Matthew 16:18

INTRODUCTION: It is clear from this passage that Christ Himself built His ekklesia or church during His earthly ministry. It is also evident from Ephesians 3:21 that the ekklesia of Christ would continue to exist through the ages. Matthew 28:20 confirms this conclusion. What Christ was building during His earthly ministry must still exist in the world; otherwise, His promise was bogus. Holding to the authority and inerrancy of the sacred Scriptures, we believe the same kind of ekkelesia Christ instituted during His ministry still exists today, even as the same kind of marriage God instituted between one man and one woman continues to exist today despite attempts by men to institute new kinds of marriages. That other sorts of so-called churches exist does not mean Christ’s ekklesia has ever ceased to exist. While individual local churches do cease to exist, the ekklesia of Christ as an institution has ever existed somewhere in the world from the days of Christ until this very day.

The Nature of the Church. The church or ekklesia Jesus built was a local and visible institution, not a universal, visible church, as Rome claims, or a universal, invisible church as the Reformers affirm. Sometimes the word ekklesia is used in a generic sense, as in Ephesians 5:23. Sometimes it is used figuratively for all the redeemed, as J. M. Pendleton explains in his Church Manual Designed for the Use of Baptist Churches, p. 5. All of the redeemed are not the church, but they are like a church or ekklesia in that they are the called-out.

The Meaning of Church Perpetuity. “All that Baptists mean by church ‘Succession,’ or Church Perpetuity is: there has never been a day since the organization of the first New Testament church in which there was no genuine church of the New Testament existing on earth.” (Baptist Church Perpetuity, W. A. Jarrel, p. 3).

The Sources of History. Most of what we find written in history about the various groups of ancient Baptists was written by their enemies, although some of their own writings have survived to this day. The enemies of these ancient people misrepresented and calumniated them. They not only burnt and otherwise martyred them but burned their books as well. However, enough truth has survived even in the false accusations of their enemies to tell the story of these ancient Baptists.

The Name “Baptist.” Baptist denotes a baptizing or immersing church. The term anabaptist which is applied erroneously to all ancient Baptists refers to a church which ostensibly rebaptizes, hence; they are said by their enemies to be rebaptizers. This name was given to the ancient Baptists; they did not take it to themselves and always denied they rebaptized anyone.

The Prominent Issue in Church History. Ancient Baptists are always recognized by the fact they always immersed believers, not infants. The immersion of believers only on the profession of their faith has always characterized true Baptists. We must remember that many orthodox teachings were held at first by the apostate Church of Rome. Little by little, the apostate or false church exchanged these orthodox beliefs for novel ones. The Nicene Council established new doctrines which differed from those held by the original New Testament Churches. All Baptists have held a Biblical Theology and their practices have been consistent with that theology. If we as Baptists hold to the same Biblical truths today as the early New Testament Churches held, then we will expect to find churches adhering to these same doctrines and practices in every century between the first and the twenty-first. We do in fact find in every century groups of believers and churches known by different names who were Baptists, i.e. they practiced the immersion of believers only.
While every group of ancient Baptists may not have agreed with one another, or with us on every issue, let us remember that various fellowships of modern-day Baptists do not always agree in all their doctrines and practices. The independency of each church and liberty of conscience among believers accounts for such differences.

THE MONTANISTS, About A.D. 156-180

Perhaps no other group has been more maligned and falsely accused of heterodox views than the Montanists. The Montanists get their name from one Montanus who was accused of believing he was the Holy Spirit by the Lutheran historian, John Lawrence Mosheim. This slander was corrected by Mosheim’s translator in a footnote (Ecclesiastical History, John Lawrence Mosheim, Vol. 1, p. 65). Schaff wrote of Montanus, “His adversaries wrongly inferred from the use of the first person for the Holy Spirit in his oracles, that he made himself directly the Paraclete, or, according to Epiphanius, even God the Father.” (History of the Christian Church, Philip Schaff, Vol. 2, p. 418). The Montanists have been vindicated of many false accusations against them by other historians such as Agustus Neander as well as Philip Schaff. Schaff cites a work by Wernsdorf Theoph entitled Commentatio de Montanistis Saeculi II, golgo creditis hoereticis which is “A vindication of Montanism as being essentially agreed with the doctrines of the primitive church and unjustly condemned.” Montanus’ aim was to maintain or to restore the scriptural simplicity, nature and character of the religion of the New Testament with a constant reliance on the promise of the Holy Spirit (Jarrel, p. 70).

Thomas Armitage wrote of the Montanists, “Both the opposition of Tertullian, and the open denial of the Montanists that baptism is the channel of grace, renders it unlikely that they adopted this practice [infant baptism]. They insisted so radically on the efficacy of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, that to have immersed unconscious babes would have nullified their basic doctrine of the direct agency of the Spirit, and have thwarted their attempts at reform, in the most practical manner.” (A History of the Baptists, Thomas Armitage, Vol.1, p. 177). Armitage also said of the Montanists, “The one prime-idea held by the Montanists in common with Baptists, and in distinction to the Churches of the third century was, that membership in the Churches should be confined to purely regenerate persons; and that a spiritual life and discipline should be maintained without any affiliation with the authority of the State” (Armitage, p. 175). Jarrel concludes that “when Montanism arose, no essential departure from the faith in the action, the subjects of baptism, church government or doctrine, the Montanists, on these points, were Baptists.” (Jarrel, p. 69)

THE NOVATIANS, About A.D. 250

This group of ancient Baptists was called Novatians after the name of Novatian. The Novatians are linked with the Montanists in that they renewed the moral protests of Montanus (Jarrel, p. 77). Many of Novatians followers united with the Montanists (Schaff, Vol. 2, p. 197). When a division occurred in 251 A.D. in the church at Rome over the election of a pastor, the conservative element of the church sided with Novatian against a more liberal group which elected Cornelius as pastor. The issue was a lax discipline on the part of Cornelius and the church at Rome toward those who had denied their faith because of persecution. The liberal party was for receiving them back into their fellowship; the conservative party opposed it. The conservative and minority group withdrew from the liberal majority and elected Novatian as their pastor. Thus, the Novatians stood for the purity of the church in both doctrine and practice. They maintained the discipline of the church was essential to its doctrinal purity.

The baptism of Novatian has been questioned. It is asserted by some that he was not immersed. Because he was ill, Novatian received what is called clinic baptism. He was covered with water while on his sick bed. The intent was to cover him in water, which act would have been immersion. It is difficult to believe that, if he had not been properly immersed while sick, he would not have sought to be baptized properly when he was well. Novatian, however, was not the founder of a church. He was simply a leader among those who stood for the purity of the church. Since the Novatian Churches certainly immersed, it is highly unlikely Novatian himself was unbaptized.

Neander says, “The controversy with the Novatian party turned upon two general points:—1. What are the principles of penitence? 2. What constitutes the idea and essence of a true church? “ (General History of the Christian Religion and Church, Agustus Neander, Vol. 1, p. 339). Neander further quotes Novatian as saying, “We ought doubtless to take care of those who have thus fallen, but nothing can be done for them beyond exhorting them to repent, and commending them to the mercy of God. . .they must not be received to the communion; they should only be exhorted to repentance--the forgiveness of their sins must be left to that God who alone has power to forgive sin.” (Neander, pp. 339, 40). It is not surprising to learn that the Novatians were the first to be called the cathari or pure. J. M. Cramps concludes, “We may safely infer that they [the Novatian Churches] abstained from compliance with innovation [infant baptism], and that the Novatian churches were what are now called Baptist churches, adhering to the Apostolic and primitive practice.” (Baptist History, J. M. Cramp, p.45.).

THE DONATISTS, About A.D. 311

The Donatists were given this name by their adversaries because of their leader, Donatus. The Donatists were much like the Novatians (Neander, Vol. 3, p. 258). Schaff links the Donatists with both the Montanists and Novatians (Schaff, Vol. 3, p. 360). It is obvious, that they, like the two aforementioned groups, held to the purity of the church. Armitage quotes Merivale as saying of the Donatists: “They represented the broad principle of the Montanists and Novatians, that the true Church of Christ is the assembly of really pious persons only, and admits of no merely nominal membership.” (Armitage, p. 200). Henry Danvers quotes Cryspin’s French History as saying, “We put the Donatists and Novatians together, because they did so well agree in Principle” (A Treatise of Baptism, Henry Danvers, p. 225). They considered their own churches pure and denounced the catholics as the schismatics. Mosheim wrote, “The doctrine of the Donatists was conformable to that of the church, as even their adversaries confess. . .The crime, therefore of the Donatists lay properly in the following things: in their declaring the church of Africa, which adhered to Caecillanus, fallen from the dignity and privileges of a true church and deprived of the gifts of the Holy Ghost. . .” (Mosheim, Vol. 1, pp. 109,110).

Bohringer, a biographer of Augustine is quoted by Jarrel as saying, “Infant baptism is the only point of difference between Augustine and the Donatists, and this grew out of the Donatist notion of the church.” (Jarrel, p. 96). That the Donatists rejected infant baptism is obvious from the fact that Austin’s controversy with them was over this issue (Danvers, p. 107). David Benedict in his History of the Donatists concludes that the Donatists were “thorough-going antipedobaptists” (p. 134).

The Donatists believed in the independency of the local church. Jarrel quotes W. W. Everts, Jr., .of whom he wrote, “perhaps, no one in America has a better knowledge of church history” (p. 96) as saying, “We clearly trace among them the polity of the apostolic and Baptist church. Independence of the hierachy was universally maintained, and no higher authority than the local church was acknowledged.” (Jarrel, p. 98). That the Donatists believed in a local, not a hierarchal church is evident from the fact that at the Council of Carthage 279 Donatists bishops were present. At another time 410 Donatist bishops assembled together. In a hierarchal church, only a few bishops are necessary for the largest country, but the bishops among the Donatists were obviously pastors of local, independent, and individual churches.

Jarrel quotes Prof. Heman Lincoln, Professor of Church History in Newton Theological Seminary as writing: “The Donatists held. . .many of the principles which are regarded as axioms by modern Baptists. They maintained absolute freedom of conscience, the divorce of church [and state], and a regenerate church membership. These principles, coupled with their uniform practice of immersion, bring them into close affinity with Baptists.” (Jarrel, p. 105). It is clear, then, that the Donatist Churches consisted of regenerate members who were baptized by immersion. Because they were falsely called Anabaptists, it is obvious they baptized those who came to them from the catholic party.

THE PAULICIANS, About A.D. 611

The Paulicians were given their name by their enemies because of their adherence to the teachings of the Apostle Paul. Like Baptists today, they strictly adhered to New Testament Order in their faith and practice. They are linked with the Montanists, the Novatians, and the Donatists in doctrine and practice. As we shall see later, they are also linked with the Albigenses and known as Bogomiles, Patereni, and Cathari. They received the New Testament as their inspired guide. Because they did not use the Old Testament as their rule of faith and practice, they were falsely accused of rejecting the Old Testament. They had a high regard for Scripture. Neander says, “. . .it is evident, even from the manner in which their teachers write to the members of the sect, and from the order and denominations of their ecclesiastical officers, that they designed and strove to derive their doctrines from the New Testament; and particularly from the writings of the Apostle Paul.” (Neander, Vol. 5, p. 339).

The Paulicians are falsely called Manichaeists or dualists, a system of belief that claims there are two basic and opposing principles of good and evil. Men derive the elements of goodness in the world from the former and badness from the latter. Neander wrote, “We find nothing at all, however, in the doctrines of the Paulicians, which would lead us to presume that they were an offshoot from Manichaeism; on the other hand, we find much which contradicts such a supposition.” (Neander, Vol. 5, pp. 337,338).

Jarrel writes, “In these churches of the Paulicians, the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper they held to be peculiar to the communion of the faithful; i.e. restricted to believers” (Jarrel, p. 115). He then gave this summation of the Paulicians: “While I have more testimony to prove the Paulicians were Baptists as to the ordinances, I conclude this point with these as amply sufficient: (1.) They did administer the ordinances. (2.) Only to believers. (3.) They recognized the scriptural truth, that only immersion is baptism. (4.) As they baptized only believers they believed in a regenerate church membership.” (Jarrel, p. 119).

George Stanley Faber vindicated the Paulicians of all the calumnies their enemies brought against them concerning the orthodox faith. He writes,”They held the allied doctrines of theTrinity and the Incarnation: but they renounced the worship of the Cross and of the Virgin and of the Saints; while they evidently disbelieved that material presence of the Lord’s body and blood in the consecrated elements which finally received the name of Transubstantiation. The God-denying speculation, which explains away the doctrine of the Trinity and which asserts Christ to be a mere man, they abhorred.” (The History of the Ancient Vallenses and Albigenses, George Stanley Faber, p. 54).

THE ALBIGENSES, About A.D. 900

The Albigenses get their name from Albiga or Albi in southern France. They were both numerous and influential there for many years. In fact, it is said they filled and molded France and Italy with their pure lives, affecting in a lesser degree other parts of Europe as well. Coming from Asia where they had been known as Paulicians, they came also to be known as Albigenses. Jarrel quotes a Dr. Carl Schmidt, an eminent German authority of Strasburg, speaking of their being called Albigenses, saying: “Before that time the sect was spoken of as Publicants or Publicani, probably a corruption of the name Paulicians, which the Crusaders had brought back from Western Europe” (Jarrel, pp. 124, 125).

Like the Paulicians, the Albigenses were falsely called Manichaeans, a charge that Faber literally destroys in 131 pages of his excellent work. Since they are linked with the Paulicians, they are also linked with the Donatists, the Novatians, and the Montanists. They were also known and Paterines and Cathari.
The Albigenses denied marriage was a sacrament but did not reject marriage, as they are falsely accused. They rejected both infant baptism and baptismal regeneration (Armitage, pp. 278, 280). They also had a very simple ecclesiastical organization. The Albigenses are one and the same people with the Waldenses.
THE WALDENSES, About A.D. 1100
The Waldenses received their name from a valley of the Pyrenees Mountains, not from Peter Waldo. They have been called the Valdenses, Vaudois, Vallenses, as well as the Waldenses. As it is with Baptists today, there were different groups or fellowships of Waldenses. They believed in a professedly regenerate church membership, practiced immersion, rejected baptismal regeneration, held to the authority of Scripture, and believed in salvation by grace and election (Jarrel, pp. 161-166). They issued a Confession of Faith in 1120 A.D. They were persecuted mercilessly by the agents of Rome. Many of them later became Protestants and practiced infant baptism, though there are still some Waldenses who hold to the true and Apostolic faith.
THE LOLLARDS About A.D. 1315
The Lollards were given this name by their enemies for their leader, Walter Lollard, a German preacher of renown among the Waldenses who came to England. The Lollards are known best for John Wycliffe, the great translator of the Bible, of whom Danvers wrote, “Of whose opinions and doctrines so well agreeing with the Waldenses of old, we have an account, as from his own writings, so from many authors that have collected the same from them. . .” (Danvers, p. 278). That Wycliffe was a Baptist is evident from 29 tenants he held as listed by Danvers (Danvers, pp. 279-287). The Lollards were among the forerunners of the English Baptists. Obviously they were linked with the Waldenses, the Albigenses, the Paulicians, the Donatists, the Novatians, and the Montanists.
CONCLUSION: WE HAVE THUS SEEN THE PERPETUITY OF THE CHURCH JESUS BUILT! Running like a pure mountain stream from its source, the church has continued, though at times unseen because of being underground, to this very day. It has been called by various names but is known for its uncompromising stand for the faith once delivered to the saints. Existing today because of Christ’s promise and the fidelity of its members, the church will continue into the ages of the ages. Will we who are privileged to be members of the Lord’s churches continue to be faithful and willing instruments whom the Holy Spirit uses to perpetuate the Church of Jesus Christ?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Armitage, Thomas. A History of the Baptists. 2 vols. Watertown, Wisconsin: Baptist Heritage Press Reprint, 1988 (First Published in New York, 1890).

Benedict, David. History of the Donatists, with Notes. Gallatin, Tennessee: Church History Research & Archives Reprint, 1985 (First Published in Providence, R. I. 1875).

Cramp, J. M. Baptist History from the Foundation of the Christian Church to the Present Time. Watertown, Wisconsin: Baptist Heritage Publications, 1987 Reprint (First Published in London, 1871).

Danvers, Henry. A Treatise of Baptism. Harrisonburg, Virginia: Sprinkle Publications Reprint, 2004 (First Published in London, 1674).

Faber, George Stanley. An Inquiry into the History and Theology of the Ancient Vallenses and Albigenses. Gallatin, Tennessee: Church History Research & Archives Reprint, 1990 (First Published in London, 1838).

Jarrel, W. A. Baptist Church Perpetuity. Dallas: Published by the Author, 1894.

Mosheim, Henry Lawrence. An Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modern, from the Birth of Christ to the Beginning of the Eighteenth Century. Trans. Archibald Maclaine. 2 vols. Rosemead, California, 1959 Reprint. (First Published in 1764).

Neander, Dr. Augustus. A General History of the Christian Religion and Church. Trans. Joseph Torrey. 9 vols. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1850.

Pendleton, J. M. Church Manual Designed for the Use of Baptist Churches. Philadelphia: The Judson Press, 1867.

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. 8 vols. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Reprint, 1995 (First Published in 1910).