Not a Sermon - Notes on Menno Simons
Menno
Menno Simons does not inform us how he obtained Luther’s books. About three or four years after he “entered the service of the Hierarchy” as a priest in Pingjum, the authorities of Friesland confiscated a number of Lutheran books which were found in the possession of the priests at Witmarsum
“Afterwards it came to pass, before I had ever heard of the Brethren, that a God-fearing, pious man named Sikke Snyder was beheaded at Leeuwarden for the reason that he had been baptized. It sounded to me strange indeed to hear of a second baptism. I examined the Scriptures with diligence and earnest application but could find nothing concerning infant baptism.”
“Having made this discovery [that there is no Scripture foundation for infant baptism],” Menno says further, “I repeatedly conversed on the subject with the priest who held the office of the pastor of Pingjum and after much discussion he had to admit that there is no Scriptural ground for infant baptism. Notwithstanding this I had not the courage to trust my own understanding but consulted several ancient authors. They taught me that children were to be washed by baptism from the original sin. I compared this with the Scriptures and found that it made baptism take the place of the blood of Christ.
“Then I consulted Luther, desiring to know his grounds for infant baptism. He taught me that infant’s should be baptized because of their own faith. I perceived that this also was not in accordance with the Word of God. Thirdly, I consulted Bucer. He taught, infants should be baptized in order that they may be the more diligently instructed and brought up in the ways of the Lord. I saw that this also was without foundation. Then I consulted Bullinger12 who directed me to the Old Covenant and circumcision. This, as well, I found incapable of being substantiated by Scripture.”
“Having thus observed that the most noteworthy authors differed so greatly among themselves, each one following his own reason [instead of the Scriptures], I saw clearly that we were deceived with infant baptism.”
“To a weak perishable creature which grew out of the earth, was broken in the mill, was baked at the fire and which I have bitten with my teeth and consumed by my stomach, namely to a bit of bread I have said, ‘Thou hast redeemed me,’ as Israel said to the golden calf, ‘These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.’ ” (171b; I:222a).
Yes, my reader, Gellius knows as well as I what Christ has commanded us concerning baptism, how the holy apostles have taught and practiced it; again that Paul renewed the baptism in the instance of certain persons who had been baptized with John’s baptism (although this was of heaven), because they were not informed concerning the Holy Ghost, also that the worthy martyr Cyprian with all African bishops and the council of Nice did not consider the baptism of heretics valid, etc.
“But as long as they baptize the unconscious infants, esteem all whom they have baptized as Christians, dispense the bread to the impenitent, and admit all the avaricious, extortioners, pompous, intemperate, etc., to the fellowship of their church, the world shall continue to be their church and their church the world” (289 seq.; II:70).
The form of exorcism used somewhat later among the Lutherans was: “I conjure thee, thou unclean spirit, to come out and depart from this servant of Jesus Christ.” Menno Simons denounces repeatedly “the wretched exorcism” and other unscriptural ceremonies connected with baptism, such as breathing upon the infant, giving him salt, anointing him with oil and saliva, etc.
Luther, Zwingli and Calvin accepted Roman Catholic baptism but were not Romanists.
Beloved, since the ordinance of Jesus Christ is unchangeable, and it alone is acceptable to the Father; and since He has commanded that the Gospel should first be preached and, secondly, those who believe baptized, it follows that those who baptize and are baptized without being taught the holy Gospel and without faith, baptize and are baptized on their own opinion, without the doctrine and command of Jesus Christ; therefore it is an ungodly, useless and vain ceremony. For had Israel circumcised their females because it was not expressly forbidden, they would have circumcised without the ordinance of God, for He had commanded that the males should be circumcised. It is the same in this instance. If we baptize the unconscious infants, although it is not expressly forbidden in Scripture, just as it was not forbidden to circumcise the females, we baptize without the ordinance of Jesus Christ; for He commanded that those should be baptized who hear and believe His holy Gospel
