Changes

While Zwingli, Luther and Calvin accepted and defended infant baptism, this practice of infant baptism together with all elements of [[apostolic tradition]] not found explicitly taught by the Bible alone according to the Reformation principle of ''[[sola scriptura]]'' was unequivocably condemned by Anabaptist and Baptist groups and [[Mennonite]]s as a Catholic doctrine, and therefore as being manifestly a [[satan]]ic lie promulgated and promoted by the [[Antichrist]], most evidently evil and obviously destructive, to anyone with eyes to see, a deceptive doctrine of devils straight out of the pits of hell.<ref>[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+4%3A1&version=NRSVCE 1 Timothy 4:1]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+1%3A6-9&version=NRSVCE Galatians 1:6-9]. See [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude+1%3A17-19&version=NRSVCE Jude 17-19]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Peter+2%3A9-11&version=NRSVCE 2 Peter 2:9-11]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Peter+3%3A15-18&version=NRSVCE 3:15-18]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+2%3A18-19&version=NRSVCE 1 John 2:18-19].</ref> This warning clearly condemns to hell all who accept infant baptism as necessary: all of mainstream Christianity, Catholics, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, and among Protestants, several denominations: Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists and other Reformed denominations, Presbyterians, Methodists, some Nazarenes, and the Moravian Church.

While Zwingli, Luther and Calvin accepted and defended infant baptism, this practice of infant baptism together with all elements of [[apostolic tradition]] not found explicitly taught by the Bible alone according to the Reformation principle of ''[[sola scriptura]]'' was unequivocably condemned by Anabaptist and Baptist groups and [[Mennonite]]s as a Catholic doctrine, and therefore as being manifestly a [[satan]]ic lie promulgated and promoted by the [[Antichrist]], most evidently evil and obviously destructive, to anyone with eyes to see, a deceptive doctrine of devils straight out of the pits of hell.<ref>[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+4%3A1&version=NRSVCE 1 Timothy 4:1]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+1%3A6-9&version=NRSVCE Galatians 1:6-9]. See [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude+1%3A17-19&version=NRSVCE Jude 17-19]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Peter+2%3A9-11&version=NRSVCE 2 Peter 2:9-11]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Peter+3%3A15-18&version=NRSVCE 3:15-18]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+2%3A18-19&version=NRSVCE 1 John 2:18-19].</ref> This warning clearly condemns to hell all who accept infant baptism as necessary: all of mainstream Christianity, Catholics, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, and among Protestants, several denominations: Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists and other Reformed denominations, Presbyterians, Methodists, some Nazarenes, and the Moravian Church.

Foremost with their strong objection to infant baptism were the [[Anabaptists]], who were persecuted and condemned as [[Heresy|heretics]] by the majority of Christian believers, Catholic and Protestant.<ref>[https://thoughtsofalivingchristian.wordpress.com/2010/11/21/the-persecution-of-anabaptism-16th-century-catholic-lutheran-and-calvinist-perspectives-2/ The Persecution of Anabaptism: 16th Century Catholic, Lutheran and Calvinist Perspectives (thoughtsofalivingchristian.wordpress.com)] <br> [https://themennonite.org/feature/the-birth-of-anabaptism The Birth of Anabaptism, Valerie G. Remple (themennonite.org)].</ref> Zwingli found their theologies to be contradictory, Luther found their entire organization confusing, Calvin labeled them as “poor fools”, “scatterbrains”, “ignoramuses” and “enemies of government”, and the Catholics associated them with the Devil, labeling them “messengers of the Antichrist”.

Foremost with their strong objection to infant baptism were the [[Anabaptists]], who were persecuted and condemned as [[Heresy|heretics]] by the majority of Christian believers, Catholic and Protestant.<ref>[https://thoughtsofalivingchristian.wordpress.com/2010/11/21/the-persecution-of-anabaptism-16th-century-catholic-lutheran-and-calvinist-perspectives-2/ The Persecution of Anabaptism: 16th Century Catholic, Lutheran and Calvinist Perspectives (thoughtsofalivingchristian.wordpress.com)] <br> [https://themennonite.org/feature/the-birth-of-anabaptism The Birth of Anabaptism, Valerie G. Remple (themennonite.org)].</ref> Zwingli found their theologies to be contradictory, Luther found their entire organization confusing, Calvin labeled them as “poor fools”, “scatterbrains”, “ignoramuses” and “enemies of government”, and the Catholics associated them with the Devil, labeling them “messengers of the Antichrist”.<ref>See for example [https://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2007/07/luther-there-are-almost-as-many-sects.html '''Luther: "There are almost as many sects and beliefs as there are heads..." (beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com)] —''Luther condemns the Anabaptists''.</ref>

The term Anabaptism "ana- (''again'') baptism" referred to being “rebaptized,” and it was a punishable offense. Since the establishment of the [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine Christian Empire]], rejection of infant baptism, and re-baptism of those who had been baptized as infants as a repudiation of infant baptism, was condemned as ''anathema'' by local synods of bishops and the subsequent affirmation of their discernment by the judgment of the ecumenical councils of the whole [[catholic]] church east and west.<ref>See [http://www.heretication.info/_heretics.html Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Christianity and its Persecution of Heretics. (heretification.info)]</ref> In response to their [[ecclesiastical]] anathemas against heretical rejection of the doctrine and practice of infant baptism, repudiation of the practice of infant baptism had been made a [[capital offense]] by the [[Government|civil authority]] of the Byzantine Christian Emperors. This relationship of mutual support between the institutional church and civil authorities formed a kind of “Christian” kingdom, ideally intended as a realization of the doctrine of [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+12-13&version=RSVCE Romans 12–13], [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+12&version=RSVCE 1&nbsp;Corinthians 12], [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+13%3A17&version=RSVCE Hebrews 13:17] and [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Peter+2%3A13-3%3A17&version=RSVCE 1&nbsp;Peter 2:13–3:17]. Thus, the Catholic Church’s spiritual authority was connected to civil authority. Through baptism, one became a part of the church and a citizen of the state. One’s baptismal record functioned as a kind of birth certificate. Christendom provided a way of understanding the world that seemed to bring it into a harmonious whole. The state handled civil life, and the church offered eternal life through counselling a prudent application of apostolic traditions of ethical and moral doctrinal practice, prayer, scripture and the sacraments. Each ruled their respective sphere and supported the other. Even Reform-minded leaders found it difficult to imagine a legitimate church refusing to baptize infants. Anabaptists stood alone in being willing to challenge the practice of infant baptism.  

The term Anabaptism "ana- (''again'') baptism" referred to being “rebaptized,” and it was a punishable offense. Since the establishment of the [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine Christian Empire]], rejection of infant baptism, and re-baptism of those who had been baptized as infants as a repudiation of infant baptism, was condemned as ''anathema'' by local synods of bishops and the subsequent affirmation of their discernment by the judgment of the ecumenical councils of the whole [[catholic]] church east and west.<ref>See [http://www.heretication.info/_heretics.html Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Christianity and its Persecution of Heretics. (heretification.info)]</ref> In response to their [[ecclesiastical]] anathemas against heretical rejection of the doctrine and practice of infant baptism, repudiation of the practice of infant baptism had been made a [[capital offense]] by the [[Government|civil authority]] of the Byzantine Christian Emperors. This relationship of mutual support between the institutional church and civil authorities formed a kind of “Christian” kingdom, ideally intended as a realization of the doctrine of [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+12-13&version=RSVCE Romans 12–13], [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+12&version=RSVCE 1&nbsp;Corinthians 12], [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+13%3A17&version=RSVCE Hebrews 13:17] and [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Peter+2%3A13-3%3A17&version=RSVCE 1&nbsp;Peter 2:13–3:17]. Thus, the Catholic Church’s spiritual authority was connected to civil authority. Through baptism, one became a part of the church and a citizen of the state. One’s baptismal record functioned as a kind of birth certificate. Christendom provided a way of understanding the world that seemed to bring it into a harmonious whole. The state handled civil life, and the church offered eternal life through counselling a prudent application of apostolic traditions of ethical and moral doctrinal practice, prayer, scripture and the sacraments. Each ruled their respective sphere and supported the other. Even Reform-minded leaders found it difficult to imagine a legitimate church refusing to baptize infants. Anabaptists stood alone in being willing to challenge the practice of infant baptism.