[JFR]
There is a lot of material concerning the Baptists in
America. It is noted that many Baptists left Europe
because of persecution. The history of Baptists in
America is also littered with persecution that they
thought they had left behind. The way to Freedom of
Worship in America is also blood-stained as these
early churches fought to have the freedom to carry
out the Great Commission as they felt that God
would them to do.
I am utilizing A History of the Baptists of the United
States by Albert Henry Newman who was a
Professor of Church History in McMaster University
in Toronto, Canada. It was copyrighted in 1894 and
was published by the Christian Literature Company.
Newman, in the Introduction of this work, goes to
great lengths to show the tie between the Baptists in
Europe and those in early America, later to be called
the United States of America.
~ 347 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
[Newman]
The Tie Between European Baptists and the
American Baptists
The Anabaptist movement of the sixteenth century
had its roots in the evangelical parties of the Middle
Ages, to which it owed its modes of thought, its type
of Christian life, and its methods of work. To the
peculiar circumstances of the time, it owed most of
the features that differentiate it from the earlier
movements. The term " Anabaptist " was applied
indiscriminately to all who, dissenting from the
dominant forms of Protestantism and from Roman
Catholicism, insisted on setting up separate churches
for the embodiment and propagation of their views.
To the dominant parties, Thomas Miinzer, the
mystical fanatic and socialistic agitator, who never
submitted to nor administered rebaptism, who
persisted in baptizing infants, and who sought to set
up the kingdom of Christ by carnal warfare, the
scholarly and soundly Scriptural Hubmaier, the
intellectual and spiritual mystic, Denck, and the
chiliastic fanatics of Miinster, were all alike
Anabaptists, and even the most Christ-like of these
were treated as criminals of the deepest dye. There
was some excuse for this confusion in the fact that
most of those to whom the epithet was applied denied
the Scriptural authorization of infant baptism and
~ 348 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
made baptism on a profession of faith a condition of
entering into their fellow- ship.
The beginning of the sixteenth century was a time of
unrest and expectancy. A spirit of revolution was
abroad. Enough of evangelical light and enough of
the spirit of freedom had been diffused among the
oppressed masses to insure among them an
enthusiastic reception for any movement that should
give fair promise of relief from priestcraft and of
social amelioration. When Luther denounced
indulgences and afterward went on assailing, one
after another, the corruptions, and errors of the
Roman Catholic Church, those who had come under
the influence of the evangelical movements of the
earlier time felt that now at last the day of deliverance
had come and rallied to his support. Luther's bold
proclamation of the sufficiency and authority of the
Scriptures, of the universal priesthood of believers,
and of the right of each individual Christian to
interpret the Scriptures for himself, and his
repudiation of " whatever falls short of, is apart from,
or goes beyond Christ," must have produced a strong
impression on those who had been long listening for
such a mighty leader to voice their sentiments. It was
natural that when Luther began to draw back, in
deference to the views of the civil rulers and from
fear of disastrous revolution, the radical reformers
that had taken him at his word should refuse to
conform to his moderated scheme and should set
~ 349 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
themselves in opposition to what they considered a
temporizing policy. (pp. 40-42)
The actions of Luther caused a backlash of violence
by some of the most radical of “Ana-Baptists.” The
rebellion engulfed most of Europe and even into
Switzerland. The persecution of the true Anabaptists
was great. Sometimes entire congregations migrated
to other places to try and escape it.
By 1530 nearly all of the Anabaptist leaders of the
earlier time had been destroyed. Persecution had
become so fierce and so general that apart from
Moravia there was scarcely a place of refuge. (p. 50)
Scriptural Baptism?
The traditions according to which Baptist churches,
as distinct from congregations of Dutch Mennonites,
existed in England prior to 1609 seem to be
unsupported by any evidence that the historian can
accept. It is possible that some Welsh congregations
of the ancient British type, or some Lollard
congregations, practiced believers' baptism in the
sixteenth century or earlier, but decisive evidence is
wanting. (61)
[JFR]
It seems that the Mennonites had a great deal of
influence on the churches in England. When the
~ 350 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
question concerning baptism arose, some were sent
to Holland to the Mennonites in order to receive
scriptural baptism.
I have read what Newman has written several times
on this matter, but I am still unclear as to whether
there was scriptural baptism present in this whole
affair.
Eventually, the persecution of the Baptists became so
severe that most of them migrated to Holland where
there was the freedom to worship as they pleased.
There was still much debate as to whether infant
baptism was scriptural or not. Some churches
seemed to have practiced it while others forbade it.
(Those churches who did not condone and believe in
infant baptism were often called “separatists.”)
[Newman]
About 1602 John Smyth, a Cambridge graduate and
one of the most scholarly men of his time, gathered a
separatist church at Gainsborough. About 1606
pastor and congregation emigrated to Amsterdam
and established themselves side by side with the
older English congregation as the " Second English
Church at Amsterdam." (p. 62)
[JFR]
Newman writes that later Smyth abandoned New
Testament principles and although he had renounced
~ 351 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
infant baptism, he became convinced that his
baptism and the baptism of those with him in that
“Second English Church at Amsterdam,” was also
invalid. He reinstituted baptism by immersion, but
church authority in the matter is quite questionable.
[Newman]
Smyth justified his act in instituting baptism anew on
grounds entirely satisfactory to modern Baptists. He
claimed that he and his followers had just as much
right to " baptize themselves " as his opponents had
" to set up a true church." " For if a true church," he
proceeds, " may be erected, which is the most noble
ordinance of the New Testament, then much more
baptism. ... If they must recover them, men must
begin so to do, and then two men joining together
may make a church." He maintained that " any man
raised up after the apostasy of antichrist, in the
recovering of the church by baptism," may "
administer it upon himself in communion with
others." The necessity for this procedure lay in the
fact " that there was no church to whom we could
join with a good conscience to have baptism from
them." (pp. 64, 65)
[JFR]
I cannot find anywhere in Newman’s writings where
the fact that scriptural baptism must come through a
~ 352 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
local church was ever introduced. That never seems
to arise in the matter of scriptural baptism.
[Newman]
Smyth and his followers were soon excluded from
the church that Smyth started because of the false
teachings to which he adhered. (p.65)
From the exclusion of Smyth and his adherents
onward, Helwys and Murton were the leaders of
what afterward came to be known as the General
Baptists. Smyth continued till his death to antagonize
pedobaptism, and few have ever presented the
Baptist argument in a more convincing manner.
Smyth claimed that the English separatists had
placed themselves in a position that they could not
consistently hold. They had renounced the Church of
England as apostate, and yet had been content with
the baptism and the ordination that they had received
in connection with that body; they claimed to be
striving to set up churches of the regenerate, but
continued to baptize infants, and without claiming
that they were re-generated thereby, to give them a
quasi-membership in their churches. Some of the
opponents of Smyth, apparently under the influence
of his arguments, abandoned the extreme separatist
position in favor of what is known as semi-
separatism. (pp. 65, 66)
~ 353 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
There arose two different groups in England that
were called Baptists.
The appellative " Particular" as applied to Baptists
has reference to their doctrine of redemption as
limited to the elect, in contradistinction to the
doctrine of universal redemption from which the
General Baptists derived their designation. The rise
of the Particular Baptists was as follows: in 1616
Henry Jacob, an Oxford graduate, who had been
converted to Congregational views by Francis
Johnson, and who had been for some years pastor of
an English congregation at Middelburg, Zeeland,
returned to England with a number of his church-
members, and settled at Southwark, London. He
doubtless soon gathered into his congregation the
scattered members of earlier churches, so far as these
had survived and remained in the vicinity.
Jacob's church was to be the mother of the English
Independents and of the Particular Baptists as well.
Discouraged
by
the
threatening
aspect
of
ecclesiastical affairs, Jacob emigrated to Virginia in
1624. He was succeeded in the pastorate by John
Lathrop, a Cambridge graduate. Pastor and people
suffered
almost
constant
persecution
under
Archbishop Laud. [In] 1632 forty of the members,
including the pastor, were thrown into prison.
Lathrop was released in 1634, but felt obliged to
emigrate to New England. During Lathrop's
pastorate a number withdrew "because the
~ 354 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
congregation kept not to their first principles of
separation," and because they were "convinced that
baptism was not to be administered to infants, but
only to such as professed faith in Christ."
According to an account attributed to William Kiffin,
a prominent actor in a later secession and afterward
one of the most influential of the Particular Baptist
leaders, "the church, considering that they were now
grown very numerous, and so more than could, in
these times of persecution, conveniently meet
together, and believing also that those persons acted
from a principle of conscience and not obstinacy,
agreed to allow them the liberty they desired, and that
they should be constituted a distinct church, which
they performed the 12th of September, 1633. And as
they believed that baptism was not rightly
administered to infants, so they looked upon the
baptism they had received in that age as invalid;
whereupon most or all of them received a new
baptism. Their minister was Mr. John Spilsbury."
According to a record of the original church, in 1638
seven others, whose names are given, "desiring to
depart and not to be censured, our interest in them
was remitted, with prayer made in their behalf, . . .
they having first forsaken us and joined with Mr.
Spilsbury." Spilsbury felt no difficulty about the new
introduction of believers' baptism, maintaining that
"baptizedness is not essential to the administrator,"
and repudiating the demand for apostolic succession
~ 355 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
as leading logically to "the popedom of Rome." The
Baptist leaven would continue to work in this
congregation until the whole mass should have been
leavened. According to the " Kiffin Manuscript," "
1640, 3d month. The church became two by mutual
consent, just half being with Mr. P. Barebone, and
the other half with Mr. H. Jessey. Mr. Richard Blunt
with him, being convinced of baptism, that also it
ought to be by dipping the body into the water,
resembling burial and rising again (Col. ii. 12; Rom.
vi. 4), had sober conference about it in the church;
and then with some of the forenamed, who also were
so convinced, and after prayer and conference about
their so enjoying it, none having then so practiced in
England to professed believers, and hearing that
some in the Netherlands had so practiced, they
agreed and sent over Mr. Richard Blunt (who
understood Dutch) with letters of commendation,
who was kindly accepted there, and returned with
letters from them, John Batte, a teacher there and
from that church, to such as sent him. 1641. They
proceed on therein—viz., those persons that were
persuaded baptism should be by dipping the body
had met in two companies and did intend so to meet
after this; all these agreed to proceed alike together,
and then manifesting (not by any formal words) a
covenant (which word was scrupled by some of
them), but by mutual desires and agreement each
testified, these two companies did set apart one to
baptize the rest, so it was solemnly performed by
~ 356 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
them. Mr. Blunt baptized Mr. Blacklock, that was a
teacher amongst them, and Mr. Blunt being baptized,
he and Mr. Blacklock baptized the rest of their
friends that were so minded, and many being added
to them, they increased much." Among those who
seceded with Spilsbury in 1633, and who were
immersed in 1641, was Mark Lukar, who was
afterward to occupy the position of ruling elder and
to be a leading worker in John Clarke's church at
Newport, R. I., of which he was " one of the first
founders " (Felt), and who died at Newport at an
advanced age in 1676, " leaving the character of a
very worthy walker." This point of connection
between the earliest Particular Baptist church of
England and one of the two earliest American Baptist
churches has hitherto, so far as the writer is aware,
been overlooked, and is of considerable importance.
(pp. 71-73)
Open or Closed Communion?
Baptism was not the only matter that concerned these
predecessors of the American churches.
It was an almost inevitable consequence of the
circumstances under which these churches were
formed that open communion should have been to
some extent practiced. The separations were from the
beginning peaceful, and when the pastor of the
original congregation became a Baptist, pedobaptist
members remained in the church. Mixed churches
~ 357 ~
Church History Through the Trail of Blood
involved open communion. William Kiffin became a
staunch advocate of restricted communion; Henry
Jessey, John Tombes, John Bunyan, and others
advocated
and
practiced
open
communion.
Restricted communion gained ground during the
eighteenth century; but toward the close of that
century and during the present century, under the
influence of Robert Robinson, Robert Hall, and
Charles H. Spurgeon, open communion has become
very general among English, but not among Welsh
and Scotch, Baptists. Yet the number of close-
communion
churches
in
England
is
still
considerable.
Conclusion to Chapter 1
[JFR]
Thus, the foundation is laid for the account of the
Baptists in the United States of America. In the next
chapter, we will consider who became responsible of
the organization of Baptists and the introduction of
freedom of worship.
~ 358 ~