A little further on he writes: “When this was done, he (the teacher) went among them, and laid his hands upon their heads, saying: Sing with a loud voice, ‘I believe in one God the Father.’ Turning then to the women, he did the same.”
This, the author says, was done for the sake of discipline and virtue, that these might be implanted together with the doctrine of the faith, in the catechumens; for Christ said to his apostles (Matth. 28): “Teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;” adding: “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.”
Understanding this to be the best course, the apostle Peter (Acts 2) first enlightened the people by preaching, and taught them to repent of their former wicked life; whereupon those who with eager ears heard the word of God, and had derived profit therefrom, were baptized.
“Would to God,” says the writer who has quoted this, “that the Roman church had continued in the baptismal ordinance of Christ and his holy apostles; never would there have become of it such an absurd infant baptism, and, thence, such a grossly barbarous and ignorant Christendom in Europe.” _Bapt. Hist., page 528._
Those who had been baptized thus (that is, upon faith), were then exhorted several times by a deacon, to pray on their bended knees. _Bapt. Hist., page 532, ex Ord. Rom., and Amal. Fort._
Who will believe that these persons, who have thus written on baptism, were members of the Roman church? I say nothing of the many other points which they, as can be inferred, maintained in opposition to the common Romanists. Who would not hold it certain, that these people were entirely separated from the papists, who observed the Roman superstitions? Yea, that at the present day they would be declared heretics by the Pope, and, should persecution arise, be placed at stakes and burned alive? as has occurred not long since, yea, recently, to many of our fellow-believers, on account of the same belief, as will appear more fully in the sequel of this history.
We shall, therefore, commit these people to God. Whether they agreed in all other points with the common Anabaptists, we are not able to show; it suffices us that they, though called Romanists, opposed the belief of the common Romanists, and that they approached very near the truth in important points, especially in the article of baptism. With this we will leave them, and proceed to other testimonies.
_About A. D. 772._--We quote the following from _Bapt. Hist., page 515_: “Those who had come to adult years, had to be instructed first in the Christian doctrine, and were then examined before baptism.
“Wittikind became a catechumen, was instructed in the faith, and then baptized with Albion.
“They had to say the creed and the Lord’s Prayer.” _Syn. Aug., cap. 2._
“The teachers had to instruct the people, how to renounce (Satan) at baptism, and what to believe.” _Syn. Turon., cap. 18._
_Page 516_: “They had to be tolerably instructed in the doctrine of Christ, and be given to godliness, for (in the council of Arles) it was enjoined upon the leaders to teach them.”
“They used to renounce the devil and his works; which works are--murder, fornication, adultery, drunkenness, and such like; the pomp is pride, presumption, vanity, vain-glory, temerity.” _Syn. Tur._
Certainly, these were all wholesome and good rules, approaching very near the apostolical teachings; hence we accept them as good instruction in this iron and corroded age. It is achieving a good deal, if one who stands at the point where many crooked roads meet, takes the right, or, at least, the best one. That these people who observed said rules, were entirely free from error in other points, it is not our intention to maintain. He that walks amidst the darkness of night, can easily miss the way; so also they, living as they must, in the darkness of popery, could easily be misled in this or that point. We let God judge them, being content with this, that through the darkness we have seen the rays of their knowledge and good practice.