Dating is not a godly institution

04-Nov-2017 20:31 by 3 Comments

Dating is not a godly institution - Horny chat room

One misconception we must avoid is the idea that since the Roman Catholic Church employs sprinkling as the mode of baptism today, therefore the Catholic Church ordinarily sprinkled during the Middle Ages. There can be no doubt that immersion was the mode of baptism commonly used in the Catholic Church up to at least the 14th Century. Mezeray says, "In the 12th Century they (Waldenses) plunged the candidate in the sacred font."[3] If the early Waldensian literature lacks clear references as to their mode of baptism, this is explained by the fact that that question was not a matter of controversy between them and their Catholic enemies. until the rise of Peter Waldo in the twelfth century who established the sect of the Waldenses among the mountains of Piedmont. He says they discarded godfathers and confirmations, and denounced infant baptism as a useless ablution. Alexander III, in council condemned the Waldensian or Puritan heresy, for denying baptism to infants. [11] Those who survey the available literature on the medieval Waldenses will find that the only references to infant baptism among them describe the practice of some compromisers who, under the pressure of intense persecution, took their infant children to the Catholic priests for baptism, in order that they might appear to conform to the Catholic system. [12] Samuel Morland, The History of the Evangelical Churches of the Valleys of Piemont, Gallatin, Tennessee, Church History Research and Archives, 1982, pp.

[15] This language definitely excludes infants from participation in the ordinance of baptism, since they cannot exercise faith. The most probable opinion is, that they baptized minors, after they had been instructed, which was the general practice in the time of Claude, and there is no positive proof, and there can be none, that they baptized babes. They refused baptism to infants, when it came into use in other churches. [26] The Waldenses scattered in the Netherlands might be called their salt, so correct were their views and devout their lives. It is indubitable that they rejected infant baptism, and used only adult baptism. A number of them, particularly in the early part of their history, judged that baptism should be administered to believers only, and acted accordingly; others entirely rejected that ordinance, as well as the Lord's Supper; a third class held to Paedobaptism.

Answer: When the priests not knowing the intention of Christ in the sacraments, say, that the grace and the truth is included in the external ceremonies, and persuade men to the participation of the sacrament without the truth, and without faith. [22] In regard to baptism, nothing can be determined by any writings of their own, for they published nothing. They believed in the doctrine of the Trinity, and baptized believers. There is no account that the French Waldenses, or the Waldenses proper, ever practiced infant baptism.

Then there is this question and answer preserved from an ancient Waldensian catechism: Minister: By what marks is the undue administration of the sacrament known? This was the account given of them after their union with the Waldenses.

We translate the passage: “The Apostolicals or Henricians; their doctrines, according to St. Peter of Bruis seized the entire Biblical presentation of baptism, and forced its teaching home upon the conscience and the life, by rejecting the immersion of babes and insisting on the immersion of all believers in Christ, without any admixture of Catharistic nonsense. It is incredible that their principles, including opposition to infant baptism, should have failed to find any expression among the Waldenses, who lived in the same regions as the Petrobrussians and Henricians.

These statements from Chapter 28 leave no doubt as to whether infants were to be baptized: Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized. Christ wants His baptism based upon His word for the forgiveness of sins, and then He promises, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” [19]Jacob Merning says that he had, in the German tongue, a confession of faith of the Baptists, called Waldenses, which declared the absence of infant baptism in the early churches of these people, that their forefathers practised no such thing. Monastier says: Peter the Venerable, abbot of Clugny, attributes to Pierre de Bruis the five following points of doctrine, which he states in his ninth letter, entitled, "Against the Petrobrussians,” and addressed to the archbishop of Arles and Embrun, as well as to the bishops of Gap and Die. He (Pierre de Bruis) denies that children, before they arrive at years of intelligence, can be saved by baptism, or that the faith of another person can be useful to them, since, according to those of his opinion, it is not the faith of another which saves, but the faith of the individual with baptism, according to our Lord's words: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned.”[31]The same centuriators have also extracted from the writings of Bernard the errors which he noticed in the Apostolic heretics. ." [32]In the Petrobrussians we find a sect of Baptists for which no apology is needed. [33] The ministry of Peter and Henry created a sensation in France, as multitudes flocked to hear them preach.

All the evidence we have indicates that the Waldenses shared with their Catholic contemporaries in the practice of immersion. The evidence here is especially valuable since it was published by Morland, who was a Pedobaptist and wrote for an audience that was persuaded that the Waldenses had always been of the Reformed faith; thus, Morland cannot be accused of any partiality towards the Baptists.

[2] Since the predominant mode of baptism in the Roman Catholic Church was immersion, at least until the 14th Century, the burden of proof would definitely rest on those who would propose that the Waldenses innovated with different modes of baptism, such as sprinkling, before sprinkling came into general practice in the Church of Rome. We may consider it a point generally admitted that the ancient Waldenses possessed the Baptist peculiarity of holding the burial in baptism of those who are dead to sin.[8] [1] Rev. (Ivemey) Bernard, the saint, the renowned Abbot of Clairval, says, the Albigenses and Waldenses administer baptism only to the adults. Morland dates the manuscript from the time of the French evangelical preacher Peter of Bruys, and perhaps it was written by him.

The great Roman Catholic writers affirm that immersion was the proper form of baptism. Thomas Aquinas refers to immersion as the general practice of his day, and prefers it as the safer way, as did also Bonaventura and Duns Scotus. [7] We can conclude this subject with the words of Ray: No historian has ever charged the ancient Waldenses with the practice of sprinkling and pouring for baptism. Everts, Jr., The Church in the Wilderness, or The Baptists Before the Reformation, Nappanee, Indiana, Baptist Bookshelf, 1986, p. (Allix) Peter, Abbot of Clugny, wrote against the Waldenses, on account of their denying infant baptism. Infant baptism is denounced in a treatise on Antichrist, dating from the 12th Century, which was preserved among the Waldenses of the Alps, and brought to England by Samuel Morland, who was Oliver Cromwell’s ambassador to the court of Savoy until 1658.

This was at the time, the practice of the whole Christian world. 1164, declared without qualification for it as the proper act of baptism. Living in an age in which immersion was the universal law and the custom . [6] Concerning the 15th-Century Bohemian Waldenses, Broadbent says: One of the first things they (the Czech Brethren) did was to baptize those present, for the baptism of believers by immersion was common to the Waldenses and to most of the brethren in different parts, though it had been interrupted by pressure of persecution. Christian, A History of the Baptists, Texarkana, Bogard Press, 1922, vol. Bellarmine says, "the Berengarians admitted only adults to baptism, which error the Anabaptists embraced. (Wall) Evervinus of Stanfield complained to Bernard, Abbot of Clairval, that Cologne was infected with Waldensian heretics, who denied baptism to infants. Now that we have heard from the enemies of the Waldenses, let us hear from the Waldenses themselves concerning their views on infant baptism.

[1]It is equally clear that the form of baptism was immersion. and practicing only believer's baptism, rejecting, as we will see, water salvation, that the Waldenses were Baptists as to the action of baptism is the inevitable conclusion. Christian says: The contemporary writers, Eberhard and Ermengard, in their work "contra Waldenses" written toward the close of the 12th Century, repeatedly refer to immersion as the form of baptism among the Waldenses. Concerning the followers of the 11th-Century French reformer Berenger, or Berengarius, we are told: On his followers being examined, they said, "Baptism did not profit children." Many Berengarians suffered death for their opinions, and for opposing infant baptism. [4]The Lateran Council of 1139 did enforce infant baptism by severe measures, and successive councils condemned the Waldenses for rejecting it. Ecbertus Schonaugiensis, who wrote against this people, declares, They say that baptism does no good to infants; therefore, such as come over to their sect, they baptize in a private way; that is, without the pomp and public parade of the catholics. Even if some of them did, this would in no way detract from the fact that many Waldenses rejected infant baptism.

Everts cites the teaching of Aquinas, one of the most prominent Catholic theologians of the 13th Century, on this subject: Thomas Aquinas, the chief of the schoolmen, who flourished about the year 1250, says, in his theology, that while immersion is not essential to the validity of baptism, still, as the old and common usage, it is more commendable and safer than pouring. Robinson says: Samuel Schmucker says of the Baptists: "As a sect they never existed . One of the most prominent doctrines of him and his followers was the impropriety of the baptism of infants and necessity of immersion to the validity of baptism." [5] Although many researchers would disagree with the notion that there were no Baptists or Waldenses before the 12th Century, we can heartily agree with the conclusion that the early Waldenses practiced immersion. To the same effect Richinius affirms, that in their opinion baptism was neither necessary nor useful for infants.[2] There are numerous references showing that the medieval Waldenses were accused of rejecting infant baptism by their enemies. Berengarius and Vaudois were equivalent terms." [3]When Bishop Gerard, of Arras and Cambray, charged the Waldenses with abhorring (Catholic) baptism, they said baptism added nothing to our justification, and a strange will, a strange faith, and a strange confession, do not seem to belong to, or be of any advantage to a little child, who neither wills, nor runs, who knows nothing of faith, and is altogether ignorant of his own good and salvation, in whom there can be no desire of regeneration, and from whom no confession of faith can be expected. (Danvers) Alanus Magnus states that they denied the ordinance to children.[5]Almost all Roman Catholic writers agree with Cardinal Hosius, who says: "The Waldenses rejected infant baptism." Addis and Arnold declare of them: "As to baptism, They said that the washing of infants was of no avail to them.". Not all Waldenses fell into this dissimulation, and there are no clear references showing that the Waldenses baptized their infants themselves.

The two statements, "Many 20th-Century American Baptists believed in Biblical inerrancy," and "Many 20th-Century American Baptists rejected Biblical inerrancy," are both accurate, and the fact that some Baptists became apostate, whether in the 13th Century or the 20th, in no way disproves the existence of other Baptists and Baptist churches that remained true to the faith. Fortunately, we have the testimony of an eyewitness to the Waldensian movement of the 13th Century, Reinerius Saccho, who was a Roman Catholic inquisitor and persecutor of the Waldenses. The Waldenses could have spared themselves many severe tribulations at the hands of the Inquisition over the centuries, had they merely spoken up and said, "Yes, we do believe in infant baptism." But there is no evidence that they ever did.