Page 214

A. D. 606.-In this very year, in which the pope was accepted, by Phocas, as the head of the general Latin church, the celebrated teacher and Bishop Adrian publicly opposed infant baptism, wishing neither to baptize the children himself, nor to have them baptized, but utterly refusing them baptism; on account of which he was accused by Gregory the Great, Bishop of Rome, to John, Bishop of Larissa, as appears from a certain letter sent by Gregory to John, in which, among other things, the following is contained, "The second article of the accusation against Bishop Adrian is this: that he refused baptism to infants, thus letting them die." Centur. Magd., Cent. 9, cap. 4, page 141, according to the account in Bapt. Hist., page 496, and H. Mont. Nietigh., page 80.

It appears, indeed, that this said Adrian was criminally punished for his views against infant baptism, and because he let the infants die unbaptized, as is stated by the ancients, and shall appear more fully in our account of the martyrs.*

A. D. 610.-Infant baptism, it appears, being at this time, held in very little esteem by many, whether in consequence of the teaching of the above mentioned Adrian, or for some other reason, so that it was considered useless and not necessary to salvation, those of the Roman church publicly opposed this sentiment, in order either to eradicate it, or, at least, to excommunicate it by the anathema of the pope; wherefore, A. D. 610, in the second Bracerensian Council, among other articles, it was established, decreed, and published, "That infants must be baptized, as necessary to their salvation." Seb. Franck, Chron., Rom., Kett., fol. 74, cot. 2. P..l. Twisck, Chron., 7th book page 213, cot. 2.

But how the true Christians, who rightly observed Christ's ordinance of baptism, conducted themselves with reference to this matter, and whether they suffered any persecution on account of it, is not clearly expressed, but, if necessary, shall be explained more fully in its proper place.

About A. D. 620.-Although, through the authority of the Roman Pope, who had been chosen the supreme head of the church, and through the decree of said Bracerensian council, infant baptism was now so firmly established, that no one who wished to remain a member of the Roman church, dared utter a word against it; yet, among those who loved Christ more than the pope, and esteemed the Gospel more highly than the decrees of popes and councils, the true faith and the true ordinances of Christ, especially the article of baptism, were nevertheless maintained aright; concerning which very much might be stated, had not the books and writings of the pious been so lamentably and tyrannously destroyed by those of the Roman church.

desires to be called such, is, in his exaltation, the forerunner of antichrist." Lib. 4, Epist. 30, Sam. Velt., Geslacht Register, page 125.

A.D. 608.-Theophilactus taught at this time, that everyone must and may read the holy Scriptures, if he would rightly instruct his children in the words of the I,prd, On $ph, 6, Sam. Velt., page 152, However, we are in possession of as much testimony from authentic writers, as is necessary to establish said matter.

As regards this, that baptism was at that time administered to adult persons, by those who were opposed to the decree of the Roman church in the matter of infant baptism, appears from three circumstances: 1. from the time of baptizing; 2. from the place of baptizing; 3. from the persons baptized.

As to the time of baptizing, Easter was expressly specified in the Anti-idiorensian council, where it was established, in opposition to those who baptized new-born infants everyday: That no one should be baptized at any other time than Easter, except in case of imminent death. In Decr. Antis.; until which time instruction in the faith was usually given to the candidates, as is sufficiently shown above.

As regards the place of baptizing, it was not in a font or basin, but in the wilderness, here and there at the rivers, whither, as every one can easily judge, new-born infants cannot go; neither can they observe the manner then customary at baptism, namely, to kneel during baptism, and go in or under the water; of which there were many instances at this time in warm countries. Among others, Bede (lib. 2, cap. 16), writes, "That Paulianus baptized many persons at noon, close by the city of Trovulsinga, in the river Trehenda.";

This manner of baptizing, by the ancients called immersion or submersion, has long been observed, even up to the present time, especially by the eastern and southern nations, who understood the Greek word bdptisma (baptism), or baptizo (to baptize), to signify a total immersion or submersion in water; however, it is found that, according to the idiom of the Greek language, said words do not only signify an immersion or submersion in, but also a washing or sprinkling with, water. For instance, baptisma, ba¢tismos, is translated sprinkling, washing, dipping, etc. See Dictionar. Tetraglott., in quo voces Latine omnes cum Graca, Gallica and Belgiccu interpretatione. Amsterodami ex Typographic Ravesteniana, A. D. 1634.

However, we leave the above mode of baptism to its own merits; it sufl°irces us to have shown that it could not be administered to infants, and that those who were baptized after this manner, must have been adult and intelligent persons.

As to the third point, namely, what persons were then baptized, has been made sufficiently clear from the two preceding circumstances of time and place; but over and above this, we will mention some persons. At this time there was baptized at Jerusalem, Anastasius the Persian; at Constantinople, the celebrated Persian woman, Caesarea, with her husband and many of her followers were baptized; in Bavaria, Theodorus, also called Theodo or Theodus, with much people received baptism; in Spain, many hundreds of Jews were baptized upon faith, the number of which are reckoned by some writers