We conclude with some who in regard to baptism and the Lord's Supper held views different from those of the Catholic (that is, Roman) Church, from which latter they had separated themselves, and with this completes the account of baptism in this country.]
We do not find it stated by a single authentic author, as has been shown, that during the first two centuries any one departed from the foundation of Christ's true order of baptism, that is, from baptism upon faith, by changing this, the true baptism, into a vain or infant baptism; but it appears that in the third century there were men who not only originated, but also put it in practice and administered the same; yet it was adopted only in a few places. J. Mehrn. in Baptism. Hist., page 164, num. 10. H. Montanus, in Nietighz. van den Kinder-doop, second edition, p. 17.
It would not be out of order to give a two-fold account of this matter: in the first place, by whom, how, and in what manner baptism was then practiced in the true church of God; in the second place, by whom, how, and in what manner, infant baptism originated and was observed by some, at that time. But since it is not our purpose here to refute this error, but simply to show how true baptism, as instituted by Christ, and practiced by the holy apostles, has been observed, taught and preached from century to century; and how the church of God blossomed in that faith, as a rose amidst thorns; therefore we will pass by this question, since it does not properly belong here; however, we shall speak of it in a separate place, but proceed now in our account.
