Severe Persecution in the East, About A. D. 718.
There was now considerable tranquillity in the western countries, but in the East commotions began to arise; for about the year 718, Haumar,134 King of the Saracens, issued bloody decrees for the persecution of the Christians. He prohibited wine, according to the laws of Mohammed, which, however, did not matter much; but the most grievous of all was this: he endeavored to compel the Christians to apostatize and deny Christ; he promised exemption from tribute and taxes to those who, forsaking Christ, should adhere to Mohammed; on the other hand, he threatened to punish with death, all those who should cling steadfastly to Christ. In the meantime he oppressed them with intolerable burdens, and deprived some of life, by various torments.135
He also made a law that the testimony of a Christian should not be valid, nor be accepted against a Saracen. In short, it is stated that by virtue of said decrees, many of the innocent and defenseless Christians became martyrs; but in default of faithful historians of that time, the names of said martyrs have not come down to us, save a few, as shall appear.
NOTE.—Above all, it must be observed in this account of the eastern martyrs, that, as far as regards open churches or communities, those of the East had long before separated from those of the West, that is, from the Roman church, because they would not be subject to the power and dominion of the Pope of Rome, who, already, A. D. 606, had been declared head of all the churches; but as such they would by no means recognize or accept him. This separation, in the course of time, assumed such proportions, that, as far as we know, they have not united again even to the present day.
Moreover, it is established by different writers, that, besides said separated churches, called the Greek, there are other churches in the East, principally in the region of Thessalonica, who are agreed in all respects with the Anabaptists of the present day, and have maintained such faith and practice uninterruptedly from the time of the apostles; of this, however, we shall speak more fully in the sixteenth century, in connection with baptism.
This being the case, it would not be surprising, if in said persecution of the Christians in the East, not only this or that single person, but, what is more, very many true believers were martyred and put to death for the true faith in Jesus Christ, and the sincere practice of the precepts of the Gospel. Nevertheless, we can tell no more than what the ancient writers have left us, and shall, therefore, proceed accordingly, adding, whenever we think it necessary, our own opinion in the margin or in a note.
THE GREAT CRUELTY OF ELVELID, THE MOHAM-MEDAN, TOWARDS ALL CHRISTIAN PRISONERS, WHOM HE, WITHOUT MERCY, CAUSED TO BE PUT TO DEATH, ON ACCOUNT OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, A. D. 739.
It is stated that A. D. 739, in the 23d year of Leo Isaurus, the Mohammedan Prince Elvelid caused all the imprisoned Christians in every city to be put to death, on account of the Christian religion. Among them is mentioned one Eutichius, who was carried away to Karras, in Mesopotamia, and, at the time when said slaughter and martyrization of all imprisoned Christian believers occurred, offered up, because of the same faith and testimony, for his Savior Jesus. Compare Paul. Diac., lib. 21, with A. Mellinus, 2d book, fol. 305, col. 2, 3.
NOTE.—Of said Eutichius we find no further account, touching the confession of his faith, save that, when the other martyrs were put to death, he, too, was offered up for Christ; which must also be understood of various others. See the abovementioned authors, compared with what we have stated in the beginning of this century.
We will say nothing of Peter, Bishop of the church of Damascus, Peter Mavimenus, and others, who, at this time, were also put to death in the East, particularly at Damascus, for the testimony of the Lord Jesus, about the year 742; since the ancient writers have left us no definite information respecting their particular confession of faith, only a general statement, namely, that they suffered for Christ, and for the Christian or evangelical truth.
Hence it has come, that some who boast of Christ and his holy Gospel with their mouths, yet, by their singular expositions, yea, by their deeds and works, are very far therefrom, have nevertheless not hesitated, to claim as of their number, and produce as witnesses for their strange, and, in many respects, unchristian and unevangelical confessions, persons of whom we maintain, because of certain circumstances mentioned by ancient writers, that they believed and lived in perfect accordance with the true tenor of the holy Gospel, and, as a seal of this, testified to this with their blood and steadfast death.
O, how greatly it is to be lamented that the ancients have not left us more definite and clear information with regard to this! We feel confident, that it would still refresh many a well-meaning heart, and serve to confirm their faith, if they should see that in those early, and not less turbulent times, many of their fellow brethren and sisters had such love for Christ, their beloved blood-bridegroom, and for his heavenly doctrine (which they confess with them), that they did not hesitate, the one in the fire, another in the water, some under the teeth and claws of wild beasts, others under the sword, the deadly halter, or otherwise, to bear testimony to it.
But we hope that in the right place, and throughout, we have given as much information and explanation in regard to it, as will satisfy a true Christian and well-meaning soul. All things cannot be discussed in one place.
We will here leave this, and proceed from the East, of which we have hitherto spoken, to the West, where now we think we can find clearer information concerning several special points of the faith, namely, of such persons as did not suffer under the heathen, Mohammedans, Saracens, or the like, but under the Pope of Rome, or the Roman church, where it was customary to condemn people on some particular articles of worship. But before we proceed to the martyrs who were punished as criminals and with death, we deem it well, by way of introduction to, and preparation for, this matter, to show first, how this, as by steps, took its rise; namely, how first a few persons, whom we shall name, about this time, opposed a certain papal Legate, with words and censures, for introducing certain superstitions; and what occurred to them, on this account, from the Pope.
OF DERTHUIN, BERTHERIUS, ANOBERT, HUNORED, AND OTHERS, WHO WERE DEPOSED FROM THEIR MINISTRY, BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT ACCEPT THE SUPERSTITIONS OF THE PAPAL LEGATE, ETC., ABOUT A. D. 748.
A certain Boniface, Archbishop of Mayence, having been sent out, as an apostle, ambassador and legate, by Pope Zacharias I., to convert the heathen to the Roman see (as it was called), and to inoculate to those who already belonged to it, the Roman ceremonies and superstitions, and cause them to observe the same, many bishops, overseers, or teachers, in Germany, Bavaria, and France, opposed it with spiritual weapons, namely, with reproofs from the word of God, refusing to obey in this respect, either the Pope or his Legate.
Among those who thus refused, there are mentioned by name, Derthuin, Bertherius, Anobert, and Hunored. These men were accused to the Pope, and charged not only with said matter, but, from envy, also with being avaricious, proud and desirous of filthy lucre. Thereupon they were all deposed from their ministry, by authority of the Pope and his Legate; but how it ended with them, is not stated, though it is to be presumed that some kind of ecclesiastical exclusion, anathematization or excommunication followed; however, since this is passed by in silence, we can conclude nothing certain concerning it.
In the meantime, there appears, on the one hand, the boldness of said persons in reproving the Roman superstitions, and, on the other hand, the shameless arrogance of the Pope and his legate, in deposing and removing those who, loving the good, could not refrain, according to the doctrine of the word of God, from reproving the evil. See A. Mell., fol. 328, col. 2, compared with Aventin. Annal. Boj., lib. 3.
HOW ALBERT OF GAUL, AND CLEMENT OF SCOTLAND, ALSO OPPOSED THE PAPAL SUPERSTITIONS, ABOUT A. D. 750; ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH THEY WERE MARTYRED.
It is stated that about A. D. 750, there lived two very eminent men, Albert, surnamed Gallas, that is, of Gaul or France, and Clement, surnamed Scotus, that is, of Scotland. Both opposed the superstitions of common popery in various points; Albert began first, in some part of France, and was followed by said Clement, who came from Scotland and joined him. In consequence of this, both, yet each separately, had to feel the sting of the Pope, in such a manner as the sequel will show. In order to present this, together with the circumstances pertaining to it, in the most suitable way, we shall treat of each separately, beginning with Albert, since he was the first and principal one in said matter.
ALBERT OF GAUL, FOR OPPOSING THE ROMAN SUPERSTITIONS, CAST INTO PRISON AT FULDA, IN WHICH HE, TO ALL APPEARANCE, PERISHED THROUGH WANT, ABOUT THE CLOSE OF THE YEAR 750.
Enlightened by the heavenly radiance of the doctrine of the apostles, Albert, with voice and pen, had again and again reproved the errors and superstitions of the Roman church, asserting, namely, that priests or teachers should not be prohibited from marrying; that the relics, or bones, of the saints ought not to be venerated; that images should not be worshiped or saluted as a religious service, and that the Pope has no right to the primacy (or supremacy) over the church. He condemned the masses for the dead, purgatory, etc., as [human] inventions. Wicelius adds: He rejected as unnecessary and superstitious, ceremonies, the imposition of hands, the making the sign of the cross, confirmation, etc., and, in short, all such things as are practiced in popery for the purpose of confirming infant baptism.
Boniface, the papal Legate, therefore, accused him to the Pope, fabricating and disseminating many slanders, which were spewed out against him as bitter gall. The Pope lost no time, nor sought to delay the matter, but immediately condemned him unheard upon these false accusations; and the abovementioned articles, excommunicated him, and sent the sentence of excommunication to said false accuser, namely, to Boniface, his dear Legate, that the latter should publish it against Albert, throughout France. Hence it is, that the papists number him among the heretics, though they fail to show what heresy it was, for which he was condemned and thus shamefully excommunicated; which matter must be gleaned from other writers, except the testimony quoted above from Wicelius, according to A. M.
Having received said letter containing Albert’s excommunication, from the Pope, Boniface not only caused the same to be published throughout France, and deposed him from his ministry, but also incarcerated him in the monastery at Fulda, in which imprisonment he probably died of hunger, thirst, and divers wants. Compare Wilibald. in vita Bonifacii, Aventin. Annal., lib. 3. Nauc. Gen. 26, vol. 2. Balaeus. Cent. 14, cap. 30, 31, in Append. Epist. Zach. ad Bonif., Tom. 2, Concil Lutsenb. Haigiol. in vita Bon., with A. M., fol. 328, col. 3; also, J. Gys., edition of 1657, fol. 30, col. 2, 3.