Preface

Providing historical context can often be helpful. The following three articles, starting with this, will provide an overview of some widely known events and cover some lesser known events in church history. I intend to keep descriptions brief so that this can overall serve as an outline. This one is a long read, and it covers a large number of subjects, so be prepared. I would also say any other well-sourced information which is reliable is also welcome to be included. Please make use of the comments area below, if you like.

While many of the events covered here may be related to Biblical prophecy, they are not explicitly taken out of the Scripture so our understanding of these events may not be complete. For some important events, we only have access to the accounts of the opposing side of an issue of interest to us.

I should note that these historical outlines are presented as they are, not as arguments for the existence of the validity and purity of God’s church, for that must be gathered from Matthew 16:18, the Great Commission and the other words of Christ, which state that “the gates of hell shall not prevail” against his church. These are the truths that everyone can believe in. This is the understanding from which all things can be viewed. People should be saved by hearing God’s word and enter the church for the same reason today as they did when the words of the Bible were first spoken. What is covered below should be considered an extra subject by comparison.

There is one subject to note at the outset. The word which God has revealed by inspiration (see Titus 1:2¹), has always existed, and those words were originally in existence before all things. There were never any real uncertainties about what the Word of God is. From the time of the inspiration of God’s word, it has never been a question to the church what these holy Scriptures were, because they are preserved, which again is exactly as we have discussed throughout this site. Consider:
Psalm 119:160², Deuteronomy 29:29³, Proverbs 30:5-6⁴, Luke 16:17⁵,
1 Peter 1:23⁶, John 18:37⁷, Hebrews 4:12-13⁸. Also, John 8:47⁹.

Therefore, no council of men decided the canon of Scriptures. So, you will not find a point in the outline where a council allegedly determined the composition of Scripture, wherefrom their authority is supposed to be taken as the reason why we have the word of God. In fact, it can further be said that such misguided efforts which did take place, only managed to include apocrypha erroneously. This proved their inability to discern scriptures and disqualification in those cases. The church, who has known the word of God, never needed a council to determine this to begin with. Saved people have known God’s word in a direct way. They know that it is from God, which is why they are saved. The “believers” knew the authority of the word, knowing that it should be believed, upon hearing it. That is something that needed no council. Thus, we do not present any kind of theological council as a historical point in the outline below. The only thing that has ever been needed to know what is true from false is the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.

The truth was not decided upon a majority either. This is because the majority is often in error with respect to the truth. Nor yet was the preservation of the same Bible reliant merely upon a majority of people approving of it. In fact, quite the contrary.

Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.
– Mark 13:33

I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.
– Romans 16:19

–Dedicated to the Lord.

Here follows the first part of the history from A.D. 70 – 990, with three appendices included at the end.

A.D. 70: Second Temple defiled

Before the close of the Biblical period, the Roman General (future Caesar) Titus beseiged and laid waste to the city of Jеrusаlem in the land of Judеа.

A.D. 136: Bar Kokhba Revolt

In the time of the end (after the book of Revelation), a political revolt in Judеа, led by a Jеwish “savior figure,” is ended by the Roman empire, under Hаdriаn.¹⁰ The city of Jеrusаlеm is completely levelled to the ground, is replaced by a colony (Aеlia Cаpitolinа) and, by law of Rome, ongoing ethno-religious cleansing of the whole city is decreed. The whole province is renamed to Syria Pаlаеstinа.¹¹

One effect of this was a geographic redistributing of phаrisаical or pre-tаlmudіc predecessors, and those which at that time did not want to acknowledge Christ, to places outside of the Levant where the kingdom had been located. Early Judаіsm in these times made its primary stronghold in the city of Babylon, which was eastward and outside the reach of Roman laws.¹² Meanwhile, Christianity continued to grow elsewhere, especially at that time in the opposite direction towards the West.

A.D. 140: Marcionism

Marcion travels to Rome and attempts to join the church there in 140, while preaching from apocryphal book “Gospel of Marcion.” He was excommunicated or banned in 144, so afterward he changed locations to continue his gnostic sect.¹³ The Marcionites counted 115 years and 6 months from the time of Christ until their founding, making them a relatively old, but false sect.

Marcion himself became the apparent source of many characteristic “gnostic” doctrines, such as physical-spirit dualism. Dualism regards all matter as evil in essence, employs self-abuse of the body in various ways, and separates the “good God” of the New Testament, from the Creator. The Creator from the Old Testament is termed malorum factorem (“the author of evils”); and furthermore, gnostics of this type claimed that Jesus is not the Messiah, and the Old Testament was a false promise. Rather, they claimed, that he came from an “higher plane” and took a non-physical body. Also it was claimed that the descent into Hades was meant to redeem those who had resisted the “malevolent creator” such as Cain, who was seen by the Gnostics as a hero. He was approved by the Gnostics because he resisted the Creator. Likewise, resurrection of the spirit was accepted, but of the body, denied. Marcion taught asceticism, fasted on Sundays (to resist the “malevolent creator,”) and abstained from all meat, except for fish— he appealed at a dispute in 144 to the passage of Scripture in Luke 6:43.¹⁴ Many ideas of dualism have been adapted into other “gnostic” sects, so that Marcionites were similar to other versions of gnosticism, which have appeared in numerous local forms in history.

Marcion was also the author of the Antitheses, a work which very methodically went through the entire Old and New Testament and tried to find contradictions, in order to make a case for the ill intent of the Creator of the Old Testament. He was also the first person known to produce a corrupted Bible. He rejected the four Gospels, except his own version of the Gospel of Luke, which removed everything before v. 4.31 and every other passage which acknowledged the Creator. Marcion was the one who started the tradition of arranging a “council” in which the correct books of the Bible were proclaimed. But this was done falsely by including in it only Paul’s epistles (but not the pastoral epistles of 1, 2 Timothy and Titus) and adding his own corrupted gospel. Therefore, Marcion excluded some or all of the work of every author of the Bible.

A.D. 157: “Old Italic” Bible translated

The “Old Italic” or Vetus Latina translation of the Scriptures is produced by this date, at the latest.¹⁵¹⁶ This line of Biblical transmission continued through the Vaudois, a population that was located in the extreme north of Italy, in alpine valleys bordering on France, Switzerland.¹⁷ This line of Biblical manuscripts would later be acquired by the Geneva translators for reference in producing French, Italian, English and other Bibles.¹⁸ This early Latin translation predates and is unrelated to the Vulgate.

c. A.D. 213: Sabellian Controversy

An early Christological controversy occurred around this time involving the main faction of Trinitarians disputing the modalist Sabellians. Referring incorrectly to John 10:30,¹⁹ they taught that the Son was a mere aspect of a unitary god and they denied the distinct personhood of the Son being fully God.²⁰²¹ Beyond a general description, there is not much reliable information. Controversy continues with various unitarians.²²

c. A.D. 240: Hexaplar Septuagint first produced

Sometime on or before this date, Origen of Alexandria produced the Hexaplar Septuagint, which is his version of the (older) LXX— a Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament.²³²⁴ The Septuagint of today can always be traced back to Origen. Also included in this work were many apocrypha. See linked article (goes to another page) for more information on the Hexaplar Septuagint and its various differences from the Old Testament.

A.D. 242: Manichæism

Around 240, Mani travels to India to study religions. He later returns to his homeland in Persia in 242 with a new religion resembling Hinduism, Gnosticism and Zoroastrianism. It is composed of six books (such as “the book of Giants”), written in Syriac, with one additional picture book.²⁵²⁶

Manichaeism grows into one of the most widespread religions of the world at the time, before disappearing in the 8th century. Mani’s literature had a lasting effect on formative rаbbіnіc judаіsm and on gnosticism. This effect is still found to be present in those traditions.²⁷²⁸ This was aided by the fact that Mani’s writings were originally in Syriac, which was common language in the near East.

A.D. 245: Beginnings of Neo-platonism

Plotinus establishes his school of “Platonic” thought in Rome in 245, resulting in his systematic theology, which has been called Neoplatonism by later historians. This term is used to distinguish it from Plato’s philosophy, from which neoplatonism drew many of its ideas. This ‘newer platonic’ philosophy has deeply influenced gnosticism and judаіsm.²⁹³⁰ Its malign influence can still be seen today.³¹ It also deeply influenced later “kаbbаlists” and self-described “enlightenment humanists.”³²³³³⁴ A key thing to note is that neoplatonism is, in essence, a philosophy that is anti-Christian. This is evidenced, as its founder Porphyry was, as noted by the footnotes in the above paragraph.

A.D. 250: The Decian Persecution

The emperor Decius (died in 251) mandates that everyone throughout the Empire must make pagan ritual sacrifices to the Roman gods.³⁵

A.D. 251: Novatianism

After the end of the Decian Persecution, a large camp of churches decided that any Christians who had bowed to the persecution and made pagan ritual sacrifices should never be permitted to rejoin the churches under any circumstance.³⁶ This movement of churches was initially headed by Novatian, an inhabitant of Rome. Novatian, an influential early church figure, helped to establish mirror churches throughout the empire that maintained this common view, which existed for several centuries before the term ‘Novatianist’ fell into obscurity. However the self-description which they gave themselves of Cathari, meaning pure, would continue to be used in later times.

A.D. 303: The Diocletianic Persecution

Co-emperors Diocletian and Galerius issued a series of edicts targeting all Christians, thus making a universal persecution: The first two prohibited all assemblies, and demanded confiscation of property, and particularly the burning of their Scriptures. Many buildings were also razed. On the basis of professed Christianity, its adherents were instantly deprived of any status of court recognition, which resulted in some becoming re-enslaved.³⁷

In the third edict, the imprisoned were given conditional release if they would participate in ritual sacrifices. Harshness varied greatly. Some were burned alive, but others were officially declared to have sacrificed and released without having done anything.³⁸ By the time of the fourth edict, enforcement of these laws had ceased in the Western half of the Empire. The overlords in the East in their last edict required a group or collective sacrifice to the Roman gods to be made by each church, with punishments of different severity.

By late 306, Constantine and Maxentius had ended the persecution in the Western half and rewarded property back. In 311, Galerian pronounced the Edict of Serdica (Sofia, Bulgaria) which fully reversed all the persecutions.³⁹ Maximinus, however, revived the persecutions in his district of Asia and Egypt until his defeat in 313.⁴⁰

A.D. 313: Constantinian Shift

Following the Battle of Milvian Bridge, the emperor Constantine enacts the Edict of Milan in 313 which in his view, officially recognizes and tolerates Christianity. By 325, Constantine convenes the Council of Nicaea: creating a state-established church (or a state church) for his empire. At first, the Arians⁴¹ are exiled from the state church and the empire, but later in 335, Constantine reinstates Arius.⁴² The order of events later on in Constantine’s rule gradually morphs his initial toleration of Christianity towards just one approved state church doctrine. This doctrine is devised by Constantine and the pro-Constantine faction of bishops. It was set forth under the ruse of being state policy and yet ‘consensus’ as well, with an eye to pursuing unity in the empire, which was a matter of importance to Constantine.

A.D. 313: Donatist Controversy

In many provinces of Caesar’s realm, a controversy arose over some churches not accepting the appointment of church leaders of those who had, formerly, subverted the church in the Persecutions. Donatism, according to its common description, differed from Novatianism, however, by accepting these people as members if they underwent valid baptism, but disqualifying them from leadership positions.⁴³ This was not useful for appointing the emperor’s selections for church leaders, so this obviously did not receive favor from Constantine. The Emperor singlehandedly decided against them.⁴⁴ The people of the church should reasonably have sought toleration for their practices by the sovereign ruler, who was the emperor. Nevertheless, the fact they made an appeal to him was later counted against them. Constantine himself did not embark on a crusade against these churches, except for an initial skirmish, when they were attacked and had property forcibly taken from them and given to the state church. He made peace with “the Donatists” in 321. The council of Nicaea then took place in 325. Later Romans would continue to attack these churches through enacting of laws against them.

The “Donatist” churches were so named after the prominent North African bishop Donatus (later exiled in 347), although it was claimed elsewhere to have been started before this by Majorinus.⁴⁵ Despite the death of Majorinus in 313-315, this faction existed throughout the entire empire. These churches, which were solidly rooted in the Scripture as we noted before, made up a significant number of the so-called “pars Majorini,” or Donatists. In addition to scriptural roots, they also held some historical roots in a council of churches that took place some hundred years earlier at Carthage, around 215, which had been led by Agrippinus.⁴⁶ His policy had been that those who were converted had to join the church by baptism, and he firmly maintained that any other immersions prior to this point were regarded as nothing – not only by reason of invalid mode or an invalid minister, but by the reason that the convert had not been converted at the time of the prior immersion, therefore making it invalid.⁴⁷ These churches and Agrippinus, therefore, would have been considered “re-baptizers” by those who eventually upheld infant baptism as the standard. Of course, it is not likely that infant baptism or the idea of baptismal regeneration existed as early as 215, because the evidence for it existing this early is lacking. It may be added also, the practice of baptism by immersion⁴⁸ as method of entrance into the church, upon confession of faith, and not before this, exists clearly in the New Testament. The evidence for that is presented in this article. So then, it was in the year 313, when the churches were ordered for the first time to accept invalid baptisms by allowing such leaders to be appointed over them by Constantine, that the controversy became unavoidable. By implication, these churches had coexisted peacefully in separation from those which did not practice Biblical baptism prior to this time, as no order had been placed on them to accept such leaders.

One segment of “Donatists” remained politically influential in North Africa, with many churches of other doctrinal beliefs also persisting in the area, but largely agreeing on baptism (against Rome) and thus being collectively labeled by those who favored Rome, as “Donatist,” until the conquest of the Umayyad dynasty around 670. This means that the term Donatist was usually tied to a specific doctrinal position, not to a specific group in Africa. In the later Reformation era, Baptists were once again labeled as Donatists in reference to this divide.⁴⁹ This initial series of incidents surrounding Emperor Constantine, the Council of Arles in 314, and Majorinus, may therefore also be known as the Catholic controversy or the Baptist controversy. However, this controversy may rightly be seen as a byproduct of the ecclesiastical or state church ordering controversy (which has effects on the policy of baptism), which in turn exists as a result of a greater historical divide over final authority either in Scripture or in traditions.⁵⁰ Those who wanted to follow Scripture did not want to have their church leaders appointed over them, and did not want to change baptism away from what it was. Those that instead believed in development of “traditions” apart from Scripture, went along with these changes implemented by Constantine and the pro-Constantine faction. The pro-Constantine faction was comprised of personalities in the state church of Rome, which – after the reign of Theodosius – came to be known as Roman Catholicism.

The Donatists of the city of Carthage, for their part, maintained a separation of church and state in the wider dispute with Rome, which also took political dimensions. To Donatus was attributed the remark “Quid est imperatori cum ecclesia?” or, “What has the emperor to do with the church?”⁵¹ Following the era of Constantine was the reign of his son Constans, who attempted sometime after the year 343 to induce prominent Donatist leaders to join his cause. When offers of material riches and subversion failed, the legates of Constans— named Macarius and Paul— next turned to violent persecution.⁵² It was in the town of Bagai in Numidia that a clash occurred, but whether the rebel leaders, Donatus of Bagai and Marculus, were killed, or whether they threw themselves upon the rocks— in line with the fanaticism of the Circumcellions at that time— is unclear. It is arguable that their lifeless bodies were thrown over the ledge after they were killed, and were accused afterward of throwing themselves down. In any case, these two were hailed as martyrs in the aftermath of the battle, and the legate Macarius, by carrying out the will of Constans and of his accomplices, was widely denounced as an imperial puppet and “prophet of antichrist,” and as a malign persecutor who was sent by Emperor Constans to corrupt the nonconformist church which observed Scripture, and the old ways, uncorrupted. To view that account, please see appendix A (linked) of this article.

A.D. 325: Arian Controversy

The political battle to be recognized by the emperor for state church authority, continues past Constantine’s personal appointment Arius to official state priesthood in 335.

Arius was a prominent figure who taught that the Son of God is a lesser, created entity, and not of the same essence as God the Father. Evidence suggests that many passages of scripture were altered by the Arian faction around this time, including 1 John 5:7.⁵³⁵⁴ Particularly, emperor Constantius II went to great lengths to promote the dominance of his favored Arian bishops, such as at the Council of Ariminum in 359, in which the Roman state-approved bishops all (wrongly) recognized Arian doctrine as the orthodox state church doctrine for the Roman church.⁵⁵

The pattern of Emperors reinstating Trinitarians and subsequently Arians continues, until Theodosius. In the Edict of Thessalonica in 380, he declares by his authority the 325 Council to be one state-approved official religion.⁵⁶ After the year 380, the Arians are commonly presumed to have lost their place in the seats of power at Rome.

The newly created offices of the state bishop, head-bishop, or archbishop take on more political significance, starting in 313, as offices of imperial favor. These positions are given out by the governing Caesar to favored officers and lieutenants, and not elected by members. Churches observed by these rulers as not adapting to accept this state policy begin to be deprived of various privileges and rights at various times, momentarily favoring the politically-favored state church/state churches, whether Arian or otherwise. Sacerdotalism is a teaching seen as politically advantageous by the rulers after Constantine which becomes widely adopted, and synonymous with the state church.⁵⁷⁵⁸ The reverse teaching to this is “priesthood of the believer.”

c. A.D. 350: Gothic Bible translated

The agent Ulfilas writes a Bible translation into the local language, and an alphabet, for the barbarian Goths.⁵⁹ He uses this to preach Arianism to the Gothic tribes on the north of the Danube, with official state charter of the Roman state church, under Constantius II.⁶⁰

The raiding Goths would later take a part in the migration period during the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, spreading Arianism into Hispania (Visigoths) and Italy (Ostrogoths) and establishing rival Arian state churches in these places.⁶¹

Due to the fact that the Arians did not baptize with the formula as given in Matthew 28, trinitarians regarded their baptism as not valid, and regularly baptized converts from Arianism into their churches.⁶² Also, churches widely regarded as “Donatists” did not regard baptism performed on the unregenerate, or administered by those unqualified, and they regularly baptized converts into their churches.

c. A.D. 395: Christian College founded in Wales

Sometime during the reign of Theodosius, a college devoted to Biblical studies was founded in Wales, near Llantwit Major. It is known as Cor Tewdws, a name given retrospectively from the era of Theodosius.⁶³ Despite being ransacked some fifty years after this, the college was rebuilt in the sixth century and flourished for many centuries during Wales’ existence, as it was for a long time separate from rule of foreign powers. It was surpassed by the English academies of late and became defunct at the dissolution of the monasteries.⁶⁴⁶⁵⁶⁶ The national sovereignty of Wales was also separate from the nearby Anglo-Saxons and England until 1283. Wales had a separate order of churches, unassociated to that of England, during this time.⁶⁷

A.D. 405: The Catholic Persecutions

At the death of Theodosius and the reign of his weak son Honorius as Caesar of the West in A.D. 395, the state church faction began exerting a greater control over laws and imperial matters. On February 12, 405, non-conforming churches, those which were sometimes called “Donatist” and peacefully continued in non-acceptance of the state church’s baptism, were attacked, beginning with the official edict⁶⁸ in Imperatoris Theodosii, which decreed that any persons which they considered to be “rebaptizandi” should suffer loss of all property, and extending also for their children, unless their children recanted.

However, this law was— seemingly— not sufficiently far enough, because on March 21, 413, a further law was decreed by the same legislator,⁶⁹ which increased the severity of the penalty to death for both the baptized person and the minister, who were both deemed “rebaptizandi.” Thus, individual baptist churches would be expressly included as outlawed by this law, along with the Novatians⁷⁰ and Donatists⁷¹, who were expressly named in separate titles under this law. This order of events seems to suggest that the first law was viewed as not effective enough in its time, likely because those churches continued on despite these laws, so that they decided to make a more severe penalty by raising the punishment to death in 413.

However, the true extent of the enforcement of this law was likely not everywhere. This is because the reign of Honorius also marked the start soon after of Caesar’s power crumbling in the West. Enforcement of this law would have required resources that were not available at that time. In the year 414, all of the Roman legions had to be withdrawn from Britain to contain rebellions on the continent. The Rescript of Honorius released the land and people of Britain at this time, leaving them to their own defense.⁷²

c. A.D. 415: Pelagianism

Following an open controversy caused by Pelagius, at Diospolis (near Lod, Isrаеl) in the year 415, a round of preachers began to openly teach his newfound Pelagian doctrine across Europe.⁷³

Pelagius was educated in Britain before taking these teachings to the continent, in which he claimed that man was capable of choosing good or evil of his own will and volition. That is, man makes himself a good creature, without grace provided by God, and is supposed to do this. The teaching equates to a works gospel. The state churches, while condemnatory, were not capable of preventing this until the wave of Pelagian preachers finally died out around 455.⁷⁴

A.D. 482: The Arian Persecution

An intense period of sustained persecution befell those in Africa who confessed the divinity of Christ.

In 429, the Roman Bonifacius allowed the Vandal chief, Genseric, to cross into Africa. Bonifacius— who, since 413, was the official responsible for enforcing the Catholic persecutions in Africa— had, despite the close advisement of Augustine of Hippo against the matter, converted to Arianism sometime before 424.⁷⁵

Bonifacius had taken in a number of Arian concubines, and at some point he was temporarily misled into believing that he had a quarrel with the establishment in Rome, so had allowed the Vandal troops (also Arians) to ferry across. They immediately overwhelmed the undermanned provincial areas and secured the large fleets of ships kept there. They would proceed to capture Sicily and other isles with these ships, and conduct a sack of Rome. This was the most dogmatical Arian regime that Africa had ever seen, owing to their desire for religious unity, especially among the victorious upper class,— and so, little space was given for any Trinitarianism. For instance, four loyal servants of Genseric, Spaniards, were nevertheless tortured and put to death for later rejecting Arianism.⁷⁶ Thus, they chose to reject religious unity with their sovereign, although they had been loyal.

However, the persecution became universal in the kingdom under the reign of that sovereign’s son, Hunneric. While content with a situation of mutual tolerance for the first five years of his reign (477-481), Hunneric perceived the winds of politics shifting quickly. Suddenly, the Catholics and other Trinitarians were no longer favorable to him. Thus, any churches he found that did not conform to Arianism were scattered and destroyed, its members exiled into the Saharan deserts or to cut timber in Corsica.⁷⁷

The Catholic state church in north Africa, as previously discussed starting in 405, had engaged in 25 years of assassinations against non-conforming churches there.⁷⁸⁷⁹ From 413 until 429 in Africa, rebellion from the authorities in Rome by baptizing separately from them was even punished by death sentences. Now, under the Arian regime, openly professing the divinity of Christ was considered treasonable by that king. In fact, during the intensification of this persecution, the laws that were passed in A.D. 413 against the “rebaptizandi” were now extended by Hunneric⁸⁰ to all who remained opposed the Arian state church. These were none other than the same persecutions enacted by Rome which Augustine of Hippo had formerly argued were just to be employed against non-conforming churches. See appendix B.

The most remembered moment of this period was the imposition of an Arian bishop on the port town of Typasa, which happened sometime between 483 which was the height of the persecution, and Hunneric’s death in 484. This bishop tried first by persuasion and then by threats to urge the church there into unity under his leadership. Finally, he sent an accusation against them to the king, who ordered that their tongues and right hands should be publically maimed, which was done. After the persecution was over these persons were still able clearly to frame their words that “Jesus is Lord,” thus testifying to His divinity. This was verified by many witnesses of that time.

A.D. 529: Justinian’s law codices

With approval from the Eastern Emperor Zeno, the Arian-led Ostrogothic army conquers Italy in 493.⁸¹ After a “night of the long knives,” Theoderic kills off his rival Odoacer and rules over Italy and nearby regions for 33 years. Similarly the Visigoths, also Arians, drive out the Romans from the Iberian peninsula, and the Franks, who were ruled by Chalcedonians— so named after an A.D. 451 council— invade the vast areas of Soissons and Alemannia.⁸² By the year 500, all of Western Europe had fallen outside of Roman control.⁸³⁸⁴

This situation was somewhat reversed for a time by the reign of Justinian in the Eastern Roman empire. Shortly before his conquest of western lands, this Emperor had written in his law code, in the year 529, a copy of the law, passed by Honorius from 116 years earlier.⁸⁵ This law declared the death penalty for baptism outside of the state church. He would attempt to reimpose the Roman law in Italy, wherever he could. Book 1, Title 6 was in fact a special section on its own, reserved only to condemn what it called “rebaptizandi.” In the entire law code, this was the only statute that made a profession of belief in itself a capital crime, other than to separately condemn Arianism.⁸⁶ This suggests that, according to Justinian, he perceived that there was still rebaptizandi in some places in A.D. 529, when the law code was written.

Judаіsm and other beliefs conformable to the state church meanwhile were tolerated.⁸⁷

Justinian, with his general Belisarius, re-conquered Italy, North Africa and intervening lands in the period 533-562.⁸⁸ How much time the Romans had to actually impose their new laws is another question. In the year 568, the Lombards had migrated southward into Italy to control the greater part of the war-torn area. The eastern Romans, who were culturally Greek, lost control once again, although they held on to Rome itself (Exarchate Ravenna).⁸⁹ The Plague of Justinian also took a vicious toll during this time, as more than 10%, possibly 20% of the world population died. Thus the new Roman law was yet not firmly established in much of Italy, especially in the North.

With regard to the Vaudois in the far north of Italy, who were mentioned earlier as possessing early Latin translations of the Scripture: the Franks victoriously took control of what became Swiss and Savoyard regions,⁹⁰ while the Lombards took control over the neighboring Aosta Valley region and Turin. These were two “barbarian” kingdoms. The Romans therefore never firmly controlled the area to impose this law against re-baptism again.

A.D. 603: Canterbury excommunication

Augustine of Canterbury, an archbishop who had recently established his office inside England in the year 597, attempts to impose various measures on the churches in Wales. However, the leaderships of these churches strongly refused to recognize or associate with him at all. The Anglo-Saxon kingdoms at this time had no means to enforce a uniformity with these older churches, which were located in an area of what was formerly Roman Britain which they had not already conquered, bordering to the West of their domain. However, the delegation of 1200 Christians was killed. This instance is related in the Latin chronicle, Flores Historiarum, among others. See appendix C for the account of this.

*As can be seen in the records, these populations also sent some of their people to the continent in Armorica (modern Brittany) and Gallaecia (modern Galicia).⁹¹⁹²

A.D. 692: Latin Bibles made in Britain

The oldest surviving complete Bible in Latin was commissioned in northern England (kingdom of Northumbria) by Ceolfrid of Jarrow, also around the same time and place as the historian Bede lived.⁹³ This Bible, however, follows the Vulgate mold, not the Vetus Latina,⁹⁴ and has in fact been used as the primary source in reconstructing Jerome’s original. It survives because one of the three copies was misplaced on its way to Rome in 716. This copy, Codex Amiatinus, found its way instead to Mount Amiata in Tuscany at Abbazia di San Salvatore, where it was located in 1036.

This version of the Bible is of interest because it is possible one of the other copies⁹⁵ eventually found its way to the Synod of Chelsea in 787, when the Anglian king Offa of Mercia created the archdiocese of Lichfield in the north. He did this as a way to diminish the influence of Canterbury, and to elevate his own loyal officer, Hygeberht, to the rank of archbishop in order to perform a ceremony. It is likely the sitting archbishop in Canterbury, being controlled by a rival king, refused. But Rome went along with Offa’s decision.⁹⁶ Hygeberht was then used to consecrate Offa’s son Ecgfrith as the royal heir.⁹⁷ This occurred with a ceremony— involving likely this Bible, and likely at Brixworth Abbey.⁹⁸ However, Mercian King Ecgfrith ultimately only reigned for a mere 141 days, being taken by a sudden illness. Only a few pages from Chronicles survive of the copy that remained in Britain. This would make a very ancient example of the ceremonial use of Bibles for vows and oaths in the English part of Britain. However, later Bibles, such as the Wessex Gospels, would be written in common vernacular, not Latin, and sourced from the received text, of the original Greek gospels.⁹⁹

Offa is also the king who built the still-standing Offa’s dyke, a landmark which, at one time, divided England and Wales.¹⁰⁰

A.D. 732: Battle of Tours

A battle was fought between the invading Umayyad army and the forces of Frankish ruler, Charles Martel. Victory in battle went to the Franks, and the tide was turned against the muslim armies in Western Europe.¹⁰¹ East of Vienna – toward the Balkans and Asia, these would remain a threat. They would also initiate a piratical reign of terror in the sea as well until the response of Norman, Pisan and Venetian (as well as other) naval powers in defense— the practice of islamic piracy did not fully end until the 19th century.¹⁰²¹⁰³¹⁰⁴¹⁰⁵¹⁰⁶¹⁰⁷

A.D. 785: First Saxon Capitulary

The Frankish king Charles I¹⁰⁸ enacts a set of 34 laws in response to his forces’ successful expansion into the non-Christian Saxony. The 19th of these laws mandates that all infants must be baptised within a certain time on penalty of severe fine.¹⁰⁹ The ostensible purpose of this law is to convert the Saxons, and while it demonstrates one aspect of state enforcement of paedobaptism, it is also true that this law would place baptistic churches throughout the realm under persecution. This is because if an infant were baptised under fear of this law, to avoid the penalty, but in later years of maturity, elected for a Biblical mode of baptism to join a church, they would be prohibited by the state church perception that this is a rebaptism. This law effectively brought back official persecution of the churches for as long as it was enforced.¹¹⁰

A.D. 793: Lindisfarne attacked

The first recorded Viking raid happened on a small island near the coast of Britain, initiating a long period of instability.¹¹¹

Full-scale invasions and settlements by the pagan Norse raiders begin, and soon Orkney, Mann and the Hebrides become active settlements.¹¹²¹¹³ The death of Charlemagne’s son in 840 fractures the empire into opposing parts, increasing the occasion for raiders.¹¹⁴ In Britain, Beorhtwulf takes control of Mercia, again disuniting the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. By 850 the Norsemen had also taken complete control of Frisia and Holland, and had constructed large coastal towns in Ireland, marking its first invasion. After this came the invasion of England by the Great Heathen Army, led by Ivar the Boneless in 865, supposedly in revenge for the execution of Ragnar Lodbrok.¹¹⁵

A parallel realm known as the Danelaw existed in Britain: After 878 and the Battle of Edington, this area too was overseen by a Christian ruler.¹¹⁶ Around this time, the English king Alfred the Great¹¹⁷ ordered translations from selections in the Old and New Testament, which are now presumed lost.¹¹⁸¹¹⁹ He also encouraged the study of the scriptures in Anglo-Saxon, as opposed to Latin. Separately, around A.D. 911 the Norse leader Rollo negotiated his position to rule (upon his conversion) in what is now called Normandy.¹²⁰ Norsemen forces also occupied Brittany for a time after 919. These would later become known instead as Normans. Starting with Ælfred, England and later Britain would go through a succession of monarchs of different Christian backgrounds, including from those of the French-speaking Normans in 1066.¹²¹ Meanwhile Charlemagne’s empire would dissolve into the earliest precursor kingdoms of France, Germany, Italy and Burgundy. The area of the Vaudois remained on the Alps near these borders, in a remote corner of Italy. From the death of (Emperor) Frederick II, the County of Savoy would take hold in that area, with Upper Burgundy, and later, the Old Swiss Confederacy taking hold immediately to the north after 1536.¹²²¹²³

c. A.D. 990: Wessex Gospels translated

A translation of the four Gospels from the original Greek into Old English is commissioned during the reign of supreme Anglo-Saxon king, Æthelred the Unready.¹²⁴¹²⁵ This translation features the full passages of Mark 16:9-20, of Luke 17:36 and of John 7:53-8:11. It also includes the original Greek reading of both Matthew 6:11 and John 3:5, as opposed to the Vulgate variations. It is conjecture, but nevertheless a fascinating one to offer at this point that the college in Wales had supplied this source. The existence of some source, though, is beyond doubt.

The source could not have been the Vulgate because it does not contain the Vulgate’s alterations but it follows the original Greek text, in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Also produced around this time was the Junius Manuscript, which contains within it the much older “Genesis A” fragment, written in very early Anglo-Saxon.¹²⁶ Genesis A, as it is called, is a paraphrase of the first 22 chapters of Genesis (though fragments are missing today) which shows an awareness of other Biblical passages in respect to this. This commentary, written in an Old Saxon dialect, suggests that these ancient writers, centuries even before the Wessex Gospels, were aware of said Old Testament and New Testament passages, and the connections between them, as well as the book of Genesis.¹²⁷

Link: For Part two of this Outline

Appendix A

The following is written in, “Passio benedicti martyris Marculi”:

[based on the translation of Tilley, 1996]
“§ Here begins the Passion of the blessed Marculus which took place three days before the Kalends of December. (Nov. 29, AD 347)

“§ Vicious rumblings of the Macarian persecution thundered forth from the tyrannical home of king Constans and from the pinnacle of his palace. Two beasts were sent to Africa, viz., the same Macarius and Paul. In short, an accursed and detestable war was declared against the Church, so that the Christian people would be forced into unity with the traitors, a unity effected by the unsheathed swords of soldiers, by signals given by the standard bearers and by the shouts of crowds. But while Macarius, the more fearsome of the two beasts, had for a long time carried on this bloody business in the rest of the provinces in an underhanded way, however, in Numidia, he made public charges against the renowned Marculus of barbarous cruelty and unheard of ferocity.”

[According to the account following, Marculus was one of a group of ten chosen pastors who were sent specifically to meet with Macarius in hopes of resolving a peaceful solution, or if necessary, to serve as the first to fall in resistance – to risk their own captivity if necessary before that of others. Marculus had given up a secular study of law, according to this account, to become what they call a summus pontifex.¹²⁸]

“§ But truly, as soon as the enemy had devised an exquisite and grim form of death, it immediately led him with them under a strict guard of soldiers to the citadel of Nova Petra which is situated near the precipice of a steep mountain by the same name.

“§ Then, because the rest were afraid, one of the number of those soldiers, the most repulsive executioner, he who alone had been prepared by the devil to bring about the death of this distinguished man, anticipated the deed in his speech. He began to explain the martyrdom, in detail to all who listened. He himself had seen it in some sort of dream. ‘When I was being held by the quiet of night, suddenly I saw you appearing to me as if you were tied with rough bonds and utterly weighed down by heavy ropes. Then I untied the ropes with my own hand. Because of this, hope for mercy and for a pardon to be followed by your release.’

“It was not an absurd dream, an incongruous vision, which the executioner saw. Not without cause did he repeat what he had seen. But he followed the example of the impious Caiaphas who when he was about to kill the Lord, prophesied about his passion.¹²⁹ Rightly now had he seen the martyr tied up. So not without some logic had the executioner dreamt that he had untied him.

“By those cruel hands Marculus had to be separated from his body with the help of death. When we are freed from this world and hurry to the Lord, we are released from heavy bonds. The Apostle demonstrates this when he says: ‘It seems much better to be released and to be with Christ.’¹³⁰ For by similar reasoning the most just Simeon pointed this out, aroused by the certainty of his approaching death. He rejoiced that he would be able to escape the troubles of this world. He said: ‘Now, O Lord, you dismiss your servant in peace, for my eyes have seen your salvation.’¹³¹

“§ Then no delay, no span of time came to pass before the most cruel executioner attacked as in a predawn robbery, to bring to pass what he had already seen. Immediately turning hostile, he urged that the witness of God be brought forth from custody and be led to the rugged heights of the natural rock, a precipice of rough stone. The bloodthirsty and barbaric exactor of profane ‘unity,’ and the cruelty of the traditors accursed for all ages, chose this harsh mode of death. The glorious Marculus left the building surrounded by a squad of guards and a division of soldiers, honored even by his persecutors. He left resolute in the constancy of his Christian virtue, leaving behind the dwellingplace of humanity, hurrying on to the abode of angels. He left joyful in appearance, accelerating his pace, thinking not so much of the present punishment as of future glory. He was led along the road to the sacrifice which had been prepared for him. Banks of earth were built up on both sides, piles of stone rising little by little. He arrived at the summit notorious for his passion. The very nature of the mountain made itself useful, so that first treading the lower slopes of the hill, then the lofty heights, as if he were mounting up to the top by some sort of steps, he approached heaven and the stars in his body itself.

“When he had ascended to the very summit of the rock, all the soldiers pulled back, some from fear, some from distress, and they kept their distance from the singularity of the crime. Even if they were present with a guilty fear, they did not want to be involved in the deed.

“§ Then the savage executioner with a double dose of cruelty, there on the precipice, armed with a sword, wielded a double death with his hands. He hurled the martyr downward with his cruel right arm. He believed he had thrown into the dark depths the man to whom belonged the heights of heaven. In fact, once the solidity of the earth was removed, Marculus’ body, descending from on high to the depths, was borne through the empty expanse of air. The moderation of his speed was managed from on high so that his limbs, exempt from all adversities, might be placed atop the harshness of the rocks as if on the softest bed or the calmest waves. Then his victorious soul, by its natural progress, sought heaven more swiftly than his body had descended to earth; so with his own passion completed, both entities should be returned to the ancient sources of their origin by the hands of the omnipotent God, who always kindly cared for the martyr. He ordered that his spirit should be placed in its eternal dwelling place by the assistance of the angels and that his intact body, encircled by caressing breezes, supported by gently assisting winds, should be laid at the center of the base of the rocks.

“§ The exquisite schemes of the persecutors and the evil counsels of the traitors were brought into disarray by the help of Christ. They had planned on such a punishment as this so that the memory of the martyr might never be honored by the people of God in their testimony. For they erroneously thought that the body might be mangled on the precipice, that it might be torn by the sharp-edged rocks, so that the one deprived of life might not even have need for burial. They thought that nothing could even arrive at the ground which the pious fraternity might collect and bury, since each of the limbs might be held in the recesses of the high mountain or the entire body might be swallowed up all at once in some cleft in the fissures of the rocks or in the fractured recesses of the cliffs. But look! The hard stones and rough rocks spared his consecrated limbs. The mountains feared to harm the man whom the traitors did not fear to slay. Except for those people, every creature adores its Creator and in this respect the mountains could not lack the capacity to deserve God’s favor. Scripture even gives them a voice for his praise.¹³²

“§ Meanwhile, the fact that the glorious Marculus had achieved blessed victory in his struggle was concealed within the individual recollections of the soldiers. So in the silence of the night they brought the crime to its conclusion so secretly that not even in the fortress in which he was guarded could outsiders or the brethren have known about it, had not divine help and heavenly signs disclosed what had happened. For as soon as entry of the dawning of the day poured into the pale light of the orb of the night, and the dissimilarity of the dark and the light changed the variously colored face of heaven, immediately a magnificent cloud appeared at the center of the base of the mountain. While lightning flashed, the cloud bore witness concerning the body of the martyr with its caressing light. That cloud, heavy with morning dew, failed to throw any shadow, like a dark cover, on the vividly colored hills, but all aglow it wrapped his auspicious limbs with a bright fleecy cover. While human ceremonies might have been omitted at that time, in a way the cloud seemed to take the place of a shroud. Meanwhile, the cloud was occasionally pierced by bright lightning and it glimmered through the winding clefts so that by wondrous mighty feats it might alert the ignorant about his passion, or, because the darkness of the night still hung over the area, it might show those who were piously searching a way to find the body.

“§ Therefore, the excitement of the association of believers flamed bright, kindled by these admirable works of God, and suddenly the entire area resounded with a ringing shout, and they declared to each other their common commitments in their pious scurrying to and fro. People of both sexes equally and of every age left their homes in a hurry and flew to the mountain and the cloud in their longing for the martyr. Neither the impairment of old age nor the weakness of youth nor the fragility of sex could hold back any soul from the place. The ardor of their common faith set them all aflame. As the scurrying throng had come to those places which lay beneath the precipice, their common purpose in running had brought them together into one crowd; then their concern for finding the body dispersed them over the whole mountain. There you could see the duties of piety divided up among the people. Some with impulsive hands explored the briar patch with its rough stalks; others cast their eyes as witnesses into the crooked crevices in the gaping rocks; still others went back over the rocks they had already looked behind with their anxious eyes, lest their haste make fools of them. In the end, because their search could not be successful without the Lord, lightning was sent to that place to reveal the location which they were all seeking. The radiance of the cloud served as an indicator to point out the body longed for by the brethren. On that spot, what weeping mixed with all their joy! What embraces round his distinguished limbs! At last, when with difficulty they were all satisfied, funeral rites were celebrated with great joy by the brethren and the honor of a religious burial was restored with the greatest jubliation. For the glory of his name, the Lord revealed everything that the enemy had tried to conceal.

“§ O the memorable and extraordinary martyrdom of blessed Marculus! O the example of unshaken virtue so eagerly sought by all the devout! O the exemplar necessary for all the ranks of the clergy, by which he came to the palm, the reward of his praiseworthy life. He renounced the world in his catechumenate, showing himself worthy of the priesthood as a neophyte. In his priesthood the office of martyrdom was honored; in his martyrdom a testimony to the power of the Divine. To whom be honor and glory and power forever and ever. Amen.”

Return to entry A.D. 313

Appendix B

An examination and reply to the Letter of Augustine, dated A.D. 408,
titled, “To Vincentius, my brother dearly beloved, Augustine sends greeting.”

In 408, the prominent theological writer Augustine of Hippo wrote a short apologetic, written out in the form of a letter, to explain the actions of the early state church of Rome, regarding its persecutions, which began at least three years prior to the writing of this letter. I will provide excerpts and some comments in the form of a potential response under each section where appropriate.

Augustine¹³³ wrote (blue text):

§1. “I have received a letter which I believe to be from you to me: at least I have not thought this incredible, for the person who brought it is one whom I know to be a Catholic Christian, and who, I think, would not dare to impose upon me. But even though the letter may perchance not be from you, I have considered it necessary to write a reply to the author, whoever he may be. You know me now to be more desirous of rest, and earnest in seeking it, than when you knew me in my earlier years at Carthage, in the lifetime of your immediate predecessor Rogatus. But we are precluded from this rest by the Donatists, the repression and correction of whom, by the powers which are ordained of God, appears to me to be labour not in vain. . .”

§2. “If we were to overlook and forbear with those cruel enemies […] as that nothing at all should be contrived and done by us with a view to alarm and correct them,¹³⁴ truly we would be rendering evil for evil. For if any one saw his enemy running headlong to destroy himself when he had become delirious through a dangerous fever, would he not in that case be much more truly rendering evil for evil if he permitted him to run on thus, than if he took measures to have him seized and bound?”

Response (white text):
Scripture tells us, “But them that are without God judgeth.”¹³⁵ A church is comprised only of voluntary members. Those who do not join of their own accord are not part of the church, so “alarming and correcting” others by using force against them is not the right of the church, but of God only.

§4 “Not every one who is indulgent is a friend; nor is every one an enemy who smites. Better are the wounds of a friend than the proffered kisses of an enemy.”

Rendering evil for evil, destroying violently what another has built up, or inflicting torment upon the body, is not the “wound of a friend.” Those not in the church, whom we are called to be separate from (cf 2 Corinthians 6:14-17), will be judged by God. Furthermore, many prayers and intreatments to turn from evil, the rebuke of wisdom, are the wounds of a friend (Proverbs 27:6); not killings, inquisition and persecution. As it is written, rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.¹³⁶

§5 “You are of opinion that no one should be compelled to follow righteousness; and yet you read that the householder said to his servants, ‘Whomsoever ye shall find, compel them to come in. . .’¹³⁷¹³⁸”

§6 “ ‘…But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now;’ whence those who have understanding may perceive that it is rather the Catholic Church which suffers persecution through the pride and impiety of those carnal men whom it endeavours to correct by afflictions and terrors of a temporal kind. Whatever therefore the true and rightful Mother does, even when something severe and bitter is felt by her children at her hands, she is not rendering evil for evil, but is applying the benefit of discipline to counteract the evil of sin, not with the hatred which seeks to harm, but with the love which seeks to heal.”

In this we find that those who the writer, at one point, claims to be the Mother’s “children” who are being “disciplined,” according to him, he also says of the same that they need to be “compelled to come in,” which seems to imply as though they were not in. Someone cannot both be inside and outside of the church at the same time. So both analogies cannot work together, and they are individually faulty.

In response to this, if we keep in mind that the kings of the earth fall under the authority of the higher powers, as mentioned in the epistle to the Romans chapter 13,¹³⁹ then we will see, that the state and the church are separate entities. As one passage applies to one, other passages apply to the other, and these entities need not to be confused. In Acts 2:47,¹⁴⁰ it is written that such as should be saved were added to the church. And not all. This contradicts the concept of a coercive militant church which afflicts and terrorizes the unwilling, through force of arms – into joining it.

§9 “You say that no example is found in the writings of the evangelists and apostles, of any petition presented on behalf of the Church to the kings of the earth against her enemies. Who denies this? None such is found. But at that time of prophecy, ‘Be wise now, therefore, O ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth: serve the Lord with fear,’¹⁴¹ was not yet fulfilled. . .
In the age of the apostles and martyrs, it was fulfilled which was prefigured when the aforesaid king [Nebuchadnezzar] compelled pious and just men to bow down to his image, and cast into the flames all who refused. Now, however, is fulfilled that which was prefigured soon after in the same king. The earlier time of that king represented the former age of the emperors who did not believe in Christ, at whose hands the Christians suffered because of the wicked; but the later time of that king [of Babylon] represented the age of the successors to the imperial throne, now believing in Christ, at whose hands the wicked suffer because of the Christians.”

Does the above sound right? Later in this letter, this writer claims that the times of the end have not yet begun. He uses this as the basis for another argument. But as we see in this place, in the very same letter, contradicting his other claim, the writer of the letter says that the things prefiguring ‘the times of the end’ have been fulfilled, and uses this as an argument.

But regardless of this inaccuracy, we notice this statement: ‘There is no example found of any petitions on behalf of the church to the kings of the earth against her enemies.’ Exactly! This is an important concession by the writer and it represents the central part of why the ‘state church’ is not Biblical. Since there is no Biblical example of it, every church who wants to follow the Biblical example of the church cannot resort to it. Biblically, churches cannot resort to using kings of the earth to persecute, kill or harm their enemies. Even the writer of this letter agrees that there is no Biblical example of this.

The interesting, but not satisfactorily explained application of prophecy from Daniel here does not detract from the above plainly-admitted fact. We do recognize however that the state-church is a type of Babylon, so it is of some interest that The writer himself in the blue text above just nonchalantly links Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon to the state church, and acted as if it was a good thing. (!)

§14 “The Emperor, as you know, in that case decreed for the first time that the property of those who were convicted of schism and obstinately resisted the unity of the Church should be confiscated.¹⁴² If, however, the issue had been that your predecessors who brought the accusations had gained their case, and the Emperor had made some such decree against the communion to which Caecilianus belonged, you would have wished the emperors to be called the friends of the Church’s interests, and the guardians of her peace and unity. But when such things are decreed by emperors against the parties who, having of their own accord brought forward accusations, were unable to substantiate them, and who, when a welcome back to the bosom of peace was offered to them on condition of their amendment, refused the terms, an outcry is raised that this is an unworthy wrong, and it is maintained that no one ought to be coerced to unity, and that evil should not be requited to evil to any one. What else is this than what one of yourselves wrote: ‘What we wish is holy?’ And in view of these things, it was not a great or difficult thing for you to reflect and discover how the decree and sentence of Constantine, […] should be in force against you; and how all succeeding emperors, especially those who are Catholic Christians, necessarily act according to it as often as the exigencies of your obstinacy make it necessary for them to take any measures in regard to you.”

How would the writer of this letter choose to reply against the Arians, who later invaded Africa under the Vandal invasion twenty one years after this letter was written? We would like to know from the writer, if it was possible, since Africa was likely his provincial home. Should every church have accepted the appointment of Arian ministers, which took place, so to keep unity with them? Should he take his advice then? If some wisely choose not to join in with Arians, should the decrees of Vandalic king Hunneric be employed in force against them as well, just as the edicts of Constantine were employed against Donatists and others?

It is seen that the ‘unity’ of the state church is an unstable thing, changing itself one day and the next, being false, like shifting sand;¹⁴³ that it renders evil for evil,¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁵ and that the gospel of Jesus Christ with which we are charged is one of peace,¹⁴⁶¹⁴⁷ not of envy and strife. There is no coercion into unity¹⁴⁸, rather there is peaceable separation from those which cause divisions and offences.¹⁴⁹ Yet also, “as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.”¹⁵⁰ The following of these things is what marks the church. Because, as it says, on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.¹⁵¹ And also: Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein.¹⁵²

“…Why should those whom Christ has sown in His field, that is, in this world, and has commanded to grow alongside of the tares until the harvest,— those many thousands of believers in all nations, whose multitude the Lord compared to the stars of heaven and the sand of the sea, to whom He promised of old, and has now given, the blessing in the seed of Abraham,— why, I ask, should the name of Christians be denied to all these, because, forsooth, in regard to this case, in the discussion of which they took no part, they preferred to believe the judges, who under grave responsibility gave their decision, rather than the plaintiffs, against whom the decision was given?”

If the judges were judges of Hunneric and the Arians instead, what would be his conclusion? Should all people prefer to simply believe the judges set up by Hunneric and the Arians? Equally, what about the fact that Constantine was the judge who promoted Arius? Does the writer propose this to make Arius’ doctrine Christian to be believed? In other words, If they were to follow this writer’s advice, they would also follow after emperor Hunneric’s decisions to set up Arianism! And in fact many really did follow after the error of this writer and became Arians!

The answer to this is that they should always resort to keeping things which were once delivered, the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.¹⁵³ They are commended to God and to the word of his grace.¹⁵⁴ Paul also says in another place, “continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them”.¹⁵⁵ This means we should continue in the doctrine of Scripture, wherein we have learned, which is of the apostles who delivered this revelation to us, the faith once delivered unto the saints, regardless of what the current rulers say.

§15 “The deeds of guilty parties which either cannot be proved to those who are innocent,¹⁵⁶ or cannot be believed by them, bring no stain upon any one, since, even when known, they are borne with in order to preserve fellowship with those who are innocent. For the good are not to be deserted for the sake of the wicked, but the wicked are to be borne with for the sake of the good; as the prophets bore with those against whom they delivered such testimonies, and did not cease to take part in the sacraments of the Jеwish people; as also our Lord bore with guilty Judas, even until he met the end which he deserved, and permitted him to take part in the sacred supper along with the innocent disciples; as the apostles bore with those who preached Christ through envy,— a sin peculiarly satanic; as Cyprian bore with colleagues guilty of avarice, which, after the example of the apostle, he calls idolatry.”

The wicked and depraved are not to be praised, called righteous or part of the church, but the believers are told by the Lord to separate from them.¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁸ The Proverbs relate this: “He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him: But to them that rebuke him shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them.”¹⁵⁹

The deeds of guilty parties that are known should be dealt with accordingly.¹⁶⁰ Some things have been brought to light and they cannot remain hidden or be swept away. Especially not in respect of persons of wealth.¹⁶¹¹⁶²¹⁶³¹⁶⁴

The fact that a deed is known makes all the difference and will be judged accordingly and should not be allowed in the church, as 1 Corinthians 5 delineates.¹⁶⁵

Prophecy tells us moreover:
“My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path:
For their feet run to evil, and make haste to shed blood.” — Proverbs 1 : 15-16

Choosing to join in the transgressions with the openly guilty, to call them righteous, or to walk in their path, or to knowingly tell them godspeed in a case that it is known for certain what they do in ungodliness, that is not Biblical.

Again, the apostle says:
“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness,
but rather reprove them.” — Ephesians 5:11

§17 “For originally my opinion was, that no one should be coerced into the unity of Christ, that we must act only by words, fight only by arguments, and prevail by force of reason, lest we should have those whom we knew as avowed heretics feigning themselves to be Catholics. But this opinion of mine was overcome not by the words of those who controverted it, but by the conclusive instances to which they could point…”

These instances are anecdotal. These “instances” have nothing to do with Scripture, words, arguments or force of reason, or anything of that sort referenced to whatsoever.

Earlier in the same letter, the writer tells us that, “[Christians] are (rightly) admonished to consider what they suffer, and wherefore, and are taught to prefer the Scriptures which they read to human legends and calumnies.“

Yet in the above place, if it is authentic, this same writer is suddenly preferring human legends over Scriptures. He admits that his opinion was changed by anecdotal instances, not by words! Whoever this writer is, he shows that his whole view in this regard is based not on the word of God. Elsewhere in the letter he called upon this for authority, but has now contradictorily conceded that his reasons for leaving the truth are due to things other than that word, such as anecdotes. This, not Scripture, becomes the reason why he changed his mind, despite what was said about following Scripture over human legends. Can the writer not even practice what he preached? And should we believe things like this letter in place of the 1st century apostles in the Bible? The answer is that we should not believe the author of this letter which has the name Augustine attached to it – we ought rather believe the Scriptures which we read above human legends and calumnies.

§30 “For the same Church of holy and good believers is both small if compared with the number of the wicked, which is greater, and large if considered by itself… It is the same Church which is occasionally obscured, and, as it were, beclouded by the multitude of offences, when sinners bend the bow that they may shoot under the darkened moon at the upright in heart.”

Scripture does say that the wicked have drawn out their sword and bent their bow so as to slay such as be of upright conversation. But also, that their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bows shall be broken.¹⁶⁶ The same Psalm tells us that the wicked plotteth against the just.¹⁶⁷ It says that the Lord’s saints are not forsaken, his saints are preserved forever, but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off.¹⁶⁸ Notice the distinction. We don’t place the wicked in among with the saints, just as the Psalm does not. Because of what the Scriptures command, as we have said formerly.¹⁶⁹¹⁷⁰

§41 “It is true that those who then stood most resolute, and were able to understand the treacherous phrases used by the [Arians], were few in number when compared with the rest; but some of them it is to be remembered were then bravely enduring sentence of banishment, and others were hiding themselves for safety in all parts of the world. And thus the Church, which is increasing throughout all nations, has been preserved as the Lord’s wheat, and shall be preserved unto the end, yea, until all nations, even the barbarous tribes, are within its embrace. For it is the Church which the Son of man has sown as good seed, and of which He has foretold that it should grow among the tares until the harvest. For the field is the world, and the harvest is the end of time.”

By the letter’s own reasoning then, the Arians were numerous in the Roman Empire for a time while Trinitarians were yet hiding for safety in all parts of the world. However, the letter also says:

§9 The earlier time of that king represented the former age of the emperors who did not believe in Christ, at whose hands the Christians suffered because of the wicked; but the later time of that king represented the age of the successors to the imperial throne, now believing in Christ, at whose hands the wicked suffer because of the Christians.

Which is it, we must ask. Are false teachings predominant with men today? or is truth? Clearly, the former, not the latter. And the idea that the state church causes the wicked to suffer by the edict of the world’s kings is false. We have shown that already. The thesis of this writer, about the state church ushering in utopia is disproved easily by the events of centuries that occurred after 408 A.D. when the letter was written. Thus, the claims of the letter are shown to be untrue by plain facts. The events after the year 408 aid to dispell the myth of this false prophecy. The simple truth here is that the second coming of Christ and time of the Lord taking rule, as it says in the book of Revelation, did not happen then. It still remains to be fulfilled, over 1600 years after this letter, as this is being written now. This is the reason why the writer of the letter in 408 A.D. cannot be correct in his assertions about this.

Every church which obeys the truth continues to patiently and peacefully await the return of Christ before their reign in earth can begin.¹⁷¹¹⁷²¹⁷³¹⁷⁴¹⁷⁵ As it says, ‘the Lᴏʀᴅ loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever: but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off. The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein for ever.’¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁷

And also Scripture says: ‘Wait on the Lᴏʀᴅ, and keep his way, and he shall exalt thee to inherit the land: when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it.’¹⁷⁸ And also: ‘Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;’¹⁷⁹ Also: ‘unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.’¹⁸⁰

§42 “[I]t is beyond question that no man in the unity of Christ can be stained by the guilt of the sins of other men if he be not consenting to the deeds of the wicked, and thus defiled by actual participation in their crimes, but only, for the sake of the fellowship of the good, tolerating the wicked, as the chaff which lies until the final purging of the Lord’s threshing-floor. These things being so, where is the pretext for your schism?”

The answer of where is the pretext for separation from the world is as follows. We are commanded by the Lord that, we are “not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.”¹⁸¹

Those that disregard such a commandment, and do it so very openly, are manifestly false prophets. They do this by making the word of God of none effect, as mentioned by the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in Mark’s Gospel, ch. 7.¹⁸²

Therefore, as the first epistle of John declares, they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.¹⁸³ This is shown by a visible non-adherence to the doctrine of separation. As soon as these false doctrines of unity with the ungodly were revealed, of concord with Belial,¹⁸⁴ it was made manifest that these teachers of false unity¹⁸⁵¹⁸⁶ were among those that had, in places, crept in privately and unawares.¹⁸⁷¹⁸⁸ And this false doctrine of unity was surely a greater subversion to uncover upon finding it,¹⁸⁹¹⁹⁰¹⁹¹ requiring even more absolute separation.¹⁹²¹⁹³ This is to ensure the commandment of God is followed, and in the faith of the continuation of all things, as the operation of God continues even now. So true unity, around the truth, cannot exist with false unity that hides from the truth.

False prophets of this variety were appointed over the unstable by an abject respect of persons through the emperor Constantine. All things were inappropriately performed there, and were of none effect. After all, they taught that one may be baptised despite having not believed, even as infants. This goes against the council of Agrippinus, A.D. 200. More importantly still, it contradicts the clear requirements of scripture, which is our guiding light.¹⁹⁴¹⁹⁵ These ceremonies were also very widely performed by political appointees who we know to have been false teachers of the sort already mentioned. This helps to explain why so many have known it to be wrong and avoided it. It is a fact of ungodliness manifest. The Gospel says we shall know the corrupt by their corrupt fruit which they bring forth.¹⁹⁶

ENDING:
3. “Many whom we know well, when arguments had been brought before them, and the truth made apparent by testimonies from the word of God, answered us that they desired to pass into the communion of the Catholic Church, but were in fear of the violence of worthless men, whose enmity they would incur; which violence they ought indeed by all means to despise when it was to be borne for righteousness’ sake, and for the sake of eternal life.”

This writer admits that violence should be despised (that is, not regarded) when it is incurred for righteousness’ sake. It is the same for those that use violence to compel joining Catholicism, the writer’s cause, or anything else.

Do not “compel others to righteousness,” using force as this writer would argue in this letter.¹⁹⁷ We are not to viciously threaten others to induce them to fear, these things ought not to be. That is something not Biblical and not the gospel of Christ. We should continue to hear the record that God gave of his Son in Scripture¹⁹⁸ and not fear these violences.

We are rather to fear God’s word.¹⁹⁹ Fear him which is able to cast and destroy both soul and body in hell.²⁰⁰ Paul also reasoned with Felix the governor, of righteousness, temperance, and judgement to come.²⁰¹ This is all done through words. “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.”
— 1 Corinthians 1:18

Return to entry A.D. 482

Appendix C

The following is written in Flores Historiarum:

“A.D. 603. Ethelfrid, king of the Northumbrians, fighting against the Britons at Caerleon, slew a great number of religious men belonging to the abbey of Bangor.

“At this time the man of God, Augustine,²⁰² availing himself of the authority and assistance of king Ethelbert, summoned to his synod the bishops and doctors of the nearest province of Britain to the place which, in the language of the Angles, is called to this day Augustines-ac, that is to say, the Oak of Augustine, on the borders of the West Saxons and the Wiccii, and began to persuade them with fraternal admonitions to hold the catholic faith with him, and to unite with him in undertaking the joint labour of preaching the gospel to the nations for the sake of the Lord ; as hitherto they had celebrated the sacred feast of Easter and done many other things in a manner contrary to the unity of the church. And after a long discussion, when they would not assent to either the prayers or exhortations of Augustine, he said, ‘Brethren, let us pray to Almighty God that he will vouchsafe, by his heavenly tokens, to declare to us, which tradition is to be followed, and which is the true way to his heavenly kingdom. Let some sick man be brought, and let all belief be placed in, and all authority given to, that party by whose prayers he is cured.’ And when his adversaries, though against their will, had agreed, a sick man was brought in, deprived of his eyesight. And when he had been submitted to the bishops of the Britons, but had derived no advantage from their ministry, at length Augustine bent his knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, entreating him to restore sight to the blind, in order that, by the bodily illumination of one man, God might kindle the grace of spiritual light in the heart of many believers. And immediately the blind man received his sight, and Augustine was proclaimed by every one as the true messenger of the highest right. Then the Britons confessed they understood then that that was the true way which Augustine preached, but still they said that they could not, without the consent of their chiefs, forsake their ancient customs, so that they begged that another synod might be held, consisting of more members. And when that had been decided on, there came, as it is related, seven bishops and many most learned men of the Britons, especially from their most noble monastery, which, in the language of the Angles, is called Bangorneburg, over which, at that time, Dionotus is said to have presided as abbot. And they, when on their way to the aforementioned council, came first to a holy and prudent man, who had led the life of a hermit among them, and consulted him whether they ought to desert their own traditions at the preaching of Augustine. And he answered them, ‘If he be a man of God, follow him.’ They said, ‘And how can we prove this?’ He said to them, ‘The Lord has said, “Learn of me, because I am meek and lowly of heart.” If, therefore, that Augustine is meek and lowly of heart, it is credible that he himself both bears Christ’s yoke himself, and offers the same to you to take upon you. But if he be stern and haughty, then it is plain that he is not of God, nor are you to regard his words.’ They replied again, ‘And how are we to discern this?’ ‘Contrive,’ said the hermit, ‘that he shall first arrive with his friends at the place of council, and then if he, of his own accord, rises up when you approach, you may know that he is a servant of Christ, and obediently listen to him. But if he disdains you, and will not rise up to you, though you are more in number, then he, likewise, may be disdained by you.’ It therefore so happened, that when they arrived, Augustine was sitting in his chair. And they, on seeing this, presently fell into a passion, and considering him full of pride, set themselves to contradict every thing he said. And Augustine said to them, ‘If you are willing to comply with me in three things only, namely, so as to celebrate Easter at its proper time, to fulfil the ministry of baptism, by which we are regenerated to God, according to the customs of the Roman Church, and to preach the word of God to the nation of the Angles in union with us, we will patiently tolerate your other customs, though contrary to ours.’ But they declared that they would do none of these things, and that they would not consider him as archbishop, arguing with one another, ‘If he would not rise up to us, how much more will he slight us, if we once become subject to him?’ And the man of God, Augustine, is related to have said to them, ‘If they would not have peace with their brethren, would they accept war from their enemies? And if they were unwilling to preach the way of life to the nation of the Angles, he told them they would endure the revenge of death at their hands.’ And all this came to pass in every respect as he had foretold, through the working of God’s vengeance. And not long afterwards, Ethelfrid, king of Northumberland, a man of great courage and a most ferocious pagan, having collected a great army in the city of Legions, which is called by the Britons Caerleon, and which was called the city of the Legions, because the Roman Legions used to be stationed there, made a great slaughter of them. For being about to engage in battle with the Britons, when he saw that their priests, who had come together to address their prayers to God on behalf of the soldiers who were occupied in war, were stationed in a safe place, he asked who they were, or what they were going to do there. For there were a great many of them from the monastery of Bangor, which is said to have contained such a number of monks that they were divided into seven classes with seven rectors, and no division contained fewer than three hundred religious brethren. And the greater part of them having kept a fast for three days, met together with other priests also for the sake of praying to God, having Brochimallus for their defender, to protect them from the swords of the barbarians while they themselves were engaged in praying. And when the tyrant Ethelfrid had learnt the object of their presence, he said, ‘And if these men invoke the aid of their God against us, then, they are fighting against us, although they do not bear arms, for they assail us with their prayers.’ Therefore he directed the attack to be made on them first, and then destroyed the rest of that wicked army, not without great loss to his own forces. In that battle it is said that of these men who had come to pray, there were about twelve hundred men slain, and that only fifty escaped by flight. Brochimallus fled also with his men at the first onset of the enemy, and left those whom he ought to have defended, unarmed and exposed to the swords of their slayers. And thus the prophecy of the blessed pontiff Augustine was fulfilled.”

Return to entry A.D. 603

Historical Outline Part 1