were condemned and opposed wherever a large assembly of the brethren afforded an opportunity to give expression to the religious consciousness of the Baptist membership.’ … No one outside of their number has better described their advanced position as a people in all respects than Fusslin, in his preface to volume II of Beitrage: ‘The reformers rejected the superstitious abuses attached to the sacraments; the Anabaptists restored the sacraments themselves to memorials for believers. The reformers preached against unnecessary bloodshed; the Anabaptists denounced war of every kind. The reformers protested against Catholic tyranny; the Anabaptists denied to any civil power authority in matters of religion. The reformers decried public vices; the Anabaptists excluded f521 the immoral from their fellowship. The reformers sought to limit usury and covetousness; the Anabaptists made them impossible by their practice of communion. The reformers educated their preachers; the Anabaptists looked for the inner annointing. The reformers condemned the priests for simony; the Anabaptists made every preacher dependent on the labor of his own hands and the free gifts of f522 the people. … There was a great difference between Anabaptists and Anabaptists. There were those among them who held strange doctrines, but this cannot be said of the whole sect. If we should attribute to every sect whatever senseless doctrines two or three fanciful fellows have taught, there is no one in the world to whom we could not ascribe the most abominable errors.’ Grebel tells us that two hundred moral and moderate Baptists in Munster heroically withstood the iniquity, and it was not established until forty-eight of that number had been
put to a bloody slaughter for their resistance. So that in the struggle nearly fifty Baptists fell martyrs to purity in the German Sodom; and at last the ministers and most of the people yielded to the clamor for polygamy under this reign of terror. While this handful of madmen had not been educated in visions, violence and indecency by the Baptist leaders of Switzerland and Germany, others had impregnated them with these doctrines from the cradle. For centuries these teachings and practices had filled the air. The doctrine of wild visions, both of God and the devil, was taught in the monastic institutions, and wonders of this sort were blazoned abroad by bishops, cardinals and popes everywhere. The Catholic communion believed then and still believes in new revelations from God. Saints innumerable are mentioned who heard voices from heaven, had visits from the Virgin and Father, the Son and angels — as Ignatius Aquinas, Teresa, Felix and Anthony. Francis was not only inspired to read men’s minds and consciences as well as their faces, but he received the rules of his new order of monks direct from God. Like John of Leydon, he appointed twelve apostles, and one of them hanged himself to boot. He also prophesied that be should be a ‘great prince,’ and be adored over the whole earth. Bridget, Catharine and Rosa, with endless nuns, were prophetesses. Teresa took the crucified Christ by the hand, was espoused to him, and went up to heaven in the shape of a white dove. The Munster men never had such dreams, raptures, apparitions, phantasms and ecstacies as the canonized saints of Rome. Neither did Luther help the lunatics to sounder doctrine, when he saw the devil in the form of ‘dog,’ a ‘whisp of straw,’ a ‘wild boar,’ and a ‘star;’ nor when he threw the ink-stand at his head. As to violence, Catholics and Protestants taught them that tradition, reason and Scripture made it the pious duty of saints to torture and burn men as heretics out of pure love for their holiness and salvation. … Who educated these fanatics in Christian love and gentleness? The law of their times was to repel force with force. When the Munster men came into power they applied the reasonings of their tutors in atrocity, saying: ‘Our bounden duty is to rid the earth of Christ’s enemies and ours, as they would rid it of us.’ And who will say that all these murderers did not stand on the same plane of outrage and barbarity in this respect? As to immoralities — every pure mind shrinks from the indecencies of Munster. And who had set them this example? They practiced polygamy; but ten long years before this, 1524, Luther had written: ‘The husband must be certified in his own conscience and by the word of God that polygamy is permitted to him. As for me, I avow that I cannot set myself in opposition to men marrying several wives, or assert that such a course is repugnant to Holy Scripture.’ About the same time he preached his famous sermon on ‘Marriage,’ which chastity may well pass in silence, beyond this one expression: ‘Provided one has faith, adultery is no sin.’ … And what better example had the Catholics set the Munster men in that line of purity? From the ninth century down, as Bowden says in his ‘Life of Hildebrand,’ ‘The infamies prevalent among the clergy are to be alluded to, not detailed.’ The open licentiousness of the popes was appalling. The popes of the fifteenth century were profligate and debased beyond belief. Innocent III. publicly
- Page 111 and 112: CHAPTER 14. — THE PETROBRUSSIANS
- Page 113 and 114: orders, and, indeed, grounds all hi
- Page 115 and 116: would not adore images, offer praye
- Page 117 and 118: Says Mosheim: CHAPTER 15. — THE A
- Page 119 and 120: Baird: ecclesiastical affair’s. T
- Page 121 and 122: political f325 heresy was the sourc
- Page 123 and 124: CHAPTER 16. — THE WALDENSES. Of t
- Page 125 and 126: from their rejecting infant baptism
- Page 127 and 128: (6.) From the foregoing they agreed
- Page 129 and 130: “In this liturgy there is no offi
- Page 131 and 132: “As to baptism they said that was
- Page 133 and 134: “formerly no person was brought t
- Page 135 and 136: Says Robert Baird: “There is noth
- Page 137 and 138: CHAPTER 17. — THE ANABAPTISTS. In
- Page 139 and 140: pedobaptism.’ … ‘The visible
- Page 141 and 142: In an article in the Standard, Prof
- Page 143 and 144: “Baptism should be given to all t
- Page 145 and 146: Luther and the other reformers as t
- Page 147 and 148: scholars in his day, was drowned in
- Page 149 and 150: sin, buried with Christ, he rises t
- Page 151 and 152: on a converted membership they agre
- Page 153 and 154: ecause of the effrontery with which
- Page 155 and 156: Dr. Wall also says: “France seems
- Page 157 and 158: CHAPTER 18. — THE ANABAPTISTS AND
- Page 159 and 160: with Munzer in reference to baptism
- Page 161: once deeply imbibed, blinds the eye
- Page 165 and 166: destructive fanaticism with which a
- Page 167 and 168: “The plebeian sect of the Anabapt
- Page 169 and 170: Moller: “Condemned in Rome, Monta
- Page 171 and 172: “They had not become extinct when
- Page 173 and 174: Novatians and the Donatists, which
- Page 175 and 176: CHAPTER 20. — THE BAPTIST CHURCH
- Page 177 and 178: “Haeriticus est omnis non orthodo
- Page 179 and 180: “The Bogomiles were a branch of t
- Page 181 and 182: teachings of Peter de Bruys, and it
- Page 183 and 184: CHAPTER 21. — THE WALDENSES OF AP
- Page 185 and 186: Sylvester, 314 to 335 A.D. and acco
- Page 187 and 188: accept the testimony of the ‘Cath
- Page 189 and 190: efore Waldo, let them prove it,”
- Page 191 and 192: certain professors of church histor
- Page 193 and 194: history, with a genuine Waldensian
- Page 195 and 196: events as to deny that traditional
- Page 197 and 198: deserved his surname by residing am
- Page 199 and 200: we have demonstrated, the names are
- Page 201 and 202: Baptists. Keller insists throughout
- Page 203 and 204: (6.) While Waldo may have been the
- Page 205 and 206: CHAPTER 22. — THE WALDENSES PERPE
- Page 207 and 208: Peter de Bruis and Henry — “But
- Page 209 and 210: first propagandists on Holland soil
- Page 211 and 212: Dr. Limborch, Professor in the Univ
put to a bloody slaughter for their resistance. So that in the struggle nearly<br />
fifty <strong>Baptist</strong>s fell martyrs to purity in the German Sodom; and at last the<br />
ministers and most of the people yielded to the clamor for polygamy under<br />
this reign of terror. While this handful of madmen had not been educated in<br />
visions, violence and indecency by the <strong>Baptist</strong> leaders of Switzerland and<br />
Germany, others had impregnated them with these doctrines from the cradle.<br />
For centuries these teachings and practices had filled the air. The doctrine of<br />
wild visions, both of God and the devil, was taught in the monastic<br />
institutions, and wonders of this sort were blazoned abroad by bishops,<br />
cardinals and popes everywhere. The Catholic communion believed then and<br />
still believes in new revelations from God. Saints innumerable are mentioned<br />
who heard voices from heaven, had visits from the Virgin and Father, the Son<br />
and angels — as Ignatius Aquinas, Teresa, Felix and Anthony. Francis was<br />
not only inspired to read men’s minds and consciences as well as their faces,<br />
but he received the rules of his new order of monks direct from God. Like<br />
John of Leydon, he appointed twelve apostles, and one of them hanged<br />
himself to boot. He also prophesied that be should be a ‘great prince,’ and be<br />
adored over the whole earth. Bridget, Catharine and Rosa, with endless nuns,<br />
were prophetesses. Teresa took the crucified Christ by the hand, was espoused<br />
to him, and went up to heaven in the shape of a white dove. The Munster men<br />
never had such dreams, raptures, apparitions, phantasms and ecstacies as the<br />
canonized saints of Rome. Neither did Luther help the lunatics to sounder<br />
doctrine, when he saw the devil in the form of ‘dog,’ a ‘whisp of straw,’ a<br />
‘wild boar,’ and a ‘star;’ nor when he threw the ink-stand at his head. As to<br />
violence, Catholics and Protestants taught them that tradition, reason and<br />
Scripture made it the pious duty of saints to torture and burn men as heretics<br />
out of pure love for their holiness and salvation. … Who educated these<br />
fanatics in Christian love and gentleness? The law of their times was to repel<br />
force with force. When the Munster men came into power they applied the<br />
reasonings of their tutors in atrocity, saying: ‘Our bounden duty is to rid the<br />
earth of Christ’s enemies and ours, as they would rid it of us.’ And who will<br />
say that all these murderers did not stand on the same plane of outrage and<br />
barbarity in this respect? As to immoralities — every pure mind shrinks from<br />
the indecencies of Munster. And who had set them this example? They<br />
practiced polygamy; but ten long years before this, 1524, Luther had written:<br />
‘The husband must be certified in his own conscience and by the word of God<br />
that polygamy is permitted to him. As for me, I avow that I cannot set myself<br />
in opposition to men marrying several wives, or assert that such a course is<br />
repugnant to Holy Scripture.’ About the same time he preached his famous<br />
sermon on ‘Marriage,’ which chastity may well pass in silence, beyond this<br />
one expression: ‘Provided one has faith, adultery is no sin.’ … And what<br />
better example had the Catholics set the Munster men in that line of purity?<br />
From the ninth century down, as Bowden says in his ‘Life of Hildebrand,’<br />
‘The infamies prevalent among the clergy are to be alluded to, not detailed.’<br />
The open licentiousness of the popes was appalling. The popes of the fifteenth<br />
century were profligate and debased beyond belief. Innocent III. publicly