Lutheran movement in england during the reigns of henry VIII. And edward VI

CHAPTER XXI. THE ORDER OF BAPTISM IN THE ENGLISH CHURCH.

Archbishop Laurence’s Testimony. The English Introduction, with Lutheran Sources. The Rubrics traced to Lutheran Orders. The English Baptismal Exhortation, with its original in parallel columns. Palmer’s difficulty explained. A prayer from Luther. Blunt, Palmer, Procter on the Prayer. Höfling’s Investigations. The Sign of the Cross and accompanying words, from the Cologne Order. The Exorcism, from Luther. Palmer on the Lutheran origin of what follows. History of closing Collect. An Address, from Osiander. Development of Address in Brandenburg-Nürnberg, Cassel, Würtemberg and I. Edward VI. Baptism in Private Houses. Conditional Baptism.

Concerning the Order for the Ministration of Baptism, Archbishop Laurence says: ²⁷⁷ “The office of our own Church is principally borrowed from the Lutherans.” Dr. Blakeney, with like frankness: “The address is borrowed, to a great extent, from the Reformed Service of Cologne… The first prayer is derived from a form which is attributed to Luther… In the selection of the Gospel, our Reformers have followed not the Sarum office . . but the Cologne… The collect is taken from the same service,”²⁷⁸ etc. So Blunt, Campion and Beaumont, Warren, etc., etc. That Archbishop Laurence is right in saying that it was principally borrowed, from the Lutherans, will be manifest on an examination of the Order of 1549. [[@Page:254]]

“OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC BAPTISM, TO BE HELD IN THE CHURCH.

“It appeareth by ancient writers, that the Sacrament of Baptism in the old time, was not commonly ministered but at two times in the year, at Easter and Whitsuntide, at which times it was openly ministered in the presence of all the congregation.”

Schw. Hall (1526, Brentz): “In the first churches, only two times were appointed for Baptism, Easter and Pentecost.”

Cologne (1543): “It is known that the ancients baptized only on Easter and Pentecost.”

Nassau (1536, Sarcerius): “Baptism should be administered on festival days, before the assembled congregation.”

“Which custom (now being grown out of use) although it cannot for many considerations be well restored again, yet it is thought good to follow the same as near as conveniently may be: Wherefore the people are to be admonished, that it is most convenient that Baptism should not be ministered, but upon Sundays and other holy days, when the most number of people may come together.”

Cologne, (1543): “But since it perhaps would not be so suitable to restore such times to their old position, Holy Baptism, if the children be not sickly, and there be anxiety about deferring it unto the holy day, must not be given until the holy days when the people and church of God are together.”

Cf. Würtemb. (1553 but, doubtless, from an earlier Order): “Nevertheless we deem it more profitable that, except from the necessity of their weakness, children should be presented for Baptism, not at the time when there are no church assemblies,but on a Sunday, or other festival days, or upon a weekday, where there be preaching, or a large number of people come together.”

“As well for that the congregation there present may testify the receiving of them, that be newly baptized, into the number of Christ’s Church, as also because in the Baptism of Infants, every man present may be put in remembrance of his own profession made to God in his Baptism.”

Schw. Hall (1526): “Whereby they not only do a kindness unto the child by public prayer, but every one is admonished of his Baptism, that he direct his life accordingly.” [[@Page:255]]

Sax. Vis. Articles (1528): Thus Baptism is not only a sign to children, but also draws and admonishes adults to repentance.” Cf. Würtemb. (1553).

For which cause also, it is expedient that Baptism be ministered in the English tongue.

Schw. Hall (1526): “It is not only useless, but unreasonable to baptize in a strange language.”

Würtemb. (1537): “Baptism should be ministered in German.”

“Nevertheless (if necessity so require) children ought at all times to be baptized, either at the church or else at home.”

Schw Hall (1526): “Baptism may, as necessity requires, be administered at all times and places”

Nassau (1536): “Baptism should be administered on festival days before the assembled congregation, but dare not be denied sick children.”

Cologne (1543): “Where there be not danger of death . . where the child be not sickly… But if this cannot be, the child shall be baptized at any time when brought. For, without Holy Baptism, they must not be allowed, so far as we concerned, to depart.”

The rubric directs that information of the desire to have the child baptized, be given, “overnight or in the morning,” while the Reformation of Cologne prescribes that it be given “in good time.” The question is first asked whether the child be baptized or not, evidently in order that where Lay or Noth-taufe have occurred, parents may be prevented from any such erroneous practice as that of a supposed rebaptism. Such practice the Prussian Order of 1525 explicitly forbids, as “a blasphemy of holy baptism.” Hence the Brandenburg-Nürnberg Order of 1533 explicitly states: “The priest shall first ask, whose the child is, what it shall be named, and whether it have received Jachtaufe,” (Lay Baptism), and the Reformation of Cologne: “The pastors should ask whether in haste they have before received Baptism, or, as it is called, genothtauft sein. For if this have occurred according to the proper order, the pastors should maintain the order.”

The service begins with an Exhortation, which most English [[@Page:256]] writers trace to the Reformation of Cologne. It is unworthy of Blunt’s scholarship that he tries to resolve the connection of the two formulas into a mere suggestion. Nor does he seem to be acquainted with more than the opening sentence. The exhortation is older than the Reformation of Cologne. In its first form, it was prepared by Luther in 1521, was repeated in a number of the older Orders, as the Saxon of 1539, and the Pomeranian of 1542, and was amplified and combined with a similar Exhortation from Brandenburg- Nürnberg of 1533, in Mark-Brandenburg, 1540, Schw. Hall, 1543, Ott-Heinrich, 1543, and Reformation of Cologne, 1543. This Exhortation, in the various forms in which it occurs in the Lutheran Orders, may be found in Höfling’s Das Sacrament der Taufe.²⁷⁹ The compilers of the English formula seem to have had Luther’s original formula before them, which they greatly condensed.

Luther (1521).	I. Edward VI., (1549)
Dear friends in Christ: We hear daily out of the Word of God, and learn by our own experience, that we all from the fall of Adam, are conceived and born in sin, wherein, being under the wrath of God, we must have been condemned and lost eternally, except we be delivered by the only begotten Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ.	Dear beloved: Forasmuch as all men be conceived and born in sin, and that no man born in sin can enter into the Kingdom of God, except he be regenerate and born anew of water and the Holy Ghost;
I beseech you, therefore, that, from Christian love, ye earnestly intercede for this child with our Lord God, that ye bring it to the Lord Jesus Christ, and unite in imploring for it the forgiveness of sins and entrance into the Kingdom of Grace and Salvation.	I beseech you to call upon God the Father, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that of his bounteous mercy, he will grant to these children that thing which, by nature, they cannot have, that is to say, that they may be baptized with the Holy Ghost, and received into Christ’s holy church, and be made lively members of the same.

Palmer says of this: “We can perhaps scarcely find any parallel to this amongst the primitive rituals of the church, except in those of the churches of Gaul. The Gothic and ancient Gallican liturgies published by Thomasius and Mabillon, prescribe an [[@Page:257]]address or preface of this kind at the very commencement of the office of baptism.”²⁸⁰ But the example which he gives shows only a very remote resemblance. It is: “Beloved brethren, let us in the holy administration of the present Mystery, humbly beseech our Almighty Creator and Saviour who has deigned by his grace to restore the adornments of nature, lost by the fall, to impart his virtue to these waters, both that the presence of the Triune Majesty may assist in producing the effect of most holy regeneration,” etc. The reader will see how little influence such an Exhortation could have had, either on Luther, or on the English reformers.

Concerning the prayer which followed, there can be no question that it comes from Luther. Blunt says:²⁸¹ “This prayer is not derived from the old office of the English Church, but is probably of great antiquity. Luther translated it into German from the ancient Latin [?] in 1523, and it appears again in his revised baptismal book of 1524. From thence it was transferred to the Nürnberg office, and appears in the Consultation of Archbishop Hermann in 1545 [?]. The latter was translated into English in 1547, and the prayer, as it stands in the Prayer Book of 1549, is almost indentical with this translation as given above,” i. e. the prayer in I. Edward. This prayer was some what abbreviated in II. Edward, 1552, and, therefore, also in the English Book as now known. Palmer, after all his labor to find the “original,” from which Luther translated, gives a prayer from the Gothic Missal, in which there is one clause of eight words similar: “O God who didst sanctify the river Jordan for the salvation of souls.” Procter²⁸² frankly says: “The first prayer seems to have been originally composed by Luther.”

Höfling, after the most thorough search among the Mediaeval Agende, has failed to find a trace of this prayer. Its absence [[@Page:258]]from the Romanizing Protestant liturgies is also significant. He concludes, therefore, that, although in Luther’s Taufbüchlein of 1523, everything else has been translated, “the hypothesis of Luther’s authorship has most foundation. This excellent prayer has also, within the sphere of the Lutheran Church, not merely the most extensive diffusion, but also the most permanent acceptance and adoption.”²⁸³

As given in the first English Prayer Book, it reads:

“Almighty and everlasting God, which of thy justice didst destroy by floods of water the whole world, for sin, except eight persons, whom of thy mercy (the same time) thou didst save in the Ark; and when thou didst drown in the Red Sea wicked King Pharao, with all his army, yet (at the same time) thou didst lead thy people the children of Israel, safely through the midst thereof; whereby thou didst figure the washing of thy holy baptism; and by the baptism of thy well-beloved Son Jesus Christ, thou didst sanctify the flood Jordan and all other waters to this mystical washing away of sin; we beseech thee (for thy infinite mercies) that thou wilt mercifully look upon these children, and sanctify them with thy Holy Ghost, that by this wholesome laver of regeneration, whatsoever sin is in them, may be washed clean away; that they, being delivered from thy wrath, may be received into the ark of Christ’s Church, and so saved from perishing: and being fervent in spirit, steadfast in faith, joyful through hope, rooted in charity, may ever serve thee: And finally attain to everlasting life, with all thy holy and chosen people.”

The use of the sign of the cross at this point, the manner in which it was made and almost the very words follow the Reformation of Cologne. The precious collect that follows is from the old offices: “Deus, immortale praesidium.” “O God, du unsterblicher Trost.” “Almighty and immortal God, the aid of all that need,” etc. In the ancient service, it belonged to the order for the Baptism of adults. Luther transferred it to Infant Baptism. [[@Page:259]]

Even the Exorcism which Luther transferred from the Order for Adult Baptism, is retained. The single sentence of the Reformation of Cologne, and Brandenburg-Nürnberg, was not sufficient, and to it was added the substance of Luther’s vigorous formula of 1524:

Luther, 1523.	I. Edward VI., 1549.
Darum, du leidiger [Vermaledeyter, Mk-Br., 1540] Teufel, erkenne dein Urtheil, etc.	Therefore, thou cursed spirit, remember thy sentence, etc.

Blunt, who regrets its omission in later editions, throws the blame upon “the half-sceptical Germanism of Bucer!”

The Gospel read was, in the ante-Reformation offices, from Matth. 19: 13-15. The English Reformers followed the Reformation of Cologne, which in turn followed Luther, in substituting Mark 10: 13-16.

Palmer²⁸⁴ explains what immediately succeeds: “The address and collects which follow the Gospel, and terminate the Introduction of the baptismal office, do not occur in the ancient offices of the Ancient Church, as far as I can perceive… The forms themselves are in part taken from the Ritual of Hermann of Cologne.” He should have said, that the Collect “Almighty and everlasting God, heavenly Father” is a literal translation, only a qualifying clause of the Lutheran Order being suppressed.

The rest of the service is almost precisely that of Luther. The closing Collect which at one time was the subject of much controversy in the Church of England, originally was used in the baptism of proselytes in connection with the chrism that followed baptism:

“Almighty God, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath regenerated thee of water and the Holy Ghost, and hath given unto thee remission of all thy sins, anointeth thee with the unction of salvation unto everlasting life, in the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.”

“Almighty God, grant unto them, remission of all sins, send, [[@Page:260]]Lord, upon them, the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, and give them the spirit of wisdom and understanding,” etc.

Luther, in 1523, when his revision of the old order, was as yet only tentative, retained the chrism and therefore left the Collect in its first form, only translating it. This Order was retained by Mk-Brandenburg, 1540, and Ott-Heinrich, 1543. The English Commission retained the chrism, modifying the form only by the change of the conclusion into “vouchsafe to anoint thee, with the unction of his Holy Ghost, and bring thee to the inheritance of everlasting life.” Luther, however, in 1526, had omitted the chrism, and amended the Collect accordingly, being followed in this by Brandenburg-Nürnberg, into the simpler form: “And who hath forgiven thee all thy sins, strengthen thee by his grace unto everlasting life.” Had the more thorough Lutheran revision been followed by Cranmer and his associates, the subsequent revision in the English Prayer Book, which has greatly marred it, might have been prevented.

The address to the Sponsors, while derived partially from the Sarum and York Uses, is far more dependent upon the formula originally introduced by Osiander in 1524, into his Taufbuche,²⁸⁵ and thence adopted by the Brandenburg-Nurnberg Order of 1533. The Cassel Order of 1539, shows other points of resemblance, which reach a more complete development in the Würtemberg Order of 1553.

I. Edw. (1549). “Forasmuch as this child hath promised by you his sureties to renounce the devil and all his works, to believe in God and to serve him; ye must remember, that it is your parts and duties to see that this infant be taught, so soon as he shall be able to learn what a solemn vow, promise and profession, he hath here made by you. And that he may know these the better, ye shall call upon him to hear sermons, and chiefly ye shall provide that he may learn the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer and the Ten Commandments in the vulgar tongue, and all other things which a Christian ought to know and believe to his soul’s [[@Page:261]]health; and that this child may be virtuously brought up to lead a godly and a Christian life; remembering always that baptism doth represent unto us our profession, which is, to follow the example of our Saviour Christ, and to be made like unto him; that, as he died and rose again for us, so should we, who are baptized, die from sin, and rise again from righteousness; continually modifying our evil and corrupt affections, and daily proceeding in all virtue and godliness of living.”

Brandenburg-Nürnberg, (1533): “I beseech you from Christian love, as to what ye have now done in Baptism, in the place of this child, that if it be deprived of its parents by death or other misfortune, before it come to the use of reason, ye diligently and faithfully instruct and teach it, first the Ten Commandments, in order that thereby it may learn to know God’s Will, and its sins; then, the Creed, whereby we receive grace, the forgiveness of sins, and the Holy Ghost; lastly, also the Lord’s Prayer, in order that it may call upon God, and pray to him for aid to withstand Satan, and to lead a Christian life, until God shall fulfil that which he has now begun in Baptism, and it shall be eternally saved.”

If we find nothing in Brandenburg-Nürnberg, corresponding to the closing words from “Remembering,” etc., anyone who is familiar with the close of Luther’s treatment of Baptism, in his Catechism, knows whence they are derived.

The corresponding Würtemberg admonition of four years later is so rich and beautiful that it is here added. It almost precisely corresponds with the Cassel Order of 1539, and therefore, in its most essential features, was in the hands of the English Commission.

“Ye all, parents and relatives of this child, and as many as be here present, should now acknowledge and regard this child since Holy Baptism, as none else than a child of the Almighty, and a member of our Lord Jesus Christ, whom also the angels of God’s serve, in no wise doubting that whatsoever ye do this child, whether ill or good, that ye do God Himself, and our [[@Page:262]]Lord Jesus Christ. Nor should effort or labor be spared by any one, according to his calling and relation with this child, to bring it up well for the Lord and to instruct and teach it, to observe all that the Lord has commanded us to be observed; and accordingly, ye parents, relatives and sponsors should spare no pains, and have the child, so soon as it have attained the proper age, faithfully brought to the church for catechetical instruction, in order that it may learn thoroughly what great and inexpressible gifts have been bestowed and transmitted it in Holy Baptism, and then, in the church, willingly and cordially and cordially confess and affirm for itself its faith, and in act and deed renounce the devil and the world, with all their works and lusts, and declare that it will abide by the Lord and his Holy Church, in entire obedience to his Holy Gospel, live faithfully to our Lord Christ unto the end, and, as a living member of Christ, and faithful branch of Christ’s vine, bring forth much fruit to the glory of God, and the advancement of his Holy Church. Amen.”

Passing to the Order “Of them that be in Private Houses in time of Necessity,” the dependence is no less manifest. Without entering into all the details of the service, a few of the main features may suffice.

I. Edward: “They shall warn them that without great cause, and necessity, they baptize not children at home in their houses. And when great need shall compel them so to do, that then they minister on this fashion:

First let them that be present tall upon God for his grace, and say the Lord’s Prayer, if the time will suffer. And then one of them shall name the child, and dip him in water, or pour water upon him, saying these words: ‘I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.’ And let them not doubt but that the child so baptized is lawfully and sufficiently baptized, and ought not to be baptized again, in the church. But yet nevertheless, if the child which is after this sort baptized, do afterwards live, it is expedient that he be [[@Page:263]]brought into the church, to the intent that the priest may examine and try whether the child be lawfully baptized or no.”

Compare this now with Reformation of Cologne (1543, on the basis of the Saxon Order of 1539, the Würtemberg of 1536, and Hamburg of 1529):

“The pastors should instruct the people in their sermons, that they should not readily hasten to Nothtaufe, unless extreme necessity require, that baptism be administered, and if so that they must first call upon our Lord God, pray the Lord’s Prayer, and then baptize the child, as Christ commanded his apostles, in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, nothing doubting that the child is properly and sufficiently baptized, and should not be baptized again in the church, or otherwise. Yet such child if it live, should be brought into the church, that the pastor may ask the people whether they be certain that the child have been properly baptized.”

Reformation of Cologne, (1543.)	I. Edward, (1549.)
The Pastor shall ask further:	The Priest shall examine them further:
Through whom was this done?	By whom the child was baptized?
And who were present?	Who was present, when the child was baptized?
Whether they who baptized the child, called properly upon the name of the Lord?	Whether they called upon God for grace and succour in that necessity?
And baptized the child with water?	With what thing or what matter they did baptize the child?
In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost?	With what words the child was baptized?
Whether they know that these words were used according to Christ’s command?	Whether they think the child to be lawfully and perfectly baptized?
Now, my dear friends, I declare that ye have done right and well, in doing all this in the Name, and according to the command of our Lord Jesus Christ.	I certify you that in this case ye have done well, and according unto due order, concerning the baptizing of this child.

The rest of this service is a repetition of what is found in the order for Public Baptism. The form for “Conditional Baptism:” “If thou be not baptized already,” etc., is not in accordance with the Cologne Order, although the act is. It was [[@Page:264]]prescribed in the ancient orders, and afterwards endorsed by the Council of Trent. The old Lutheran Orders vary. The Reformation of Hesse (1526) and Hamburg (1529) presents it, while that of Schleswig-Holstein (1542, Bugenhagen) expressly forbids it. Cologne and Saxony, simply say that the child shall be baptized, precisely as though it were known to be not baptized. [[@Page:265]]