Page 241After adding a note; we prepare to flee from the Mohammedan persecutions, and turn to England and Italy, where more and clearer light, has arisen. Marginal note of Hincmar, Bishop of Laudun, that, through the hatred of the Bishop of Rheims, and by a certain council held at Dusiacum about A. D. 866, he was condemned and finally sent into banishment. Johannes Erigena, a Scotchman, and hence, called Scotus, through the instigation of some monks, put to death by his scholars, for the confession of the evangelical truth, at Meldum, in England, A. D. 884. Observations about the time of this history, as well as some remarks upon the history itself, according to the accounts of.Carion, P. Melancthon, C. Peucer, Sebastian Franck of Worth, P. J. Twisck, Caesar Baronius, and A. Mellinus. Finally, his belief is compared with that of Berengarius, of whom we shall speak in the eleventh century. Conclusion.] About the year A. D. 814.-In our account of Holy Baptism for the year 814, we made mention of Haimo, a celebrated teacher of that day, as well as of some salutary and good.testimonies, which he left respecting the baptism of believers. Writing on Rom. 6, he treats of four different kinds of baptism, the fourth or last of which he calls baptism by the shedding of blood, indicating withal, what he means thereby, as well as what persons were baptized in this manner. The fourth (baptism), he says,"is by the shedding of blood; with which the Lord Himself and all holy martyrs were baptized." B. H., 2d part, page 540, num. 2, from Centur. Magd. IX., cap. 4, fol. 75. Someone perhaps may think that in this passage by Haimo, nothing is said of a present persecution or martyrdom, but that it is simply shown that the shedding of the blood of the martyrs can, in some measure, be called a baptism, with which the Lord Himself and many of His followers, namely, all the holy martyrs, had, so to speak, been baptized. To this we will offer no objection, for it is well remarked; nevertheless, it will throw light upon the object we have in view, namely, to show the martyrdom of this time. Hence, in order to reach this end, we say: It would not have been necessary then only to recount to the hearers the shedding of the blood of the martyrs, as well as that in a certain way this may be called a baptism, if at that time the exigency of martyrdom or the shedding of blood for the Lord's sake had not existed, or, at least, if there had been no danger of being persecuted or martyred. Certainly, all good teachers regard the opportuneness of the times, the condition of persons, and other circumstances, in the matter of teaching, lest the salutary and good words of God, by being spoken at the wrong time, or on an unsuitable occasion, should prove void, powerless, and vain to those who hear it. Thus we must believe that also said teacher (Haimo) proceeded, and that, consequently, when he called the shedding of the blood of the martyrs a baptism, and adduced this for the purpose of instructing his brethren, there must have been an exigency of martyrdom, either at the time, or near at hand; otherwise the assertion and exposition of this excellent teacher would not have been adduced properly, or at the right time and on the proper occasion. We shall, therefore, ascertain from other authors the condition of that time, and whether then or shortly after, any persecution, bloodshedding or martyrdom arose against the Christian believers, to which the afore-mentioned teacher might have had reference in his instruction touching said matter.
|
