Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, move, protect
30,891
edits
Changes
→Sixteenth century: addn historical info re Anabaptist movement - some expansion of this Section
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”.
In 1852, Robert Boyt C. Howell wrote a paper he delivered to the Southern Baptist Publication Society "The Evils of Infant Baptism" in which he set forth in nineteen chapters the following arguments against infant baptism: <ref>[http://www.reformedreader.org/history/howell/evilsofinfantbaptismtoc.htm The Evils of Infant Baptism, By Robert Boyt C. Howell, Charleston, SC: Southern Baptist Publication Society 1852.] </ref>
The term "ana- (''again'') baptism" referred to being “rebaptized,” and it was a punishable offense. Since the establishment of the [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantime Christian Empire]], rejection of infant baptism, and re-baptism of those who had been baptized as infants, was condemned as ''anathema'' by local synods of bishops and the affirmation of these by the ecumenical councils of the whole [[catholic]] church east and west, had been made a [[capital offense]] by the Byzantine Christian Emperors. This relationship of mutual support between the institutional church and civil authorities formed a kind of “Christian” kingdom. 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 more important eternal life through doctrinal practice, prayer 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.
By baptizing each other, these so-called Anabaptists denied the Catholic Church’s claim of spiritual authority and challenged its relationship to civil authority. They declared their true citizenship to be in the kingdom of heaven rather than to any kingdom or ruler of the world. Anabaptists argued that their primary allegiance was always owed to Christ alone. This was a form of Christian [[anarchism]] rooted in [[secular]] [[antinomianism]]. Civil and religious authorities throughout Europe moved quickly to quell what they viewed as a dangerous movement. Wherever groups of Anabaptist believers emerged, in the Swiss and German regions of Europe and as far north as the Netherlands, they met with great opposition. Thousands were imprisoned and put to death by burning at the stake or by being drowned in a local river. Drowning was considered a particularly appropriate death for Anabaptists. They had, said the authorities, sinned through the use of baptismal water so by the water they would lose their lives.
[[Baptist]] churches adopted the same views of infant baptism and the absolute need for confessional credobaptism of adult believers. Many other Protestant and independent churches profess their opposition to the doctrine of infant baptism as diabolical and satanic, while others among them accept it as being supported by the Bible because the scriptures do not explicitly condemn the baptism of infants and young children, Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Congregationalists and other Reformed denominations, Presbyterians, Methodists, (some) Nazarenes, and the Moravian Church. Compare the [[Mennonite]]s.
The doctrinal stand of the [[Southern Baptist Convention]] (SBC) is strongly opposed to Catholicism. In 1852, Robert Boyt C. Howell wrote a paper he delivered to the Southern Baptist Publication Society "The Evils of Infant Baptism" in which he set forth in nineteen chapters the following arguments against infant baptism: <ref>[http://www.reformedreader.org/history/howell/evilsofinfantbaptismtoc.htm The Evils of Infant Baptism, By Robert Boyt C. Howell, Charleston, SC: Southern Baptist Publication Society 1852.] </ref>
CHAPTER 1<br>
CHAPTER 1<br>