SQLite format 3@  ±±MwtableTopicsTopicsCREATE TABLE Topics (Title NVARCHAR(100), Notes TEXT)![¿ûöñìçâÝØÓÎÉÄ¿ºµ°«¦¡œ—’ˆƒ~ytoje`[033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs24 CONTENTS…n!‹M0000-Title{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red255\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 BAPTIST HISTORY: FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH TO THE CLOSE OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY\par \cf0 \par \cf2 BY\par J. M. CRAMP, DD.,\par AUTHOR OF\par "A TEXT-BOOK OF POPERY," "THE REFORMATION IN EUROPE," ETC., ETC.\par \cf1 \par \cf0\par PHILADELPHIA: AMERICAN BAPTIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY,\par 530 ARCH STREET\¨3Ž2j1R.--++*ñ)Ý'®&€$F"ù â̸¨H* úËœŽ f e dK:#.\par \cf0\b0\par \par \b THE PRIMITIVE PERIOD.\par \b0\par CHAP.\par I.Introductory Remarks-P\'e6dobaptist Concessions\par \par II.The Apostolic Fathers-Justin Martyr-Iren\'e6us\par \par III.Tertullian-Baptism of Children in Africa-Origen-First Appearance of \par Infant Baptism-The Clinics-Christianity in England\par \par \b THE TRANSITION PERIOD.\par \b0\par I.The Catechumens-Progress of Infant Baptism-Delay of Baptism-Gregory \par Nazianzen-Chrysostom-Basil-Ephrem of Edessa-The Emperor \par Constantine-Immersion still the Mode\par \par II.Christian Intolerance-Justin's Law, enjoining Infant Baptism-The \par Novatians-The Donatists-Pelagianism\par \par \b THE OBSCURE PERIOD.\par \par \b0 I.The Manich\'e6ans-Cautions to the Student-All Opponents of Infant Baptism \par not Baptists-Account of the Paulicians-Their Views of Baptism\par \par II.Religious Reform in Europe-The Canons of \par Orleans-Arras-Berengarius-Miscellaneous Anecdotes\par \par \b THE REVIVAL PERIOD.\par \b0\par I.State of Affairs in Europe during this Period-The Crusades -Other \par Important Events-The Scholastic Divines and \par Philosophers-Universities-Printing\par \par II.Paulicians in France and Italy-General View of the Reform \par Movement-Various Names given to the Reformers-Sentiments held by \par them-False Charge of Manich\'e6ism-Their Activity-Reinerus Saccho's Account\par \par III.Success of the Reforming Parties-Consternation at Rome-Anathemas-The \par Dominican and Franciscan Orders-Sanguinary Persecution-Crusade against the \par Albigenses-The Inquisition Movement in England-John de Wycliffe-The \par Lollards-Bohemia\par \par IV.Various Opinions respecting Baptism-Berengar-Peter of Bruys-Henry of \par Lausanne-Arnold of Brescia-Cologne-England-Lombers-Pope Lucius III\par \par V.Heretics of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries-Wycliffe's Sentiments \par on Baptism-The Bohemians-Baptism among the Waldenses-Church \par Government-Immersion\par \par \b THE REFORMATION PERIOD.\par \b0\par I.Rise of the Reformation-Opinions held by the Baptists-Misrepresented by \par the Reformers-Their Wonderful Increase-Support under Sufferings\par \par II.German Baptists-Thomas Munzer-The Peasant War-Michael Satler- Hans \par Schaffier -Salzburg- Wolfgang Brand-Huebert-The Burggraf of Alzey-Imperial \par Edicts\par \par III.Persecuting Tenets of the Reformers-German Diets-The Congregation at \par Steinborn-Leonard Bernkop-The Crown of Straw-Johannes Bair-Hans \par Pichner-Hans Breal-Baptists in Italy\par \par IV.Baptists in Switzerland-Zuingli-Concessions of Bullinger and \par Meshovius-Disputations-Drownings-Felix Mantz -Balthazar Hubmeyer-Louis \par Hetzer-Emigration to Moravia-Jacob Hutter\par \par  V.The Netherlands-Sicke Snyder-Furious Edict-The Inquisition-Severities of \par Philip II.-Torture-Lysken-Gerrit Hase-poot-Joris Wippe-Private \par Executions-Horrid Rackings\par \par VI.Biography of Menno Simon-Account of his Publications-Church Government \par among the Baptists-Missionary Excursions\par \par VII.Baptists in England-Proclamation of Henry VIII.-Latimer's Sermon \par before Edward VI.-Baptists excepted from "Arts of Pardon"-Royal \par Commissions against them-Ridley-Cranmer - Joan Boucher- Rogers - \par Philpot-Bishop Hooper's Scruples-George Van Pare-Protestant Persecutions \par Inexcusable-Congregations in Essex and Kent-Bonner-Gardiner-Disputations \par in Jail-Queen Elizabeth's Proclamation against Baptists-Bishop Jewel \par -Archbishop Parker-Dutch Baptists\par \par VIII.Enormities Perpetrated at Munster and other places-Injustice of \par Ascribing them to Baptist Sentiments\par \par  \b THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD.\par \par \b0 I.Baptists Persecuted by all other Sects-Liberal Policy of William, Prince \par of Orange-The "Union of Utrecht"-Differences of Opinion-Persecution in \par Moravia and in Switzerland\par \par II.Dutch Baptists Persecuted in England-Account of Hendrick Terwoort and \par Jan Pieters-Their Martyrdom-Their Religious Sentiments-Whitgift's \par Invectives against the Baptists\par \par III.Severity of Elizabeth's Government-Bigotry of James I.-The Hampton \par Court Conference - Emigration - John Smyth's Church-Their \par Confessions-Bartholomew Legate-Extracts from Baptist Publications on \par Liberty of Conscience-The King's distress at their Increase\par \par IV.Character of Charles I.-Sufferings during his Reign-First Particular \par Baptist Church-Samuel Howe-Dr. Featley's Book-Baptist Confessions of \par Faith-Toleration hated by the Presbyterians-Their attempts to put dow n the \par Baptists-Milton's Lines-The Assembly of Divines-Outcry against \par Immersion-Parliamentary Declaration in favor of the Baptists-Fearful \par "Ordinance" against them-Their Activity during the Commonwealth and the \par Protectorate-Cromwell's Baptist Officers-The "Triers"-Baptists in Ireland\par \par V.Character of Charles II. and James II.-Commencement of \par Persecution-Venner's Rebellion-Disclaimer by Baptists -Severe \par Sufferings-John James-Act of Uniformity-The Aylesbury Baptists-Benjamin \par Keach Pilloried-Conventicle Act-Five-Mile Act-Their Effects\par \par VI.History of the Broadmead Church, Bristol\par \par VII.Declaration of Indulgence-Confession of Faith-Fierce Persecution - \par Thomas Delaune -The Duke of Monmouth's Rebellion-Account of the Hewlings - \par Mrs. Gaunt-The Dark Time-Another Declaration of Indulgence-William \par Kiffin-Thc Glorious Revolution\par \par VIII.Prin ciples and Practices of the Denomination-Human Tradition \par Renounced-Freedom of Conscience Demanded-Personal Piety requisite to \par Church Fellowship-Purity of Discipline-Cases cited-Mode of Public \par Worship-Plurality of Elders-Communion-Singing-Laying on of hands-The \par Sabbath\par \par IX.Biographical Notices-John Smyth, Thomas Helwys, and John \par Spilsbury----Henry Denne-Francis Cornwell, A.M.-Christopher \par Blackwood-Major-General Harrison-Col. Hutchinson\par \par X.Biographical Notices Continued- Henry Jessey, A.M.-John Canne-Vavasor \par Powell-Abraham Cheare\par \par XI.Biographical Notices Continued-John Toombes, B.D.-Francis Bampfield, \par A.M.-Henry D'Anvers-Edward Terrill-Dr. Du Veil-John Bunyan\par \par XII.Biographical Notices Continued-Thomas Grantham-Hanserd \par Knollys-Benjamin Keach-William Kiffin-Anecdotes\par \par XIII.Baptists in North America-Church at Providence-Bapti sts in \par Massachusetts - Persecuting Enactment against them-The Whipping of Obadiah \par Holmes-First Church at Holmes-First Church at Boston-Newport-Swansea-Other \par Churches-Roger Williams-Gregory Dexter-Obadiah Holmes-John Miles-Elias \par Keach\par \par \b THE QUIET PERIOD.\par \b0\par I.General Character of the Period-Baptist General Assembly in \par London-Questions-Particular Baptist Fund-Baptist Board-The Deputies-The \par Widows' Fund-The Book Society-Bristol College-Dr. John Ward-Toleration \par Act-Schism Bill-Dissenters excluded from \par Office-Restrictions-Relief-Decline of the General Baptists-Communion \par Controversy-Effects of High Calvinism on the Particular \par Baptists-Commencement of Revival-Fuller and Sutcliffe-State of the \par Denomination in England-Foreign and Home Missions\par \par II.Biographical Notices-Dr. John Gale-John Skepp-John Brine-Dr. Gill-John \par Macgowan-Robert Robinson-Robert Hall, Sen.-John Ryland-The \par Stennetts-Benjamin Beddome - Samuel Pearce - John Piggott - The \par Wallins-Dr. Andrew Gifford-Mordecai Abbott, Esq.-Thomas and John \par Hollis-Miss Steele-Mrs. Seward\par \par III.Progress of the Denomination in North America-Sufferings in New \par England-Mrs. Elizabeth Backus-Mrs. Kimball-Virginia-Whitefield's \par Preaching-The "New Lights"-First Churhes in Different States-Philadelphia \par Association-Other Associations-Correspondence with London Ministers-Great \par Revivals-Brown University-Nova Scotia-New Brunswick-Canada\par \par \b STATISTICS AND REFLECTIONS.\par \b0\par I.Effects of the Mission Enterprise-Revivals-Extension of the \par Denomination-Statistical Table-Societies-Diversity and Adaptation of \par Talent-Baptist Agency now employed-Peculiarities of the Present \par Period-Duties of Baptists.\par \par \par \par \par } that they may be able to correct the erroneous \par and expose the false. It is the object of this work to endeavour to meet their \par wishes. \par \par Let us begin with the New Testament. Who can read that blessed book with serious \par attention without coming to the conclusion that the religion of which it treats \par is personal and voluntary, and that none are worthy to be called Christians but \par those who "worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no \par confidence in the flesh"? (Phil. iii:3). When Moses addressed the Israelites, \par and exhorted them to obedience, he included their children in his exhortations, \par because the children were in the covenant. Judaism, with all its privileges and \par responsibilities, was hereditary. The rights and duties of the parents became \par the rights and duties of their offspring, as such. It is not so under the New \par Dispensation. Men are not born Christians, but they become Christians, when they \par repent and believe. "As many as received Him, to them gave He power to become \par the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name; which were born, not of \par blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John \par i:12, 13). Judaism was a national institute: Christianity is an individual \par blessing. The Jews were a nation, dealt with as such, and separated from other \par nations Christians are believers, taken out of all nations, and in Christianity \par "there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, \par Scythian, bond nor free, but Christ is all and in all" (Col. iii:II). Hence, \par when the Apostles wrote to Christian churches their mode of address was \par altogether different from that adopted by Moses. They did not say, "you and your \par children," or represent the children as in covenant with God, and therefore \par entitled to certain rights and bound to the performance of certain duties. The \par churches to which they sent their epistles were spiritual societies-that is, \par associations of individuals professing "repentance toward God and faith toward \par our Lord Jesus Christ", to whom they had surrendered themselves, as their \par Prophet, Priest, and King. If those individuals were parents, they were taught \par to bring up their children "in the nurture and admonition of the Lord"; but \par their children were not classed with them, as the children of the Jews were, nor \par could they be, till they themselves also repented and believed. It is an obvious \par inference, that no modern society deserves to be called a Christian Church, \par which is not founded on such principles as have now been explained. \par \par If you were to place a New Testament in the hands of an intelligent, impartial \par person, who had never heard of our divisions and denominations, what idea would \par he be likely to form of the spirit and design of Christianity, or of a Christian \par Church? Would he not see, in every part of the book, appeals to men's \par understandings and emotions, and such requisitions as could be addressed to \par those only who were capable of thinking and acting for themselves? Would he not \par conclude that Christianity has to do with mind-that a Christian must be a man of \par repentance and faith, and that a church is a voluntary society, formed of such \par men? \par \par We come to the question of baptism. What is baptism? It is "the answer of a good \par conscience toward God" (i Peter iii:21). It is "putting on Christ" (Gal. \par iii:27). It is the voluntary act of a believer, an act of obedience and \par self-dedication. Such is the uniform tenor of the history. So the multitudes \par went out to John, "even all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and were \par all baptized of him in the river of Jordan" (Mark i:5). So the Samaritans, "when \par they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the \par name of Jesus Christ, were baptized, both men and women" (Acts viii:12). Mark it \par well-"men and women,"-no children! So, in later times, the baptized were \par reminded of their obligations: "We are buried with Him by baptism into death, \par that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even \par so we should walk in newness of life" (Rom. vi:4). \par \par The New Testament tells of the baptism of believers, and of churches composed of \par believers. We read of no other baptism, no other churches. It will not do to say \par in reply that all who were baptized were not believers, and that all the members \par of Apostolic churches were not sincere. There were, doubtless, hypocrites then, \par as there are hypocrites now. Even the Apostles were sometimes deceived. But this \par does not affect the case. All who were baptized professed to be believers, and \par were baptized as such. The profession of faith was held to be essential to \par baptism and to church fellowship. None could profess faith who were incapable of \par understanding the faith. The act of profession implied approbation, conviction, \par choice. \par \par This, then, is the starting point. Here is the beginning of the history of \par baptism. With the New Testament only before us, we find baptism connected with \par the profession of faith. It is a personal, voluntary act; and such an act only \par is befitting Christianity. \par \par But in the Christianity of the nineteenth century, or what is called such, there \par is a service of another kind. It is sprinkling-not immersion; and the subjects \par are infants-not believers. How is this? In what manner was it introduced? How \par and when did it originate? \par \par These questions will be answered hereafter. This section will be closed by \par placing before the reader a few extracts from P\'e6dobaptist writers of the \par nineteenth century, showing how the learned men of these times regard the \par subject, from an historical point of view. \par \par NORTH BRITISH REVIEW, Presbyterian (article ascribed to the Rev. Dr. Hanna). \par "Scripture knows nothing of the baptism of infants. There is absolutely not a \par single trace of it to be found in the New Testament."1 \par \par PROFESSOR JACOBI, University of Berlin, Reformed Church. "Infant baptism was \par established neither by Christ nor by the Apostles. In all places where we find \par the necessity of baptism notified, either in a dogmatic or historical point of \par view, it is evident that it was only meant for those who were capable of \par comprehending the word preached, and of being converted to Christ by an act of \par their own will."2 \par \par DR. HAGENBACH, Basle, Reformed Church. "The passages from Scripture which are thought to intimate that infant baptism had come into use in the Primitive \par Church, are doubtful, and prove nothing."3 \par \par NEANDER, the Church Historian. "Baptism was administered at first only to \par adults, as men were accustomed to conceive baptism and faith as strictly \par connected. We have all reason for not deriving infant baptism from Apostolic \par institution; and the recognition of it which followed somewhat later, as an \par Apostolical tradition, serves to confirm this hypothesis." . . . "In respect to \par the form of baptism, it was, in conformity with the original institution and the \par original import of the symbol, performed by immersion, as a sign of entire \par baptism into the Holy Spirit, of being entirely penetrated by the same."4 \par \par PROFESSOR STUART, late of Andover, Congregationalist. "There are no commands, or plain and certain examples, in the New Testament relative to infant baptism."5 \par \par DR. HODGE, of Princeton, New Jersey, Presbyterian. "In no part of the New \par Testament is any other condition of membership in the Church prescribed than \par that contained in the answer of Philip to the eunuch who desired baptism. The \par Church, therefore, is in its essential nature a company of believers."6 \par \par DR. WOODS, Congregationalist. "We have no express precept or example for infant \par baptism in all our holy writings."7 \par \par DR. CHALMERS, Presbyterian. "The original meaning of the word baptism is \par immersion; and though we regard it as a point of indifference whether the \par ordinance so named be performed this way or by sprinkling, yet we doubt not that \par the prevalent style of the administrations in the Apostles' days was of an \par actual submersion of the whole body under water."8 \par \par DR. BLOOMFIELD, Episcopalian. "There is here (Rom. 6:4) plainly a reference to \par the ancient mode of baptism by immersion; and I agree with Koppe and Rosenm\'fcller \par (two German commentators), that there is reason to regret it should have been \par abandoned in most Christian churches, especially as it has so evidently a \par reference to the mystic sense of baptism."9 \par \par Rev. W. J. CONYBEARE, M.A., Episcopalian. "This passage (Rom. 6:4) cannot be \par understood unless it be borne in mind that the primitive baptism was by \par immersion."10 \par \par Many more quotations might be given, but these will be sufficient. It will be \par observed that none of these writers are Baptists. But they do not venture to \par affirm that infant sprinkling is derived from the New Testament. Learned \par P\'e6dobaptist generally admit that believers only were baptized in Apostolic \par times. \par \par 1 August, 1852. \par 2 Kitto's Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature. Art. "Baptism." \par 3 History of Doctrines, i. 193. \par 4 History of the Church, i. 310, 311. \par 5 Hayne's Baptist Denomination, p. 31. \par 6 Ibid. \par 7 Ibid \par 8 Lectures on Romans, ch. vi. 4. \par 9 Critical Digest, in loc. \par 10 Life and Writings of St. Paul, ii. American Edition. \par \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } ÉQ'“ 0004-Contents{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs24 CONTENTS…n!‹M0000-Title{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red255\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 BAPTIST HISTORY: FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH TO THE CLOSE OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY\par \cf0 \par \cf2 BY\par J. M. CRAMP, DD.,\par AUTHOR OF\par "A TEXT-BOOK OF POPERY," "THE REFORMATION IN EUROPE," ETC., ETC.\par \cf1 \par \cf0\par PHILADELPHIA: AMERICAN BAPTIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY,\par 530 ARCH STREET\par 76 EAST NINTH ST, NEW YORK; \par 38 LOMBARD BLOCK, CHICAGO, ILL.;\par 209 NORTH SIXTH ST., ST. LOUIS, MO.\par \par \par \par \par \par } BBÕq©=0101-Introductory Remarks-Paedobaptist Concessions{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 BAPTIST HISTORY. \par \cf0 \par \par \par \cf1 CHAPTER I. \par Introductory Remarks-Paedobaptist Concessions\cf0 . \par \par Baptists are often asked for information respecting the history of their \par distinctive opinions and practices. Inquirers say that statements various and \par even contradictory are made in their hearing, and they are very desirous of \par being put on the right track, so  "in the name of the Father, and of the \par Son, and of the Holy Ghost." It was the declaration of their adhesion to Christ, \par and the symbol of their renunciation of sin. It was in every case the act of a \par free agent, and thus it harmonized with the spiritual nature of Christianity. \par All this is now generally admitted. \par \par The next inquiry is, Did the usages of the period im\-mediately succeeding the \par Apostolic, accord with these views? Or did they indicate any change or any \par depar\-ture from them? \par \par Here it is necessary to interpose a caution. Apostolic example has the force of \par authority. It is the inspired exposition of the law. Not so the example of the \par primitive churches as they are called, that is, as they existed after the \par Apostolic age. The plainness of the Christian cere\-monial offended those who \par were fond of pomp and show, and the equality of the Christian brotherhood \par offended those who loved power. Hence corruptions crept in. They were \par anticipated and foretold by the Apostles. And hence the necessity of \par distinguishing between Divine law and human tradition. We have no power to \par change the law, or to make any addition to it. The assumption of such power in \par primitive times was a fatal error, the evil consequences of which are felt to \par this day. Instead of adhering strictly to the Scripture rule, men dealt with \par Christianity as they dealt with systems of philosophy. They treated it as if it \par were susceptible of improvement, and might be accommodated to circumstances. \par They took the liberty to engraft on it certain peculiarities of Judaism, and \par even of Paganism. They multiplied forms to the sore detriment of the spirit and \par the life. \par \par It has been customary to appeal to the opinions and practices of the churches of \par the first three centuries after the Apostles. In the controversy with the Church \par of Rome it is an available argument to this extent, that it takes from that \par Church the plea of antiquity, since it proves that Romanism, as such, did not \par exist in the above-mentioned period. Yet it cannot be denied that the first \par steps towards Romanism were then taken. Professing Christians soon abandoned the \par high ground of Scripture, and took pleasure in "vain deceit" and "will-worship." \par In this they are not examples for our imitation. We must go further back-to the \par Book itself-to the recorded enactments of the Divine Lawgiver; and our object \par will be to ascertain how far, and by whom, the Savior's will has been regarded. \par This can only be accomplished by consulting the writers of the times now under \par consideration. The "Apostolic Fathers" first claim attention. They are: \par Barnabas, Hermas, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, and Polycarp. To these some add \par Papias, a few fragments only of whose writings have been preserved by Eusebius, \par the ecclesiastical historian. They contain no reference to the subject now \par before us. \par \par The writings ascribed to Barnabas and Hermas were probably composed in the \par second century, by some weak-minded Christians, who fathered their own poor \par effusions on the coadjutor of the Apostle Paul, and the brother mentioned by him \par in his epistle to the Romans (chap. 16:14). But though they are not genuine \par books, they may be regarded as witnesses to the religious views entertained by \par the Christians of those times. In the work ascribed to Barnabas, we find the \par following passage:-"We descend into the water laden with sins and corruption, \par and ascend bearing fruit, having in the heart the fear [towards God], and in the \par spirit the hope towards Jesus."1 There are several references to baptism in the \par writings bearing the name of Hermas, some of them exceedingly fanciful, but \par there is not the slightest allusion to infant baptism; he speaks repeatedly of \par descending into the water, and ascending out of it, evidently alluding to \par immersion. \par \par Let us pass on to Clement of Rome. He was bishop or pastor of the Church in \par Rome, and died about the year 100. His epistle to the Corinthians is a precious \par gem. Baptism is not mentioned in it. A second epistle to the Corinthians is \par attributed to him, but without sufficient grounds. There is one sentence \par referring to baptism. It is as follows:-"If we do not keep the baptism pure and \par undefiled, with what confidence shall we enter the kingdom of God?"2 \par Ignatius comes next. He was pastor at Antioch in Syria, and suffered martyrdom \par by exposure to wild beasts at Rome, A.D. 116. Several letters were written by \par him, which have come down to us in an interpolated state. There are a few \par allusions to baptism. He refers twice to the baptism of our Saviour by John. He \par tells the Smyrneans that the ordinance should not be administered without the \par bishop.3 In writing to Polycarp he uses this military phraseology-"Let your \par baptism continue as a shield, faith as a helmet, love as a spear.4 This is all." \par Polycarp suffered martyrdom by fire at Smyrna, A.D. 167. An epistle to the \par Philippians is attributed to him. It does not allude either to baptism or to the \par Lord's Supper. \par \par Justin Martyr was a philosophic Christian. He was put to death at Rome, A.D. \par 166. In his first "Apology," addressed to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, he gives \par the following account of baptism as practiced in his days: "As many as are \par persuaded and believe that what we teach is true, and undertake to conform their \par lives to our doctrine, are instructed to fast and pray, and entreat from God the \par remission of their past sins, we fasting and praying together with them. They \par are then conducted by us to a place where there is water, and are regenerated in \par the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For they are then washed \par in the name of God the Father and Lord of the Universe, and of our Saviour Jesus \par Christ, and of the Holy Spirit."5 Observe the manner in which he speaks of \par baptism. The candidates are those who are "persuaded" and "believe;" and the \par ordinance is administered, not by sprinkling, but by the washing of immersion. \par Semisch, the learned biographer of Justin, says, "Whenever Justin refers to \par baptism, adults appear as the objects to whom the sacred rite is administered. \par Of infant baptism he knows nothing." \par \par Iren\'e6us became bishop of Lyons in France, A.D. 177, and died A.D. 202. He \par mentions baptism several times, and seemingly connects it with regeneration, as \par Justin had done before him, in the passage just cited: but it is extremely \par doubtful whether Justin or Iren\'e6us thought that men were regenerated in or by \par baptism. Their object was to show that as the convert came under new obligations \p ar and entered into new relationships, at his baptism, it was equivalent to the \par assumption of a new life: he was in this profession "born again unto God," and \par publicly entered into the spiritual family. This view of the subject is \par confirmed by another representation given of baptism by Justin in the course of \par his narrative. He says, "This washing is called 'Illumination,' because those \par who learn these things are enlightened in their minds."6 Baptism is not " \par illumination," but it is so called because it is connected with an enlightened \par state of mind: in like manner, baptism is called "Regeneration," not because it \par regenerates, but because it is connected with a regenerate state and a new life, \par profession of which is then made. \par \par Two passages used to be quoted by P\'e6dobaptist writers, as testimonies in favour \par of infant baptism. One is from Justin Martyr. He writes thus:-"Many men and many \par women, sixty and seventy year!s old, who from children have been disciples of \par Christ, preserve their continence."7 The other is from Iren\'e6us. These are his \par words: "He came to save all persons by Himself; all, I say, who are regenerated \par by Him unto God-infants, and children, and boys, and young men, and old men." \par But baptism is not mentioned in either of these passages, and modern critics \par have confessed that they afford no support to the P\'e6dobaptist view. All that \par Justin means is, that he knew many persons who had been disciples of Christ from \par early life; and he expressly connects "choice" and "knowledge" with baptism, of \par which infants are incapable. The language used by Iren\'e6us "merely expresses," \par says Hagenbach (a German P\'e6dobaptist), "the beautiful idea that Jesus was \par Redeemer in every stage of life, and for every stage of life; but it does not \par say that He became Redeemer for children by water baptism."8 \par \par We are now brought to the cl"ose of the second century. But few Christian authors \par had as yet appeared. Is it not remarkable, however, that in none of their \par writings which have been preserved is there any mention of infant baptism? If it \par existed, it must have been a prominent thing in the Church transactions of the \par period. But these Christians knew nothing of it. Neither Clement of Rome, nor \par Ignatius, nor Justin, nor any other author, wrote a word which would lead us to \par suppose that infants were baptized. There is a singular difference in this \par respect between the statements of these Christian fathers and the correspondence \par of modern P\'e6dobaptist missionaries. Read the letters of missionaries in the \par Reports of Missionary Societies. How careful they are to give us full \par information respecting the number of children that have been baptized, and how \par numerous are the references to them! With what solicitude are arrangements made, \par and their operation watched over, with a view to the religious instruction and \par training of baptized children! We search the Christian writings of the first two \par centuries in vain for anything of this kind. That the Christians of those times \par gave their children the benefit of religious teaching and example is not to be \par doubted; but they did not baptize them till they could answer for themselves, \par and voluntarily assume the vows of the Christian profession. \par \par We have now advanced two hundred years, and have not yet found infant baptism. \par It will come in sight soon, along with other corruptions and inventions. \par \par 1 Chap. ii. \par 2 Sect. 6. \par 3 Sect. 8. \par 4 Sect. 6. \par 5 Sect. 79. \par 6 Sect. 80. \par 7 Apol. i. sect. 18. \par 8 History of Doctrines, i. p. 193. Dr. Ira Chase has examined all the passages n \par Iren\'e6us in which the phrase "regenerated unto God" occurs. See Bibliotheca \par Sacra, November, 1849. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } »P»°5g‚à0103-Tertullian-Baptism of Children in Africa{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0$Ü}A¹I0102-The Apostolic Fathers{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 CHAPTER II. \par The Apostolic Fathers-Justin Martyr-Iren\'e6us. \par \cf0 \par This, then, is our starting point. The baptism of the New Testament is the \par baptism of believers. Our next inquiry will be, How the post-Apostolic Church \par thought and acted on this subject ? \par \par Christian baptism, as instituted by the Saviour, and practiced by the Apostles, \par was the immersion of believers in water,% Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 CHAPTER III. \par Tertullian-Baptism of Children in Africa-Origen-First Appearance \par of Infant Baptism-The Clinics-Christianity in England. \par \cf0 \par We are now approaching the development of those corrupting influences which had \par been at work from the Apostolic age, silently sapping the foundations of \par personal piety. In adverting to the language employed by Justin Martyr and \par Iren\'e6us, we endeavoured to clear those authors from the imputation of \par unevangelical sentiments, and to interpret their expressions in a sound and safe \par sense. But though it may be possible to hold them guiltless, it is feared that \par many of their cotemporaries were fairly open to the charge of holding \par unscriptural opinions. A notion had grown up, that baptism actually accomplished \par what was professed in it. As the miraculous gifts of the& Spirit were often \par bestowed upon believers immediately after their baptism, men began to think that \par it was then first that the Spirit wrought on the soul. And as the act of \par obedience to the Saviour in the ordinance was commonly associated with spiritual \par enjoyments and manifestations, and happy converts, like the eunuch, "went on \par their way rejoicing," there were some who came to the conclusion that what was \par connected with baptism was produced by it. If the convictions that led the \par candidate to the baptismal water, and impelled him to the act of dedication to \par the Savior's service, were greatly strengthened at his baptism, so that he then \par experienced a more intensely satisfying consciousness of pardon and union with \par Christ, results were confounded with causes, and the new believer was taught to \par ascribe to baptism the blessings which he had in fact enjoyed before, but which \par he realized more vividly when he obeyed the Lord. \p'ar \par This step taken, the transition to yet more perilous errors and evils was easy. \par When baptism was thus invested with a kind of supernatural power, the outward \par act was soon substituted for the spiritual qualification. Instead of directing \par inquirers to the Atonement, and encouraging them to seek by prayer for the \par teaching and aid of the Holy Spirit, the religious instructions of that age \par expatiated on the vast powers of baptism. Tertullian, for example, a Christian \par writer who flourished at the close of the second and the commencement of the \par third century, "declares the following spiritual blessings to be consequent upon \par baptism:-remission from sins, deliverance from death, regeneration, and \par participation in the Holy Spirit. He calls it the 'sacrament of washing,' the \par 'blessed sacrament of water,' the 'laver of regeneration.'"1 When such opinions \par as these were entertained, is it not evident that the door was open to manifol(d \par abuses, and that those who had so far departed from Christian truth, would be \par likely enough to interfere with Christian worship and obedience? \par \par Tertullian was a native of Carthage in Africa, and spent most of his life in \par that city. It is supposed that he died about the year 220. His tract, "De \par Baptismo," was probably written twenty years before his death. From that tract \par and from other writings of his, we learn that at the beginning of the third \par century, there were some strange additions to the ordinance of baptism. The new \par convert was placed among the catechumens, that he might be fully instructed in \par the faith. After a sufficient probation he was admitted to baptism. The \par following account of the manner in which it was administered is taken from the \par late Bishop of Bristol's "Ecclesiastical History of the Second and Third \par Centuries, illustrated from the Writings of Tertullian":- \par \par "The candidate, having be)en prepared for its due reception by frequent prayers, \par fasts, and vigils, professed, in the presence of the congregation and under the \par hand of the president, that he renounced the devil, his pomp, and angels. He was \par then plunged into the water three times, in allusion to the Three Persons of the \par Holy Trinity, making certain responses which, like the other forms here \par mentioned, were not prescribed in Scripture, but rested on custom and tradition. \par He then tasted a mixture of milk and honey-was anointed with oil, in allusion to \par the practice under the Mosaic Dispensation of anointing those who were appointed \par to the priesthood, since all Christians are, in a certain sense, supposed to be \par priests-and was signed with the sign of the cross. Lastly followed the \par imposition of hands, the origin of which ceremony is referred by our author to \par the benediction pronounced by Jacob upon the sons of Joseph."2 \par \par The administration of bap*tism was at that early period encumbered by ceremonies \par of merely human invention; in fact, Tertullian complains, in another work, that \par "various forms and observances had been introduced into the Christian worship, \par of which some bore too close a resemblance to the customs and practices of the \par Gentiles." The signing with the sign of the cross was a superstition early \par practiced among the Christians. They crossed themselves perpetually. Whatever \par they undertook or engaged in-when they went out-when they returned home-when they dressed themselves, or put on their shoes, or sat down to a meal, or went \par to the bath or to bed-the sign of the cross was associated with everything. We \par need not wonder that the heathen suspected it to savour of magic. \par \par We have mentioned these particulars for the purpose of showing that, at the \par beginning of the third century, religious declension had considerably advanced. \par No one will now be surprised at he+aring that an attempt was made to extend the \par administration of baptism in an unwarrantable manner. It is referred to by \par Tertullian in his tract, "De Baptismo," in terms of strong disapproval. Some \par persons had introduced children (not infants) to baptism, or advocated the \par administration of the ordinance to them. Tertullian indignantly reproves the \par practice. "Let them come," he says, "when they are taught to whom they may \par come; let them become Christians when they are able to know Christ. Why should \par this innocent age hasten to the remission of sins?"3 Now, is it not obvious that \par Ter\-tullian was entirely unacquainted with infant baptism, and that this \par children's baptism, which then first began to be talked of, was regarded by him \par as an unauthorized innovation? The sign of the cross, the giving of milk and \par honey, and similar ceremonies, were comparatively, small matters, trifling \par circumstances; they were uncalled-for additi,ons to the ordinance, and were so \par far mischievous but they did not change it. It was still connected with \par knowledge, and repentance, and faith. But the admission of children, if they \par were not old enough to repent and believe, would change the ordinance. It would \par dissever it from those religious prerequisites with which it had been hitherto \par uniformly associated. The Gentile or Jewish rites which had been added to it \par tended to make it more imposing, and so attracted the notice of the weak-minded; \par but to allow children to be baptized, who were not subjects of repentance and \par faith, would be, in Tertullian's opinion, to revolutionize the institute \par altogether. We act more wisely, he remarked, in temporal matters; surely we \par ought not to admit to baptism those whom we consider unfit to manage temporal \par affairs. So he argued. \par \par The case is quite clear. Children (not infants, but probably children from six \par to ten years old-) are first mentioned in connection with the ordinance at the \par beginning of the third century, and then with disapproval. "Tertullian's \par opposition," the learned Baron Bunsen remarks, "is to the baptism of young, \par growing children; he does not say a word about new-born infants."4 \par \par Some writers have laboured hard to prove that Origen referred in his writings to \par infant-baptism as a then existing fact, and that he assigned to it an Apostolic \par origin. Origen was the most learned Christian of that age. He flourished from \par A.D. 203 to A.D. 254, and attained high repute, both as a teacher in the \par catechetical school of Alexandria and as an author. But his references are to \par child-baptism, not to infant-baptism; and the difference between him and \par Tertullian is, that the latter decidedly objected to the practice, while Origen \par spoke of it with approbation. How far, however, did that approbation extend? \par Only to the baptism of such chil.dren as were capable of instruction, and gave \par indications of piety; for he uniformly taught that "the benefit of baptism \par depended on the deliberate purpose of the baptized." His reply to an objection \par of Celsus expresses his views. That heathen writer, having stated that \par "intelligent and respectable persons" were invited to initiation in the heathen \par mysteries, proceeds thus:-"And now let us hear what persons the Christians \par invite. Whoever, they say, is a sinner, whoever is unintelligent, whoever is a \par mere child, and, in short, whoever is a miserable and contemptible creature, the \par kingdom of God shall receive him." Origen answers him in the following \par manner:-"In reply to these accusations we say, it is one thing to invite those \par who are diseased in the soul to a healing, and it is another to invite the \par healthy to a knowledge and discernment of things more divine. And we, knowing \par the difference, first call men to be healed. We/ exhort sinners to come to the \par instruction that teaches them not to sin, and the unintelligent to come to that \par which produces in them understanding, and the little children to rise in \par elevation of thought to the man, and the miserable to come to a more fortunate \par state, or (what is more proper to say) a state of happiness. But when those of \par the exhorted that make progress show that they have been cleansed by the Word, \par and, as much as possible, have lived a better life, THEN we invite them to be \par initiated among us."5 \par \par Such children as Origen here describes would be "initiated," that is, baptized \par by any Baptist in these days. If they have been "cleansed by the Word," what \par more can we require? Tertullian's objection seems to have arisen from the undue \par eagerness of some persons to hurry children to the baptismal water before they \par could fully understand and receive the truth. But neither of these fathers \par refers to in0fants. They ascribed influences to baptism which are nowhere \par mentioned in the New Testament. They used language implying that an outward \par ceremony produced an inward, spiritual effect. They taught the necessity of \par baptism in order to pardon and salvation. And yet they also maintained the \par necessity of repentance and faith; and therefore they demanded, that, if young \par children were baptized, they should not be admitted to the ordinance till they \par were "able to know Christ," and were "cleansed by the Word." \par \par We have at length arrived at the origin of Infant Baptism. Its birth-place was a \par district of Northern Africa, one of the least enlightened portions of the earth \par in that age; the time, the middle of the third century; the occasion, certain \par unscriptural notions which had gradually gained prevalence respecting the design \par and efficacy of the baptismal rite. Having adverted to those extravagances in a \par former section, it is u1nnecessary to adduce further proof. But the reader can \par easily trace the pro\-gress of error. When believers, newly baptized, rejoiced in \par the forgiveness of sin, and exhibited satisfactory evidence of a regenerated \par state, men soon began to regard pardon and regeneration as the effects of \par baptism. Hence sprang the opinion of its necessity to salvation. That being \par admitted, the question of time came next under consideration. Was it not \par desirable to obtain pardon and regeneration at the earliest period possible? And \par besides, were not infants circumcised under the Jewish law? These questions were \par in the mind of Fidus, a bishop of some place in Northern Africa. We can have no \par doubt as to his duty under such circumstances. He ought to have searched the New \par Testament, if he had one (we cannot be sure of it, for books were scarce and \par dear in those days), and inquired into the differences between the Old and the \par New Dispensations, t2he carnal and the spiritual Israel. If he had carried on the \par inquiry fairly, his difficulties would have been removed without further \par reference. But he either could not or would not conduct the requisite \par investigation. Cyprian was at that time Bishop of Carthage, and was reverenced \par as a great authority in all Church affairs. Fidus wrote to Cyprian. Certain \par persons, he said, had advised the baptism of infants immediately after birth; \par but he could not agree with them, and particularly for this reason, that whereas \par it was customary to receive the baptized with a brotherly kiss, a newly-born \par infant could not be so received, being treated as unclean for several days after \par its coming into the world. He thought it best, therefore, to wait till the \par eighth day, and to baptize the infant at the same time at which, under the law, \par it would have been circumcised. But he asked advice of Cyprian, who laid the \par case before a council which 3had assembled at Carthage, in the year 252, for the \par settlement of various ecclesiastical matters. Sixty-six bishops met on that \par occasion. The answer is given in a letter written by Cyprian, from which the \par following extract is taken:- \par \par "None of us could agree to your opinion. On the contrary, it is the opinion of \par us all, that the mercy and grace of God must be refused to no human being, so \par soon as he is born; for since our Lord says in His Gospel, 'The Son of Man is \par not come to destroy men's souls, but to save them,' so everything that lies in \par our power must be done that no soul may be lost. As God has no respect of \par persons, so too He has no respect of age, offering Himself as a Father with \par equal freeness to all, that they may be enabled to obtain the heavenly grace. As \par to what you say, that the child in its first days of its birth is not clean to \par the touch, and that each of us would shrink from kissing such an object,4 even \par this, in our opinion, ought to present no obstacles to the bestowment of \par heavenly grace; for it is written, 'To the pure all things are pure;' and none \par of us ought to revolt at that which God has condescended to create. Although the \par child be but just born, yet it is no such object anyone ought to demur at \par kissing it to impart the divine grace and the salutation of peace, since each of \par us must be led, by his own religious sensibility, to think upon the creative \par hands of God, fresh from the completion of their work, which we kiss in the \par newly formed man when we take in our arms what God has made. As to the rest, if \par anything could prove a hindrance to men in the attainment of grace, much rather \par might those be hindered whose maturer years have involved them in heavy sins. \par But if even the chief of sinners, who have been exceedingly guilty before God, \par receive the forgiveness of sin on coming to the faith, and no one is pre5cluded \par from baptism and from grace, how much less should the child be kept back, which, \par as it is but just born, cannot have sinned, but has only brought with it, by its \par descent from Adam, the infection of the old death; and which may the more easily \par obtain the remission of sins, because the sins which are forgiven it are not its \par own, but those of another?"6 \par \par This is very misty theology. In fact, the religion of great numbers, in the \par third century, was a compound of Judaism and Paganism, with a slight seasoning \par of Christianity. Gaudy ceremonials were delighted in, and the strange power \par which had been ascribed to magical influences was transferred to the ordinances \par of the Gospel. The immersion in water, the eating of the bread, and the drinking \par of the wine, were associated in their minds, as producing causes, with spiritual \par transformations and blessings. The bodily act was substituted for the mental, \par and "faith w6as made void." We do not affirm that every professing Christian was \par enveloped in this darkness; but it is too evident that the views of the majority \par were confused, and that, under the leadership of such men as Cyprian, the \par churches were fast drifting into dangerous notions. \par \par Nevertheless, they were consistent in some things. They did not separate baptism \par from the Lord's Supper, as is done by all P\'e6dobaptist in these times. They held \par that those who were entitled to the one had an equal right to the other. When \par the infant had been plunged into the baptismal water, it was considered a member \par of the Church, and received the Lord's Supper. If it was too young to eat the \par bread, they poured the wine down its throat. This, too, originated in Northern \par Africa, and there only we find it, in the period now under notice.7 \par \par Another innovation is traced to the third century. We allude to clinic baptism, \par that is, the baptism 7of sick persons, confined to their beds. It was not \par baptism, properly so called, as they were only sprinkled with water, or had \par water poured on them. The reason alleged for this departure from Apostolic \par practice, was the necessity of baptism to the salvation of the soul, and the \par consequent danger of deferring it, lest the sickness should terminate in death. \par Thus one error led to another. If those clinics recovered, they were not \par baptized afterwards; but they were not admitted to the ministry. Novatian, \par however, was an exception to this rule. He had been sprinkled or received a \par pouring on his bed, when his dissolution was hourly expected. After his \par recovery, his eminent qualifica\-tions for the ministry induced the churches to \par deviate from the established custom, and he was ordained. Subsequently he took a \par high stand as a reformer. \par \par We are now brought down to the year 254, the date of Origen's death. The \par downwar8d tendency is before us. Baptism, at first the voluntary act of a \par believer in Christ, has become, in numerous instances, the performance of a \par ceremony upon an unconscious infant. In all these cases the design of the \par Christian profession is subverted. Members are introduced into the churches who \par are necessarily destitute of the spiritual qualifications enumerated in the New \par Testament. It does not require the gift of prophecy to foretell the disastrous \par consequences. Religious declension was both the cause and the effect of the \par introduction of infant-baptism. The cause, inasmuch as so great a change could \par not have taken place if the Christian mind had not previously lost a due sense \par of the spiritual nature of religion: the effect, since the unholy mixture \par arising from the new arrangement could not but prove injurious to the interests \par of piety. "What communion hath light with darkness?" \par \par It may be expected that some accou9nt of the introduction of Christianity into \par England should be given. It is highly probable that the Gospel reached this \par country at an early period, by means of merchants of Gaul in the first instance, \par and of missionaries afterwards. But dates and details are wanting. The \par statements of Tertullian and others are rather rhetorical flourishes than \par truthful records. That Joseph of Arimathea went to England, with several \par companions, and built a church "made of rods, wattled or interwoven," in which \par they "watched, prayed, fasted, preached, having high meditations under a low \par roof, and large hearts betwixt narrow walls,"8 is now generally acknowledged to \par be a fable. That the Apostle Paul visited Britain when he traveled "to the \par extreme bounds of the West," as Clemens Romanus expressed it, is more easily \par said than proved. That Claudia, mentioned by Paul in 2 Timothy 4:21, was of \par British origin, is a conjecture, and nothing more. The story of King Lucius, as \par Dean Milman observes, "is a legend."9 We must be content to remain in ignorance \par of the special instrument employed for the enlightenment of England, and can \par only remark that the Christian Church, when planted there, harmonized, in its \par doctrines and services, with the churches of Gaul, from which country missionary \par expeditions naturally took their westward course. \par \par 1 Bishop Kaye's Tertullian, p. 432. \par 2 P. 434. \par 3 De Baptismo, chap. 18. \par 4 Christianity and Mankind, ii. p. 115. \par 5 See Christian Review, April, 1854, containing an article by Dr. Ira Chase on \par the "Opinions of Origen especting Baptism." \par 6 Labbe and Kossart, Concil. i. pp. 742-744. \par 7 Bingham's Christian Antiquities, book xii. chap. i. sect. 3, and book xv. \par chap. iv. sect. 7. \par 8 Fuller's Church History, cent. i. sect. 13. \par 9 History of Latin Christianity, book iv. chap. iii. \par \f1\fs20 \par } °°„MCˆi0100---THE PRIMITIVE PERIOD{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE PRIMITIVE PERIOD. \par \cf0 \par \ul CHAPTER \par \ulnone \par I. Introductory Remarks-P\'e6dobaptist Concessions \par \par II. The Apostolic Fathers-Justin Martyr-Iren\'e6us \par \par III. Tertullian-Baptism of Children in Africa-Origen-First Appearance of \par Infant Baptism-The Clinics-Christianity in England \par \par } < and \par the world. The object of this education was admission into the free society and \par brotherhood of the Christian community. The Church adhered rigidly to the \par principle, as constituting the true purport of the baptism ordained by Christ, \par that no one can be a member of the communion of saints, but by his own free act \par and deed, his own solemn vow made in presence of the Church. It was with this \par understanding that the candidate for baptism was immersed in water, and admitted \par as a brother upon his confession of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It \par is understood, therefore, in the exact sense (1 Peter 3:21), not as being a mere \par bodily purification, but as a vow made to God with a good conscience through \par faith in Jesus Christ. This vow was preceded by a confession of Christian faith \par made in the face of the Church, in which the catechumen expressed that faith in \par Christ, and in the sufficiency of the salvation offered by hi=m. It was a vow to \par live for the time to come to God and for his neighbour, not to the world and for \par self; a vow of faith in his becoming a child of God, through the communion of \par his only-begotten Son, in the Holy Ghost; a vow of the most solemn kind, for \par life and for death. The keeping of this pledge was the condition of continuance \par in the Church; its infringement entailed repentance or excommunication. All \par Church discipline was based upon this voluntary pledge, and the responsibility \par thereby self-imposed. But how could such a vow be received without examination? \par How could such examination be passed without instruction and observation? As a \par general rule, the ancient Church fixed three years for this preparation, \par supposing the candidate, whether heathen or Jew, to be competent to receive it. \par With Christian children the condition was the same, except that the term of \par probation was curtailed according to circumstances. P\'e6d>obaptism in the more \par modern sense, meaning thereby the baptism of new-born infants with the vicarious \par promises of parents and other sponsors, was utterly unknown to the early Church, \par not only down to the end of the second, but indeed to the middle of the third \par century."1 \par \par The catechumen institution may be traced back to an early period-as far as the \par second century. At first, as we gather from the New Testament, converts were \par baptized as soon as they acknowledged Christ. Afterwards, it was judged \par expedient to prepare them for baptism by a course of instruction, generally \par extending, as Baron Bunsen states in the above-cited passage, to three years. In \par the first ages they experienced Christianity, and then professed it. In after \par times they learned Christianity, and that, in too many instances, was all: \par conversion and experience were unknown. But this catechumenical system was \par adapted to those only who were able? to learn, and therefore excluded infants. \par Its very existence was incompatible with infant\-baptism; and the consequence \par was, that when the latter became general the former disappeared, or dwindled \par down to an unmeaning form. But in the period which is now before us the \par Catechumens were a distinct order. Certain persons, called Catechists, were \par appointed to instruct them. They occupied a separate place in Christian \par assemblies, and were required to withdraw before the celebration of the Lord's \par Supper, which they were not permitted to witness. From the Latin phrase used in \par dismissing the assembly, the whole service was called "Missa," from which the \par English word "Mass" is derived. There were the Missa Catechumenorum, or service \par of the Catechumens, and the Missa Fidelium, or service of the Faithful; the \par former comprising the reading of the Scriptures and the sermon; the latter, the \par Lord's Supper and the devotional exercis@es which preceded and accompanied it, \par denoting the fellowship of believers, to which class the Catechumens did not \par belong till after their baptism. \par \par It is a very noticeable fact, that the baptismal service, as prescribed in the \par earliest liturgies, was prepared for Catechumens only. There was no provision \par for infants. Had infant-baptism been then in existence, the ecclesiastical \par arrangements would have recognized it, and there would have been a twofold \par service, as there is now in the Church of England, one for infant, and the other \par for "those of riper years." \par \par We have called the period from A.D. 254 to A.D. 604 the "Transition Period," \par because, so far as baptism was concerned, and, indeed, in many other particulars \par which might be adduced if needful, the ecclesiastical system was in a formative \par state. It was neither one thing nor the other, but a mixture of incongruities. \par The catechumenical arrangement was Afounded on the theory of baptism on a \par personal profession of faith, and so far accorded with the New Testament. But \par infant-baptism had sprung up in Northern Africa, and was gradually extending \par itself through the powerful influence of Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, who wrote \par largely on the subject. His sheet-anchor in the argument was the supposed \par efficacy of baptism in removing the defilement of original sin. These two \par theories were in opposition to each other, for if all candidates for baptism \par were to become catechumens and receive preparatory instruction, infant-baptism \par had no place. Yet there it was, daily gaining ground. Augustine's authority gave \par it the advantage in the West; but in the East, the baptism of children from \par three to ten years of age, who could in some sort answer for themselves, \par lingered much longer. And great numbers followed the example of the Emperor \par Constantine, who deferred his baptism till the latest Bpossible period, that all \par his sins might be washed away at once, as he, poor man, vainly imagined they \par would be, by the administration of the ordinance. Thus we find a great diversity \par of practice. There was infant-baptism spreading from North Africa-child-baptism \par prevalent in the East-catechumen-baptism, properly so called, the ordinary mode \par of admitting converts-and procrastinated-baptism, including such cases as \par Constantine's. We see, then, that this period is rightly termed the "Transition \par Period." \par \par Neander says, "It was still very far from being the case, especially in the \par Greek Church, that infant-baptism, although acknowledged to be necessary, was \par generally introduced into practice. Partly, the same mistaken notions which \par arose from confounding the thing represented by baptism with the outward rite, \par and which afterwards led to the over-valuation of infant-baptism, and partly, \par the frivolous tone of thinkinCg, the indifference to all higher concerns, which \par characterized so many who had only exchanged the Pagan for a Christian \par outside,-all this together contributed to bring it about, that among the \par Christians of the East, infant-baptism, though acknowledged in theory to be \par necessary, yet entered so rarely and with so much difficulty into the \par Church-life during the first half of this period."2 \par \par "The baptism of infants," Gieseler observes, "did not become universal till \par after the death of Augustine."3 \par \par Had infant-baptism been universally regarded as a Divine ordinance, it would \par have been everywhere observed, and Christian parents would have been \par scrupulously heedful of their duty towards their children in this matter. But it \par was not so. Some of the best men of the time were children of pious parents, but \par were not baptized till they attained maturity. We say again, this could not have \par taken place if infant-baptisDm had been from the beginning regarded as an \par Apostolic institution. A few instances may be given. \par \par Gregory Nazianzen, Archbishop of Constantinople, who died in the year 389, and \par whose father was Bishop of Nazianzen, was not baptized till he was nearly thirty \par years old. He expressly intimated his disapproval of infant-baptism, in one of \par his public discourses, and advised that children should not be baptized till \par they were three years old or more, at which time they might be able to answer \par the questions proposed to candidates.4 \par \par Chrysostom, the golden-mouthed preacher, also Archbishop of Constantinople, and \par born of Christian parents, received baptism at the age of twenty-eight. He died \par in the year 407. \par \par Basil of Caesarea, though he could boast of Christian ancestry for several \par generations, was not baptized till he was twenty-seven years old. Addressing \par Catechumens, he says (A. D. 350), "Do you demur, anEd loiter, and put it off, \par when you have been from a child catechized in the Word? Are you not acquainted \par with the truth? Having been always learning it, are you not yet come to the \par knowledge of it? A seeker all your life long, a considerer till you are old? \par When will you become one of us?" Observe-"from a child catechized"-but baptism \par still delayed.5 \par \par Ephrem of Edessa, a learned writer of the Syriac Church (died A.D. 378), was \par born of parents who, as Alban Butler remarks, "were ennobled by the blood of \par martyrs in their family, and had themselves both confessed Christ before the \par persecutors, under Diocletian or his successors. They consecrated Ephrem to God \par from his cradle, like another Samuel, but he was eighteen years old when he was \par baptized."6 They would be called good Baptists in these times. They \par "consecrated" their child, that is, prayed for him, and trained him "in the \par nurture and admonition of the Lord;F" but they did not think of his being \par baptized till he was a believer, which was not till he was "eighteen years old." \par Would they have acted thus, if infant-baptism had been the universal and binding \par practice of the Church? \par \par Speaking of the Emperor Constantine, the historian Gibbon says, "The example and \par reputation of Constantine seemed to countenance the delay of baptism. Future \par tyrants were encouraged to believe that the innocent blood which they might shed \par in a long reign would instantly be washed away in the waters of regeneration: \par and the abuse of religion dangerously undermined the foundation of moral \par virtue."7 The truth of the last observation is undeniable. All ecclesiastical \par history illustrates it. And there is no more melancholy confirmation than that \par which is afforded by the records of baptism. The figment of baptismal \par regeneration, one of the earliest corruptions of Christianity, was an outrage on \par mGorals and religion. It encouraged men in sin, and holstered them up with a \par false hope, substituting the outward form for repentance, faith, and a changed \par heart and life. Infant-baptism, also, soon unfolded its injurious tendencies and \par effects. They will present themselves at every step of our progress. It seems \par astonishing that so gross a perversion of Christianity should have acquired such \par a firm hold of men's minds. But it is among the things that are doomed, and the \par day is not far off. \par \par With the sole exception of the clinics, already referred to, baptism still \par consisted in the immersion of the candidate, who was ordinarily divested of \par clothing. The same method was adopted for children as for adults. And the \par immersion was still commonly performed thrice. \par \par The following passages are taken from Bingham's "Antiquities " (book xi. chap. \par 11). \par \par "Cyril of Jerusalem" (died A.D. 386) "makes it an emblem of tHhe Holy Ghost's \par effusion upon the Apostles; for as he that goes down into the water and is \par baptized is surrounded on all sides by the water, so the Apostles were baptized \par all over by the Spirit; the water surrounds the body externally, but the Spirit \par incomprehensibly baptizes the interior soul." \par \par "So St. Ambrose" (died A.D. 396) "explains it. 'Thou wast asked, Dost thou \par believe in God the Father Almighty? And didst thou answer, I believe; and then, \par thou wast immerged in water, that is, buried."' \par \par "St. Chrysostom" (died A.D. 407) "proves the resurrection from this practice; \par 'for,' says he, 'our being baptized and immerged into the water, and our rising \par again out of it, is a symbol of our descending into hell or the grave, and of \par our returning from thence.'" \par \par "St. Jerome" (died A.D. 420) "makes this ceremony to be a symbol of the Unity as \par well as the Trinity. 'For,' says he, 'we are thrice dipped in theI water, that \par the mystery of the Trinity may appear to be but one; we are not baptized in the \par names of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but in one name, which is God.'" \par \par "St. Augustine" (died A.D. 430) "tells us there was a twofold mystery signified \par in this way of baptizing. The trine immersion was both a symbol of the Holy \par Trinity, in whose name we are baptized, and also a type of the Lord's burial, \par and of His resurrection on the third day from the dead. For we are buried with \par Christ by baptism, and rise again with Him by faith." \par \par Leo the Great (died A.D. 461) says, "The trine immersion is an imitation of the \par three days' burial; and the rising again out of the water is an image of Christ \par rising from the grave." \par \par Gregory the Great (died A.D. 604) wrote thus to Leander, Bishop of \par Seville:-"Concerning the three immersions in baptism, you have judged very truly \par already, that different rites and customs do notJ prejudice the Holy Church, \par whilst the unity of faith remains entire. The reason why we use three immersions \par at Rome is to signify the mystery of Christ's three days' burial, that whilst an \par infant is thrice lifted up out of the water the resurrection on the third day \par may be expressed thereby. But if anyone thinks this is rather done in regard to \par the Holy Trinity, a single immer\-sion in baptism does no way prejudice that; for \par so long as the unity of substance is preserved in Three Persons, it is no harm \par whether a child be baptized with one immersion or three; because three \par immersions may represent the Trinity of Persons, and one immersion the Unity of \par the Godhead." \par \par At first, baptism was administered in rivers, pools, baths, wherever a \par sufficient quantity of water could be conveniently obtained. In the fourth \par century, baptisteries began to be erected. These were large buildings, \par contiguous to the churches. There was usually but one in a city, attached to the \par bishop's or cathedral church. The baptistery proper, or font, was in the center \par of the building, and at the sides were numerous apartments for the accommodation \par of the candidates. Several of these baptisteries yet remain, and have been \par frequently described by travelers. The baptisteries at Rome (in the church of \par St. John Lateran), Ravenna, Florence, Pisa, and Parma may be particularly \par mentioned. The fonts in these baptisteries are from three to four feet-deep, and \par of proportionate size. Of course they were intended for immersion. \par \par 1 Vol. ii. p. 105. \par 2 History of the Church, ii. p. 319. \par 3 Ecclesiastical History, ii. p. 47. \par 4 Ullmann's Gregory of Nazianzen, p. 27. \par 5 "Oratio exhortatoria ad baptismum," quoted in Wall's History of Infant \par Baptism, chap. xii. \par 6 Lives of the Saints. Art. " St. Ephrem." \par 7 Decline and Fall, chap. xx. \par \par \par } ÍÍ…kk‚Š{0201-The Catechumens-Progress of Infant Baptism{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE TRANSITION PERIOD \par \par CHAPTER I. \par The Catechumens-Progress of Infant Baptism-Delay of Baptism- \par Gregory Nazienzen-Chrysostom-Basil-Ephrem of Edessa- \par The Emperor Constantine-Immersion still the Mode. \par \cf0 \par The statements made in former sections are abundantly confirmed by impartial \par divines and historians. One of the most learned men of the present day, the late \par Baron Bunsen, writes thus in his work entitled, "Christianity and Mankind." \par "The Apostolical Church made the school the connecting link between herself;Miciently deplored. Hitherto, Christians had endured afflictions for \par the Lord's sake, and had willingly suffered the loss of all things rather than \par renounce the faith. But a change had taken place, involving a temptation which \par proved too powerful for many of them. When Constantine the Great declared for \par Christianity, he expected to stand in the same position towards that religion as \par he had before occupied with regard to Paganism. The Emperors were the high \par priests of Paganism, and the civil government had from time immemorial directed \par and controlled the religion of the country. Was not the same policy still to be \par observed? Had Constantine examined the New Testament, the question would soon \par have been answered. But he was very imperfectly acquainted with that book; and, \par besides, the exclusive authority of God's Word in matters of religion had long \par been given up. The profession of Christianity in those times was a very \par differeNnt thing from what it had been in the first and purest ages. Scripture \par was smothered by tradition. The simplicity of Apostolic form had given place to \par complicated ceremonies. Expediency had supplanted right. The enquiry was not, \par What has Christ commanded?-but rather, How may influence, and power, and \par patronage, and wealth be obtained? How may the Gospel become popular? Such being \par the views of the leaders, it is not surprising that the people groveled in \par worldliness, or that rulers determined to use Christianity as a State machine, \par as they had used Paganism. Constantine led the way, and his successors naturally \par trod in his steps. He began by enjoining external compliance with Christian \par institutions. The observance of the Lord's-day was enforced by imperial law. \par \par Interference in Christian controversies followed. The bishops were too ready to \par invoke the exercise of the imperial authority, and there was not religious \par intOelligence enough among the people to discern and resist the usurpation. The \par State set up the idol, uniformity, and they bowed down and worshipped it. The \par views entertained by the majority were called "Catholic," because they were said \par to be held by all, and "Orthodox," because they were assumed to be right. Those \par who differed from the majority were termed heretics. The words "orthodoxy" and \par "heresy" were not always employed, however, in the same sense. As each man \par deemed himself right and his opponent wrong, every man was orthodox in his own \par eyes; and as successive emperors patronized one or another form of belief, he \par who was orthodox in one reign was liable to be stigmatized as a heretic in the \par next. Patronage, power, and persecution are closely allied. When imperial \par intervention was called for, to settle Christian disputes or to suppress a \par rising sect, there was no way of exercising it but by means of penalties, for \par law Pmust of necessity be powerless unless offences against it are punished. \par \par Hence arose the monstrous anomaly of Christian persecution. If orthodoxy was in \par the ascendant, the Catholic emperor pulled down Arian churches, and fined the \par people for attending Arian worship. The same measure was meted out to other \par sects. If an Arian sat on the throne, the Catholics were subject to the same \par indignities. It was unchristian on both sides. Pagans and Jews were hardened in \par their unbelief. When Christianity was forced into an alliance with the State, \par the form (though even that was disguised) remained, but the spirit had departed. \par Were we writing an ecclesiastical history, we should enlarge here. We should \par expatiate on the sin of legislation in the Church, whose duty it is to obey \par Christ's laws, not to make new ones,-on the pomp and pride of bishops,-the \par tyranny of kings,-the arrogance of councils,-and especially on the evils which \par hQave resulted from the wordly admixture connected with the introduction of \par infant-baptism. But just now we must confine ourselves to the influence of the \par State on religion, and particularly in relation to the subject before us. \par \par The Emperor Justinian (who reigned from A.D. 527 to A.D. 565) was a thorough \par despot. He would acknowledge no will but his own. The rights of conscience were \par altogether ignored by him. He claimed absolute mastery over his subjects, and \par required them to renounce Paganism and embrace Christianity, because he willed \par it, without reference to other considerations. A notable edict of his \par illustrates these remarks. It enacted, "that such parents as were yet unbaptized \par should present themselves, with their wives and children, and all that \par appertained to them, in the Church; and there they should cause their little \par ones immediately to be baptized, and the rest as soon as they were taught the \par Scriptures aRccording to the canons. But if any persons, for the sake of a public \par office or dignity, or to get an estate, received a fallacious baptism \par themselves, but in the meantime left their wives, or children, or servants, or \par any that were retainers, or near relations to them, in their ancient error, \par their goods in that case are ordered to be confiscated, and their persons \par punished by a competent judge, and excluded from bearing any office in the \par commonwealth."1 \par \par Thus the fabric of infant-baptism rested on two pillars-delusion and force: \par delusion, inasmuch as the ceremony was supposed to be invested with regenerating \par and saving power,-force, as employed by the State, in the interest of the \par Church. It is true they called it an "apostolic institution;" but that was an \par after-thought. Exorcism, unction, the sign of the cross, holy water, \par infant-communion, and many other childish practices, were also called "Apostolic \par instiStutions,"-not at first, but long after they were invented, to conceal their \par real origin and prevent men from discovering the trickery. \par \par Unquestionably the progress of religion in the community, which was emphatically \par designated "the Church," was altogether downward during the "Transition Period." \par It is an interesting inquiry, how far the spirit of the Gospel was preserved, \par and its essential truths maintained, by those whom ecclesiastical historians \par have denominated "heretics" and "schismatics." We shall pursue this inquiry in \par succeeding chapters. In order to find the true Church, we must look out of the \par "Church" commonly so called. \par \par The Novatians and Donatists were the two leading sects of the period now under \par consideration. There were many other sects, so called, for it was the fashion to \par designate as a "heretic" every individual who thought differently from the \par majority, and to consider those who agreed with hiTm as constituting a party, \par usually bearing his name. If we were to do so now, the multiplication of sects \par would be indefinite. \par \par Novatian lived at Rome. He had embraced Christianity, but his baptism had been \par deferred; and it has been already stated that in sickness which threatened to be \par fatal he had been sprinkled or poured on as he lay on his bed, since it was \par impossible to immerse him. This is the first recorded instance of clinic \par baptism. It was in fact no baptism at all, though it differed from \par infant-sprinkling. In the latter, both the subject and the act are wrong. In \par Novatian's case, there was a proper subject, but the ceremony performed was not \par baptism, though it was the best substitute they could think of. It shows us, by \par the way, how error was creeping in. Novatian ought to have waited for his \par recovery, when he would have been in a fit state to receive the ordinance. Had \par it pleased God that his sickneUss should be fatal, he would have died without \par baptism, and he would have been in David's position, who desired to build the \par temple, but was not permitted. The desire was approved, though the purpose was \par not accomplished. He "did well that it was in his heart." Already, however, the \par pernicious notion of the necessity of baptism to salvation had become prevalent, \par and consequently Novatian was sprinkled or received a pouring. \par \par Novatian possessed such talent and zeal that he became a popular teacher. On the \par death of Fabian, Bishop of Rome, in the year 250, there was a strong desire that \par Novatian should succeed him, and so he would, had it not been for his known \par sentiments on one point. Lax habits of discipline, as he believed, had grown up, \par and were very mischievous in their tendencies. In the Decian persecution great \par numbers had apostatized, who, on the return of tranquility, sought re-admission \par into the churches. NovatVian differed from his brethren on this subject. He held \par that apostasy was a sin which wholly disqualified an individual for restoration \par to Christian fellowship, and that it would be destructive to the purity of the \par Church to readmit those who had so grossly fallen. God might pardon them. They \par might find a place in heaven. But the Church must not be defiled, for it is a \par congregation of saints. Now, whatever opinion we may form respecting Novatian's \par particular theory, it is undeniable that the principle on which it rested was \par derived from the New Testament. Yet it was too spiritual for the times. A \par majority declared in favour of Cornelius, who was duly installed Bishop of Rome. \par Nevertheless, the minority would not yield. The time had come (so they argued) \par for a decided stand. The holiness of the Church was in danger, and must be \par maintained at all hazards. Separation was better than corruption. They withdrew, \par formed a separatWe church, and invited Novatian to become their pastor. Others \par imitated their example in various parts of the empire, and Novatian churches \par sprang up in great abundance. They continued in existence more than three \par centuries. In all the principal towns and cities, these dissenting communities \par might be found. They were the Puritans of those days, and were so designated. \par There was a wholesome rivalry for some time between them and the "Orthodox" or \par "Catholic" body, each operating as a stimulus and a check upon the other. \par \par Carrying out their governing principle in all its details, they baptized all who \par joined their churches, even though they had been already baptized by ministers \par of the orthodox body, deeming the baptism of a corrupt church invalid. They were \par therefore the first "Anabaptists," in the strict and proper sense of that word. \par They were also genuine reformers. Dr. Waddington, an Episcopalian historian, \par observes,X that Novatian "considered the genuine Church of Christ to be a society \par where virtue and innocence reigned universally, and refused any longer to \par acknowledge those as its members who had even once degenerated into \par unrighteousness. His followers were called Cathari or Puritans, and they \par comprehended many austere and independent Christians, in the East no less than \par in the West. But this endeavour to revive the spotless moral purity of the \par primitive faith was found inconsistent with the corruptions even of that early \par age: it was regarded with suspicion by the leading prelates, as a vain and \par visionary scheme; and those rigid principles which had characterized and \par sanctified the Church in the first century, were abandoned to the profession of \par schismatic sectaries in the third."2 \par \par There is no evidence that, at the time of Novatian's separation from the Roman \par Church, infant-baptism had found its way into Italy. The probabiliYty is all on \par the other side, since one hundred and sixty years after that event we find \par Boniface, Bishop of Rome, propounding doubts and questions to Augustine which \par indicated that infant-baptism was looked on by him quite distrustfully. These \par difficulties would not have existed if he had believed that the rite had a \par divine origin. The incongruity between the ceremonial employed and the reality \par struck him forcibly. The ceremonial had been originally prepared for \par catechumens, and was then a reasonable service. When infants were substituted \par for catechumens, the same forms were observed, but they were strangely out of \par place. In answer to the usual question, the sponsor replied on behalf of the \par infant, "I believe," whereas, as Boniface remarked, not only was the child \par unable to believe, but no one could tell whether he would believe in after life \par or not. No wonder the good man was puzzled.3 \par \par It reminds us of an incZident that occurred in England some years ago. A lad, the \par child of Baptist parents, was sent to a school where the Church of England \par catechism was taught. Abraham (that was his name) was compelled to stand up with \par the other boys. It happened one day that it came to his turn to answer this \par question- "Why then are infants baptized, when by reason of their tender age \par they cannot perform them" [that is, the conditions, of repentance and faith]? \par Abraham looked full in his master's face, and said, "Why indeed, sir?" He was \par not asked to recite any more.4 \par \par Novatianism and infant-baptism were diametrically opposed to each other. It was \par impossible to preserve the purity for which the Novatians contended in any \par church which had admitted the novel institution. Those who had been baptized in \par infancy might evince, when they reached maturity, an utter destitution of vital \par godliness, and consequent unfitness for union with a Christia[n body; but being \par already members by virtue of their baptism, they could not be expelled unless \par they fell into gross vice, and so their influence and example might operate most \par injuriously on the religious character of the Church. This could not escape the \par observation of Novatian Christians. It would prove a salutary caution. We may \par safely infer that they abstained from compliance with the innovation, and that \par the Novatian churches were what are now called Baptist churches, adhering to the \par Apostolic and primitive practice. Had the writings of Novatian authors been \par preserved, we should have had more explicit information; but it was the ancient \par policy to destroy all books written by alleged heretics. Novatian published a \par work on the Trinity, which has not been involved in the common destruction. A \par copy of it is now before the writer. It is generally commended for its clearness \par and orthodoxy, but there is no allusion to the b\aptismal controversy. \par \par The Donatists first appeared in the early part of the fourth century. A dispute \par about an election to a bishopric was the occasion of their separation from the \par Catholic Church. C\'e6cilian was chosen Bishop of Carthage in a somewhat irregular \par manner, and hastily ordained. Among those who officiated at his ordination was \par Felix, Bishop of Aptunga. This man was said to be a traditor, that is, one who \par had delivered up copies of the Scriptures to the civil authorities during the \par Diocletian persecution. His concurrence in the ordination was thought by some to \par vitiate the service. They refused to regard C\'e6cilian as a regularly appointed \par bishop. A secession took place, which spread rapidly and extensively, so that in \par a short time the Donatist churches in Africa were nearly equal in number to \par those of the hitherto dominant party. \par \par As in the case of the Novatians, the discussion of the general ques]tion of \par church purity arose out of the circumstances that originated the division. The \par Donatists pleaded for purity. They maintained that Christian churches should \par consist of godly persons, and no others, and that, in all the arrangements made \par for their management, that important principle should be kept in view. They \par followed the ex\-ample of the Novatians in rebaptizing those who joined them from \par other churches. They baptized new converts on a profession of faith, as a matter \par of course, for that was the practice of all churches. Whether they went further \par than this is open to question. Their principles would undoubtedly lead them to \par the rejection of infant-baptism. Some authors affirm that they did reject it. \par For our own part, we are disposed to hesitate on that point. We are inclined to \par think that they were divided in opinion, and that some of them admitted \par infant-baptism, though the admission was inconsistent with their^ acknowledged \par principles. The majority, we are willing to believe, adhered to the New \par Testament practice. \par \par At one of the African Councils, held about the year 397, it was agreed to \par consult their "brethren and fellow-priests," Siricius, Bishop of Rome, and \par Simplician, Bishop of Milan, respecting those who had been baptized in in\-fancy \par among the Donatists, and who, when they reached mature age, desired to join the \par church which assumed the title "Catholic."5 \par \par It was subsequently decided that they should not be re-baptized. This proves \par that infant-baptism was practiced in that sect; whether universally or not, is \par another question. Augustine never charges them, as a body, with heresy on that \par point; nor does Opatus, a cele\-brated writer against the Donatists. \par \par There is another circumstance proper to be mentioned. The difference between the \par Donatists and their opponents had been submitted several times to _imperial \par decision. In the first instance the Donatists, it appears, consented to the \par reference; but they soon discovered the impropriety. "What has the Emperor to do \par with the Church? What have Christians to do with kings, or bishops at court?" \par they asked. Were they not right? Have not the Baptists been distinguished in all \par ages by the maintenance of these views? Have they not ever held that civil \par government has nothing to do with religion, that Christianity asks for no \par support from the State, and that the union of Church and State has been \par productive of some of the worst evils that have defiled the Christian \par profession? Have they not always repudiated the use of carnal weapons in the \par defense and propagation of the truth, and demanded, for themselves and for all \par men, entire freedom of thought and action in all religious concerns? This is \par their glory, and no man can take it from them. \par \par Both the Novatians and the `Donatists suffered severely for their dissent, \par especially the latter. The celebrated Augustine taught the unchristian doctrine \par that heresy should be suppressed by the civil magistrate, and invoked the \par imperial sword against the Donatists. Their property was confiscated, the \par prisons were crammed with them, and great numbers lost their lives by the hands \par of the execu\-tioner. A sanguinary law was enacted, that the re-baptizer and the \par re-baptized should be put to death. That so atrocious an enactment should excite \par tumults in a country where the separatists constituted one-half of the Christian \par population, cannot be considered surprising. Other persons, not connected with \par them, took advantage of it, and great disorders ensued. But Augustine and his \par party were the aggressors. \par \par Pelagianism troubled the Church in the fifth century. As Pelagius taught that \par infants derive no moral taint from Adam's transgression, it has been ianferred \par that he was of necessity an opposer of infant-baptism, since it had then become \par a generally admitted notion that baptism cleanses from original sin. Pelagius, \par however, did not deny the propriety of baptizing infants, who obtained, he said, \par the kingdom of heaven by their baptism, which "kingdom of heaven" he \par distinguished from eternal life, and represented as a kind of intermediate \par state. We need hot dwell on such follies, and therefore pass on to observe, that \par as many in that age stoutly denied the right of infants to baptism, refusing to \par acknowledge the power of the Church to add to the ordinances of Christ, the \par Council of Milevi, held A.D. 416, passed a decree in the following terms: \par "Whosoever denies that newly-born infants are to be baptized, or affirms that \par they are indeed baptized for the remission of sins, but that they derive no \par original sin from Adam, . . . let him be accursed."6 \par \par Such are the bsupports of infant-baptism-the frail buttresses of the building; \par Justinian's mandate, and this anathematizing decree of Milevi. But what has the \par Saviour said? "Every plant which My heavenly Father hath not planted shall be \par rooted up" (Matthew 15:13). \par \par Much has been said respecting the contest of Augustine the monk with the British \par Christians on the subject of baptism. It has been supposed that infant-baptism \par was then unknown in England, and that Augustine endeavoured to force it on the \par people, as an integral part of Romish policy. Neither assertion is correct. \par There is no good reason to suppose that infant-baptism, which had been gaining \par prevalence all over Europe, by the zealous labours and powerful influence of \par Augustine of Hippo, had been kept out of England. We have just seen that \par Pelagius, who was a Welshman, did not oppose it. Augustine's object was to \par procure uniformity of ceremonies, and to induce the Britons cto adopt the \par observances grafted by the Romish Church on the simple baptismal service of the \par New Testament. Nothing was said about children. Their baptism was no doubt \par gradually introduced into England, as in other parts, and ultimately superseded, \par as it did elsewhere, the primitive ordinance. At any rate, we find traces of it \par in Wales in the sixth century.7 \par \par Whether compliance was refused by any parties, and in what numbers, cannot now \par be ascertained. Here, as in many other respects, there is a lack of information. \par God's witnesses lay hid for ages.8 \par \par 1 Bingham, book xi. chap. iv. \par 2 History of the Church, i, p. 166 (Second Edition). \par 3 See his letter in Augustin. Opera, xxxix. pp. 235-244 (Ed. Caillau). \par 4 The lad was a son of the Rev. Abraham Austin, many years pastor of the Baptist \par Church meeting in Elim Chapel, Fetter Lane, London. He died in 1816. See Baptist \par Magazine, vol. viii. pp. 397, 441. \par 5 Labbe and Cossart, ii. p. 1071. Bingham's Antiquities, book iv. chap. iii. \par Sect. 12. \par 6 Labbe and Cossart, ii. p. 1538. \par 7 See the Liber Landavensis. Llandovery, 1840. \par 8 Bede's Ecclesiastical History is the only authority for the account of \par Augustine's interview with the British clergy. The monk required of them, among \par other things, that they should "administer baptism, by which we are born to God, \par according to the custom of the holy Roman Apostolic Church" (Dr. Giles's \par Translation). The word used by Bede was "compleatis," and his meaning was that \par they should render the administration complete or perfect, by the addition of \par Romish ceremonies. In some editions of Fabian's Chronicle, Augustine is \par represented as saying, "that ye give Christendom to children." Fabian, it may be \par supposed, knew of no baptism but that of infants, and translated, or rather \par paraphrased, accordingly. He died A.D. 1513. \par \par \par } õõÃ#aƒ…u0202-Christian Intolerance-Justinian's Law{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE TRANSITION PERIOD \par \par \par CHAPTER II. \par Christian Intolerance-Justinian's Law, enjoining Infant-Baptism-The \par Novatians-The Donatists-Pelagianism. \par \par \cf0 The period now under consideration was marked by one "transition" which can \par never be suffL §§„V Aˆ}0200-THE TRANSITION PERIOD{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE TRANSITION PERIOD. \par \par \cf0 I.The Catechumens-Progress of Infant Baptism-Delay of Baptism-Gregory \par Nazianzen-Chrysostom-Basil-Ephrem of Edessa-The Emperor \par Constantine-Immersion still the Mode \par \par II.Christian Intolerance-Justin's Law, enjoining Infant Baptism-The \par Novatians-The Donatists-Pelagianism \par \par } ûû„ ;‡[0300-THE OBSCURE PERIOD{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE OBSCURE PERIOD. \par \cf0 \par I.The Manich\'e6ans-Cautions to the Student-All Opponents of Infant Baptism not Baptists-Account of the Paulicians-Their Views of Baptism \par \par II.Religious Reform in Europe-The Canons of Orleans-Arras-Berengarius-Miscellaneous Anecdotes \par \par \par } htists, in the New Testament sense \par of that term, who hold baptism as an ordinance binding on all believers, and \par refuse it to all other persons. Now, Manich\'e6ism was a compound of Oriental \par philosophy and Christianity. The fanciful and wild speculations in which Manes \par indulged were as ill-founded in reason as in Scripture, and justly entitled \par their author to the appellation "fanatic." He incorporated sundry portions of \par Christianity into his incongruous system, and therefore the party has been \par ranked among the heretics, though, as we think, with little propriety. The \par heretics, as they are called, were seceders from the established or Catholic \par Church. Manes originated an independent body, on entirely original principles, \par and ought to be placed in the same list as Mohammed and other founders of \par systems. It is said that he admitted baptism and the Lord's Supper among the \par services enjoined on his followers; but the Supper was ceilebrated with water \par instead of wine, and baptism was optional; those only who wished it were \par baptized; those who did not desire it were not debarred from membership on that \par account, and infants were excluded from participation in the rite. After these \par explanations it will not be deemed strange that we have refrained from classing \par the Manich\'e6ans with the revivers of primitive religion.1 \par \par We are now entering on the period which we have denominated "obscure." It is so \par called because the information is generally scanty, and sometimes of very \par doubtful character. We may begin by remarking that the student of ecclesiastical \par history must beware lest he be led astray by the misrepresentations of bigoted \par historians. Manich\'e6ism was soon looked on as a concentration of all that was \par outrageous and bad in religious opinion, and it became the fashion to call all \par heretics "Manich\'e6ans." Hence many excellent men have been so sjtigmatized, whose \par views and practices accorded with the Word of God. It is necessary to repair to \par the original sources of history, and even then to scan very closely the \par statements handed down to us, that they may be disentangled, as far as possible, \par from mistake or misrepresentation. \par \par Further: it is not safe or proper to report all opponents of infant-baptism as \par Baptists, in our sense of the word. Throughout the middle ages there were many \par dissenters from the Catholic faith, as it was called, who rejected baptism \par altogether, holding sentiments respecting that ordinance which much resemble \par those of the Quakers in these times. Possibly they were driven to those extreme \par views by contemplating the absurd ceremonies connected with baptism, and the \par superstitious notions entertained by the majority. It seemed to them better to \par have no baptism at all than to countenance such follies. Doubtless they were \par wrong, althougkh much might be offered in excuse for them. But when these parties \par are adduced as witnesses for infant-baptism, an unfairness is sometimes \par committed. Their opposition was against all baptism, and not against infant \par baptism only. We are not disposed to regard any persons as Primitive Baptists \par unless they practiced the baptism of believers; their rejection of \par infant-baptism will not warrant the imposition of that worthy name on them. Mr. \par Orchard's "History of Foreign Baptists," and other works of a similar kind, have \par now and then fallen into this error.2 \par \par At the same time it must be confessed that there is often the utmost difficulty \par in forming a satisfactory judgment in regard to the opinions held by the \par reformers of the Middle Ages. We know nothing of them but by the reports of \par their adversaries, who were predisposed against them, and who, for want of \par religious sympathy, were unable to appreciate or even to understandl their \par peculiar views. The same words were sometimes used by opposing parties in \par different senses, and truths were seen in different aspects. Hence the confusion \par and contradictoriness which are too often apparent. \par \par These observations apply to the case of the Paulicians. They first appeared \par about the middle of the seventh century, in Armenia, and soon spread \par wonderfully, till they were numbered by hundreds of thousands. Their enemies \par accused them of Manich\'e6ism, which accusation they indignantly repelled. The only \par ancient authorities whence we can derive a knowledge of their sentiments are \par Photius and Petrus Siculus, who wrote against them with great bitterness, and on \par that account can scarcely be considered as worthy of entire credence. Photius \par was Archbishop of Constantinople, and died A.D. 890; Petrus Siculus, a learned \par nobleman, died a few years later. He was sent by the Emperor Basil to Tibrica, a \par Pauliciman town, in the year 870, to negotiate an exchange of prisoners. He \par remained there seven months, and availed himself of the opportunity of learning \par the opinions and practices of the Paulicians, both by disputing with them and by \par instituting inquiries among the Catholics in the neighborhood. It is unfortunate \par that there is no better authority to consult, for Petrus Siculus was so bitterly \par prejudiced against the people that his statements cannot be received without \par doubt and distrust. The only safe course is to endeavour to disentangle facts \par from opinions, insinuations, and invectives, and thus to ascertain the truth. \par Yet even then it is impossible to furnish a complete picture. Petrus Siculus \par deals chiefly in negatives. He tells us what the Paulicians denied, and rails at \par them for presuming to differ from the Catholic party, but he leaves us to guess \par what they really believed, in many important particulars. We mention these \parn things that the reader may perceive the difficulty which lies in the way of an \par impartial narrator. \par \par About the year 653, during the reign of the Emperor Constans II., a young man \par named Constantine, resident at Mananalis, in Armenia, rendered hospitable \par attentions to a stranger whom misfortune had brought under his roof. The \par stranger proved to be a deacon of a Christian Church, and he had in his \par possession a precious treasure, which he gave to Constantine on his departure, \par in return for the kindness shown him. It was a copy of the Gospels and the \par Epistles of Paul. Constantine read, believed, and obeyed. Manich\'e6ism, by which \par he had been deluded, was immediately renounced. His Manich\'e6an books were thrown aside, and the sacred writings were exclusively studied. Shortly afterwards he \par removed to Cibossa, where he lived and laboured for twenty-seven years. He was a \par diligent and successful preacher. Great numbers received the otruth. In what \par manner he proceeded to form them into societies or churches, and how they were \par governed, we have not the means of knowing. We may conjecture and infer, but \par inference is not history. If the report of Petrus Siculus be correct, they lay \par under considerable disadvantage in not having the Book of the Acts in their \par hands, from which they would have gathered the practices of the Apostolic \par churches, and perhaps this circumstance exerted an unfavorable influence on \par their arrangements. But we must not affirm positively on this subject. \par \par Constantine died the death of a martyr. The Emperor Constantine Pogonatus sent \par Simeon, one of his officers, to Cibossa, with a military detachment. He \par apprehended Constantine, compelled the congregation to present themselves before \par him, and ordered them to stone their minister. They stood in silence for a \par while, no one lifting up his hand in obedience to so cruel a command. At lenpgth \par a man named Justus stepped forward, and the murderous deed was done. Simeon then undertook the work of conversion. He disputed with the followers of Constantine, and laboured hard to restore them to the Catholic Church. But he laboured in vain. Not only so, the arguments used on the other side were too powerful for him. He yielded to the force of truth, and returned to Constantinople a \par Paulician in heart. At first he did not avow the change that had taken place, \par but at length he found it impossible to conceal it, and consequently he left the \par Imperial service, retired to Cibossa, joined the persecuted sect, and became the \par successor of the very man whom he had murdered by the hand of Justus. After \par several years of usefulness, Justus, who had professed repentance and had been \par restored to the Church, quarreled with him and betrayed him to a neighboring \par bishop, by whose means all the members of the Church then resident in Cibossa \par were seized anqd burned alive in one vast pile. Paulus only escaped. He fled to \par Episparis. His two sons, Genesius and Theodotus, became Paulician ministers. \par Genesius was on one occasion apprehended as a heretic and taken to \par Constantinople, where he underwent an examination before the Patriarch. It is \par thus reported by Petrus Siculus: \par \par Patriarch.-"Why hast thou derided the orthodox faith?" \par Genesius.-"Anathema to him who denies the orthodox faith" (meaning thereby his \par own heresy, which he boasted of as the true "orthodox faith"). \par Patriarch.-"Wherefore dost thou not believe in and adore the venerable cross?" \par Genesius.-"Anathema to him who does not adore and worship the venerable and \par life-giving cross" (meaning Christ Himself, whose outstretched arms present the \par figure of the cross). \par Patriarch.-"Why dost thou not worship and adore the holy mother of God?" \par Genesius.-"Anathema to him who does not adore the most holy mother of God, the r\par common mother of us all, into whom our Lord Jesus Christ entered" (meaning the \par heavenly Jerusalem, into which Christ has entered, as our Forerunner). \par Patriarch.-"Why dost thou not partake of the immaculate body and precious blood \par of our Lord Jesus Christ, but dost rather despise the same?" \par Genesius.-"Anathema to him who despises the body and blood of Jesus Christ" \par (meaning thereby the words " body and blood," and nothing more). \par "In like manner," says Petrus Siculus, "he spake of baptism, saying that Jesus \par Christ Himself is baptism, and that there is no other, because He said, 'I am \par the living water.' And thus, perverting everything by his own false \par interpretations, he was acquitted and honorably dismissed." \par \par After this, Mananalis was again the headquarters of the Paulicians. Genesius \par lived there thirty years, and died in peace. Various troubles and disasters \par followed. Joseph, who seems to have succeeded Genesius, wisthdrew to Episparis, \par and afterwards to Antioch, in Pisidia, where he laboured thirty years. He was \par succeeded by Bahanes. But there must have been many more engaged in the work \par besides these, for the imperfect notices that are left indicate an extensive \par series of operations, embracing a large number of churches, and a powerful body \par of adherents. \par \par About the year 810 the Paulicians were joined by Sergius, who became one of the \par most eminent men of their community. The account of his conversion is \par exceedingly interesting. He was an intelligent, well-educated young man, and \par much esteemed for his many excellent qualities; but he was profoundly ignorant \par of religion. One day a Christian woman (evidently a Paulician) met with him and \par entered into conversation. "Why," said she, "do you not read the Holy Gospels?" \par "Because," he replied, "it is not lawful for us laymen, but only for the \par priests." "You are altogether mistaketn," she rejoined, "for there is no respect \par of persons with God; He will have all men to be saved." She then proceeded to \par expose the priestly tyranny of the age, and the gross superstitions by which the \par people were deluded, urging the young man to examine the matter for himself. He \par did so. He read, and thought, and prayed, and became a Christian "in deed and in \par truth." The genuineness of his conversion was proved by his eminently holy life \par and incessant zeal. He traversed a large part of Western Asia, preaching \par everywhere, and calling on the people to abandon the follies of a corrupted \par Christianity, and "worship God in the spirit." Thirty-four years were thus \par spent, and marvelous results accompanied his efforts. Multitudes were converted. \par So general was the defection from the established Church, that the Greek emperor \par was greatly alarmed, and adopted the severest measures for the suppression of \par the Reformation. The Pauliciauns had endured persecution from the beginning, and \par had "increased and multiplied" under it. But the storm raged with such terrific \par fierceness during the first half of the ninth century, that utter extermination \par seemed inevitable. It is affirmed that under the auspices of the Empress \par Theodora, who held the regency during the minority of her son Michael, from A.D. \par 832 to A.D. 846, no fewer than one hundred thousand Paulicians were put to \par death, "by the sword, the gibbet, or the flames." Sergius was one of the \par victims. He and his brethren went to join those of whom it is said that they \par constantly cry, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost Thou not judge and avenge \par our blood on those that dwell on the earth?" (Rev. 6:10) \par "Oppression maketh a wise man mad." \par \par There is a point at which resistance becomes venial, if not obligatory. Imperial \par cruelty provoked retaliation and revenge. The Paulicians took up arms in defense \pavr of their families and their homes. The transition from self-defense to active \par rebellion is easy, and the provinces of the East were convulsed with civil war, \par for all the miseries of which the persecutors were responsible. It continued \par many years. The co-operation of the Saracens was sought, and many provinces of \par the Empire were desolated. But we will not pursue the history further. It is \par difficult to trace the progress of religion when carnal weapons have been taken \par up. We will only observe that the Paulician revival had early extended to \par Thrace, now the Turkish province of Roumelia that in the tenth century a large \par number of Paulicians were removed to Philippoplis in that country, and also to \par Bulgaria, the adjoining province; and that in the following age they began to \par migrate into Italy, France, and other parts of Europe.3 \par \par When Petrus Siculus sat down to write his history, he was predetermined to \par blacken the Paulwicians to the utmost. Consequently, he maintained that they were \par Manich\'e6ans, notwithstanding the disclaimer of Constantine, their founder; and \par having taken that position, he was resolved to hold it. We shall not think it \par worth while to discuss the question. There may have been some among them who \par still retained a regard to the philosophic speculations with which they were \par familiar before conversion, and which had for many ages proved very injurious to \par spiritual Christianity; and that unworthy persons sometimes crept in among them \par may be readily admitted. That is the fate of all parties. But here was their \par distinction;-they withdrew from the Greek Church because that Church had \par abandoned the high ground of Gospel truth and spiritual worship. They asserted \par the right and duty of searching the Scriptures, and would admit no other rule. \par They abhorred saint-worship. They would not adore the cross, nor bow down before \par images. xThey abjured the ecclesiastical hierarchy. In a word, they appear to \par have been Protestants before the Reformation, and even before those who have \par been commonly reckoned as its precursors. The meager accounts of them which \par remain, tinged as they are with obstinate prejudice, fail to give us \par satisfaction. Had we the letters of Sergius, which Petrus Siculus tells us his \par followers valued highly, we should be able to obtain full and accurate \par information. This, however, is certain, that a religious movement, springing \par from God's word, and so firmly maintained against opposition, that two hundred \par years after its rise the astonishing number of one hundred thousand of its \par adherents were cut off without destroying the body, must have possessed a mighty \par influence. We agree with Joseph Milner, the ecclesiastical historian, who \par observes that in this case we have "one of those extraordinary effusions of the \par Divine Spirit by which the knyowledge of Christ and the practice of godliness is \par kept alive in the world."4 \par \par But we cannot agree with that writer in the statement, that the Paulicians "were \par simply scriptural in the use of the Sacraments." Neander says, more truly, that \par "they combated the inclination to rely on the magical effects of external forms, \par particularly the Sacraments: indeed, they went so far on this side as wholly to \par reject the outward celebration of the Sacraments."5 \par \par On the question of baptism, Photius writes to this effect that though the \par Paulicians despise "saving baptism," they pretend that they have received it, \par inasmuch as they received the Gospel, wherein Christ declares that He is the \par "living water;"6 \par \par and he adds, that they are willing that the priests should baptize their \par children, notwithstanding their disbelief in any saving benefit accompanying the \par rite. Admitting the correctness of this account, the Pauliczians rejected \par water-baptism, teaching that the knowledge of Christ, which is spiritual \par baptism, is sufficient. If they allowed the priests to baptize their children, \par as Photius states, it was probably to save themselves from annoyance, perhaps \par from persecution; and as, in their opinion, the baptism did the children neither \par good nor harm, it was looked on as a matter of indifference. We do not justify \par or commend them. Whatever their views were, the priests judged that they had \par saved the children by baptizing them, and there should not have been any \par opportunity given for cherishing that anti-Christian notion. Still it is to be \par remembered that we are by no means certain of the truth of the statement, as the \par writer was a virulent opposer of the Paulicians, and aimed to excite hatred \par against them. The same remark will apply to Petrus Siculus, who, as Gibbon very \par properly says, wrote "with much prejudice and passion." \par \p{ar Some maintain that the Paulicians did not reject either baptism or the Lord's \par Supper (which also they are said to have held in a spiritual sense only), but \par the unauthorized additions that had been made to the ordinances, and the current \par opinions respecting their design and efficacy. In other words, they rejected \par baptismal regeneration, and transubstantiation. The progress of perversion, it \par is truly affirmed, had brought men to this point, that baptism was no longer \par regarded as a profession of Christ, nor the Lord's Supper as a memorial of His \par love; the former was held to be the instrument of regeneration, and in the \par latter there was said to be an actual reception of the Savior's body and blood. \par Whoever refused to acquiesce in these representations was reproached as a denier \par of the ordinances, whereas his opposition was confined to corruptions and \par abuses. This is not an improbable supposition, but we have not the means of \pa|r verifying it, for want of historic materials. \par \par It is, however, to be considered, that the Paulicians were not altogether agreed \par among themselves. There were divi\-sions and parties. It may possibly be that \par Photius and Petrus Siculus designedly referred to those of them whose opinions \par were, in their judgment, the farthest removed from Catholic verity, and that \par while some wandered into errors and excesses, the remainder pursued a scriptural \par course. Photius himself states that some of them observed the Lord's Supper, \par though, as he affects to believe, they did it "to deceive the simple." This \par indicates the existence of two parties. Those who observed one ordinance were \par not likely to neglect the other. We are therefore not indisposed to believe that \par there were among the Paulicians many who preserved the truths and worship of \par Christianity, as derived from the New Testament. \par \par [1] Manes was a Persian. He was put to de}ath by order of Varanes I., King of \par Persia, in the year 278. Se Beausobre's Histoire Cyitique de Manichee et du \par Manicheisme, and Mosheim's De Rebus Christianis, &c., p. 728-903. \par [2] It is not pleasant to be compelled to make any statements calculated to \par throw discredit on other writers ; but the interests of truth are paramount to \par all other considerations, and Baptists ought to be especially careful in this \par matter \par \par Gibbon writes thus: "In the practice, or at least in the theory, of the \par sacraments, the Paulicians were inclined to abolish all visible objects of \par worship, and the words of the Gospel were, in their judgment, the baptism and \par communion of the faithful."-Decline and Fall, chap. 54. \par \par The Rev. W. Jones, referring to Gibbon as his authority, says: "The sacraments \par of Baptism and the Lord's Supper they held to be peculiar to 'the communion of \par the faithful,' that is, ought to be restricted to believers.~" -Lectures on \par Ecclesiastical History, ii. p. 181. It will be observed that this is not by any \par means a correct representation of Gibbon. It is quoted by Orchard as an \par independent testimony. \par \par Mr. Orchard (History of the Baptists, p. 130) gives the following as a quotation \par from Mosheim: "It is evident they [the Paulicians] rejected the baptism of \par infants. They were not charged with any error concerning baptism." We are sorry \par to say that the first part of this alleged quotation is not to be found in \par Mosheim. The second part is a mutilation. The words of the historian, which \par occur in a note, are here copied: "The Greeks do not charge the Paulicians with \par any error in respect to the doctrine of Baptism. Yet there is no doubt that they \par construed into allegory what the New Testament states concerning this ordinance. \par And Photius (Contra Manich. lib. i. p. 29) expressly says, that they held only \par to a fictitious baptism, and understood by baptism, i.e., by the water of \par baptism-the Gospel."-Ecclesiastical History, cent. ix. part 2. chap. v. sect. 6. \par Mr. Orchard gives also the following, as a quotation from Dr. Allix: "They, with \par the Manich\'e6ans, were Anabaptists, and were consequently often reproached with \par that term." We have looked in vain for this quotation. Dr. Allix, speaking of \par the Manichees, says: "In those barbarous and cruel ages, a small conformity of \par opinion with the Manichees was a sufficient ground to accuse them of Manicheism \par who opposed any doctrines received by the Church of Rome. Thus would they have \par taken the Anabaptists for downright Manichees, because they condemned the \par baptism of infants."-Remarks upon the Ancient Church of Piedmont, chap. xv. \par Mr. Orchard says (p. 300), Ecbertus Schonaugiensis, who wrote against this \par people, declares, "They say that baptism does no good to infants; therefore, \par such as come over to their s€ect they baptize in a private way, that is, without \par the pomp and public parade of the Catholics."-Wall's History, part 2, p. 228. \par This seems to be clear and explicit testimony. According to the statement, as \par here presented, the Cathari not only rejected infant-baptism, but also baptized \par adults, "in a private way." The reader will be astonished to learn that the very \par opposite was the fact. These people, according to Eckbert, as very fairly quoted \par by Wall, rejected baptism altogether. Here is the entire passage, copied from \par Wall. He is speaking of Eckbert, or, as be calls him, Ecbertus Schonaugiensis: \par He says, Sermon I. "They are also divided among themselves; for several things \par that are maintained by some of them, are denied by others." And of baptism \par particularly, he says, "Of baptism they speak variously; that baptism does no \par good to infants, because they cannot of themselves desire it, and because they \par cannot profess any faith. But there is another thing which they more generally \par hold concerning that point, though more secretly, viz., that no water baptism at \par all does any good for salvation. And therefore such as come over to their sect, \par they re-baptize by a private way, which they call baptism with the Holy Spirit \par and with fire." This was the " consolamentum." It is described in the next \par chapter. \par \par Mr. Benedict copies Orchard, and thus unwittingly propagates the \par mistake.-History of the Baptists, p. 67, edit. 1848. The original passage, \par translated by Wall, is in Biblioth. Maxim. Lugdun. xxiii. p. 601. \par [3] The "Historia" of Petrus Siculus is printed in the sixteenth volume of the \par Biblioth. Maxim. Lugdunens. Gieseler has given an abstract of the statements of \par Photius in his Ecclesiastical History, ii. pp. 209-212. \par [4] History of the Church, cent. ix. chap. ii. \par [5] History of the Church, iii. p. 263. \par [6] Ibid, i. p. 9. \par } ÀÀÕP eƒªK0301-The Manichaeans-Cautions to the Student{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE OBSCURE PERIOD \par \cf0 \par CHAPTER I. \par The Manichaeans-Cautions to the Student-All Opponents of Infant \par Baptism not Baptists-Account of the Paulicians-Their Views of Baptism. \par \par Some may wonder that we have as yet said nothing about the Manich\'e6ans, a sect \par which first came into notice about the latter part of the third century, and \par continued in existence, if historians are to be believed, a thousand years or \par more. They were charged with denying infant-baptism. But we wish it to be \par understood that we consider those only as Bapgƒeneral and vague \par that we cannot fully gather from them the opinions supposed to have been held by \par the said reformers. Whatever their various sentiments were, we find them \par indiscriminately libeled as "Manich\'e6ans," which was as much as to say that they \par were children of the devil, and should be left to their fate. It is a curious \par fact that Italy was the fountainhead of these heresies. Powerful and cunning as \par the Popes were, they could not preserve their own territories from the spiritual \par infection. \par \par Now and then the hidden seed sprouted up and showed itself above ground. An \par instance occurred at Orleans, in France, in 1022. Ten canons of the Church were \par discovered to be imbued with heretical notions, which they were said to have \par received from Italy, by means of a lady of that land. The discoveries excited \par great horror. Forthwith the king and queen, attended by a large retinue of \par prelates, hastened to the spot to„ make inquisition. One Arefastus, who had \par pretended to be an inquirer into the new opinions, and by that means had won the \par confidence of the leaders, became a witness against them. They were charged, \par among other things, with holding that there is no washing away of sins in \par baptism, that in the Lord's Supper the bread and wine are not changed into the \par body and blood of the Saviour, and that it is unlawful to pray to the saints. \par These were unpardonable sins. The accused were men of learning and piety, whose \par unimpeachable characters and holy lives were well known, and by whose \par benevolence many poor were daily relieved; but they did not believe in baptismal \par regeneration, transubstantiation, and saint-worship, and therefore they must be \par burned alive-and burned they were, on the very day of their trial. First, \par however, they were solemnly degraded from the priestly office, the queen \par standing guard at the church door while the cer…emony of degradation was being \par performed, lest the populace should push in and anticipate the execution by \par murdering them. Her majesty gave a striking manifestation of her zeal for \par orthodoxy, immediately afterwards, by knocking out the eye of one of the \par sufferers, who had been her own confessor, and against whom, therefore, she was \par especially enraged. They were then taken outside the city walls and committed to \par the flames. One author states that three or four other persons, who had embraced \par the same opinions, and who were of very respectable standing in society, \par suffered with them.1 \par \par Three years afterwards, another band of heretics made their appearance at Arras, \par in Flanders. They were apprehended and brought before a council convened on the \par occasion, when they gave this account of themselves: "Our law and discipline," \par said they, "which we have received from the Master, will not appear to be \par contrary to Gospel †decrees and Apostolic sanctions, if any one will diligently \par consider the same. For it is this-to relinquish the world, to restrain the flesh \par from concupiscence, to provide for our support by the labour of our own hands, \par to seek the hurt of none, to show charity to all. This righteousness being \par preserved, there is no need of baptism; if this be turned from, baptism cannot \par save. This is the sum of our justification, to which the use of baptism can add \par nothing, for it comprises the entire purpose of all Apostolic and evangelical \par instruction. But if any say that some sacrament lies hid in baptism, the force \par of that is taken away by these three considerations: First, the reprobate life \par of the ministers can afford no saving remedy to the persons to be baptized; \par secondly, whatever sins are renounced at the font are afterwards taken up again \par in life and practice; thirdly, another's will, another's faith, and another's \par confession, ‡do not seem to belong to, or to be of any advantage to, a little \par child, who neither wills nor runs, who knows nothing of faith, and is altogether \par ignorant of his own good and salvation, and from whom no confession of faith can \par be` expected."2 \par \par These men, up to a certain point, were scripturally orthodox. They saw clearly \par that religious service must be a personal, voluntary act, flowing from faith, \par and that therefore infant-baptism could have no foundation in the Word of God, \par since infants were unable to believe. They rejected it, and in doing so they \par rejected baptism altogether, for at that time infant-baptism was the baptism of \par the Catholic Church. See here an illustration of our Lord's statement to the \par Jews, "Ye have made the Word of God of none effect by your traditions." \par According to the tradition, regeneration and grace were bestowed in \par infant-baptism, and hence that ceremony, being generally adopted, superseded ˆthe \par baptism of believers. Hence, too, the effect produced on inquiring minds. "This \par baptism," said they-and they argued conclusively from the premises,-"is \par manifestly a vain and useless thing. It cannot accomplish the promised results. \par It never did. If we are already pious, baptism is needless; if we are not, \par baptism cannot make us so." Thus a Christian ordinance was suppressed. The men \par of Arras were "not far from the kingdom of God;" but it is evident that they \par were imperfect Christians. They discerned error, but they did not perceive the \par whole truth, for the error eclipsed it. This was the position of a large number \par of the reformers of the Middle Ages. They held Baptist principles as we now hold \par them, so far as regarded the rejection of infant-baptism. Whether they practiced \par the baptism of believers, historians do not say, though we would not build an \par argument on that silence. Those of them who were priests of the Cathol‰ic Church, \par as the canons of Orleans, must have been accustomed to administer \par infant-baptism. How they reconciled that practice with their convictions, we \par know not. \par \par It is a remarkable fact that the decrees of councils contain no references \par whatever to heretics for several centuries previous to the eleventh. There are \par enactments in abundance touching the honours and privileges of the clergy, \par anathemas in rich profusion against breaches of ecclesiastical law, and \par threatenings of punishment for gross and unnamable violations of chastity. But \par heresy is not mentioned, except in two or three individual cases. It is clear \par that there was no disturbing movement. The operations of the Paulicians were \par confined to the East till nearly the close of the "Obscure Period," when they \par entered Europe. There were men in the West who "sighed and cried for all the \par abominations that were done," but they mourned in secret, and they weŠre not \par numerous enough to attract attention or to excite opposition. \par \par Certain miscellaneous matters will be now adverted to in conclusion. \par A.D. 692. Ina, King of the West Saxons, enacted a law by which it was enjoined \par that all infants should be baptized within thirty days after birth, under a \par penalty of thirty shillings. If the child died without baptism, the father's \par entire estate was to be confiscated.3 \par \par A.D. 741. Pope Zachary, writing to Boniface, a German bishop, affirmed that \par immersion in the name of the Trinity was essential to baptism, but that the \par moral character of the administrator was not essential. The Pope's meaning was, \par that a bad man might be a good priest. Certainly the Pope was a poor theologian. \par The same pope, writing to the same bishop, referred to a priest, who, being \par ignorant of Latin, the only language then used in Church services, in trying to \par repeat the form, said, "Baptizo to in nomi‹ne Patria, et Filia, et Spiritu \par Sancta. The reader will see what nonsense he made of it! Nevertheless, said the \par Pope, as the priest was not heretical, but only ignorant, and as he intended to \par baptize in the name of the Trinity, though he blundered over it, there was no \par need to re-baptize the child. It must be considered all right.4 \par \par In another letter the same Pope mentioned one Samson, a Scotch priest, who held \par that a person might be made "a Catholic Christian," by the imposition of the \par bishop's hands, without baptism, and, as far as appears, without repentance or \par faith.5 Verily, there were singular people in those days. \par \par A.D. 754. Pope Stephen II. declared that if an infant was baptized in wine, \par there being no water to be had, the baptism was valid. And if, the infant being \par very sick, the baptism was performed with water, not in it, the water being \par poured from a shelf, or by the hand, and the proper words used,Œ that baptism was \par valid. The Pope might have spared himself the trouble of giving these decisions. \par There was no validity in either case.6 \par \par Immersion was the ordinary mode of administering baptism during all this period. \par The case mentioned above was one of the exceptions that were sometimes allowed, \par when children were supposed to be in danger of death. Yet even in such \par circumstances the Anglo-Saxon priests were warned to abide by the ritual. At a \par Synod held at Calcuith, in 816, it was ordained that the priests should not pour \par water on the heads of the infants, but should immerse them, according to the \par example of the Son of God, who was thrice immersed (so the Synod declared) in \par the water of Jordan.7 With this agrees Dr. Lingard's account. He states that \par "the regular way of administering baptism was by immersion." In the case of an \par adult, he "descends into the font, the priest depressed his head three times \par below the surface, saying, 'I baptize thee,' &c." In the case of an infant, "the \par priest himself descends into the water, which reached to his knees. Each child \par was successively delivered undressed into his hands, and he plunged it thrice \par into the water."8 \par \par A.D. 787. By a canon of the Second Council of Nice, all persons were forbidden \par to conceal heretical books. Bishops, priests, or deacons, disobeying the canon, \par were to be deposed; monks or laymen, excommunicated.9 No wonder we are often so much at a loss respecting the opinions held by those who were called heretics, \par many of whom were not properly heretics, but genuine religious reformers. Their \par books were carefully gathered and burned, and it was made a crime to conceal \par them. You may write it thus:- \par \par "Infallible recipe for the suppression of heresy." \par "If it is propagated by preaching, silence the preacher if he will preach, put \par him out of the way. If it is propagated by writing, burn the books; should the \par author still persist, burn him too. Probatum est." \par \par A.D. 797. A Capitulary of Charlemagne contains the following enactments:- \par All infants must be baptized within a year of their birth. Penalties for \par neglect,-a nobleman 120 shillings; a gentleman 6o shillings; other persons 30 \par shillings.10 These were heavy fines, for at that time the price of a good sheep \par was a shilling. A fine of one hundred and twenty sheep for neglecting the \par baptism of a child! Is it not monstrous? \par \par 1 Labbe and Cossart, ix. pp. 836-842. \par 2 Act. Synod. Attrebatensis, Gieseler, ii. p. 496. \par 3 Labbe and Cossart, vi. p. 1325. \par 4 Labbe and Cossart, p. 1505. \par 5 Ibid. p. 1520. \par 6 Ibid. p. 1652. \par 7 Labbe and Cossart, vii. p. 1489. \par 8 History and Antiquities of the Anglo-Saxon Church, i. pp. 317-320. \par 9 Labbe and Cossart, vii. p. 603. \par 10 Ibid. p. 1152. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } tNt‰O ;’u0400-THE REVIVAL PERIOD{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THä{ oÉ0302-Religious Reform in Europe-Canons of Orleans{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE OBSCURE PERIOD \par \cf0 \par \par CHAPTER III. \par Religious Reform in Europe-The Canons of Orleans-Arras-Berengarius-Miscellaneous Anecdotes. \par \par Although certain scattered notices in historical writings render it probable \par that during the "Obscure Period" religious reformers were silently working their \par way in different parts of Europe, the expressions used are so g‚E REVIVAL PERIOD. \par \cf0\b0 \par I.State of Affairs in Europe during this Period-The Crusades -Other \par Important Events-The Scholastic Divines and Philosophers-Universities-Printing \par \par II.Paulicians in France and Italy-General View of the Reform Movement-Various Names given to the Reformers-Sentiments held by them-False Charge of Manich\'e6ism-Their Activity-Reinerus Saccho's Account \par \par III.Success of the Reforming Parties-Consternation at Rome-Anathemas-The \par Dominican and Franciscan Orders-Sanguinary Persecution-Crusade against the \par Albigenses-The Inquisition Movement in England-John de Wycliffe-The \par Lollards-Bohemia \par \par IV.Various Opinions respecting Baptism-Berengar-Peter of Bruys-Henry of \par Lausanne-Arnold of Brescia-Cologne-England-Lombers-Pope Lucius III \par \par V.Heretics of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries-Wycliffe's Sentiments on Baptism-The Bohemians-Baptism among the Waldenses-Church Government-Immersion \par \par } ‘THE REVIVAL PERIOD \par \cf0\b0 \par CHAPTER I. \par State of Affairs in Europe during this Period-The Crusades-Other \par Important Events-The Scholastic Divines and Philosophers-Universities-Printing. \par \par I have termed the period we are now entering on the "Revival Period," not on \par religious grounds only, but also because throughout the whole period a new and \par powerful impulse was acting on the human mind. In some sense it might be said \par that the darkness had passed away. That expression, however, must be taken in a \par very modified acceptation. What is meant is this: before the days of Hildebrand \par the darkness became denser and denser; but after his days light gradually forced \par itself in, and the commingling led to fierce conflicts. The Church of Rome \par continued as dark as ever; in some respects, and in certain districts, it was an \par infernal blackness. Nevertheless, there were gleamings here and there, growing \par brighter and brighte’r, and tending to permanence; so that many men began to see \par where they were, which was a great point gained. It was as in Egypt of old. \par While the masses slumbered amid a darkness "which might be felt," there was a \par goodly number of God's people in the land, the true "children of Israel," and \par they "had light in their dwellings." \par \par Significant and momentous events characterized this period. All Europe was in a \par ferment. First came the struggles between the Popes and the Emperors, in which \par many gallant warriors bit the dust, and flourishing kingdoms were laid waste. \par Then the Crusades-the veriest triumphs of ignorance, folly, superstition, and \par savagery, that the world had ever seen-which more than decimated the nobility of \par Europe, exalted crowns at the expense of coronets, and stuffed the maw of the \par Church of Rome, already pretty well gorged, with ill-gotten wealth. And yet some \par good came out of the evil. The tyrants of the “world, whether despots or \par republicans (France has furnished types of both), "do not think so, or mean it \par in their hearts;" but the "King of kings" is on His throne, "judging right," and \par they work out His will, unwittingly it may be, yet surely. So it was with the \par Crusades. At first the Popes seemed to have it all their own way. They had hit \par upon a grand expedient to lull the European population to sleep in the arms of \par the Church. Those who went to the holy wars traveled blindfold as priests guided \par them: and those who remained at home handed out gold, and silver, and precious \par things at the holy father's bidding. Rome drove a profitable trade in those \par days! But loss was at hand. The Crusades aroused and expanded men's minds. \par Commerce found additional avenues. Municipal institutions were established. The \par learning and the arts of the East became known. Intercourse with foreign nations \par was extended. Curiosity was awakened and i”nquiry stimulated. The literary \par treasures which had long been hidden in Eastern monasteries were brought to \par light and circulated, and "forgotten tongues" were learned again. All this was \par adverse to anti-Christian interests, and showed how the wise were once more \par "taken in their own craftiness." We are reminding the reader of the great events \par of the period now before us. A simple enumeration must suffice. Think of Magna \par Charta, and the establishment of the English House of Commons-the invention of \par the mariner's com\-pass, of gunpowder, of linen paper, and of the printing \par press-the battles of Crecy, Poictiers, and Agincourt, with their \par consequences-the Great Western schism-the Council of Constance-the Wars of the Roses-the discovery of America, and of the passage to the East Indies round the \par Cape of Good Hope. Were they not times of activity and progress ? \par \par The reader must not suppose that this has no connection with "Baptist •History." \par It has. We found the records of the last period scant and fragmentary. Why? The \par world was asleep, intellectually and morally asleep. Rome had administered an \par opiate, and Europe lay slumbering in her lap. It is not surprising that under \par such circumstances it is difficult to spell out the annals of thought and \par freedom. Baptist sentiments can hardly be understood, much less appreciated, in \par such dozing days as those. They require for their full development a time of \par mental stir. They rejoice in those collisions which produce sparks and flames, \par and thus illuminate the nations. They have a tendency to produce them. \par Let us proceed, then, to show how enlightenment sprang up and brought forth \par fruit in the "Revival Period." \par \par It began with the Scholastic Philosophers and Divines. "The scholastic \par theology," says Mr. Hallam, "was, in its general principle, an alliance between \par faith and reason, an endeavour to arran–ge the orthodox system of the Church, \par such as authority had made it, according to the rules and methods of the \par Aristotelian dialectics, and sometimes upon premises supplied by metaphysical \par reasoning." The scholastic philosophy, according to the same author, "seems \par chiefly to be distinguished from the theology by a larger infusion of \par metaphysical reasoning, or by its occasional inquiries into subjects not \par immediately related to revealed articles of faith."1 These philosophers and \par divines are often described as learned triflers who wasted their time and their \par energies in speculations, inquiries, and disputes, which might have been as well \par or better left alone; and their ponderous folios, scarcely ever read, but \par moldering away in public libraries, are pointed at as monuments of laborious \par folly. But this is a partial, perhaps a prejudiced, verdict. It is true that \par these men did perplex their brains with questions which they c—ould not answer, \par and sometimes, like the angels Milton speaks of, "found no end, in wandering \par mazes lost." It is also true that their theological investigations were \par conducted in a preposterous manner, since they strove to reason out their \par theology by the aid of the Aristotelian philosophy, instead of deriving it from \par the pure fountain of Holy Writ. And it must be granted that in their \par philosophical disquisitions they generalized and distinguished very much in the \par dark, and that the student of their works is constantly thrown into inextricable \par doubt and difficulty by their twisted reasonings, the cloudy verboseness of \par their style, and the barbarous unintelligible epithets they were in the habit of \par employing. Yet, with all these deductions, it cannot be denied that the \par school-men rendered great service in their day. There are bright gems in their \par writings, though hidden beneath much rubbish. If you sometimes meet with the ˜ \par uncouth, the ridiculous, or the hopelessly obscure, there are also vestiges of \par the profound and glimpses of the sublime. Their powerful intellects (for some of \par them were literary giants) were devoted, for the most part, to the upholding of \par Popery, and on that account we may not be sorry for the oblivion into which they \par have fallen. But they taught men to think, although their methods were as rude \par as were the mechanical tools of the times in which they lived, and the process \par of learning was consequently slow. Their influence gradually extended, till at \par length it reached those who were more desirous of applying to practice the \par knowledge already acquired than of striking out new paths, which might after all \par lead into a wilderness. There was an imperceptible and general sharpening of the \par human mind. The number of independent inquirers continually increased, and the \par circle of information was widened. Then, improved methods of me™ntal training \par were devised. The establishment of numerous schools and universities was the \par result. \par \par The following is a list of the principal school-men, with the curious and \par whimsical titles given them: \par \par DIED A.D. \par Peter Lombard, Master of Sentences.............................................................................................\'851164 \par Alexander of Hales, Irrefragable Doctor.................................................................................................... 1245 \par Thomas Aquinas, Angelic \par Doctor....................................................................................................1274 \par Bonaventura, Seraphic \par Doctor....................................................................................................1274 \par Alan of Lille, Universal \par Doctor....................................................................................................1294 \par Roger Bacon, Wonderšful \par Doctor....................................................................................................1294 \par Richard Middleton, Solid and Copious \par Doctor...........................................................................................1304 \par Duns Scotus, Subtle \par Doctor.......................................................................................... 1308 \par William Occam, Singular and Invincible \par Doctor....................................................................................1347 \par Archbishop Bradwardine, Profound \par Doctor..................................................................................1349 \par John Tauler, Sublime and Enlightened \par Doctor...................................................................................1361 \par Durand of St. Pourcain, Most \par Resolute...................................................................................1383 \par Peter de Alliaco, the Eagle of France›, and the Maul of \par Errorists.................................................................... 1425 \par John Gerson, Most Christian \par Doctor.......................................................................1429 \par \par Universities have been mentioned. The University of Paris was founded A.D. 1206. \par Eight others in different parts of Europe, including Oxford and Cambridge, were \par founded in that century. The next century was the age of Dante, Petrarch, \par Boccaccio, and our own Wycliffe and Chaucer; sixteen universities were founded \par in that century. Between the commencement of the fifteenth century and the close \par of the "Revival Period," twenty-nine more were added to the list. Great numbers \par of students attended these institutions. Many of them did not learn much, and in \par all cases the course of study was very limited. But assuredly the poet's \par affirmation-"A little learning is a dangerous thing"-is not to be regarded as \par oracular. The students of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries were \par undoubtedly inferior to those of the present age: but was it not better to get \par "a little learning" than to remain in ignorance? And may it not be fairly \par inferred that the universities and schools of the times now under consideration \par (for schools also increased and extended in every direction), exerted a highly \par beneficial influence on society at large? \par \par Printing was invented about the middle of the fifteenth century; and the study \par of classical literature, which had been revived more than a hundred years \par previously, received a powerful impetus after the fall of Constantinople, when \par educated Greeks emigrated into Italy and France, and the love of learning was \par everywhere diffused. \par \par 1 State of Europe during the Middle Ages, chap. ix, part ii. See also Bishop \par Hampden's Bampton Lectures on "The Scholastic Philosophy." \par \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } {è{´ S‚çW0402-Paulicians in France and Italy{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REVIVAL PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER II. \par Paulicians in France and Italy-General View of the Reform Movement-Various Names given to the Reformers-Sentiments held by them-False Charge of Manich\'e6ism-Their Activity-Reinerus Saccho's Account \par \par We have glanced at the Paulicans-their labors-their sufferings-and áaeÂm0401-State of Affairs in Europe-The Crusades{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 žtheir various \par dispersions. Many of them sought a home in Italy and France, about the close \par of the tenth and the beginning of the eleventh century. There they met with \par congenial spirits. Right-minded men in those countries had protested from time \par to time, though unavailingly, against Romish encroachments. The coming of the \par Paulicians inspired them with fresh courage, and from the middle of the eleventh \par century we read of a succession of valorous attacks upon those errors, \par superstitions, and vices, which not only abounded in less enlightened parts, but \par disgraced even the metropolis of Christendom. \par \par These dissidents formed a numerous and compact body in Italy, where the Papal \par yoke chafed the necks of the people and made them restive. Had it not been for \par the support derived from the Imperial power, Italy would have been Protestant \par before the Reformation. The success of Arnold of Brescia was an impressive \par warning.Ÿ In the year 1143, he established a new form of government in Rome, \par which wrested the civil power out of the hands of the Popes, and compelled them \par to content themselves with the management of ecclesiastical affairs. That the \par attempt was ill-advised, because society was not sufficiently prepared for it, \par seems evident; but the continuance of the new order of things for eleven years, \par and the alacrity with which the people adopted an anti-Papal policy, were \par remarkable signs of the times. \par \par Peter of Bruys began his career as a reformer in the year 1104, and laboured \par twenty years in the good work, chiefly in the South of France. He was followed \par by Henry of Lausanne, who preached the Word of God with great success in the \par same district. \par \par In the year 1170, Peter Waldo, a merchant of Lyons, renounced his secular \par engagements, and devoted himself to the revival of religion. He procured a \par translation of the New Testame nt into the French language, and spent his life in \par toilsome journeys among the people, during which he circulated portions of the \par Scriptures, preached, and by other methods sought to promote true godliness. \par Being joined by a number of like-minded men, their united efforts produced an \par extensive reformation. The "Poor Men of Lyons," as they were called, because \par they sacrificed worldly prospects and lived in poverty, became a numerous and \par formidable body. But persecution scattered them. Waldo himself escaped to \par Bohemia, and died there. Many of his followers settled in the same country. \par Almost everybody has heard and read of the Waldenses. We will not occupy \par valuable space with any account of the disputes respecting their origin. Some \par trace them to Peter Waldo, or to some other person of a similar name. Others \par maintain that their name is derived from the Latin word "Vallis," whence \par Vallensis, and by a slight corruption, Valdens¡is, in the plural, Valdenses, and \par then Waldenses. The valleys of Piedmont and other Alpine districts, secluded \par from general observation, had given shelter for several ages to numbers of \par protesters against Romish corruptions. There they studied the Scriptures, \par cultivated practical piety, and served God according to the dictates of their \par consciences. There is no doubt that they sympathized heartily with the religious \par movements which were going on in other parts of Europe. In persecuting times \par their valleys were welcome places of refuge. \par \par We have said that the South of France was the scene of the efforts of Peter of \par Bruys and Henry of Lausanne. Other reformers rose up in the same district. \par Toulouse and Albi were the towns about which they chiefly clustered. From the \par latter was derived the term "Albigenses." \par \par Many other appellations were used to designate the reforming sects of the \par twelfth and thirteenth centu¢ries. An inquirer is apt to be misled by them. He \par wonders at their divisions, and he asks, What were the diversities of opinion or \par of practice by which they were distinguished from one another? But he asks in \par vain. The fact is, that the numerous names and descriptions found in imperial \par edicts and decrees of councils refer to parties who held substantially the same \par views. The occupations in which many of them were engaged, the places where they \par lived, or some peculiarity in their manners, furnished the distinctive titles \par which appear in ecclesiastical histories. Thus, they were called Cathari, or \par Lure, because they pleaded for personal holiness and a pure church; or \par Humiliati, because of their modest deportment. The Arnaldish\'e6 were the followers \par of Arnold; the Speronist\'e6, of Speron. The Garatenses, Albanenses, Bagnoroli, \par Roncaroli, and Concorrezenses, were inhabitants of the towns from which those \par appellations were de£rived. To the Inzabatati that name was given because so many \par of them belonged to the lower classes, who wore sabots, or wooden shoes; or, as \par others suppose, because they refused to observe saints' days, holding that the \par Christian Sabbath is the only feast day of the Church, whence they were called \par Inzabatati, or Sabbath-men. Those who lived in Southern France were often called \par Texerants, weavers, a large number of them gaining their livelihood by that \par trade. But all these names, and many more, were given to persons in Italy, \par France, Ger\-many, Spain, and Flanders (for they were found in all those \par countries), whose religious views and practices were sub\-stantially the same. We \par say "substantially," because it is not to be supposed that they agreed with each \par other in every minute particular. The freedom which they claimed in separating \par from the Roman Church was still further indulged among themselves. They would \par "call no man¤ Master." But the diversities of opinion which might pre\-vail among \par them were perfectly consistent with unity in regard to the essential truths of \par the Gospel. \par \par However they might differ from one another on matters of small moment, they were \par "of one heart and one soul" in opposing the abominations of the Papacy. They \par held the Pope to be Antichrist, and they regarded the Church of Rome as the \par mystical "Babylon," spoken of in the Book of the Revelation, "the mother of \par harlots and abominations of the earth." They maintained that the true Church \par consists only of believers. They pleaded for the transla\-tion of the Scriptures \par into all modern languages, that men might read "in their own tongues the \par wonderful works of God." They derided the ceremonies of Romish worship-the holy water, the incense, the bowing and kneeling, the ringing of bells, &c.-and \par taught that God is to be wor\-shipped with "pious affections." They read and \p¥ar studied the Divine Word continually, so that many of them could repeat large \par portions of it from memory, and all were skilful in illustrating and defending \par their sentiments by appropriate quotations from Holy Writ. They denied the \par authority of bishops, the validity of the numerous distinctions of rank among \par the clergy, and the lawfulness of ecclesiastical titles. They denounced tithes. \par \par They declaimed against donations and legacies to churches or monasteries. They \par rejected councils. They abhorred image-worship and the reverence paid to relics. \par They did not believe in transubstantiation. They would not confess to the \par priests, saying that confession was to be made to God only. They laughed at \par dedications, consecrations, exorcisms, blessing of salt, spices, and candles, \par and other superstitious rites, regarding them as fitter themes for ridicule than \par for reasoning. They would not pray to any saints. They held purgatory to be¦ a \par fable, and they knew that it was a profitable one to the priesthood. They mocked \par at penances, indulgences, and all such trumpery. In a word, they acknowledged no \par authority in the Church but that of the Lord Jesus Christ; and they refused to \par obey any laws relating to religion which were not to be found in the New \par Testament. \par \par The ecclesiastical historians charge many of them with Manich\'e6ism. But we ought \par to be careful how we entertain that charge. The evidence on which it is founded \par is derived from the writings of their enemies (their own books have been \par industriously destroyed), or from statements made by renegades, who saw that the \par more monstrous the picture which they drew of their former associates, the more \par acceptable it would be to the priesthood. It may be admitted that some of them \par indulged in foolish, perhaps injurious speculations, mainly derived from the old \par Gnostic notions, "intruding into thing§s which they had not seen." It is well \par known, too, that most of them were distinguished by such peculiarities as \par refusing to take oaths or to bear arms. But the errors of a few ought not to be \par imputed to all; and it deserves to be considered, that when the Church had \par substituted trash for truth and form for power, there was a strong temptation to \par get to the farthest possible remove from her. It might be innocently enough \par believed, that whatever was denounced and opposed by Rome was therefore worthy \par of regard; and in that twilight period it was difficult to see all things \par clearly. \par \par Another thought or two may be added. Even if it be granted that Manich\'e6an \par speculations prevailed among some of these sects, it is not to be supposed that \par they were understood by the mass of their adherents, who were unquestionably \par incompetent to engage in controversies of that kind. They knew something of \par faith in the Lord Jesus; t¨hey could trust, and love, and obey; and they could \par exemplify all Gospel brotherly-kindness: but as for discussions respecting the \par "two principles," the nature of souls, and such like matters, they were \par altogether out of their reach. Nor is it to be imagined that their teachers \par enlarged on such topics in their public ministrations, for that would have \par spoiled their usefulness. It is further to be considered, that the same writers \par who bring forward the charge of Manich\'e6ism, do also accuse the Cathari of \par horrible and not-to-be-mentioned crimes, which were said to be perpetrated by \par them in their religious assemblies-just as the heathen, in the first age of the \par Church, propagated similar calumnies against the Christians. The accusations \par were equally baseless in both cases, and were met in both by indignant denial. \par But if one accusation is manifestly outrageous and unfounded, may not the other \par be? Are we not entitled to the ©inference that there was, at the least, gross \par exaggeration, if not malicious libel? And, finally, is it credible that those \par who avowed and manifested unlimited deference to the Word of God should have \par been led astray by the fantasies of the Manich\'e6an theory? \par \par The reader may be surprised that we are saying nothing about the Baptists. Let \par him be patient. We are working our way towards them. In fact, many of those of \par whom we have just spoken advocated Baptist sentiments, and will have to be \par mentioned again before the account of this period is closed. But we think it \par preferable to give first a general outline of the history of all the dissenting \par parties. \par \par The old writers bitterly complain of the activity of those who were called \par heretics. They could not understand it. The priests celebrated mass, heard \par confessions, at\-tended to their various parochial duties, and were satisfied. As \par for the monks, if they fªasted, meditated, prayed, punished themselves, or ,said \par they did, that was sufficient. The authors we are speaking of had no sympathy \par with the yearnings of Christian compassion for souls, and thought such efforts \par as the sectarians employed extremely irregular and troublesome. Human nature is \par the same everywhere and at all times. "They do exceedingly trouble our city," \par said the men of Philippi. The Jews of Thessalonica inflamed the mob by telling \par them that the men who "had turned the world upside down" had come to their city. \par Sleeping sinners wished not to be aroused. False teachers, administering opiates \par to souls, look upon truth-tellers as intruders and foes, and raise the hue and \par cry against them. \par \par Our Lord and His Apostles experienced such treatment. The faithful in succeeding \par ages shared like sufferings. But they quailed not, nor did they desist. They \par delivered the message entrusted to them, whether men would hear« or whether they \par would forbear. \par \par This is attested by all the records. The Cathari in Germany, France, and Italy, \par in the early part of the twelfth century, and the Lollards of England in the \par fifteenth, were equally guilty of the unpardonable crime-in Rome's eyes\- of \par endeavoring to save their fellow-men from sin and hell, by directing them to the \par only Saviour. They saw them "perishing for lack of knowledge." They saw the \par pretended spiritual father giving his children a stone for bread, a serpent for \par a fish, and a scorpion instead of an egg, so that the people were dying for want \par of food. God had given them the "bread from heaven," and they were under orders \par to distribute it to the starving, "without money and without price." They spent \par their lives in obeying the command. In the exercise of their pious zeal they \par sometimes exposed themselves to great dangers. Reinerus Saccho, who will be \par mentioned presently, tells¬ of one of the Cathari who swam over a piece of water \par in the depth of winter for the purpose of conveying a knowledge of the truth, as \par he understood and believed, to a person who lived on the opposite side. \par \par Their zeal was guided by judgment. Preaching occupied the first place in their \par esteem. Whenever they could gain the public ear, they gathered congregations, \par and proclaimed "the glorious Gospel of the blessed God," striving to convince \par men of the vanity of their hopes, and to lead the sinner from self and the \par creature to the finished work of Jesus. As it was in the days of our Lord \par Himself, many thousands of the "common people" heard them gladly. Like their \par Master, they "went about doing good." While some itinerated from place to place, \par preaching as they could find opportunity, others visited houses and entered into \par familiar conversation with the inmates. To do this more effectually they carried \par with them packs of ­merchandise, like the peddlers of these times, and thus \par frequently contrived, during the disposal of their wares, to excite in the minds \par of their hearers an earnest desire to obtain that wisdom which is "better than \par rubies." Nor was this all. They established schools in many places, in which \par religious instruction was freely given; and it is said that not unfrequently \par they sent their own youth to the University of Paris, where they received the \par best edu\-cation the world at that time afforded, and returned to their friends \par well qualified to meet Romish disputants and fight them with their own weapons. \par Another method adopted by them was the preparation of books. Those among them \par who were able composed treatises, which were copied (for printing was not \par invented till the middle of the fifteenth century) and circulated as widely as \par the means they possessed would allow. Thus great good was accomplished. But \par their books have peri®shed. With the exception of "The Noble Lesson," a precious \par Waldensian treatise, which is ascribed to the twelfth century, and which \par forcibly exposes the follies and frauds of Rome, the publications which were \par issued by these early reformers have been destroyed. Such was the policy of the \par false church-to stifle thought, prevent discussion, and exact blind, uninquiring \par obedience. \par \par Reinerus Saccho wrote a book against the Waldenses, under which title he \par evidently referred to the several bodies of alleged heretics then existing. This \par was about the year 1250. He said that he had belonged to the Waldenses about \par seventeen years, but had rejoined the dominant church. He received an \par appointment as inquisitor, doubtless because his knowledge of the sentiments and \par practices of his former associates eminently qualified him for that hateful \par office. In one part of his work he gives the following account of the manner in \par whic¯h the peddlers introduced religious topics among the families they visited:- \par "The heretics employ very cunning methods, by which to insinuate themselves into \par the society of the noble and great. They do it in this way. One of them takes \par with him some suitable articles of merchandise, such as rings or dresses, and \par offers them for sale. When they have bought what they choose, and ask the man if \par he has anything else to sell, he answers, 'I have more precious jewels than \par these; I would give them to you, if you would promise not to betray me to the \par clergy.' The promise being given, he proceeds:-'I have a gem so brilliant, that \par a man may know God by it. I have another, whose glow lights up the love of God \par in the heart of him who possesses it,'-and so forth, speaking of the gems \par figuratively. Then he recites some chapter of the New Testament, such as, the \par first of Luke-'In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God,' &c., or \p°ar the Savior's discourse in the thirteenth of John. When he observes that his \par hearers are beginning to be pleased, he quotes a passage from Matthew-'The \par Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat,' &c.-'Woe unto you, for ye shut up the \par kingdom of heaven,' &c., or that of Mark-'Woe unto you, for ye devour widows' \par houses,' &c. If he is asked to whom those threatenings apply, he answers, 'To \par the clergy and the monks.'" \par \par "Then he compares the state of the Roman Church with, their own, saying, 'The \par teachers of the Roman Church are proud and pompous; they love the uppermost \par rooms at feasts, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi: but we desire no such \par rabbis. As for them, they are incontinent; but all our teachers are married, and \par live chastely with their wives. They are rich and covetous, as it is said, "Woe \par unto you that are rich, for ye have received your consolation;" but we, having \par sufficient food and clothing for our su±pport, are therewith content. They \par themselves fight, and they excite others to war, and they give orders to kill \par and burn Christ's people, to whom it was said, "All they that take the sword \par shall perish with the sword:" but we suffer persecution for righteousness' sake. \par They eat the bread of idleness, "working not all;" but we work with our own \par hands. They pretend to be the only teachers, as it is said, "Woe unto you, for \par ye have taken away the key of knowledge," &c.; but among us, the women as well \par as the men teach, and he who has been a disciple but seven days can instruct \par another. Among them there is scarcely a teacher to be found who can recite three \par successive chapters of the New Testament; but almost every man and woman among \par us can recite the whole of it; and because we hold Christ's true faith, and \par teach a holy life and doctrine, they persecute us to death, as the Scribes and \par Pharisees persecuted Christ.'" \par ²\par "'Moreover, they say and do not, and they bind heavy burdens on men's shoulders, \par but will not touch them themselves with one of their fingers; but we do all that \par we teach. They compel men to observe human tradition rather than God's \par commands-such as fasts, feasts, and many other things, which are human \par institutes: but we teach that the doctrine of Christ and His Apostles is to be \par kept, and that only.'" \par \par "Having talked in this way, the heretic adds-'Consider now, which is the better \par state and the better faith-ours, or that of the Roman Church-and make your \par choice.' And thus many a one is turned aside from the Catholic faith, takes the \par heretic into his house, conceals him there month after month, and is confirmed \par in his perversion."1 \par \par In this passage Saccho represents the Waldensian as doing all in his power to \par inflame the hatred of the people against the priesthood, and would have us \par believe that that was the main object in view. There can be no doubt that much \par was said on those occasions that was calculated to induce distrust and avoidance \par of the Romish clergy. But the pious peddler did not stop there. No! His aim was \par to guide souls to Christ, and numbers were led by those conversational sermons \par to renounce fleshly confidence and seek peace through the blood of the Cross. \par With that necessary addition to the statement, Saccho's narration may be taken \par as trustworthy. It is pleasing to reflect that many of our Baptists ancestors \par were so honorably and usefully employed. The same spirit animated their \par successors several centuries afterwards. Gretser, the Jesuit (he died A.D. \par 1636), who edited Saccho's book, placed this note in the margin of the account \par which has been now quoted-"A true picture of the heretics of our age, especially \par of the Anabaptists." \par \par 1 Biblioth. Maxima, xxv. p. 273. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } ´tbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REVIVAL PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER III. \par Success of the Reforming Parties-Consternation at Rome-Anathemas- \par The Dominican and Franciscan Orders-Sanguinary Persecution- \par Crusade against the Albigenses-The Inquisition-Movement \par in England-John de Wycliffe-The Lollards-Bohemia. \par \par All the authorities agree in testifying to the astonishing success of the \par Reformers of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The fact is, that they found \par "a people prepared for the Lord." Disgusted with the absurdities which were \par palmed on them in the name of religion, and shocked at the frauds and crimes \par which were daily perpetrated, they panted for something better than Rome \par proffered. The Gospel of Christ, as preached by the persecuted sects, satisfied \par their souls. Great nuµmbers of them believed and rejoiced in God. And the \par converts lived so well that they won universal respect. The barons of Southern \par France encouraged and protected them. It was to their interest to do so, for \par they were an honest, industrious tenantry, cheerfully paying rates and taxes, \par and thus contributing materially to the improvement of the estates on which they \par were located. Peace, prosperity, and good order prevailed wherever their \par communities were established. How could it be otherwise? They were all brethren, \par and they were "taught of God to love one another." They trained their children \par in principles of truth and uprightness. They abjured litigation and violence. \par \par Accounting one day as good as another, they lost no time by observing the \par holidays of the Church. They never left their farms and merchandise to wander \par about on pilgrimages. They spent no money in the purchase of indulgences. They \par thought it wrong to ¶build and endow monasteries. In short, they were quiet, \par thrifty people, and the land was the better for them. So their landlords judged \par and felt, and they shielded them against Papal fury at the risk of their own \par safety. This kindness cost some of them dear: they were involved in the general \par ruin which the crusading fiends brought upon the country. \par Rome looked on and trembled. Her subjects were fast leaving her. Her dominion \par was crumbling away. What was to be done to secure the remainder, and recover \par lost ground? \par \par Cursing was first thought of, because it was easy, and the Church was expert at \par it. So the bishops met in council, year after year, and in all places where the \par Reformers appeared right heartily did they curse them. As our Lord had foretold, \par they said "all manner of evil against them falsely," hurled anathemas at their \par heads, and called upon the people to "hate them with a perfect hatred." A long \par list o·f those councils is before the writer. The bishops must have been very \par busy in those days. A large portion of their time must have been spent in \par attending the meetings. \par \par A more reasonable plan was next invented. The reforming sects owed much of their \par success to preaching. Addressing the people in their own language, and in \par strains of rough but forcible eloquence, into which Scripture phrases were \par largely interwoven, they acquired an influence which the clergy sought in vain \par to snatch from them. A non-preaching priesthood was powerless in such a \par conflict. Feeling this disadvantage, ecclesiastical ingenuity hit upon a new \par scheme. In the early part of the thirteenth century the Dominican and Franciscan \par orders were founded. In their establishment special regard was had to the great \par necessity of the times. From among the monks of those orders men were chosen \par whose talents pointed them out as best fitted for the work, and t¸hey were sent \par out, after proper training, as public preachers. The churches being open to \par them, they were placed at once on vantage-ground, which they occupied with much \par zeal and skill. They cultivated the arts of pleasing, and soon learnt to adapt \par themselves to the popular taste. And whereas the greedy propensities of the \par resident clergy had long exposed them to the shafts of ridicule and sarcasm, the \par new orders professed absolute poverty, received alms from the people for their \par daily support, and abjured all right to hold property. That self-\-denying habit \par did not last long, but reputation was secured by it, and the Dominicans and \par Franciscans stood high in public favour. \par \par We must not, however, look for uniform and unswerving adhesion to peaceable \par measures. It was not in the nature of Rome to restrict herself in this matter. \par She always had a keen scent for blood. Persuasion was very well when there was \par no pow¹er to use force; but what persuasion could be so effective as that of the \par dungeon, the sword, and the fire? All the various modes of persecution were \par brought into active operation. The German Emperors, instigated by the Popes, \par issued sanguinary edicts, threatening the severest punishments to heretics of \par every name. The Popes themselves acted with characteristic ferocity, and all the \par councils breathed the same spirit. The general council held at Rome in the year \par 1179, called the third of Lateran, led the way. If any of the heretics held \par public offices, they were to be turned out of them as soon as they were \par detected. All intercourse with them was forbidden; there was to be no buying or \par selling with them. Contracts with them were declared to be void. Houses in which \par they were found were ordered to be destroyed; and if any person allowed them to \par settle on his lands, those lands were to be con\-fiscated. Noblemen were \par commandeºd not to offer them protection. In every parish two or three inhabitants \par were to be appointed to make diligent and constant search for heretics, and to \par denounce them, whenever found, to the authorities. No advocate was to be \par permitted to plead for them, when they were placed on trial. On conviction, they \par were to be delivered over to the secular power, to be burnt. And all magistrates \par and judges were warned that if they did not faithfully execute these decrees, \par they would be excommunicated.1 \par \par Fearful scenes were enacted. The human bloodhounds were at work in all \par directions. "This year," says one of the writers of the times, speaking of the \par year 1233, "innumerable heretics were burnt in every part of Germany." \par Still they were unsubdued. Some evaded the search, and lived in concealment. \par Some withdrew to more friendly lands. In Southern France the barons were slow to \par deprive themselves of the advantages which they derived »from the residence of \par industrious, orderly men on their estates, and the exterminating process seemed \par likely to fall into abeyance. \par \par This was too much for popes to bear. All the bigotry and brutality by which the \par holders of the popedom have ever been signalized, appeared to be concentrated in \par Innocent III. Enraged at the failure of the measures hitherto employed, he gave \par commissions to extraordinary legates, authorizing them to require the \par co-operation of the civil powers in hunting down and extirpating heretics. They \par prosecuted the murderous enterprise with unremitting ardor. But they were \par baffled in France. Innocent then proclaimed a crusade. Full pardon of sins was \par promised to all who would engage in the unholy war, with whatever plunder they \par might obtain, and even the territories of such princes and nobles as should \par resist. A large army was quickly gathered. The narrative of their proceedings \par occupies some ¼of the darkest pages of the world's history. We have not space for \par the horrid details, and must therefore refer the reader to the ordinary sources \par of information. When he reads the narratives which contemporary historians have \par transmitted to posterity-how the crusaders attacked town after town, and \par indiscriminately butchered the inhabitants-how, on one occasion, when it \par appeared that the population of the place was partly Roman Catholic and partly \par heretical, the monk who controlled the movements of the army said, "Kill all; \par God knows who are His own,"-how terms of capitulation were granted, and \par afterwards basely violated-how, at Carcassone, fifty were hanged and four \par hundred burnt-how, at Lavaur, the lady of the castle was thrown into a well, and \par stones heaped over her, and "the numberless heretics that were in the fortress \par were burnt alive with great joy,"-how, in short, the whole country of Languedoc, \par one of the finest p½ortions of France, was reduced to a desert, tens of thousands \par of its inhabitants slaughtered, and all property destroyed:-I say, when he reads \par these accounts, and marks the fiendish barbarity of the men who proclaimed \par themselves defenders of the faith, and notes that they were taught to expect \par pardon and heaven for their diabolical outrages, he will be prepared to admit \par that the system which sanctioned such villainous proceedings could have had no \par other origin than the pit of darkness. It has been well observed by a modern \par writer, that Popery is "the master-piece of Satan."2 \par \par To the crusaders succeeded the Inquisition. The germ of that institution \par appeared in the directions for parochial visitation which have been already \par mentioned, and in the appointment of legates to various districts, armed with \par special power to punish heretics. In the Pontificate of Gregory IX., about the \par year 1233, the tribunal of the Inquisition¾ was established; that is, the work of \par punishing and suppressing heresy was taken out of the hands of the bishops and \par committed to inquisitors. The first court was stationed at Toulouse. Afterwards \par the arrangement was extended to Spain and other countries, wherever the Pope \par could gain admittance for it. Dominic had shown so much zeal in forwarding the \par object, and the members of his order, after his death, evinced such alacrity in \par the cause, that it was at length judged advisable to entrust the Inquisition \par wholly to the Dominicans. They have managed the tribunal in the most effective \par manner for the interests of Rome, while they have covered themselves with \par deserved infamy. The ecclesiastical historians will fully gratify curiosity in \par this respect. Those who wish to enter on an extended inquiry may be advised to \par procure Limborch's "History of the Inquisition," or Llorente's "History of the \par Inquisition in Spain." The secrecy ¿of its processes, the withholding of evidence \par from the accused, the refusal to confront him with the witnesses, the employment \par of spies, the use of torture in every horrible form that malignant ingenuity \par could devise, and the unmercifulness and hardheartedness of the whole procedure, \par have fixed a stigma on the Inquisition which can never be effaced. It has \par accomplished the bloody work of Popery with terrible faithfulness. In doing so \par it has taught the world that Rome is the relentless enemy of truth, right, and \par freedom. \par \par These tremendous demonstrations produced, to a great extent, the desired effect. \par In France, the Albigenses, though not altogether exterminated, were silenced for \par a time. Numbers escaped from the murderers and fled the country. Such as \par remained were compelled to abstain from public acts of worship, and to cease \par from all attempts to spread their opinions. After the plans of the Inquisition \par had beÀen brought into regular operation, the Church in France was but little \par troubled with heretics for the next two hundred years. The suppression was not \par so complete in Italy and Germany, and other parts of Europe, whence there was \par freer access to regions beyond the reach of the Inquisition. \par \par At a Synod held in London, in the year 1286, Archbishop Peckham condemned \par certain metaphysical speculations which had been recently introduced, and which \par indicated that those who held them were opposed to transubstantiation. The \par seventh article furnishes a key to the whole. It condemns those who affirm that \par in such matters they ought not to be bound by the authority of Augustine, or \par Gregory, or the Popes, but only by "Scripture and necessary reason."3These men, \par whoever they were, had imbibed right principles. One cannot help thinking that \par they must have been Baptists, so entirely does the position they maintained \par harmonize with our oÁwn. All honor to those, of every age and of every land, who \par will not bow, in matters of religion, to any other authority than "Scripture and \par necessary reason." \par \par There were tens of thousands of such men in Europe, in the fourteenth and \par fifteenth centuries. The seed sown by Peter of Bruys, Henry of Lausanne, Peter \par Waldo, and others, had produced a plentiful harvest. In vain did inquisitors \par rage, and plot, and torture, and burn. They were neither omniscient nor \par omnipresent: mighty as they were, they were not omnipotent. If they cursed \par heresy here, it sprang up there; and, when hard pressed, found shelter in many \par an inaccessible mountain or secluded valley: It was only in France that the \par exterminating policy succeeded, or seemed to succeed. In other parts of the \par Continent, the Reformers, though "cast down," were not "destroyed." They \par laboured on noiselessly, with good success, and prayed and waited for better \par timesÂ. They abounded in every part of the German empire, and were found as far \par East as Constantinople. The Pope could not suppress them in Northern Italy. So \par numerous were they, that a member of any of their churches might travel from \par Cologne to Milan, and lodge every night in a brother's house. \par \par A quickening impulse was given in the fifteenth century, which may be traced to \par England. The absorbing propensities of the ecclesiastics had excited general \par disgust, which often ripened into hatred. By operating on the fears of ignorant \par or seriously disposed persons, they had procured, in return for promised masses \par and other imaginary benefits, gifts and legacies of property to an immense \par amount. It was even affirmed that one-half of the freehold estates of the \par country were in their possession. Profligacy was connected with wealth, and it \par was generally believed that none led more licentious lives than those who had \par taken the vow oÃf celibacy. Besides this, the Mendicant Orders were daily \par increasing in numbers and strength, and, as their popularity grew, they became \par formidable rivals of the parish clergy, whose revenues were proportionately \par diminished. Hence arose contentions fierce and long. Each party strove to \par blacken the other, and from the revelations made on both sides, the people \par gained information which would have been otherwise hidden from them; for, when \par rogues fall out, knavery is disclosed. These circumstances combined to create \par much bitter feeling against the clerical orders. Dislike of their characters and \par deeds led to doubts respecting their teachings. Who could hope to hear good \par words from foul mouths? Opinions which had been long current in the Church, \par began to be regarded with suspicion, and customs which had become venerable for \par their antiquity, were neglected or submitted to with reluctance, perhaps sneered \par at. \par \par John dÄe Wycliffe's influence greatly contributed to these results. The insolence \par and rapacity of the Mendicant Orders first moved his indignation. He lectured \par against them at Oxford so powerfully, that a determination to withstand their \par encroachments became general among thinking men, who were encouraged in their \par opposition by a considerable number of the nobility and gentry. Pursuing his \par inquiries, Wycliffe went further than he originally intended, and propounded \par opinions which were extremely unpalatable to the staunch supporters of Popery. \par Rome upheld and protected the Mendicants, and stirred up persecution against all \par who opposed them. Wycliffe himself was in great danger, and would have fallen a \par victim to Papal vengeance but for the protection of the Duke of Lancaster and \par other men of high rank. He was compelled to leave Oxford, however, and to retire \par to his rectory of Lutterworth, Leicestershire, where he died in peace, December Å \par 31st, 1384. For many years before his death he had continued to follow the \par leadings of truth and to yield to conviction. The injustice of the Popes in \par regard to the Mendicant controversy, and their steadfast resolve to uphold all \par abuses and resist all reforms, filled him with disgust. What was the character \par of the system which cherished such enormities? In answering that question, he \par was led to compare the professed Christianity of the fourteenth century with \par that of the New Testament. The contrast shocked him. He saw that the religion of \par Christ and His Apostles had long been practically abjured. The cunning, crooked \par policy of the Church of Rome, in withholding the Scriptures from the people, and \par thus placing them in a state of abject dependence on the priesthood, was \par contem\-plated by him with abhorrence. He devoted himself to the enlightenment of \par his countrymen. By the publication of short tracts and carefully written \Æpar treatises, he set before them, in plain, nervous style, the evils in which they \par had been involved, and the truths which claimed their faith. He exhorted them to \par think and judge for themselves. He spent the latter years of his life in \par translating the Scriptures into the English language, and happily accomplished \par his purpose. For the first time the people of England had the opportunity of \par reading the Word of God in their own tongue. A more precious gift than the \par English Bible could not have been bestowed upon them. \par \par When the Pope condemned Wycliffe's sentiments, he ordered the Government of \par England to deal with him as a heretic; but the Reformer's friends were so \par numerous and influential, that the Papal shaft fell harmless. The subject was \par taken up by the Council of Constance, which met in the year 1415, and a sentence \par of condemnation was issued. Wycliffe was out of their reach, but his books were \par widely circulated,Ç and his bones were in his grave at Lutterworth. Books and \par bones were deemed fit objects of revenge, and orders were given to burn them. \par The sentence was not executed on his bones till the year 1428, when, by command \par of Pope Martin V., the tomb was violated. After a repose of upwards of forty \par years, the remains of the good man were disinterred. The fire reduced them to \par ashes, and the ashes were cast into the Swift, a small stream that runs through \par Lutterworth. Thomas Fuller, the quaint Church historian, says: "This brook has \par conveyed his ashes into Avon, Avon into Severn, Severn into the narrow seas, \par they into the main ocean. And thus the ashes of Wycliffe are the emblem of his \par doctrine, which now is dispersed all the world over."4 \par \par After Wycliffe's death, the work was carried on by the Lollards, as those who \par embraced his opinions were called. The origin of that appellation is hid in \par obscurity. Some derive it from theÈ name of one of their traders, Walter Lollard. \par Others, with Mosheim, regard it as "a term of reproach, brought from Belgium \par into England."5So great was their success that a Romish writer of those times \par affirms that one-half of the people had become disaffected to the Church. This \par is an exaggeration; but it is evident, from the strenuous endeavors of the \par ecclesiastics to procure the adoption of violent measures, that the reforming \par party had assumed a formidable appearance. The Lollards traveled from place to \par place, preaching and teaching, as the Waldenses and others did on the Continent. \par Sometimes they obtained possession of the churches (for many of them belonged to \par the clergy, and kept their places, as Wycliffe had done before them). Sometimes \par they preached in the churchyards; they went to the fairs and markets, where the \par people congregated in great numbers, and often addressed immense assemblies, who \par heard them with muchÉ sympathy and respect. They circulated portions of the \par Scriptures as they had opportunity, and thus there grew up a strong attachment \par to the Word of God. Men would sit up all night to read it, or to hear it read by \par others. Some "would give a load of hay for a few chapters of St. James or St. \par Paul in English," as John Foxe testifies. The bishops stormed and raved. In the \par year 1400 they procured the enactment of the statute de h\'e6retico comburendo, and \par burnt as many as they could lay their hands on. In some instances even children \par were compelled to set fire to the pile in which their parents were to be \par consumed. Others "had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings." A large number of \par them were imprisoned in the Tower of London, and in other prisons of the land. \par Yet the light of the Gospel was not extinguished. When the Reformation broke \par out, there were many thousands in England who were already prepared to side with \par the frieÊnds of truth against Antichrist and his abettors. \par \par From England the movement spread eastward as far as Bohemia. To what extent the \par influence of Wycliffe's writings was felt in the intervening countries, it is \par not possible to say, but that they were very popular in Bohemia is matter of \par history. Anne of Bohemia, Queen of Richard II., befriended the Reformer, and \par probably transmitted copies of his works to her own country. John Huss possessed \par them and studied them attentively. Many others, some of them persons of high \par rank, were eager to obtain the Englishman's books. When the Council of Constance \par ordered them to be burnt, upwards of two hundred volumes, most of them richly \par bound and adorned, were thrown into the flames. But many more, we may be sure, \par were retained by their owners. Wycliffe, though dead, continued to speak and \par instruct. Peter of Bruys, and other godly men, lived in their successors. At the \par close of this period there were vast numbers in every part of Europe who \par "worshipped God in the spirit, rejoiced in Christ Jesus, and had no confidence \par in the flesh." Councils had thundered forth their curses, popes had issued their \par bulls, and inquisitors had exhausted their ingenuity-but it was all in vain. The \par Church of God still lived. \par \par 1 Labbe and Cossart, x. pp. 1503-1535 \par 2 Sismondi's History of the Crusades against the Albigenses. Jones's History \par of the Waldenses, chap. v. sect. 6. Michaud's History of the Crusades. Rev. R. \par Cecil's Works, iii. p. 416. Edition 1816. \par 3 Labbe and Cossart, xii. p. 1262. \par 4 Church History of Britain, book iv. cent. 15, sect. 52-54. See Dr. Vaughan's \par Life and Opinions of John de Wycliffe. \par 5 Ecclesiastical History, cent. xiv. part 2, chap. ii. Sect. 20. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } p‘"pôsUé!0405-Heretics-Wycliffe-The Bohemians{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REVIVAL PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER V. \par Heretics of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries-Wycliffe's Sentiments on \par Baptism-The Bohemians-Baptism among the Waldenses-Church Government-Immersion. \par \par The references to heretics in the proceedings of Councils during the fourteenth \par and fifteenth centuries are comparatively few in number and very general in \par theë÷]ƒíY0404-Various Opinions Respecting Baptism{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fÌ¿W‚ýi0403-Success of the Reforming Parties{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\font³Íonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REVIVAL PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER IV. \par Various Opinions respecting Baptism-Berengar-Peter of Bruys-Henry of Lausanne-Arnold of Brescia-Cologne-England-Lombers-Pope Lucius III. \par \par The Reformers of whom we have given a brief account, although they differed from \par one another on some minor points, agreed in these three things:-the sole \par authority of Scripture in matters of religion, in opposition to the burdens of \par tradition which had been laid upon men's shoulders; the spiritual nature of \par Christianity, and the consequent necessity of personal faith and regeneration by \par the Holy Spirit, in opposition to dead forms and reliance on the priesthood; and \par the right of every one to think and act for himself in these all-important \par affairs, in opposition to the tyrannicaÎl assumptions of the Romish clergy, \par sustained by the secular power. They sought Bible truth, spiritual life, soul \par freedom. This three-fold cord will guide us in the labyrinthine darkness of the \par Middle Ages. Whenever we can lay our hands on it we find the grace and power of \par God. \par \par We come now again to the consideration of baptism. On this subject there were \par differences of opinion. Some retained the doctrine and practice of the dominant \par church; others rejected both baptism and the Lord's Supper; for the former they \par substituted a ceremony which they called "consolamentum," or the "baptism by \par fire," in allusion to the words of John the Baptist. "They assembled in a room \par dark and closed in on all sides, but illuminated by a large number of lights \par affixed to the walls. Then the new candidate was placed in the center, where the \par presiding officer of the sect laid a book (probably the Gospel of John) on his \par head, and gavÏe him the imposition of hands, at the same time reciting the Lord's \par Prayer."1 In arguing against infant-baptism they adopted the same course of \par reasoning as has been employed by Baptists in all ages. They uniformly exposed \par the absurdity of baptizing those who could not believe. A third party propounded \par scriptural truth, but evidence is wanting as to how far their views were \par developed. It may be inferred that they abstained from baptizing children, as in \par all consistency they were bound to do. The fourth class consisted of those who \par not only taught, but openly practiced, Baptist sentiments. We will furnish such \par information as we have gathered respecting them, derived from the original \par sources. There will be no hazarding of conjectures or surmises. \par \par Many of the Councils of this period refer in general terms to the heretics of \par the times, condemning them in the lump, without enumerating the various sects, \par and sometimes witÐhout any specification of their opinions. In some instances, \par however, there is such reference. Those who rejected "baptism of children," were \par condemned by the following Councils, viz., Toulouse, A.D. 1119 ; Lateran II., \par A.D. 1139; Lateran III., A.D. 1179; London, A.D. 1391. We do not affirm that all \par the parties condemned were Baptists, because probably some of them rejected both \par baptism and the Lord's Supper; but we wish to direct particular attention to the \par fact that their denial of infant-baptism was uniformly justified by them on the \par ground of the non-existence of faith in the child. They saw clearly that, in the \par New Testament, faith is always represented as the prerequisite to baptism, and \par hence they naturally enough said, "These children cannot believe-why do you \par baptize them?" \par \par Berengar of Tours was an excellent man. He was Principal of the Cathedral School \par in that city, and afterwards Archdeacon of Angers. His Ñfame as a teacher induced \par young men in different parts of France to repair to him for instruction. Neander \par says, "He was constantly deviating from the beaten tract-striking out his own \par path, in matters both of secular and ecclesiastical science-a proof of the \par independence and freedom of judgment with which he pursued all his inquiries. \par Thus, for example, he studied to make improvements in grammar, and endeavoured \par to introduce a new pronunciation of Latin."2This freedom and independence \par eminently characterized his theological researches. The controversy on \par transubstantiation attracted his attention, and he was quickly repelled by the \par absurdities propounded on that subject. He saw that Christian ordinances \par required faith in those who observed them, without which the observance was \par altogether useless; and, in regard to the Lord's Supper in particular, he \par abjured the commonly received opinion, and taught the spiritual presenceÒ of the \par Saviour, in connection with the believing apprehension, on the part of the \par communicant, of the truths embodied in the institution. For this he was severely \par persecuted, condemned, and compelled, through fear of death, to renounce his \par alleged heresies. But he re-asserted them, and they were embraced by great \par numbers of his former pupils, and by many other persons in France and Germany. \par In the following extract from one of Berengar's writings, the reader may see in \par what light he viewed baptism and the Lord's Supper. "Our Lord Christ requires of \par thee no more than this. Thou believest that out of His great compassion for the \par human race, He poured out His blood for them; and that thou, by virtue of this \par faith, wilt be cleansed by His blood from all sin. He requires of thee, that, \par constantly mindful of this blood of Christ, thou shouldst use it to sustain the \par life of thy inner man in this earthly pilgrimage as thou sustainÓest the life of \par thy outward man by meat and drink. He also requires of thee that in the faith \par that God so loved the world as to give His only begotten Son as a propitiation \par for our sins, thou shouldst submit to outward baptism, to represent how thou \par oughtest to follow Christ in His death and in His resurrection. The bodily \par eating and drinking of bread and wine-says he-should remind thee of the \par spiritual eating and drinking of the body and blood of Christ, that whilst thou \par art refreshed in the inner man by the contemplation of His incarnation and of \par His passion, thou mayest follow Him in humility and patience."3 A person who \par held such sentiments as these could not with propriety practice infant-baptism. \par Consequently, we find that he is charged by writers of those times with \par attempting to overthrow that rite. Deoduin, Bishop of Liege (who died A.D. \par 1075), says of Berengar, and of Bruno, Bishop of Angers, who had been one of Ôhis \par pupils,- "As far as is in their power they overturn the baptism of little \par children." Guitmund, a Benedictine monk, and afterwards Archbishop of Aversa \par (who died A.D. 1080), uses similar language, and expresses his horror at the \par "depth of all evil" into which such persons would be likely to fall, whom the \par devil should persuade, through Berengar, to renounce their baptism in infancy, \par since, as he supposed, they would hold themselves at liberty to plunge into \par every vice, in the assurance that whenever they might be baptized all would be \par cleansed away.4 The reader will not sympathize with Guitmund in that matter. He \par will pity his ignorance. Berengar's teaching did not produce such effects. \par Berengar died A.D. 1088. Later writers have stated that his followers were very \par numerous. It is even said that in the next century as many as 800,000 persons \par professed his sentiments. It is obvious, however, that any exact enumeration is Õ \par impossible. As Berengarians, the party was not of long continuance. But the \par principles remained, though the name was disused, and were spread over a large \par part of Europe. \par \par In less than twenty years after Berengar's death, Peter of Bruys was preaching \par in the South of France with great power and blessing. It is to be wished that we \par had the materials for the history of this movement, and Peter's own account of \par his doctrine. We know not by what means he was led to those thoughts and \par conclusions which issued in his assuming the bold position of a reformer. If the \par Abbot of Clugny is to be believed, he had been a priest, and for some \par unmentioned reason had been dismissed from his parish; but the abbot refrains \par from any statement of facts.5 Certainly Peter must have had a profound \par conviction of the utter worthlessness and injurious tendency of the religion of \par the age. He saw that people were "mad upon their idols," subÖstituting the \par outward for the inward, the name for the reality. It seemed to him that nothing \par but a radical change would meet the necessity of the case. Seeing that the \par churches were held in so great reverence, as consecrated buildings, the only \par places where worship should be celebrated, he taught that God's blessing was not \par limited to localities, and that prayer to Him, if sincere, was as acceptable in \par a shop or in the market-place as in a church, in a stable as before an altar. \par Reproving the pomp and splendor and the constant appeals to the senses by which \par the public services were characterized, especially the chants and the music, he \par instructed the people that "pious affections" were far more pleasing to God than \par loud vociferations. Instead of conniving at the adoration of the cross, or \par allowing any respect to be paid to it, he said that it should be regarded only \par as the representation of an instrument of cruelty, and t×herefore worthy of all \par detestation and fit to be destroyed. There was a practical demonstration of the \par effects of his instructions. The people assembled in great numbers on Good \par Friday, collected all the crosses they could lay their hands on, made a bonfire \par of them, roasted meat at the fire, and ate it publicly. Once more, Peter \par dissuaded his hearers from attempting to benefit the dead by prayers or by \par payment for priests' masses. No advantage, he told them, could accrue to the \par departed from anything of the kind. \par \par Baptism and the Church were contemplated by Peter in the pure light of \par Scripture. The Church should be composed, he constantly affirmed, of true \par believers, good and just persons: no others had any claim to membership. Baptism \par was a nullity unless connected with personal faith, but all who believed were \par under solemn obligation to be baptized, according to the Savior's command. \par Peter was not merely what Øis now called a "Baptist in principle." When the \par truths he inculcated were received, and men and women were raised to "newness of \par life," they were directed to the path of duty. Baptism followed faith. Enemies \par said that this was Ana-baptism, but Peter and his friends indignantly repelled \par the imputation. The rite performed in infancy, they maintained, was no baptism \par at all, since it wanted the essential ingredient, faith in Christ. Then, and \par then only, when that faith was professed, were the converts really baptized.6 \par Great success attended Peter's labours. At first he preached in thinly populated \par places and villages. But, like his Divine Master, he "could not be hid." \par Multitudes flocked to hear him, and the towns and cities of Narbonne and \par Languedoc were enlightened by his ministry. This continued for twenty years. \par What an interesting chapter would it form in the history of the Church, if the \par record of the facts could be recÙovered! What striking conversions! What \par penetrating, powerful sermons! What revival meetings! What lovely manifestations \par of Christian fellowship! Doubtless such scenes were witnessed-and ministering \par angels rejoiced-and the news reached the saints in heaven, causing a fresh \par outburst of joyful acclaim. And again they sang, "Thou art worthy-for thou wast \par slain, and hast redeemed us to God by Thy blood out of every kindred, and \par tongue, and people, and nation; and hast made us unto our God kings and priests; \par and we shall reign on the earth!" \par \par Instead of recitals which would have gladdened our hearts, we have but the \par meager and melancholy jottings of a foe, written with the pen of prejudice. \par Peter the Venerable, Abbot of Clugny, whose treatise against the Petrobrusians \par is our only authority on this subject, sums up all in these words: -"The people \par are rebaptized, the churches profaned, the altars dug up, the crosses burned,Ú \par flesh eaten in public on the very day of the Lord's passion, the priests \par scourged, the monks imprisoned, and compelled by threatenings and torments to \par marry wives."7 When we bear in mind that in the first ebullitions of zeal during \par the Reformation in the sixteenth century, the instruments and objects of \par superstition, as well as its abettors, sometimes received rather rough usage, \par the people thus evincing their indignation at the trickery which had been \par practiced upon them, we may wonder the less at any uproarious proceedings taking \par place four hundred years before. We are under no necessity, however, of \par believing that the "rebaptized" people committed the outrages spoken of. At such \par times there are always many to be found who are willing to attach themselves \par outwardly to an enterprise for the sake of some worldly advantage, and when they \par run into excesses the blame is laid on the cause with which they are connected. \parÛ Yet, partial and unsatisfactory as Peter the Venerable's statement is, it \par indicates the extent and effect of the Reformer's efforts. Labbe, the Jesuit \par (also one of the editors of the "Concilia"), evidently regarded Peter of Bruys \par as a man by whose labours great injury was inflicted on Romanism. These are his \par words:-"Almost all the heretics who came after Peter of Bruys trod in the steps \par of his heresy; hence he may be deservedly called the parent of heretics."8 \par Martyrdom awaited him. Having preached with his accustomed fervor at St. Gilles, \par in Languedoc, the infuriated populace seized him and hurried him to the stake. \par It was like the murder of Stephen-the act of a lawless mob. Nor can we doubt \par that the Lord, whose presence cheered the first martyr, comforted Peter of \par Bruys, and enabled him to meet death, even in that terrible form, with the \par composure of faith. \par \par Such was the end of a Baptist minister in the twelfth centÜury. Peter's martyrdom \par is supposed to have occurred about the year 1124. But the bereaved flocks were \par not forsaken. Another shepherd was ready to take charge of them. \par Henry of Lausanne was a monk, an inmate of the monastery of Clugny, a town about \par forty-six miles from Lyons. The seclusion and inactivity of that mode of life \par ill comported with his fervid spirit. He felt a consciousness of power, and \par longed to do something for the cause of God. Being eminently gifted as a public \par speaker, he engaged in a preaching itinerancy. He commenced his labours at \par Lausanne, in Switzerland, about the year 1116, and thence proceeded to the South \par of France. His first efforts were directed to the reformation of manners and \par morals. He declaimed against the vices of the clergy and the general \par dissoluteness that prevailed, and he preached so eloquently that all classes \par bowed beneath his rebukes, great numbers confessing their sins and entering Ýupon \par a course of reform. At Mans, where, while the bishop was absent at Rome, he was \par permitted to occupy the cathedral, his influence over the people became so \par powerful that when the bishop returned they refused to receive him, and \par clamorously declared that they would adhere to Henry. Hildebert, however (that \par was the bishop's name), managed the affair with discretion, and Henry chose \par another field. He repaired to the district where Peter of Bruys had preached, \par and entered into his labours. By this time his own views were greatly enlarged. \par From opposing vice he proceeded to attack error. A treatise which he published, \par and which unfortunately is not now extant, contained a full exposition of his \par sentiments. It is said that on some points he went farther than Peter, but what \par they were is not stated. This is certain, that he fully agreed with him on the \par subject of baptism, and that those who received the truth were formed intoÞ \par "Apostolical societies," or, as we should now say, Christian churches. \par \par Henry's success alarmed the Church dignitaries of the country, who procured his \par arrest. He was condemned by the Council of Pisa, in the year 1134, and sentenced \par to confinement in a monastery. Having obtained his liberty, after a short \par imprisonment, he resumed the work of preaching, and for ten years the cities of \par Toulouse and Alby, and the district in which they are situated, enjoyed the \par benefit of his exertions. Astonishing results followed. Many nobles sanctioned \par and protected him. Multitudes were added to the churches, and, as in the times \par of the Apostles, "a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith." \par The celebrated Bernard of Clairvaux says, in a letter to a nobleman, "The \par churches are without flocks, the flocks without priests, the priests are nowhere \par treated with due reverence, the churches are leveled down to synagogues, theß \par sacraments are not esteemed holy, the festivals are no longer celebrated;" and \par he states in one of his sermons, that "Women forsake their husbands, and \par husbands their wives, and run over to this sect," and that "Clergymen and \par priests desert their communities and churches."9Stripping these expressions of \par their Romish meaning, the facts of the case clearly show themselves. Had Henry \par been the historian he would have said, "God has blessed His work; priests and \par people have received the Gospel; true churches are now formed; Christian \par ordinances have supplanted the old superstitions; and the commands of Christ, \par and His only, are obeyed." \par \par Pope Eugenius heard of it, and sent Cardinal Alberic, accompanied by Bernard, to \par quash the movement. Bernard was reverenced as a great saint, and was accustomed \par to carry everything before him; but the Henricians knew Scripture as well and \par probably better than he, and quoted it agaiànst him with great effect. He met \par with poor success. But when preaching failed, force was employed. Henry was \par again seized. A council held at Rheims in the year 1148 condemned him, and he \par ended his days in prison. Samson, the Archbishop of Rheims, disapproved of \par shedding blood for the faith, and so the perpetual dungeon was substituted for \par the stake. Henry languished in solitude and privation (for they put him on \par meager diet) till the Master called him. The time of his death has not been \par recorded.10 \par \par Hildebert, Bishop of Mans, styled Henry "a great snare of the devil and a \par celebrated champion of Antichrist."11 These expressions are significant of \par extensive influence. And, indeed, it appears that his sentiments spread not only \par in Languedoc, where he chiefly laboured, but in other parts of France. It is \par probable that his disciples traveled into Germany, and propagated the same \par doctrine there.12 \par \par It isá much to be regretted that we are not furnished with any particulars \par respecting the order of worship or the mode of church government adopted by \par Peter and Henry. There can be no doubt that plainness and simplicity \par characterized the whole, and that there was a rigid adherence to the laws of the \par New Testament. They called Jesus "Master and Lord." They rendered obedience to \par His commandments, as interpreted and exemplified by the Apostles, and they were \par so scrupulously conscientious in these respects that the title of "Apostolicals" \par distinguished them from others. How much pleasure it would afford us to read a \par full description of one of their meetings-and copies of the hymns they sang-and \par a sermon or two preached by Peter or Henry-and a few extracts from their \par church-books-that we might know in what manner they sought to "walk and to \par please God." \par \par Arnold of Brescia occupies a conspicuous place in history. By some writers âhe \par has been classed with "Baptist Martyrs." There is not sufficient evidence to \par warrant such a statement. Arnold was a reformer, but not a separatist. Himself \par an ecclesiastic, he employed all his energies in attempting to restore his Order \par to primitive plainness and purity, and thus to regain the moral influence which \par had been lost, and with it to promote a revival of scriptural piety. He \par declaimed loudly against the wealth and luxury of the clergy. He taught that \par they should not be possessors of worldly property, but be supported by tithes \par and the voluntary offerings of the people. So acceptable were his teachings, \par that commotions were feared, and Arnold was banished from Italy. He pursued the \par same course in France, whither he had retired, and again he was banished. We \par then hear of him in Switzerland, where he was still indefatigable in his \par endeavors. The great Bernard, now called Saint Bernard, was unremitting in his \ãpar efforts to stop Arnold's progress, and the language employed in his letters \par seems to imply that the reformer did not content himself with inveighing against \par the pomp and pride of the clergy, but exposed whatever evils he discerned, and \par laboured to remove all the obstacles that stood in the way of religious \par restoration. His own life was a pattern of propriety. "Would that his doctrine," \par says Bernard, "were as sound as his life is austere! If you would know the man, \par he is one who neither eats nor drinks; like the devil, he hungers and thirsts \par only for the blood of souls."13Hard words, Bernard! very unlike a saint! \par Arnold's sentiments became popular at Rome. He went there, and thundered out \par well-deserved invectives against the union of secular and ecclesiastical power \par in the person of the Pope. His Holiness, he said, ought to be a prelate only, \par not a prince. He exhorted the people to demand their ancient liberties, and \par resätore the old form of government. They adopted his policy. The Pope was \par required to resign his temporal power. Insurrection followed. Rome was in a \par state of disturbance during the reigns of four successive Popes, from 1143 to \par 1154. Arnold was there all the time. But Pope Adrian IV. quelled the storm. He \par laid Rome under an interdict. The terrified inhabitants promised to expel Arnold \par if the Pontiff would remove it. Arnold fled. But he was taken prisoner in \par Tuscany, and conveyed back to Rome, where he was hanged, or, as some say, \par crucified. His body was burned, and his ashes thrown into the Tiber. This was in \par the year 1155. \par \par The only authority for the ascription of Baptist sentiments to Arnold is Otto \par of Frisingen, who states in his Chronicle that Arnold was "said (dicitur) to be \par unsound in his views respecting the sacrament of the altar and the baptism of \par children."14The common histories give no support to this affirmaåtion. Indeed, \par unless there has been an enormous suppression of facts, Arnold's attention was \par mostly confined to the points above mentioned. Bernard styles him "a flagrant \par schismatic." Baronius designates him "the patriarch of political heretics." But \par Neander observes, "The inspiring idea of his movements was that of a holy and \par pure church, a renovation of the spiritual order, after the pattern of the \par Apostolical Church . . . The corrupt bishops and priests were no longer bishops \par and priests-the secularized church was no longer the house of God. It does not \par appear that his opposition to the corrupt church had ever led him to advance any \par such remarks as could be interpreted into heresy; for, had he done so, men \par would, from the first, have proceeded against him more sharply, and his \par opponents who spared no pains in hunting up everything which could serve to \par place him in an unfavorable light, would certainly never have allowedæ such \par heretical statements of Arnold to pass unnoticed. But we must allow that the way \par in which Arnold stood forth against the corruptions of the Church, and \par especially his inclination to make the objective in the instituted order, and in \par the transactions of the Church, to depend on the subjective character of the \par men, might easily lead to still greater aberrations."15 \par \par We cannot but acknowledge the correctness of these remarks, and are disposed to \par think that either Arnold's opposition originally extended to other particulars \par besides those specified, or that his followers separated from the Church after \par his death. The "Arnoldists" were proscribed, with others, by Pope Lucius, A.D. \par 1183, and by the Emperor Frederic II., in a sanguinary edict against the various \par classes of heretics, issued in 1224. \par \par We have not the means of knowing how the societies established by Peter and \par Henry prospered after their death.ç None of the names of their successors have \par reached us. It can only be affirmed, generally, that the work continued to \par advance, as may be sufficiently gathered from the proceedings of sundry \par Councils. \par \par The heretics, as they were called, were very numerous at Cologne. Evervinus, \par Provost of Steinfeld, wrote against them in 1146, and applied to Bernard for \par aid, who discoursed virulently on the points in debate, and made up in railing \par for the lack of sound argument. \par \par Eckbert, Abbot of St. Florin, published thirteen sermons in 1163, in which he \par laboured hard to fix the charge of heresy on the Cathari, who, as usual, were \par accused of Manich\'e6ism. While both he and Evervinus affirm that the Cathari \par generally rejected baptism altogether, substituting for it the "Consolamentum," \par they agree in stating that a portion of them differed from the others in that \par respect. They rejected infant-baptism only, on the ground tèhat infants could not \par believe, and they taught that baptism should be administered to none but \par adults.16 \par \par The thirty "Waldenses," as they are called, who appeared in England about the \par year 1159, probably belonged to the same party. William of Newbury, the \par chronicler, charges them with "detesting holy baptism," which may be fairly \par understood as implying the rejection of baptism as then practiced by Rome.17 \par In 1165 a Council was held at Lombers, for the purpose of dealing with some \par persons who were known by the appellation of boni homines or "good men" (whether imposed on them by others or assumed by themselves, does not appear), and who were manifestly Baptists. When asked what they thought about baptism, they answered, that they would not say, but that they would reply "from the Gospel \par and the Epistles," meaning that they would adduce the Scripture testimony on the \par subject, and maintain the necessity of abiding by the Word of God.18éThe bishops \par failed to convince them of their error. \par \par In a Bull issued by Pope Lucius III., he denounced all who held or taught any \par sentiments differing from those professed by the Church of Rome; and he \par particularly refers to baptism.19The Baptists gave a great deal of trouble to \par the Papists in those days. \par \par The terrible storm which fell upon Southern France in the Crusade against the \par Albigenses, doubtless swept away many of the Baptist churches, and scattered \par their surviving members. Notwithstanding the vigilance of the persecutors, great \par numbers escaped. Italy, Germany, and the Eastern countries of Europe received \par them. \par \par 1 Eckbert cont. Catharos, in Biblioth. Maxima, xxiii. p. 615. \par 2 History of the Church, iii. p. 533 \par 3 Neander's History of the Church, iii. p. 525. \par 4 Biblioth. Maxima, xviii. pp. 441, 531. \par 5 Ibid., xxii. p. 1058. \par 6 Magdeburg. Centuriatores, cent xii. p. 331. \pêar 7 Biblioth. Maxima, xxii. p. 1035. \par 8 Concil. x. p. 1001. \par 9 Epist. 24,0. In Cantic. Sermones, 65. 66. Opera, i. pp. 438-440, iii. pp. \par 415-432. Ed. Paris. 1667. \par 10 Dr. Allix says that he was burnt at Toulouse, A.D. 1147, but he gives no \par authority for the statement.-Remarks on the Albigenses, chap. xiv. \par 11 Biblioth. Maxima, xxi. p. 157. \par 12 Wall says, in his "History of Infant-Baptism," that Peter of Bruys and Henry \par were "the first Anti-p\'e6dobaptist preachers that ever set up a church or society \par of men holding that opinion against infant-baptism, and re-baptizing such as had \par been baptized in infancy" (Vol. ii. p. 250. Third Edition). We do not admit the \par correctness of Mr. Wall's statements, because those churches can be traced a \par great way farther back. We were about to say, that we can trace their history as \par far back as the year 31, when the first church was formed at Jerusalem; but Mr. \par Wall's epithet, "Anti-p\'e6dobaptist," stands in the way. That church was not an \par "Anti-p\'e6dobaptist" church, because P\'e6dobaptists had not then appeared in the \par world. Infant-baptism was then unknown. Mr. Wall, however, grants that there \par were Baptist (or, as he calls them, "Anti-p\'e6dobaptist") churches in the twelfth \par century. That is so far good. Some persons in these times wish to ignore all \par this, and to make us start from the sixteenth century. Mr. Wall knew better. \par 13 Epist. p. 195. \par 14 Labbe and Cossart, vi. p. 1012. \par 15 History of the Church, iv. 149. See also the Biographical Dictionary of the \par Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, Art. "Arnold of Brescia." \par 16 Biblioth. Maxima, xxiii. p. 601. Gieseler, iii. p. 397. See Appendix. \par 17 Labbe and Cossart, x. p. 1405. \par 18 Ibid. pp. 1470, 1479. \par 19 Ibid. x. p. 1737. \par \f1\fs20 \par } ìir character. The particular opinions held are not specified, but directions \par are given to exercise constant vigilance, lest heresies should creep in \par unawares, and magistrates are specially charged to apprehend all suspected \par persons, and to put in execution the laws against them, if convicted. There was \par no lack of zeal in that respect. The civil powers were completely under the \par control of the clergy, who, while they indulged their own savage propensities, \par and sought by such means to perpetuate the reign of ignorance and delusion, \par continued to evade the responsibility. They did not torture and burn the \par heretics! How could it be supposed that ministers of mercy would have anything \par to do with deeds of blood? Oh no! They only delivered them up to the secular \par power! The base hypocrites would have hurled the thunders of excommunication \par against the secular power if the heretics had been spared. They did not burn \par them-but they deliívered them up for the purpose of being burnt! Were they not \par more than accessories to the murders? \par \par Many of the Reformers of this period inculcated truths, the legitimate \par consequences of which involved all, or nearly all, for which we now contend. \par When they argued that a Christian church should be a society of the pious, and \par that Christian ordinances belonged to believers only, they had but another step \par to take in order to appear as full Baptists. Take Dr. Vaughan's statement of \par John de Wycliffe's views:- \par \par "On baptism his expressions are at times obscure; but, according to his general \par language, the value of a sacrament must depend wholly on the mind of the \par recipient, not at all on the external act performed by the priest; and, contrary \par to the received doctrine, he would not allow that infant-salvation was dependent \par on infant-baptism."1 Connect with this the charge brought against him by the \par Council of Londîon, in 1391, as contained in one of the " articles" extracted \par from his "Trialogus," and which was to this effect,-that those who held that \par infants dying without baptism could not be saved, were "presumptuous and \par foolish."2Now, if Wycliffe believed that the ordinances of Christianity require \par faith in those who observe them, he would necessarily see the futility of \par infant-baptism, and the expression of even a doubt respecting the connection \par between infant-baptism and; salvation, would be regarded in that age as \par equivalent to a denial of the Divine authority of the rite. That great man, \par however, lived and died a priest of the Roman Catholic Church. But, as we before \par hinted, the light he had received would have guided him into Baptist paths had \par he followed it fully. Probably, if he had lived in France or Germany, he would \par have been at the head of one of the seceding parties. His writings perpetuated \par the beneficial influence exïerted in his life-time. It may be safely concluded \par that many of his immediate followers, and others who obtained possession of \par those writings, were induced thereby to extend their religious inquiries, and \par thus became more completely New Testament Christians than he was himself. That \par they laboured incessantly in propagating the truth, is manifest from the decrees \par of a Council held at Oxford in the year 1408, by which the clergy were strictly \par enjoined not to allow any persons to preach in their churches without episcopal \par license, and to be prompt in denouncing to the proper authorities all who were \par chargeable with heresy. The parties so denounced were to clear themselves of the \par charge, or be reconciled to the Church, or in default of such clearance or \par reconciliation, be committed to the civil power, in order to be "burnt in a \par conspicuous place," for a terror to all others.3Notwithstanding such perils, the \par servants of God perðsevered in their efforts. They scattered abroad religious \par tracts, they taught the young in schools, and they preached in private houses \par when the churches were shut against them. Thus the English mind was prepared for \par the Reformation.4 \par \par Some of them, perhaps the majority, opposed infant-baptism. Indeed, it is \par expressly affirmed by several historians, that they refused to baptize their \par new-born children, and that they were charged before the ecclesiastical \par authorities with maintaining that infants who died unbaptized would be saved. \par This was an unpardonable sin in the eyes of the P\'e6dobaptists, and the Lollards \par suffered grievously for it.5 \par \par It was stated in a former section, that in the twelfth century Peter Waldo and \par many of his adherents retired to Bohemia to escape the fury of the persecution. \par Others followed them in succeeding centuries. There they served God according to \par their consciences. Diversitiesñ of opinion existed among them. All held that "in \par articles of faith the authority of Holy Scripture is the highest;" but while \par some retained infant-baptism, others rejected it, and among them the practice of \par believer's baptism prevailed.6"Authentic records in France," says Mr. Robinson, \par "assure us that a people of a certain description were driven from hence in the \par twelfth century. Bohemian records of equal authenticity inform us that some of \par the same description arrived in Bohemia at the same time, and settled near a \par hundred miles from Prague, at Salz and Laun on the river Eger, just on the \par borders of the kingdom: Almost two hundred years after, another undoubted record \par of the same country mentions a people of the same description, some as burnt at \par Prague, and others as inhabiting the borders of the kingdom; and a hundred and \par fifty years after that, we find a people of the same description settled, by \par connivance, in the mòetropolis, and in several other parts of the kingdom. About \par one hundred and twenty years lower, we find a people in the same country living \par under the protection of law on the estate of Prince Lichtenstein, exactly like \par all the former, and about thirty or forty thousand in number. The religious \par character of this people is so very different from that of all others, that the \par likeness is not easily mistaken. They had no priests, but taught one another. \par They had no private property, for they held all things jointly. They executed no \par offices, and neither exacted nor took oaths. They bore no arms, and rather chose \par to suffer than resist wrong. They held everything called religion in the Church \par of Rome in abhorrence, and worshipped God only by adoring His perfections and \par endeavoring to imitate His goodness. They thought Christianity wanted no \par comment, and they professed their belief of that by being baptized, and their \par love to Chrióst and one another by receiving the Lord's Supper."7 \par \par There has been much dispute respecting the Waldenses. Some have represented them \par as being originally all Baptists. Others, on the contrary, persist in affirming \par that they were all P\'e6dobaptists. Neither statement is correct. In the first \par place, we must inquire who are meant by the appellation "Waldenses." The old \par writers were extremely careless in the use and application of epithets. After \par the rise of the Manich\'e6ans, as has been observed in a former chapter, it became \par the fashion to stigmatize all, dissident from the established order by that \par title, whether they harmonized with the Manich\'e6ans in profession and practice or \par not. So in the twelfth and the subsequent centuries, when Peter Waldo's success \par had issued in the formation of a new party bearing his name, that was the common \par appellation. Many treatises were written "against the Waldenses," the authors of \pôar which evidently intended their remarks to apply to the Reformers of those times \par generally. It is obvious, then, that the statements which we have had occasion \par to make respecting those Reformers are equally applicable to the Waldenses. \par There was no uniformity among them. A number of them, particularly in the early \par part of their history, judged that baptism should be administered to believers \par only, and acted accordingly; others entirely rejected that ordinance, as well as \par the Lord's Supper; a third class held to P\'e6dobaptism. If the, question relate to \par the Waldenses in the strict and modern sense of the term, that is, to the \par inhabitants of the valleys of Piedmont, there is reason to believe that \par originally the majority of them were Baptists, although there were varieties of \par opinion an song then, as well as among other seceders from the Romish Church. \par But the language of some of their Confessions cannot be fairly interpreted \õpar except on Baptist principles. One of them, ascribed to the twelfth century, \par contains the following articles:-"We consider the sacraments as the signs of \par holy things, or as the visible emblems of invisible blessings. We regard it as \par proper and even necessary that believers use these symbols or visible forms when \par it can be done. Notwithstanding which, we maintain that believers may be saved \par without these signs, when they have neither place nor opportunity of observing \par them." Here, it will be seen, the use of the sacraments is limited to believers; \par and, they add, in another article, "We acknowledge no sacraments (as of Divine \par appointment) but baptism and the Lord's Supper." How the Waldenses were led to \par change their practice, we shall not now inquire: it is sufficiently manifest \par that their views harmonized with ours in the early stages of their history. \par \par We have said nothing about church order and government. The reason is öthat abut \par little is known on those points. It is not safe to rely on the statements of \par adverse writers, who neither understood nor appreciated Apostolic descriptions \par and precedents. Their own ecclesiastical affairs being managed without any \par reference to the New Testament, which was an unknown book to most of the Romish \par clergy, they were not in a position to form a correct judgment respecting \par Baptist societies, and were perpetually falling into mistakes. We may gather, \par however, from occasional hints and references, that Peter of Bruys and his \par successors formed the baptized into churches, after the Apostolic pattern;-that \par the churches were presided over by pastors, regularly chosen and ordained as far \par as circumstances would allow, by whom the ordinances were administered;-that all \par the brethren were encouraged to exercise their gifts, by preaching or \par teaching;-and that brotherly love was practically manifested, by generous ÷\par contributions in aid of the poor and afflicted, extensive hospitality, and \par spiritual sympathy in its manifold forms. The communion of saints, with them, \par was not a theory, but a habit. \par \par We must now bring the account of this period to a close. It has been shown that \par there was a continuous protest against infant-baptism from the eleventh to the \par sixteenth century; and that even those who did not substitute believer's baptism \par for it, or rather who did not restore the ordinance to its primitive form, but \par who were driven into the other extreme, rejecting the sacraments, grounded their \par opposition to infant-baptism on the necessary absence, in the case of infants, \par of Christian faith. All confessed the indissoluble connection between faith and \par baptism. All maintained the sole authority of Scripture, in matters of religious \par belief and practice. All disavowed the authority of human traditions. All held \par that the churches, of øChrist should consist of truly pious men and women. All \par demanded and exercised the right of private judgment. Every one was at liberty \par to think, believe, profess, and worship, as he pleased, without the interference \par of priests, kings, councils, popes, or any other earthly power. In a word, they \par taught that man is responsible, in religion, not to his fellow-man, but to God. \par So have all Baptists taught, in all ages. \par \par Immersion was still the ordinary mode. The proof of this is abundant, both as \par contained in theological treatises and in decrees of Councils. Ebrard and \par Ermengard, in their works "Contra Waldenses," written towards the close of the \par twelfth century, repeatedly refer to it.8At the Synod of Exeter, A.D. 1277, \par explicit directions are given for the baptism of children, should there be \par danger of death, immediately after birth; and immersion is strictly \par prescribed.9The Ecclesiastical Constitutions contain frequent instructions \par respecting baptismal fonts, directing that they should be made large enough for \par the convenient immersion of a child. Records of the baptism of royal or noble \par personages illustrate these statements. Prince Arthur, eldest son of Henry VII., \par was thus baptized. The Princess Elizabeth and Edward VI. were immersed. It was \par the universal practice.10 \par \par 1 John de Wycliffe, D.D., A Monograph, p. 461. \par 2 Labbe and Cossart, xi. p. 2080. \par 3 Labbe and Cossart, pp. 2089-2102. \par 4 A very full and interesting account of their proceedings is contained in The \par Lollards, one of the volumes published by the Religious Tract Society. \par 5 Martyr's Mirror, p. 275. \par 6 Jones's History of the Waldenses, ii. pp. 44-46, 201. \par 7 Ecclesiastical Researches, chap. xiii. \par 8 Biblioth. Maxima, xxiv. p. 1542, 1610. \par 9 Labbe and Cossart, xi. p. 1266. \par 10 Baptist Magazine, Feb. 1850, p. 84. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } x Mantz -Balthazar Hubmeyer-Louis Hetzer-Emigration to Moravia-Jacob Hutter \par \par V.The Netherlands-Sicke Snyder-Furious Edict-The Inquisition-Severities of Philip II.-Torture-Lysken-Gerrit Hase-poot-Joris Wippe-Private \par Executions-Horrid Rackings \par \par VI.Biography of Menno Simon-Account of his Publications-Church Government among the Baptists-Missionary Excursions \par \par VII.Baptists in England-Proclamation of Henry VIII.-Latimer's Sermon \par before Edward VI.-Baptists excepted from "Arts of Pardon"-Royal \par Commissions against them-Ridley-Cranmer - Joan Boucher- Rogers - \par Philpot-Bishop Hooper's Scruples-George Van Pare-Protestant Persecutions \par Inexcusable-Congregations in Essex and Kent-Bonner-Gardiner-Disputations in Jail-Queen Elizabeth's Proclamation against Baptists-Bishop Jewel -Archbishop Parker-Dutch Baptists \par \par VIII.Enormities Perpetrated at Munster and other places-Injustice of \par Ascribing them to Baptist Sentiments \par \par } qqCW0500-THE REFORMATION PERIOD{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD. \par \cf0\b0 \par I.Rise of the Reformation-Opinions held by the Baptists-Misrepresented by \par the Reformers-Their Wonderful Increase-Support under Sufferings \par \par II.German Baptists-Thomas Munzer-The Peasant War-Michael Satler- Hans \par Schaffier -Salzburg- Wolfgang Brand-Huebert-The Burggraf of Alzey-Imperial Edicts \par \par \par III.Persecuting Tenets of the Reformers-German Diets-The Congregation at \par Steinborn-Leonard Bernkop-The Crown of Straw-Johannes Bair-Hans \par Pichner-Hans Breal-Baptists in Italy \par \par IV.Baptists in Switzerland-Zuingli-Concessions of Bullinger and \par Meshovius-Disputations-Drownings-Feliùüest. The \par shackles with which the nations had been long bound were broken, and it was said \par "to the prisoners, Go forth, to them that were in darkness, Show yourselves." A \par great revival of religion took place all over Europe. Popery was renounced by a \par large portion of the German people, by the Swiss, the Dutch, the Danes, the \par Swedes, the Norwegians, the English, Welsh, and Scotch, and by great numbers in \par Austria, Hungary, Bohemia, Bavaria, Italy, and France.When Luther blew the trumpet of religious freedom, the sound was heard far and wide, and the Baptists came out of their hiding places, to share in the general gladness, and to take part in the conflict. For years they had lived in concealment, worshipped God by stealth, and practiced the social duties of Christianity in the best manner they could, under the most unfavorable circumstances. Now, they hoped for peace and enlargement, and fondly expected to enjoy the cooperation of the Reformers in carrying into effeýct those changes which they knew were required in order to restore Christian churches to Primitive purity. They were doomed to bitter disappointment. The Reformers had \par no sympathy with Baptist principles, but strove to suppress them. Papists and \par Protestants, Episcopalians and Presbyterians, treated them in the same manner. \par The Baptists traveled too fast and went too far: if they could not be stopped by \par other means, the fire must be lighted or the headsman's axe employed. Thus the \par men were silenced: the Emperor Charles V., whom historians have delighted to \par honor, ordered the women to be drowned, or buried alive. Hundreds were sent out \par of the world by these methods; thousands more lost their lives by the slower \par processes of penury and innumerable hardships. The demon of persecution reaped \par an immense harvest in those days. \par \par Although there was not absolute uniformity of opinion among the Baptists, for \par they were shy of creeds, knþowing how they had been used to serve the purposes of \par soul-bondage, certain important truths were viewed by all of them in the same \par light. Modes of expression varied, but they were substantially of one mind, \par those of Poland only excepted, who leaned to the system which was afterwards \par termed "Socinianism." Baptist theology harmonized with that of the Reformation \par in regard to the leading doctrines of the Gospel, such as justification by \par faith, the necessity of Divine influence, &c. The belief in the sole authority \par of Scripture in matters of religion was carried out to its legitimate issues, \par and everything was rejected which would not abide the test, so that all rites \par and observances that were not expressly enjoined in the Word of God were swept \par away at once. Steadfastly maintaining that believers, and believers only, were \par the proper subjects of baptism, they pleaded for a pure church. The Reformers \par were astonished at this deÿmand. They said that the thing was impossible; that \par there always had been tares among the wheat, and that so it would be till the \par end of time; that the good and the bad must be indiscriminately mixed in the \par Christian commonwealth. We need not wonder at this. Popery and P\'e6dobaptism had \par blinded their eyes. They had never seen a New Testament Church, and they \par practically kept out of sight the teachings of the New Testament on the subject, \par as it is quite necessary to do when the P\'e6dobaptist theory is fully admitted; \par for if infants are baptized, and all who are baptized may claim \par church-fellowship, the church which is so formed must be a very different \par organization from that which was instituted at Jerusalem, when "believers were \par the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women." Children, it will \par be perceived, are not mentioned. The historian seems to take special pains to \par exclude them, as if he desired his readers to note the difference between \par Judaism and Christianity, the former being the establishment of a national \par institute, which was kept up by the ordinary increase of the population, the \par latter the gathering together of individual servants of the Saviour, who "were \par born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of \par God" (John 1:12, 13). One point more may be alluded to. The Baptists sternly \par asserted the rights of conscience. All men might believe and act in religion as \par they pleased, without the interference of the civil magistrate. His duties, they \par said, were confined to the preservation of order and the protection of property \par and life; God had not given him the power to regulate religious affairs, nor \par authorized him to impose any mode of worship, or to punish such as might refuse \par to admit his usurpation. We have mentioned these principles before, but it seems \par desirable to repeat the statement, because the Baptists of the sixteenth century \par have been singularly misrepresented. \par \par In some other particulars there were also great differences between them and \par other dissidents from Rome. They would not take an oath. While they obeyed \par magistrates in all things civil, they regarded the magistrate's office as \par altogether needless among Christians, who, they said, would not commit crime, \par and therefore such officers would not be wanted among them; and besides, a \par magistrate could not discharge his duties but by force, which is not allowable \par to Christ's servants. Neither would they engage in war. They denounced it as \par utterly unlawful. The use of carnal weapons, whether for attack or defense, was \par abjured by them. Hence they never resisted their persecutors. When the \par oppressions exercised by the rich and noble engendered hatred of the higher \par orders, some of the Baptists were disposed to plead for a general equality, or  \par at any rate for such restraint on power and wealth as would take away the means \par of doing mischief. Among themselves, too, the spirit of true brotherhood so \par prevailed, in acts of sympathy and kindness, that they were regarded as \par advocates of the community of goods and opponents of separate personal property. \par On these accounts they were treated as enemies of civil society, fit only to be \par exterminated. But though they were more scrupulous than most religionists are \par now, their very peculiarities sprang from the love of peace. Such men could not \par be dangerous to the commonwealth. All they asked was to be let alone, that they \par might serve God according to their consciences. And yet they were hunted like \par wild beasts. \par \par Impartiality requires us to mention one opinion which some of them held. Unable \par to conceive how the Lord Jesus could be the Child of the Virgin without \par partaking of human depravity, they imagined that, though born of Mary, He did \par not "take flesh" of His mother. Joan Boucher was burned alive in the time of \par Edward VI. for maintaining this alleged heresy. It is not necessary to trouble \par the reader with any observations on it. It is often better to confess ignorance \par than to dogmatize. Suffice it to say, that among the Baptists of those days the \par opinion in question was a harmless speculation. They believed that the Lord \par Jesus Christ was "God manifest in the flesh." That was enough. If they did not \par choose to adopt the current modes of expression, they were at any rate sound at \par heart. We ought to be very careful how we make a man "an offender for a word." \par The Baptists of the sixteenth century, generally, were a goodly, upright, \par honorable race. They hated no man. But all men hated them. And why? Because they \par testified against the abominations of the times, and wished to accomplish \par changes which would indeed have revolutionized society, because it was \par constructed on anti-Christian principles, but which were in accordance with the \par Word of God. An outcry was raised against them, as if they were "the \par off-scouring of all things," and their blood was poured out like water. Even the \par Reformers wrote and acted against them. The writers of that age searched out the \par most degrading and insulting epithets that the language afforded, and applied \par them with malignant gratification. Latimer speaks of the "pernicious" and \par "devilish" opinions of the Baptists. Hooper calls those opinions "damnable." \par Becon inveighs against the "wicked," "apish Anabaptists," "foxish hypocrites," \par that "damnable sect," "liars," "bloody murderers both of soul ,and body," whose \par religious system he denounces as a "pestiferous plague," with many other \par foul-mouthed expressions which we will not copy. Bullinger designates them as \par "obstinate," "rebellious," "brain-sick," "frantic," "filthy knaves." Zuingli \par speaks of the "pestiferous seed of their doctrine," their "hypocritical \par humility," their speech, "more bitter than gall." But enough of this. These men \par could, notwithstanding all, appeal to those who witnessed their sufferings, and \par boldly declare, with the axe or the stake in view, none venturing to contradict, \par that they were not put to death for any evil deeds, but solely for the sake of \par the Gospel. \par \par It has been a common practice to ascribe to a whole community the follies or \par wrong-doings of a few. In the controversial works of the period now before us, \par the reader will meet with heaps upon heaps of representations respecting the \par opinions and conduct of the Baptists, which, if true at all, can only affect \par individuals, and ought not to be imputed to the body. \par \par Notwithstanding the deadly onset that was made upon them from all quarters, they \par spread and increased most astonishingly. Leonard Bouwens, an eminent Baptist \par minister in Holland, who died in 1578, left in writing a list of upwards of ten \par thousand persons whom he had baptized. Menno Simon and other laborers in the \par cause introduced "great multitudes" into the churches. The spirit of reform must \par have taken fast hold of the minds of the people, or they would not have embraced \par so readily a system, the profession of which was a sure passport to persecution \par in its most painful and revolting forms. Luther and his coadjutors opened the \par door of the temple of freedom to others, but remained themselves in the porch. \par They feared to penetrate into the interior. The Baptists passed by them, entered \par in, and explored the recesses of the hallowed place. For this they were reviled \par and oppressed. Thousands of them fell in the fight. But multitudes pressed after \par them, to be "baptized for the dead;" and each could say, \par \par "I'll hail reproach and welcome shame, \par If Thou remember me." \par See how the Lord blessed His faithful servants. Algerius was burned at Rome in \par the year 1557. Thus he writes, a short time before his martyrdom:- \par \par "I will relate an incredible thing: that I have found infinite sweetness in the \par lion's bowels. Who will believe that which I shall relate? Who can believe it? \par In a dark hole I have found cheerfulness; in a place of bitterness and death, \par rest and hope of salvation; in the abyss or depth of hell, joy. Where others \par weep, I have found laughter; where others fear, I have found strength. Who will \par ever believe that in a state of misery I have had great pleasure; that in a \par lonely corner I have had glorious company; and in the hardest bonds, perfect \par repose? All these things (ye, my companions in Jesus Christ), the bountiful hand \par of God has granted me. Behold! He who at first stood far from me is now with me; \par and Him whom I imperfectly knew, I now see clearly; Him whom I formerly saw afar off, I now contemplate as present; He for whom I longed, now stretches forth His hand; He comforts me; He fills me with joy; He drives bitterness from me, and \par renews my strength and consolation; He gives me health; He supports me; He helps \par me up; He makes me strong. Oh, how good the Lord is, who suffers not His \par servants to be tempted beyond their ability! Oh, how light, pleasant, and sweet \par is His yoke! Is any like unto God most high, who supports and refreshes the \par tempted, who heals the stricken and wounded, and restores them altogether? None \par is like unto Him. Learn, my most beloved brethren, how gracious the Lord is; how \par faithful and compassionate is He who visits His servants in their trials; He who \par humbles Himself, and condescends to stand by us in our huts and mean abodes. He \par grants us a cheerful mind and a peaceful heart." The letter is dated "from the \par most delightful pleasure-garden, the prison called Leonia, the 12t h of July, \par 1557."1 \par \par The reader will peruse with much interest the following extracts from letters \par addressed by a pious mother to her children, "written hastily"-in \par prison-"trembling with cold:"- \par \par "Love one another without strife or wrangling. Be affectionate the one to the \par other. The wisest must bear with the dull, and admonish them with kindness. The \par strong must have compassion on the weak, and assist him with all his power from \par love . . . Love your enemies, and pray for them that speak evil of you, and make \par you suffer. Rather suffer wrong than do wrong. Endure rather grief than put \par another to grief. Be yourselves reproached rather than reproach another. Be \par rather belied than belie ano\-ther. Let what is yours be taken from you rather \par than take what is another's. Be rather stricken than strike another . . . Oh, my \par dear lambs, mind that you spend not your youthful days in vanity and pride; nor \par in tippling or feasting; but in sobriety and humility, in the fear of God, \par diligent in all good works, that you may be clothed with the adorning of the \par saints; that God may make you meet, by His grace, to enter into the marriage of \par the Lamb, and that we may see you there with joy. Your father and I have shown \par you the way, with many others besides. Take the example of the prophets and \par apostles. Even Christ Him\-self went this way; and where the Head has gone \par before, there must the members follow."2 \par \par The husband of this good woman had won the crown of martyrdom before her. She \par followed soon after, and joined her companion before the throne. There "the \par noble army of martyrs" praise God. "They have washed their robes and made them \par white in the blood of the Lamb." \par \par 1 Baptist Martyrology, published by the Hanserd Knollys Society, ii. pp. 114, \par 122. \par 2 Baptist Martyrology, pp. 289-301. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } IÔI‚CQ‚„E0502-German Baptists-Thomas Munzer{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER II. \par German Baptists-Thomas Munzer-The Peasant War-Micha ûiE÷0501-Rise of the Reformation{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD \par \cf0\b0 \par \par CHAPTER I. \par Rise of the Reformation-Opinions held by the Baptists-Misrepresented by the \par Reformers-Their Wonderful Increase-Support under Sufferings. \par \par The period on which we are now entering is one of wondrous interû el Satler-Hans \par Schlaffer-Salzburg-Wolfgang Brand-Hueber-The Burggraf of Alzey-Imperial Edicts. \par \par On the 10th of December, 1520, Luther burnt the Pope's bull against him, \par together with the decretals and other Papal documents, without the walls of \par Wittenburg, in the presence of an immense concourse of people. By that act he \par severed himself from the Church of Rome, and proclaimed the advent of a new \par order of things. The Baptists hailed it with joy, rightly judging that it \par indicated a great and favorable change of public opinion. They availed \par themselves of the advantages thus offered, and immediately engaged in active \par operations for the spread of truth. Luther had freed himself from the Pope: they \par pro\-claimed freedom from Luther, and from all other human authority, so far as \par religion was concerned, and called on their fellow-countrymen everywhere to \par demand their rights. \par \par This was more than Luther intended. Gr eat and good man as he was, he had his \par crotchets, like some other great men. He was willing that others should think \par for them\-selves, so that they thought as he thought. If they did not, he looked \par on them with suspicion, and they soon found it best to keep out of his way. His \par followers and flatterers regarded him with an awe bordering on superstition. \par Sleidan, the historian, was struck with surprise at the boldness of Thomas \par Munzer, who, said he, "not only began to preach against the Roman Pontiff, but \par against Luther himself!"1 Doubtless that was "an iniquity to be punished by the \par judge." Reference to the earthly judge, in religious affairs, was too common in \par those days. \par \par Believer's baptism and martyrdom were closely con\-nected. The first witnesses \par for God in Germany, in the Reformation age, were Baptists. Hans Koch and Leonard \par Meyster were put to death at Augsburg in the year 1524. \par \par The reader will find in most church histories doleful accounts of the German \par Anabaptists. Storck and Stubner, the writers tell us, pretended to prophesy, and \par demanded submission on the ground of their Divine calling. They advocated a wild \par millenarianism, maintaining that the day of God's vengeance was at hand, and \par that the saints would put down all worldly rule, and possess the earth. And \par Thomas Munzer, they say, not only held similar senti\-ments, but also headed the \par insurrection of the peasants, which brought so much misery on Germany, and \par ultimately on the poor peasants themselves. \par \par Now, we have no desire to defend anything foolish or wrong. Granted, if you \par please, that the men just spoken of were visionaries, and that their conduct was \par in some respects indefensible; but let it be further granted that they were not \par the Baptist body, and that for their follies that body was by no means \par responsible. As for the Peasant War, Gieseler justly remarks that "no traces of \par Anabaptist fanaticism were seen" in it.2This is honorable and important. \par But it is necessary here to repeat the observation, that our accounts of these \par men are mainly derived from their enemies. Thomas Munzer is blackened in \par P\'e6dobaptist histories. The reader of those histories would think him the very \par incarnation of all evil. Yet what are the facts? Just these;-that he was a \par pious, learned man, and an eloquent preacher, whom the people followed \par amazingly; and that he was driven from place to place, because as fast as he \par learned the truth he preached it, sometimes to the great annoyance of Luther and \par his friends, whose misconceptions and errors, as he deemed them, he was not \par backward to expose. Let us listen to Robert Robinson:- \par \par "He had been a priest, but became a disciple of Luther, and a great favorite \par with the Reformed. His deportment was remarkably grave, his countenance was \par pale, his eyes rather sunk as if he was absorbed in thought, his visage long, \par and he wore his beard. His talent lay in a plain and easy method of preaching to \par the country people, whom (it should seem as an itinerant) he taught almost all \par through the electorate of Saxony. His air of mortification wore him the hearts \par of the rustics; it was singular then for a preacher so much as to appear humble. \par When he had finished his sermon in any village, he used to retire, either to \par avoid the crowd, or to devote himself to meditation and prayer. This was a \par practice so very singular and uncommon, that the people used to throng about the \par door, peep through the crevices, and oblige him sometimes to let them in, though \par he repeatedly assured them that he was nothing, that all he had came from above, \par and that admiration and praise were due only to God. The more he fled from \par applause, the more it followed him; the people called him Luther's curate, and \par Luther called him his 'Absalom,' probably because he stole the hearts of the, \par men of Israel."3 \par \par The Peasant War was an ill-advised, badly manage thing. But the peasants had \par right on their side. Their manifesto was a plain-spoken, noble document. It told \par a sad tale of oppression. The historian Robertson epitomizes it thus:-The chief \par articles were, that they might have liberty to choose their own pastors; that \par they might be freed from the payment of all tithes, except that of corn; that \par they might no longer be considered as the slaves or bondmen of their superiors; \par that the liberty of hunting and fishing might be common; that the great forests \par might not be regarded as private property, but be open for the use of all; that \par they might be delivered from the unusual burden of taxes under which they \par laboured; that the administration of justice might be rendered less rigorous and \par more impartial; that the encroachments of the nobles upon meadows, and commons \par might be restrained."4The conclusion is admirable. We copy it from Gieseler, who \par has inserted, the entire paper. " In the twelfth place, it is our conclusion and \par final resolution, that if one or more of the articles here set forth is not in \par agreement with the Word of God, we will recede therefrom, if it be made plain to \par us on scriptural ground. Or, if an article be now conceded to us, and hereafter \par it be discovered to be unjust, from that hour it shall be dead and null, and \par have no more force. Likewise, if more articles of complaint be truly discovered \par from Scripture, we will also reserve the right of resolving upon these."5It is \par said that Munzer assisted in preparing this document. If so, it does him honor. \par Whatever silly or extravagant opinions he fell into, he may be excused, for in \par those days very few public men escaped connection with some weakness or other. \par His conduct in joining the insurgents has brought heavy censure upon him. But he \par paid dearly for it. Taken prisoner after the battle in which the peasants were \par defeated, or rather slaughtered, for it was no fight, he was subjected to cruel \par tortures, after the fashion of the times, and put to death. \par \par Though the Peasant War was not in itself a Baptist affair at all, occasion was \par taken from Munzer's connection with it to raise a storm of indignation against \par the Baptists, as if they were all rebels. The persecution raged fiercely, and it \par never wholly ceased during the period. Baptists worshipped God and preached the \par Gospel at perpetual hazard of liberty and life. Still they held on their way. \par Sometimes they met in buildings far removed from general observation; sometimes \par in the woods; and not unfrequently long intervals passed between their meetings, \par so hot was the pursuit after them. One effect was produced which proved \par advantageous to their cause:-they were "scattered abroad,"-eastward, to Moravia, \par Hungary, and the adjoining countries-westward, to Holland. Everywhere numerous. \par churches sprang up. \par \par Sebastian Franck, a trustworthy historian of those times, affirms that "within a \par few years not less than two thousand Baptists had testified their faith by \par imprisonment or martyrdom."6A few of the details shall be placed before the \par reader. \par \par Michael Satler had been a monk. He was converted to God, and became a preacher. \par He was put to death at Rottenburg, May 26, 1527. Thus ran his sentence:-"That \par Michael Satler be delivered over to the executioner, who shall bring him to the \par place of execution and cut out his tongue; he shall then throw him upon a cart, \par and twice tear his flesh with red-hot pincers; he shall then be brought to the \par city gate, and shall have his flesh five times torn in like manner." This \par fiendish sentence was executed, and the body was afterwards burnt to ashes. \par Satler's wife and several other females who were arrested at the same time were \par drowned. A number of brethren who shared the imprisonment with them were \par beheaded.7Rottenburg was celebrated for such scenes. In 1528, Leonard Schoener \par was beheaded and burnt there, and shortly afterwards about seventy more. \par Schoener had been six years a barefooted monk, but had left the convent through \par disgust at the wickedness of the order. He learnt the tailor's trade, and so \par gained his livelihood. After his conversion he joined the Baptists, and spent \par the remainder of his life in preaching the Gospel and baptizing throughout \par Bavaria.8 \par \par At Schwatz, eleven miles from Rottenburg, Hans Schlaffer, who had been a Romish \par priest, was beheaded. "He was put to the test by cruel tortures, and examined by \par the priests concerning infant-baptism; but he answered them from the Divine \par Scriptures, and showed, both by argument and by texts of Scripture, that it is \par commanded, and will be found throughout the New Testament, that men should first \par teach the Word of God, and they alone that hear, understand, believe, and \par receive it, should be baptized. This is the Christian baptism, and no \par re-baptism. The Lord has nowhere commanded children to be baptized. They are \par already the Lord's. So long as they are innocent and inoffensive, they are in \par nowise to be condemned. They also asked him on what foundation the sect of the \par Anabaptists properly rests. To which he answered, Our faith, actions, and \par baptism rest on nothing else than the commandment of Christ" (Matthew 28:18, 19; \par Mark 16:15).9 \par \par Leopold Snyder was beheaded at Augsburg in the same year. The sufferings in that \par city were very severe. "Not only were they beaten with rods, but their backs \par were branded, and one had his tongue cut out for his so-called blasphemy. The \par few who recanted were adjudged to a yearly fine, and were forbidden for five \par years the exercise of civil rights."10 \par \par Eighteen persons were burnt in one day at Salzburg. Many more suffered in that \par city. Among them was a lovely young maiden of sixteen, who, refusing to recant, \par was taken in the arms of the executioner to the trough for watering horses, \par thrust under the water, and there held till life was extinct. The Baptists there \par "were called garden-brethren, from their custom of meeting by night in the \par gardens and solitary places of the town, to escape the notice of their foes."11 \par Wolfgang Brand-Hueber and Hans Nidermair, both Baptist ministers, with about \par seventy others, were put to death at Lintz. "As to the said Wolfgang \par Brand-Hueber, there are still writings in the Church which show how faithfully \par he taught the Christian community; likewise, that obedience and submission \par should be rendered to magistrates, in all things not contrary to God. He held \par fast the true baptism of Christ, and the Supper of the Lord; rejecting the \par baptism of infants, the sacraments [that is, the Romish sacraments], and other \par anti-Christian abominations, as his writings (still extant) sufficiently \par declare."12 \par \par Nearly three hundred and fifty persons suffered in various ways in the \par Palatinate, in the year 1529. The Burggraf of Alzey was particularly active on \par the occasion. But his victims were steadfast. "While some were being drowned, or \par about to be led to execution, the rest who were to follow, and were awaiting \par death, sang until the executioner came for them. They remained altogether \par steadfast in the truth they had embraced; and, secure in the faith they had \par received from God, they stood like valiant warriors. By them the nobles of this \par world and its princes were put to shame. On some, whom they would not altogether \par condemn to death, they inflicted bodily punishment; some they deprived of their \par fingers; others they branded with the cross on their forehead, and inflicted on \par them many cruelties; so that even the Burggraf said, 'What shall I do? the more \par I condemn, the more they increase.'"13 \par \par These persecutions were the fruits of royal and imperial edicts. Ferdinand, King \par of Hungary and Bohemia, issued an edict in 1527, denouncing death to the \par Baptists. The priests were commanded to read it publicly in the churches four \par times a year for ten years. The Emperor Charles was equally embittered against \par them. The Edict of Worms, by which Luther was condemned, did not meet the case; \par but the deficiency was supplied at the Diet of Spires, in 1529. By the edict in \par which the decisions of the Diet were embodied, it was "clearly ordained that all \par and every Anabaptist, or rebaptized person, whether male or female, being of \par ripe years and understanding, should be deprived of life, and, according to the \par circumstances of the individual, be put to death by fire, sword, or otherwise; \par and whenever found should be brought to justice, indicted, and convicted; and be \par no otherwise judged, tried, or dealt with, under pain of heavy and severe \par punishment."14 \par \par At the time of the publication of this edict, a number of Baptists ("nine \par brethren and three sisters") were in prison at Alzey. "The mandate was then read \par to the prisoners, and, as they would not yield, they were, without further \par trial, in fulfilment of the Emperor's edict, led to execution; the brethren by \par the sword, but the sisters by being drowned in the horse-pond. While they were \par yet in confinement, a sister came to the prison to comfort the female prisoners. \par She said to them that they should valiantly and firmly cleave to the Lord, and \par not regard this suffering, for the sake of the everlasting joy that would \par follow. This visit becoming known, she also was speedily apprehended, and \par afterwards burned, because she had comforted and strengthened the other \par prisoners."15 \par \par "But," says Sebastian Franck, "the more severely they were punished, the more \par they multiplied. Peradventure many were moved by the steadfastness with which \par they died, or perhaps God marked the endeavors of rulers and tyrants to root out \par heresy with the sword."16 \par \par 1 De Statu Religionis, lib. v. p. 265. Ed. 1785. \par 2 Ecclesiastical History, v. p. 352. \par 3 Ecclesiastical Researches, chap. xiv. \par 4 Charles V., book iv. \par 5 Ibid. v. pp. 347-349. \par 6 Baptist Martyrology, i. p. 49. \par 7 Baptist Martyrology, p. 27 \par 8 Ibid. p. 47. \par 9 Ibid. p. go. \par 10 Baptist Martyrology, p. 54. \par 11 Ibid. p. 57. \par 12 Ibid. i. 103. \par 13 Baptist Martyrology, p. 118. \par 14 Ibid. p. 116. \par 15 Baptist Martyrology, p. 117, \par 16 Ibid. p. 125. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } nborn-Leonard Bernkop-The Crown of Straw-Johannes Bair-Hans Pichner-Hans \par Breal-Baptists in Italy. \par \par The Baptists continued to spread in Germany, not withstanding the odium that was \par attached to them in consequence of the Munster business. They were plundered, \par thrust into dungeons, banished, numbers of them beheaded or burned alive, yet \par still they made head against all opposition, and multiplied everywhere. It is \par stated that "between the Eifel mountains on the Rhine [in Westphalia] and \par Moravia, not less than fifty churches are said to have been existing at this \par period [about the year 1557], some of them having from five to six hundred \par members. Fifty elders and ministers gathered at one time at Strasburg, from a \par district of about a hundred miles in circumference, to consult together on the \par interests of Christ's kingdom."1 \par \par It is distressing to observe how completely the Reformers of those days were \par imbued with the persecuting spirit. At a Diet held at Hombourg, in Hesse Cassel, \par in 1536, the opinions of many divines were adduced, sanctioning the punishment \par of the Baptists by the magistrates. Some would have them scourged; some branded; \par some banished; but most of them held that death should be the infliction, and \par Luther, Melancthon, and Bucer were of the number. See how sophistically the last \par mentioned Reformer reasoned. A three days' discussion was held with the Baptists \par of Marburg. George Schnabet, one of their ministers, disputed with Bucer. "The \par Hessian Church is not the Church of Christ," said Schnabet, "because it \par persecutes the poor, and banishes them from their possessions. The kingdom of \par God is joy and righteousness; but this church, with great zeal, commits \par injustice-it persecutes the innocent," &c. To this Bucer replied, "The Church \par does not persecute; it is the magistrates, and they only certain mischievous \par Anabaptists. The Church wishes to remain in peace; but these men despise the \par Church." . . . "It is nowhere written," said Schnabet, "that unbelievers should \par be put to death." "Blasphemy must be punished," Bucer replied. "The disturbance \par of religion ought to be forbidden much more than any temporal mischief." \par "Unbelievers," Schnabet argued, "ought not to be punished; our enemies should be \par loved." "When the magistrate punishes an enemy," said Bucer, "he loves him. It \par is a father punishing his child."2 \par \par The Emperor Charles V. continued to evince his malignity by procuring cruel \par edicts at German Diets. In 1544, at the Diet of Spires, when other Protestants \par were treated with leniency, severe measures were adopted against the Baptists. \par At Augsburg, in 1551, extermination was denounced against them. Nor was it a \par vain threat. Priests and people united to put it into execution, and tremendous \par sufferings followed. \par \par In several instances brethren who had been commis\-sioned to visit other churches \par were discovered as they passed through the German territories, betrayed to the \par authorities, and either died in prison or were publicly executed. It was a \par dangerous thing in these days to be a member of a deputation. \par Torture was frequently employed, in order to wring from the sufferers the names \par and places of abode of their asso\-ciates, or to force them, under the pressure \par of anguish, to renounce the faith. \par \par In the year 1539, the Vienna police, aided by a detachment of cavalry, surprised \par a congregation at Steinborn, and captured nearly all of them. They were lodged \par in the castle of Falkenstein. After remaining in confinement about five weeks, \par during which time strenuous efforts were made by the priests to persuade them to \par abjure, it was notified to them that the women and children would be released, \par but that the able-bodied men would be sent to se a. The youths, and some that \par were weak or sickly, were reduced to bondage, and given to Austrian noblemen. \par Ninety men were sent away under a strong guard, bound two and two, to proceed on \par foot to Trieste, a journey of more than two hundred miles. "Man and wife were \par separated from each other, and children of tender years left behind; which flesh \par and blood could not have borne, but by the power of God and for His sake. So \par deplorable was the separation, that the king's marshal, and others like him, \par could not refrain from tears . . . They were led about by his majesty's \par messengers through towns, villages, and the open country, from one jurisdiction \par to another. In their journeys thy were constrained to suffer much, and various \par kinds of adversity and great affliction, but God always afforded them His \par gracious help, and in particular, that every morning and evening, without \par hindrance, they could make and present their prayer to G!od, and durst, beside, \par without impediment, speak each one to the comfort of his brethren. This they \par received with great gratitude as a special favor and gift of God. By this means \par the people in many places were convinced of their innocence and piety; so that \par they who, at their first coming, regarded them as evil-doers, felt great \par compassion for them. To this, the king's servants who conducted them bare \par repeated testimony, and told them that they should not pass through the towns \par and country places in silence, but might make known their faith by singing, or \par in some other way . . . God was thus pleased to reveal His Word and truth in all \par places and lands, to make them known to the people who knew them not, and to \par cause their sound to be heard. As at all times, in a like manner, He graciously \par appoints means to draw men away from unrighteousness, so, by these witnesses of \par the faith and Divine truth, who were led about into a g"reat number and variety \par of places, amidst unknown and foreign tongues, where the truth was not heard, \par being unknown and hidden from the people, were some from Carniola and Italy led \par to inquire after the truth. Some were brought to the acknowledgment of the \par truth, who, to this very day, serve God with an upright heart. But how these \par captive brethren, during their journeys, and in many places, were treated, how \par they were driven and beaten, and with cords and chains were bound together, and \par what in consequence they suffered, were too long to be narrated. Yet, how great \par soever the oppression they endured, their hearts were always comforted by God."3 \par When they had been in Trieste nearly a fortnight, they contrived to escape from \par the prison in which they were lodged. Fifteen of them were re-taken, but the \par others eluded search, and arrived among their brethren in safety. They were \par "received with joy and thanksgiving, as a gift sen#t by God." The fifteen were \par never heard of any more. \par \par Leonard Bernkop was burned at Salzburg in 1542. "He was led to the place of \par execution, and a fire made on one side of him, so that he was, as it were, \par roasted; but he cleaved fast to the Lord. He said to the blood\-hounds and the \par servants of the executioner, 'This side is roasted enough, turn me round; \par through the power of God, the suffering I feel is but little, and it is light \par com\-pared with everlasting glory.'"4 \par \par Two young females, who had been recently baptized at Bamberg, were apprehended, \par imprisoned, and severely tortured. But they did not swerve from the truth. When \par they were led out to die, wreaths of straw were placed on their heads, "by way \par of contempt and mockery." "Since Christ," said one of them to the other, "wore a \par crown of thorns for us, why should we not, in return, and for His honor, wear \par this crown of straw? Our faithful God will, in$stead of this, set a beautiful \par crown of gold and a glorious garland upon our heads." So they went cheerfully to \par the fire.5 \par \par Johannes Bair had been in prison nearly twenty years, when he wrote the \par following letter:- \par \par "Dear brethren, I have received the writing-desk, the account of our worship, \par faith and teaching, and six lights, or candles, and pens; but the Bible, in \par particular, I have not received, though standing first in the list. Now, this is \par my prayer, that, if you have it, you will forward it me; for this above all \par things I wish to have, if it be according to the will of God. I suffer much for \par want of it, and have endured great hunger and thirst for the Word of the Lord \par during many long years. Of this I make my complaint to God and His Church, for \par it is full twenty years, save eight weeks, since the day of my miserable \par imprisonment." \par \par "I, Johannes Bair, of Lichtenfels, of all men the most% miserable and most \par forsaken, the prisoner of Jesus Christ our Lord, make again this my complaint \par before God and His angels, and also His servants, churches, and congregations. \par Now, my brethren and sisters, the best beloved of my heart in the Lord, beseech \par God for me, that He would deliver me out of this peril and great distress-a \par distress that is unspeakable. This God knows, and my poor self, and you likewise \par know it with me. Herewith be it commended to God. Written at Bamberg, in a dark \par hole, in the year 1548." \par \par Three years afterwards he slept in the Lord in the prison, and obtained the \par martyr's crown.6 \par \par Here is a specimen of diabolical atrocity. Hans Pichner was "put to the rack, \par but all their tortures were unavailing. Very vexatious it was to them that they \par could extort nothing from him. Several times they stripped him, and let him hang \par in tortures for hours on the ropes. So strained did he become, tha&t he could not \par set a step, nor stand upon his feet, nor bring his hand to his mouth to eat. \par Nevertheless he could not be turned aside, but remained steadfast in the Lord. \par Afterwards, they bound him hand and foot, and kept him confined in a dark prison \par or dungeon more than half a year . . . After this they condemned him to death, \par and led him out to the place of execution, where he exhorted the people, who \par were numerously collected together, to repentance. He was then placed with his \par back against a stake, and so beheaded; for they had so dreadfully tortured and \par stretched him that he was unable to kneel."7 \par \par Take another case. Hans Breal was apprehended in the Tyrol, in the year 1557. \par Having been repeatedly tortured, in the vain hope of compelling him to betray \par his brethren, he was at length placed in "a deep, dark, filthy tower, where he \par could neither see sun, moon, nor daylight. So that he could not tell whether it \p'ar was night or day; sometimes he could tell that it was night by its being colder \par than before. The dungeon was moist and damp, so that his clothes became foul and \par rotted on his body, and for some time he was obliged to sit naked. He had \par nothing but a coarse blanket that had been given him; this he threw round his \par body, and sat in misery and darkness. His shirt was so much rotted as not to \par leave a single slip of it, except the collar of the neck, which lie hung on the \par wall. When these children of Pilate had him brought out to see if he would \par recant, the brightness of the light was so painful, that he was glad when they \par let him go down again into the dark tower . . . Thus he lay in this foul \par dungeon, where worms and vermin were his companions, for a long time; he \par protected his head with an old hat, that from pity had been thrown to him. No \par one had been confined in this tower for some years, so that the vermin had \par greatly in(creased, and caused him much terror until he had got used to it. The \par worms frequently ate his food . . . Thus he lay in this foul tower the whole \par summer, until nearly Michaelmas day in the harvest. When they saw that the frost \par began to set in, they brought him out from thence, and led him into another \par prison, which could not possibly be worse. There he was obliged to stay for \par thirty-seven weeks, with one hand and one foot in the stocks, so that he was \par unable to lie down or sit, and could only stand. He also suffered much mocking \par and ridicule from the ungodly . . . At length an order was issued by the council \par at Innspruck, which the magistrates brought to read to him. The contents were as \par follow:-That since he was so obdurate, and would receive no instruction, he \par should be sent to sea, to which he must go the following morning; there he would \par find how the obstinate were stripped and dogged. But Hans answered that he would \par c)onfide in the Lord his God, who was on the sea as well as on land, to help him \par and give him patience. He was then released from prison, and suffered to go \par about the castle for two days, that he might learn again to walk. This he could \par not easily do, so very infirm had he become through lying in prison and in the \par stocks, fastened by locks and chains; for in this state be had lain two years \par within five weeks, and had for a year and a half never seen the sun."8 \par \par Hans was committed to the charge of an officer, and they journeyed towards the \par sea. On the second day, while resting at a tavern, the officer became drunk, and \par Hans took advantage of the opportunity to effect his escape. He recovered \par strength and health, rejoined his brethren, was called to preach the Gospel, and \par died in peace in the year 1583. \par \par Thus God's servants suffered in Germany. There were Baptists in Italy in this \par period, some of whom attained the honor of martyrdom. Julius Klampherer, who had \par been a Romish priest, was drowned at Venice in 1561. Franciscus van der Sach, a \par minister, was drowned with another brother in the same city, in 1564. Hans \par George, Count of Grovtenstein, who had fled to Germany some years before, and \par had returned to Italy in 1566, in the hope of inducing his wife to share his \par exile, was betrayed by some who recognized him, and thrown overboard on the \par voyage to Venice. "By faith he forsook all things, disregarding rank, preferring \par rather to suffer affliction with the people of God than to enjoy the honors and \par rewards of this world among his own people."9 \par \par 1 Ibid. ii. p. 125. \par 2 Baptist Martyrology, i, pp. 169, 170. \par 3 Martyrology, i. pp. 189-193. \par 4 Martyrology, p. 239. \par 5 Ibid. p. 363. \par 6 Martyrology, i. p. 372. \par 7 Ibid. ii. p. 59. \par 8 Martyrology, ii. pp. 99, 104. \par 9 Ibid. p. 425. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } RRúk]õ 0503-Persecuting Trends of the Reformers{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER III. \par Persecuting Tenets of the Reformers-German Diets-The Congregation at \par Stei,tion of the \par Baptists in Germany. We will now trace their history in Switzerland. \par Zuingli, the excellent Swiss Reformer, was at one time on the eve of becoming a \par Baptist. But he resisted the arguments in favor of our principles, and became a \par violent opposer. The Government of Zurich adopted his policy. Zuingli was a good \par deal annoyed by the Baptists, for they not only pleaded for believer's baptism, \par but zealously maintained that none but real Christians were fit members of \par churches. The natural inference was, that as spiritual societies could not be \par governed by carnal men, the union of Church and State must be dissolved, and \par each party attend to its own affairs: the State, to things temporal; the Church, \par to things religious. This was going too far for Zuingli. He repudiated the idea \par of a spiritual church, regarding it as a sheer impossibility. He could not \par relinquish the notion that worldly power and law were requisite for t-he \par establishment of the faith. Hence he concluded that the Baptist theory must be \par treated as resistance to authority, and its supporters put down by the secular \par arm. Poor man! he fell a victim to his own principles. He was slain on the \par battlefield of Cappel, while in official attendance, as chaplain, on the \par Protestant army, fighting against the Papists, October 11th, 1531. \par \par It was about the year 1523 that the Baptists first appeared in Switzerland. \par Their numbers rapidly increased. The appeal to Scripture on behalf of their \par sentiments was rendered more forcible by the innocence of their lives. Even \par Bullinger, who was strongly prejudiced against them, was compelled to confess \par it. " hey had," said he, "an appearance of a spiritual life; they were excellent \par in cha\-racter; they sighed much; they uttered no falsehoods; they were austere; \par they spake nobly and with excellence, so that they thereby acquired admiration \par .and authority, or respect, with simple pious people. For the people said, 'Let \par others say what they will of the Dippers, we see in them nothing but what is \par excellent, and hear from them nothing else but that we should not swear or do \par wrong to any one, that every one ought to do what is right, that every one must \par live godly and holy lives; we see no wickedness in them.' Thus they have \par deceived many people in this land." Me\-shovius, adverting to the views of men at \par that time on this point, writes thus:-"Some they say, write what they wish of \par the Anabaptists; that they are given up to sedition, and plot the destruction of \par the Christian common weal. But how false this is, is clearly manifest from their \par lives, actions, and doctrine, since they neither swear, nor blaspheme, nor seek \par their own things; but you will see them promote those only which are of Christ, \par which are conformable to the Scriptures; and will any one say that these a/re not \par true, nor especially worthy of a Christian man?"1 \par \par Public disputations were much in fashion at that time in Switzerland. They have \par rarely proved of any real service to the cause of truth, since it is obvious \par that the man who has the most fluent tongue, the readiest memory, the keenest \par wit, and the greatest amount of self-possession, is most likely to prevail, \par whether he is attached to the right or to the wrong side. Nor was it likely that \par either party would acknowledge defeat. Perhaps the only benefit that resulted \par from these disputations was, that many persons had an opportunity of hearing the \par truth who would not otherwise have enjoyed it, and in some instances they were \par led to further inquiry, which issued in their joining the Reformers. \par \par Three disputations were held at Zurich in the year 1525. In all of them, \par according to their adversaries, the Baptists were worsted, notwithstanding which \par they 0resolutely retained their sentiments, and declared themselves ready to seal \par them with their blood. But the magistracy did not rely on arguments. They issued \par an edict, prohibiting believer's baptism, enjoining the baptism of children, and \par threatening that the disobedient should be dealt with severely. And so they \par were. Some were imprisoned, some were banished. Still they persevered. \par \par Whereupon, in 1526, another edict was issued, ordering that if any baptized \par others, or submitted to baptism (re-baptism they called it), they should be \par "drowned without mercy."2 Zuingli, we are sorry to say, approved this infamous \par enactment. It was no vain threat. Felix Mantz was drowned at Zurich in 1527. \par Jacob Falk and Heine Reyman were drowned in 1528. These three were ministers of \par the Gospel. Anneken of Friburg, a Christian woman, was drowned at that place in \par 1529, and her body was afterwards burnt. Many others suffered, whose names are \p1ar not recorded. They did not inflict capital punishment at Basle, where the \par Baptists abounded, but they scourged them, threw them into dungeons, or banished \par them, hoping to wear them out by suffering. The great Erasmus resided there at \par that time. He bore honorable testimony on behalf of the sufferers. "The \par Anabaptists," said he, "although they everywhere abound in great numbers, have \par nowhere obtained the churches for their use. They are to be commended above all \par others for the innocency of their lives, but are oppressed by other sects, as \par well as by the orthodox" (Catholics).3 Such were the men, according to an \par opponent, whom Protestants, as well as Papists, sought to exterminate. It is \par gratifying to know that though they were treated so shamefully, their characters \par would endure the scrutiny of keen-eyed observers. \par \par We mentioned Felix Mantz. He was a native of Zurich, and had received a liberal \par education. Having earl2y adopted the principles of the Reformation, he became an \par intimate friend of Zuingli and other Swiss Reformers. But in the year 1522, he \par began to doubt the scriptural authority of infant-baptism, and of the Church \par constitution which then existed at Zurich, and he suffered imprisonment in \par consequence. After this he preached in the fields and woods, whither the people \par flocked in crowds to hear him, and there he baptized those who professed faith. \par For this the Zurich magistrates denounced him as a rebel, and about the close of \par 1526 he was apprehended and lodged in the tower of Wellenberg. On the 5th of \par January, 1527, he was drowned. "As he came down from the Wellenberg to the fish \par market," says Bullinger, "and was led through the shambles to the boat, he \par praised God that he was about to die for His truth. For Anabaptism was right, \par and founded on the Word of God, and Christ had foretold that His followers would \par suffer for the 3truth's sake. And the like discourse he urged much, contradicting \par the preacher who attended him. On the way his mother and brother came to him, \par and exhorted him to be steadfast; and he persevered in his folly, even to the \par end. When he was bound upon the hurdle, and was about to be thrown into the \par stream by the executioner, he sang with a loud voice: 'In manus Tuas, Domine, \par commendo spiritum meum.' ('Into Thine hands, O Lord, I commend my spirit.') And \par herewith was he drawn into the water by the executioner, and drowned." \par \par "It is reported here," says Capito, writing to Zuingli from Strasburg, on the \par 27th of January, 1527, "that your Felix Mantz hath suffered punishment, and died \par gloriously; by which the cause of truth and piety which you sustain, is weighed \par down exceedingly."4 No wonder! Persecution will "weigh down" any cause. And \par Protestant persecution is the most hateful of all. \par \par Balthazar Hubmeyer requires a m4ore lengthened notice. This eminent man was a \par Bavarian; born at Friedburg, about the year 1480. He studied in the high school \par of that city, intending to become a physician. But he exchanged the study of \par medicine for that of theology, and in 1512, being already noted for learning and \par \par eloquence, he was appointed professor of divinity and principal preacher at \par Ingolstadt, where he laboured between three and four years. In 1516 he removed \par to Ratisbon, and preached in the cathedral to immense throngs. His mistaken zeal \par was directed against the Jews, who were driven from the city, and their \par synagogue pulled down: on its site was built a chapel dedicated to the Virgin, \par and a wonder-working image placed over the door, to which vast numbers repaired \par in pilgrimage from the places adjacent. So blind was Hubmeyer at that time. \par The blindness was not of long duration. The report of Luther's movements and of \par Zuingli's preaching at 5Einsidlen led him to inquiry, and the novelties of Rome \par were soon abandoned. Before he left Ratisbon he had made considerable progress \par in practical reformation. He had translated the Gospels and the Epistles into \par German. He celebrated service in that language instead of in Latin. He \par administered the Lord's Supper in both kinds. He admonished the people to pray \par no more to the saints, and he destroyed images. \par \par The next three years of his life were spent at Waldshut, a town in Baden, where \par he preached with great success. There also his religious views became matured, \par and he fully embraced Protestantism. In 1522 he returned to Ratisbon, and \par continued there a year, propagating the principles of the Reformation. When he \par resumed his residence at Waldshut, he formed an acquaintance with the Swiss \par reformers, particularly Zuingli and Ecolampadius, and enjoyed frequent \par opportunities of intercourse with them. He assisted in condu6cting the great \par disputation with the Papists at Zurich, in the autumn of 1523. A visit to St. \par Gall was attended by a wondrous manifestation of blessing. He preached the Word \par "in demonstration of the Spirit and of power." His labors at Waldshut were so \par successful, that the other ministers yielded to the force of truth, and Romanism \par was abandoned. But Austrian influence was predominant in Baden, so that Hubmeyer soon found himself in a perilous position, and was compelled to seek \par concealment. After much suffering he repaired to Zurich, hoping to enjoy rest \par and refuge there. \par \par But Zuingli was not now Hubmeyer's friend. Hubmeyer's researches had issued in \par the discovery that infant-baptism is only a human tradition. He had communicated \par his thoughts to Zuingli and Ecolampadius, who were also in a doubting state of \par mind on that subject, and had sought their assistance. They remained \par P\'e6dobaptists while he, following his con7victions, took the final step, by which \par he was utterly estranged from his former brethren. He was baptized, with one \par hundred and ten others, in a village not far from Waldshut, by William Roubli, a \par Swiss Baptist. He himself baptized three hundred persons in the course of the \par next few months. A work on baptism, which he published about the same time, \par received a "virulent and violent" reply from Zuingli. "I believe and know," \par Hubmeyer said, " that Christendom shall not receive its rising aright, unless \par baptism and the Lord's Supper are brought to their original purity." Those were \par truthful words. \par \par "About July, 1525, Hubmeyer entered Zurich, and sought a refuge at the Green \par Shield Hotel, with a few friends and faithful followers. His coming was soon \par known among his fellow-brethren, and soon also to the Council of Zurich. He was \par sought out, and immured in the cells of the Court-house. For many days and weeks \par Zuingl8i and his old associates endeavoured to shake his adhesion to the truth. \par At last the torture was applied. Protestant historians say a promise of \par recantation was willingly given and written with his own hand. Alas, how \par willingly! the pains of the rack were the sharp and effectual arguments. On the \par 22nd of December he is led to the minister, and placed at a desk facing that \par from which Zuingli long and vehemently declaims against the heresies his friend \par is there come to confess. The sermon is past, and every eye turns to the rising \par form of the sick Balthazar. Though not old, his trials have told on his robust \par frame; and with a quivering voice he begins to read from the paper of \par recantation before him. As his articulation becomes distinct, he is heard to \par affirm that infant-baptism is without the command of Christ. As the words \par continue to flow, and add certainty to the incredulous ears of the crowd in the \par thronged cathedral, m9urmurs float ominously in the resounding roof, increasing \par by degrees to audible expressions of approbation or of horror. Zuingli's voice \par rises above all. He quiets the coming storm, and Hubmeyer is rapidly conveyed to \par his cell in the Wellenberg." \par \par "Redoubled efforts were afterwards made to recall the mischief that had been \par done. Probably renewed tortures were applied or threatened; for in a few months \par the sufferer is said to have made a public recantation, both at Zurich and St. \par Gall; but with so little satisfaction to his persecutors, that, although \par released from prison, he was kept in the town under strict surveillance. About \par the middle of the year 1526, by the aid of distant friends, he succeeded in \par escaping from Zurich, and, after preaching at Constance for a short time, he \par journeyed to Moravia, passing through Augsburg on his way. There he proclaimed \par the Gospel freely, and in all the region round about, baptizing: many and forming \par churches of Christ after His Word." \par \par "In the year 1528 he was arrested, probably at Brunn, where he was teacher off \par the church, at the command of King Ferdinand, and sent to Vienna. After some \par days he was thrown into the dungeons of the castle of Gritsenstein. At his own \par request he was visited by Dr. Faber, of Gran, in Hungary, who had been in former \par days his friend. Their interviews, at which two other learned men assisted, \par lasted the greater part of three days. The substance of their discussions Faber \par afterwards published, and hints that on several points Hubmeyer yielded to the \par cogency of his arguments. A written exposition of his views was afterwards sent \par to King Ferdinand by Hubmeyer; but no material change in them could have taken \par place, since he was immediately sentenced to death. He steadfastly went to the \par scaffold, and on the 10th of March, 1528, from the midst of burning flames and \par e;mbers, his spirit ascended to that region where those that have come out of \par great tribulation suffer and weep no more. The partner of his life was also \par partner of his sufferings: imprisoned with him, she, too, was led to Vienna, and \par in the river Danube found a watery grave."5 \par \par Hubmeyer was a learned man. He published several valuable works, and has the \par honor of being placed in the Romish Prohibitory Index, in the first class of \par proscribed authors. \par \par Louis Hetzer, another Baptist minister, was beheaded at Constance, on the 4th of \par February, 1529. He also had been on intimate terms with Zuingli, Ecolampadius, \par and their associates, and was highly esteemed by them till he became a Baptist. \par In conjunction with John Denk, he translated the Prophets from the Hebrew. Many \par other books were published by him. John Zwick, who was present at his death, \par said, "A more glorious and manful death was never seen at Constance. Very magreat prosperity, spiritually \par and temporally. Many other exiles joined them, so that their numbers continually \par increased. But in 1535 Ferdinand, King of Bohemia, ordered their expulsion, and \par sent a military force to carry the order into effect. Their property was seized, \par and all the indulgence they could obtain was liberty to carry away their \par movables. They withdrew into the forests, and there lived as they could, \par worshipped God, and possessed their souls in patience. Hutter exhorted and \par comforted them. "Be ye thankful unto God," he said, "that ye are counted worthy \par to suffer persecutions and cruel exile for His name. These are the rewards of \par the elect in the prison-house of this world, the proofs of your heavenly \par Father's approbation. Thus did His people Israel suffer in Egypt, in the desert, \par and in Babylon. Thus have Apostles and all the followers of the Lamb, some in \par prisons, in exile, and in persecutions, some in torme?nts, in suffer\-ings, and in \par martyrdoms, enjoyed the favor of their Lord, and have passed the more quickly to \par the paradise above. Sadness be far from you; put aside all grief and sorrow; \par reflect how great the rewards awaiting you for the afflic\-tions ye now endure." \par \par Jacob Hutter's letter to the Marshal of Moravia, written in the name of the \par brethren, is worthy of an imperishable record. We will copy it entire, that the \par reader may see what manner of men the Baptists of the sixteenth century were. \par "We brethren, who love God and His Word, the true witnesses of our Lord Jesus \par Christ, banished from many countries for the name of God and for the cause of \par Divine truth, and have hither come to the land Moravia, having assembled \par together and abode under your jurisdiction, through the favor and protection of \par the Most High God, to Whom alone be praise, honor, and laud for ever, we beg you \par to know, honored ruler of Moravia, that@ your officers have come unto us, and \par have delivered your message and command, as indeed is well known to you. Already \par have we given a verbal answer, and now we reply in writing, viz., that we have \par forsaken the world, an unholy life, and all iniquity. We believe in Almighty \par God, and in His Son our Lord Jesus Christ, Who will protect us henceforth and \par for ever in every peril, and to Whom we have devoted our entire selves, our \par life, and all that we possess, to keep His commandments, and to forsake all \par unrighteousness and sin. Therefore we are persecuted and despised by the whole \par world, and robbed of all our property, as was done aforetime to the holy \par prophets, and even to Christ Himself. By King Ferdinand, the prince of darkness, \par that cruel tyrant and enemy of Divine truth and righteousness, many of our \par brethren have been slaughtered and put to death without mercy, our property \par seized, our fields and homes laid waste, ourselAves driven into exile, and most \par fearfully persecuted." \par \par "After these things we came into Moravia, and here for some time have dwelt in \par quietness and tranquility, under thy protection. We have injured no one, we have \par occupied ourselves in heavy toil, which all men can testify. Notwithstanding, \par with thy permission, we are driven by force from our possessions and our homes. \par We are now in the desert, in woods, and under the open canopy of heaven; but \par this we patiently endure, and praise God that we are counted worthy to suffer \par for His name. Yet for your sakes we grieve that you should thus wickedly deal \par with the children of God. The righteous are called to suffer; but alas! woe, woe \par to all those who without reason persecute us for the cause of Divine truth, and \par inflict upon us so many and so great injuries, and drive us from them as dogs \par and brute beasts. Their destruction, punishments, and condemnation draw near, \par Band will come upon them in terror and dismay, both in this life, and that which \par is to come. For God will require at their hands the innocent blood which they \par have shed, and will terribly vindicate His saints according to the words of the \par prophets." \par \par "And now that you have with violence bidden us forth with to depart into exile, \par let this be our answer. We know not any place where we may securely live; nor \par can we any longer dare here to remain for hunger and fear. If we turn to the \par territories of this or that sovereign, everywhere we find an enemy. If we go \par forward, we fall into the jaws of tyrants and robbers, like sheep before the \par ravening wolf and the raging lion. With us are many widows, and babes an their \par cradles, whose parents that most cruel tyrant and enemy of Divine righteousness, \par Ferdinand, gave to the slaughter, and whose property he seized. These widows, \par and orphans, and sick children, committed to our chargCe by God, and whom the \par Almighty hath commanded us to feed, to clothe, to cherish, and to supply all \par their need, who cannot journey with us, nor, unless otherwise provided for, can \par long live-these we dare not abandon. We may not overthrow God's law to observe \par man's law, although it cost gold, and body, and life. On their account we cannot \par de\-part; but rather than they should suffer injury we will endure any extremity \par even to the shedding of our blood. Besides, here we have houses and farms, the \par property that we have gained by the sweat of our brow, which in the sight of God \par and men are our just possession: to sell them we need time and delay. Of this \par property we have urgent need in order to support our wives, widows, orphans, and \par children, of whom we have a great number, lest they die of hunger. Now we lie in \par the broad forest, and, if God will, without hurt. Let but our own be restored to \par us, and we will live as we have hiDtherto done, in peace and tranquility. We \par desire to molest no one, nor to prejudice our foes, not even Ferdinand the King. \par Our manner of life, our customs and conversation, are known everywhere to all. \par Rather than wrong any man of a single penny, we would suffer the loss of a \par hundred gulden [worth twenty pence sterling each], and sooner than strike our \par enemy with the hand, much less with sword, or spear, or halbert, as the world \par does, we would die and surrender life. We carry no weapon, neither spear nor \par gun, as is clear as the open day; and they who say that we have gone forth by \par thousands to fight, they lie, and impiously traduce us to our rulers. We \par complain of this injury before God and man, and grieve that the number of the \par virtuous is so small. We would that all the world were as we are, and that we \par could bring and convert all men to the same belief; then should all war and \par unrighteousness have an end." \par \par E"We answer further: that if driven from this land there remains no refuge for \par us, unless God shall show us some special place whither to flee. We cannot go. \par This land, and all that therein is, belongeth to the God of heaven and if we \par were to give a promise to depart, perhaps we should not be able to keep it; for \par we are in the hand of God, who does with us what He will. By Him we were brought \par hither, and peradventure He would have us here and not elsewhere to dwell, to \par try our faith and our con\-stancy by persecutions and adversity. But if it should \par appear to be His will that we depart hence, since we are persecuted and driven \par away, then will we, even without your command, not tardily but with alacrity, go \par whither God shall send us. Day and night we pray unto Him that He will guide our \par steps to the place where He would have us dwell. We cannot and dare not \par withstand His holy will; nor is it possible for you, however much you may F \par strive. Grant us but a brief space; peradventure our Heavenly Father will make \par known to us His will, whether we are here to remain, or whether we must go. If \par this be done, you shall see that no difficulty, however great it may be, shall \par deter us from the faith." \par \par "Woe, woe! unto you, O ye Moravian rulers, who have sworn to that cruel tyrant \par and enemy of God's truth, Fer\-dinand, to drive away His pious and faithful \par servants. Woe! we say unto you, who fear more that frail and mortal man than the \par living, omnipotent, and eternal God, and chase from you, suddenly and inhumanly, \par the children of God, the afflicted widow, the desolate orphans, and scatter them \par abroad. Not with impunity will ye do this; your oaths will not excuse you, or \par afford you any subterfuge. The same punishment and torments that Pilate endured \par will overtake you, who, unwilling to crucify the Lord, yet from fear of Caesar \par adjudged Him to death. GodG, by the mouth of the prophet, proclaims that He will \par fearfully and terribly avenge the shedding of innocent blood, and will not pass \par by such as fear not to pollute and contaminate their hands therewith. Therefore \par great slaughter, much misery and anguish, sorrow and adversity, yea, everlasting \par groaning, pain, and torment, are daily appointed you. The Most High will lift \par His hand against you, now and eternally. This we announce to you in the name of \par our Lord Jesus Christ; for verily it will not tarry, and shortly ye shall see \par that we have told you nothing but the truth of God, in the name of our Lord \par Jesus Christ, and are witnesses against you, and against all who set at nought \par His commandments. We beseech you to forsake iniquity, and to turn to the living \par God with weeping and lamentation, that you may escape all these woes." \par "We earnestly entreat you, submissively, and with prayers, that you take in good \par part all these our words. For we testify and speak what we know, and have learnt \par to be true in the sight of God. We speak from a pure mind filled with the love \par of God, and from that true Christian affection which we follow after before God \par and men. Farewell."8 \par \par The oppressor was melted for once. The order was recalled, and the Baptists \par enjoyed peace and freedom for some time longer. But in 1547 their expulsion was \par effected, with indescribable misery and loss. \par \par 1 Quoted in Martyrology, i. pp. 7, 8. \par 2 Martyrology, i. p. 121. \par 3 Letter to the Archbishop of Toulouse, Ibid. i. p. 165. \par 4 Martyrology, i. pp. 12-16. \par 5 Martyrology, i. pp. 61-75. \par 6 Martyrology, i. 97-101. \par 7 These calumnies are repeated in the North British Review for May, 1839, Art. \par ''Socinianism." The writer ought to have known that they were not published till \par after Hetzer's death. \par 8 Martyrology, i. pp. 149-153. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } Ö´EÖ‚G„0506-Biography of Menno Simon{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\gïIOƒÞS0505-The Netherlands-Sicke Snyder{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{IëPEƒÖk0504-Baptists in Switzerland{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par CHAPTER IV. \par Baptists in Switzerland-Zuingli-Concessions of Bullinger and \par Meshovius-Disputations-Drownings-Felix Mantz-Balthazar Hubmeyer-Louis Hetzer-Emigration to Moravia-Jacob Hutter. \par \par The sketch which has been already furnished describes the posi+J\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD \par \par \cf0\b0 \par CHAPTER V. \par The Netherlands-Sicke Snyder-Furious Edict-The Inquisition-Severities of Philip II.-Torture-Lysken-Gerrit Hase-poot-Joris Wippe-Private Executions-Horrid Rackings. \par \par In the year 1525 many of the Baptists took refuge in the Netherlands, hoping to \par be able to serve God there in quietness. They might have done so, perhaps, if \par they could have refrained from preaching the Gospel, and had forborne to \par propagate their distinctive tenets. But that was impossible. In the spirit of \par Apostolic Christianity, they "went everywhere preaching the Word." Numbers \par listened, were converted, baptized, and joined the persecuted sect, at \par Amsterdam, Antwerp, Haarlem, and other places. Then the hand of oppression was \par heavy upon them. The Emperor ChKarles V., to whose dominions the Netherlands \par belonged, directed that the heretics should be treated with unsparing severity, \par and that the Baptists should be singled out for special vengeance. The first \par martyr whose name is recorded was "Weynken Claes' daughter of Monickendam, a \par widow," who was strangled at the stake and then burnt, at the Hague, Nov. 20, \par 1527. She went to the place of execution "cheerfully, as if she were going to a \par festival." Her last words were, "I cleave to God."1 In the same year Jan \par Walen, and two others, were put to death at Haarlem. "Being bound to stakes with \par chains, and a fire being laid around them, they were slowly roasted, till the \par marrow was seen to ooze from the bones of their legs. They were thus burnt and \par roasted upwards, until death came to their release."2 \par \par Sicke Snyder (that is, Sicke, the tailor, his proper name being Freerks) was \par beheaded at Leeuwarden, in 1531. He had "receiveLd Christian baptism on \par confession of his faith, as a token of being a regenerate child of God, \par according to the instructions of Christ, seeking thus to live and to walk in \par obedience to his Maker. For this he became a prisoner in bonds at Leeuwarden, in \par Friesland, and experienced much suffering from the adversaries to the truth. And \par since he could by no torments be brought to apostatize, he was at the same place \par executed by the sword, displaying great firmness, bearing testimony to the true \par faith, and confirming it by his death and blood . . . His sentence is thus \par recorded in the Criminal Sentence Book of the Court of Friesland: -'Sicke \par Freerks, on this 20th of March, 1531, is condemned by the Court to be executed \par with the sword; his body shall be laid on the wheel, and his head set upon a \par stake, because he has been rebaptized, and perseveres in that baptism.'"3 \par \par In 1532, three persons were burned at the Hague. They wMere "fastened with chains \par to stakes, and a great fire having been made around them, they were roasted till \par they expired." At Amsterdam, "nine men were taken out of their beds by night, \par upon suspicion of Anabaptism, hurried away to the Hague, and after they had been \par imprisoned a fortnight, were there beheaded by order of the Emperor. Their \par bodies were buried, but their heads put into a herring barrel and sent to \par Amsterdam, where they were set upon stakes."4 By edicts published in the \par following year all persons were forbidden to harbor Baptist preachers in \par Holland; and obstinate Baptists, that is, those who refused to recant, were \par doomed to suffer the utmost penalty of the law. In obedience to these edicts the \par work of cruelty went on. \par \par On the 10th of June, 1535, a furious edict was published at Brussels. Death by \par fire was the punishment of all Baptists who should be detected and should refuse \par to abjure. If they rNecanted they were still to die, but not by fire; the men \par were to be put to death by the sword, "the women in a sunken pit." Those who \par resisted the operation of the edict by failing to deliver up Baptists to the \par authorities, were to suffer the same punishment as accomplices. Informers were \par promised one-third of the confiscated estates. And all persons were forbidden \par "to claim or seek any grace, forgiveness, or reconciliation for the said \par Anabaptists, or re-baptizers, or to present, on their behalf, any petitions or \par bequests;-it being understood," says the Emperor, "that it is not our will, nor \par will we permit, that any Anabaptists, or re-baptizers (because of their wicked \par opinions), shall be received into favor, but be punished as a warning to others, \par without any dissimulation, favor, or delay."5 \par \par A similar edict was published in September, 1540. And a novel experiment was \par adopted. The portraits of the principal ReformOers, Baptists included, were \par placed at the gates of the cities, and in other public situations, that \par recognition and seizure might be more easily made. Large rewards were also \par offered for the apprehension of the ministers.6 \par \par The Inquisition was introduced into the Netherlands by Charles V. in 1550. Great \par consternation was excited, and some of the towns absolutely refused to publish \par the edict. So powerful were the remonstrances, that the Emperor consented to \par modify the provisions of the edict in certain respects; but there was no \par relaxation of severity towards the Baptists. "Protestants and Papists united to \par oppress and persecute them."7 \par \par When Philip II. succeeded his father, Charles V., on the abdication of the \par latter, in the year 1556, he renewed the edict of 1550, with additional \par articles. The publication of Baptist books was prohibited, and the right of \par disposing of their property, by sale or will, waPs taken away. Nor were \par magistrates or judges to moderate or lessen the penalties in the slightest \par degree.8 In 1560, and again in 1563, these edicts were renewed and still further \par extended, so that there might be no possibility of escape. An abstract of the \par proclamation issued in the last-mentioned year will serve to show the perilous \par state of society in the Netherlands at that time. "No persons were to remove \par from Flanders to Holland without certificates from the priests and magistrates. \par Every settler was required to furnish proof that his children had been baptized \par according to the rites of Rome. Midwives were to be sworn to secure the \par christening of every infant at whose birth they might be present, and in case of \par any neglect to report it to the magistrates. Conventicles were to be diligently \par sought out and repressed. Parents were ordered to send their children to church \par and to school. Booksellers' houses and peddlers' pQacks were to be searched for \par heretical publications. All the people were enjoined to attend mass every Sunday \par and holiday. A month's continuous absence was to be punished at the discretion \par of the judges. No persons suspected of heresy were to be placed in offices of \par trust. In addition, as before stated, all the former enactments respecting \par burning, beheading, drowning, and burying alive, remained in full force."9 \par \par The records of this period are truly heart-sickening. It is wonderful that any \par Baptists survived. And yet it is the fact that they were becoming stronger and \par stronger. Menno Simon, whose public labors commenced in 1537, preached, \par baptized, formed churches, published books, and traveled extensively, often \par exposed to great peril, as will be here\-after related; nevertheless, though a \par price was set on his head, the designs of the enemy were defeated, and Menno \par died in peace. Many other ministers were indefatigRable in their zeal, among whom \par Dirk Philips and Leonard Bouwens deserve most honorable mention. \par \par The Baptist Martyrology contains distinct notices of about four hundred brethren \par and sisters who were barbarously put to death in Holland and Flanders under the \par operation of the aforesaid edicts. The misery and ruin which befell their \par families cannot be described. Numbers more suffered, of whom no account has been \par preserved. It was a season of "great tribulation." \par \par Tjaert Reynerson, "a godly farmer," was beheaded at Leeuwarden in 1539, because \par he had "from compassion and brotherly love secretly harbored Menno Simon in his \par house in his great distress." He was frequently examined by torture before his \par execution, but would neither betray his minister nor deny the faith.10 \par \par Jan Claeson had forwarded the printing and publication of Menno Simon's works. \par For this he was condemned "to be executed by the sword; his body Sto be laid upon \par the wheel; the head set on a stake." Bestevaer, an aged brother, suffered with \par him. "The beloved brother, Jan Claeson, confirmed the Word of God with his \par crimson blood, and was afterwards given for food to the birds and wild beasts . \par . . The aged Bestevaer, numbering eighty-seven years, likewise willingly \par resigned his gray head and beard to the stroke of these tyrants' sword for the \par truth of Jesus Christ. They now rest together under the altar.11 \par \par A number of Baptists met in secret at Rotterdam, in 1554, "to speak to each \par other for mutual edification and establishment in the truth of the holy Gospel \par which they had received; likewise, with one mouth and lowly hearts to pray to \par the great God of heaven and earth for the forgiveness of their sins, and the \par gift of the Holy Spirit, and also with one accord to praise and thank His most \par adorable name." They were betrayed, apprehended, tortured, and then put tTo \par death; the men, by the sword; the women were "thrown into a boat, and thrust \par under the ice till death followed." One of them was "a young female only \par fourteen years old." She composed the hymn which is found in the old hymn-book, \par beginning \par \par "To the wide world Immanuel came, \par His Father's Kingdom left," &c.12 \par \par Richst Heynes was martyred in 1547. When the officers were sent to the house, \par her husband escaped. "But her they severely treated and cruelly bound, without \par any pity or compassion, although pregnant, and so near her confinement that the \par midwife was already with her. Notwithstanding all this they led her away, \par regardless of the tears and screams of her little children, to the prison at \par Leeuwarden, where, after three weeks' imprisonment, she was delivered of a son . \par . . They afterwards inflicted great torments on this sheep of Christ, and \par tortured her to such a degree that she could not raise heUr hands to her head. \par Thus was she treated in the inhuman rack, chiefly because she would not give \par evidence against her brethren. For these wolves were in nowise satisfied, but \par still thirsted for more innocent blood. But the faithful God, who is a refuge in \par time of need, and a shield for all those who trust in Him, guarded her mouth, so \par that no one suffered through her. After all means had thus failed to separate \par her from Christ, she was condemned at the place above-named, and like a brute \par beast was put into a sack, and plunged under water until life was extinct."13 \par \par The torture was constantly resorted to, either to force a recantation or to \par procure the discovery of the hiding-places of the brethren. The victims were \par stretched on the rack; or suspended by the hands, heavy weights being attached \par to the feet; or the thumb screws were employed; or a similar instrument applied \par to the ankles. The demons who inflicted theseV tortures paid no regard to sex, \par station, or age. The delicate maiden, the honored minister, the venerable \par confessor of threescore and ten and upwards, were alike subjected to the brutal \par test. \par \par In the year 1551, Jeronimus Segerson and another were burned at Antwerp. \par Segerson's letters, written while in prison, breathe a spirit of exalted piety \par and manly endurance. "I had rather," said he, "be tortured ten times every day, \par and then finally be roasted on a gridiron, than renounce the faith I have \par confessed." \par \par Lysken, Segerson's wife, was drowned. The narrative of her examination and death \par is so interesting that we transcribe the greater portion of it. \par \par "Lysken, our sister, having long lain in bonds, has at last finished the period \par of her pilgrimage, remaining perfectly steadfast in the Word of the Lord even to \par the end; the Lord be for ever praised. She very boldly and undisguisedly \par confessed her Wfaith at the tribunal, before the magistrates and the multitudes. \par They first asked her concerning baptism. She said, 'I acknowledge but one \par baptism, even that which was used by Christ and His disciples, and left to us.' \par 'What do you hold concerning infant-baptism?' asked the sheriff. To which Lysken \par answered, 'Nothing but a mere infant's baptism, and a human institution.' On \par this the bench stood up, and consulted together, while Lysken, in the mean time, \par confessed and explained clearly to the people the ground of her belief. They \par then pronounced sentence upon her. Lysken spoke in the following manner to the \par bench: 'Ye are now judges; but the time will come when you will wish that ye had \par been keepers of sheep, for there is a judge and Lord who is above all; He shall \par in His own time judge you. But we have not to wrestle against flesh and blood, \par but against the principalities, powers, and rulers of the darkness of this \par world.X' The bench said, 'Take her away from the tribunal.'" \par \par "The people then ran earnestly to see her, and Lysken spoke piously to them. \par 'Know that I do not suffer for robbery, or murder, or any kind of wickedness, \par but solely for the incorruptible Word of God.'" \par \par She was then re-conducted to the prison, where two monks visited her, and \par endeavored, but in vain, to turn her from the faith. Next morning she suffered. \par "On Saturday morning we rose early, some before day, some with the daylight, to \par see the nuptials which we thought would then be celebrated; but the crafty \par murderers outran us. We had slept too long, for they had finished their \par murderous work between three and four o'clock. They had taken that sheep to the \par Scheldt, and had put her into a sack, and drowned her before the people arrived, \par so that few persons saw it. Some, however, saw it. She went courageously to \par death, and spoke bravely: 'Father, into Thy hands YI commend my spirit.' Thus she \par was delivered up, and it came to pass, to the honor of the Lord, that by the \par grace of God many were moved thereby." \par \par "When the people assembled, and heard that she was already dead, it occasioned a \par great commotion amongst them, for it grieved them as much as if she had been \par publicly executed. For the people said, 'Thieves and murderers they bring \par publicly before all men; but their treachery is thus more manifest.' Some \par simple-hearted people asked, 'Why must these persons die, for many bear a good \par testimony concerning them?' Some of the friends were present, and spoke openly \par to the people,-'The reason is, that, they are more obedient to God's command \par than to the Emperor's, or men's; because they have heartily turned to the Lord \par their God, from lies to truth, from darkness to light, from unrighteousness to \par righteousness, from unbelief to the true faith, and have accordingly amended: \parZ their lives, and been baptized, seeing they were true believers, according to \par the command of Christ and the practice of the Apostles.' They further showed the \par people, from the Word of God, that the Papists are they of whom the Apostle Paul \par prophesied, namely, the seducing spirits who teach the doctrines of devils; and \par moreover, that the righteous have had to suffer from the beginning, from the \par time of Abel to the present; that Christ also suffered and entered into the \par glory of His Father, and left us an example that we should follow in His \par footsteps; for 'all that will live godly in Christ Jesus must suffer \par persecution.'"14 \par \par Gerrit Hase-poot lived at Nymegen. During the heat of the persecution he fled to \par another place. After a time he returned to fetch his wife and children, but was \par seen by one of the sheriff's officers, who gave information to his master, on \par which he was taken into custody and condemned to die. "[After his condemnation," \par says the historian, "his wife came to the Town Hall to speak to him once more, \par to take her leave of him and to say adieu to her beloved husband, carrying a \par little child on her arm, which, for sorrow, she was scarcely able to support. \par When wine was presented to him (according to the custom of giving wine to those \par who were sentenced to death), he said to his wife, 'I desire not this wine, but \par hope to drink new wine, and to receive it above in my Father's house.' With \par great sorrow they were separated from each other, bidding each other adieu in \par this world (for the wife could not longer stand, but became faint from grief). \par He was then led to death. On being taken from the wagon to the scaffold, he \par raised his voice, and sang the hymn- \par \par 'Father of heaven, on Thee I call, \par O strengthen Thou my faith.' \par \par He then fell upon his knees and made his earnest prayer to God. When fastened to \par t\he stake, he threw the slippers from his feet, saying, 'It were a pity to burn \par these, for they may be of service to some poor, person !' The strap with which \par he was to be strangled coming loose, not having been properly fastened by the \par executioner, he again lifted up his voice and sang the rest of the above hymn- \par 'Farewell, ye saints, farewell; \par \par What, if I meet this end! \par Ere long the Lord shall come, \par Our only Leader, Friend: \par Joyous I wait the glorious day, \par With you to walk in white array.' \par The executioner having adjusted the cord, this witness for Jesus fell asleep, \par and was then burnt."15 \par \par At the martyrdom of Joriaen Simons and Clement Dirks, at Haarlem, in 1557, there \par was a great burning of books. Joriaen was a colporteur, and had circulated a \par large number of Baptist works. "But when it was observed that the books began to \par blaze, such a tumult arose among the people, that the magistrates hastily ] \par departed. The people then threw the books amongst the crowd, who most eagerly \par caught them. Thus, through the providence of God, instead of the truth being \par extinguished, as was intended, it was the more spread by the reading of so great \par a number of these books."16 \par \par At length, even magistrates and executioners grew weary of the work, and \par disgusted at the cruelty of the bloodthirsty inquisitors. An instance of this \par occurred in 1558. Joris Wippe was a burgomaster at Menin, in Flanders. When he \par became a Baptist, he was obliged to leave that place. He settled at Dort, in \par Holland, engaged in business as a fuller, and was much esteemed by his \par fellow-citizens. When the magistrates were informed of his being a Baptist, and \par were compelled to take proceedings against him, they did all in their power to \par prevent his death; but the higher authorities overruled them. "When Joris was \par sentenced to die, the executioner lamented,^ with weeping eyes, that he must put \par a man to death who had often fed his wife and children, and would rather be \par discharged from his office than execute a man who had done him and others so \par much good, and never any harm. Joris was finally drowned in the prison by night, \par in a cask filled with water, by one of the thief-takers, who, at the \par magistrate's direction, performed the office of executioner, and threw him \par backwards into the water. Thus he offered up his body to the Lord on the 1st of \par October, in the forty-first year of his age. The next day his body was suspended \par by the legs on a high gibbet, at the place of execution, for the sport of the \par people. Like his Master, Christ, he had to be numbered with the transgressors. \par The day following, some malefactors were whipped and banished. The executioner, \par after executing justice on these, said, 'They crucified Christ, but Barabbas \par they released.'"17 \par \par Sometimes the_ execution took place privately, within the precincts of the \par prison. Andries Langedul and two others were beheaded at Antwerp in 1559, "not \par publicly, but in the prison. The other prisoners (of whom there were then many) \par could see it through the windows of their cells. When Andries knelt to receive \par the stroke of the sword, he put his hands together, saying, 'Father, into Thy \par hands I commend'-but 'I commend my spirit' was not perfectly uttered, the rapid \par stroke of the sword prevented it." Several were drowned in the same city, the \par year following. "Peter Gomer the mason and Jacot the goldsmith, for the name of \par Christ, were drowned together in a tub." Lenaert Plovier and two young females \par "were thrust into sacks, put into wine casks, and drowned by night in prison."18 \par Joos Verbeek, "a minister of God's Word and His Church," suffered at Antwerp in \par 1561. He was racked twice in four days. He was scourged till the blood flowed. \par His` right hand having been "lamed by torture," his last letter to his wife was \par written with his left hand, "with great difficulty." He was burnt in a straw \par hut, as was the common practice towards the end of the persecution. It was \par probably adopted to prevent bystanders from witness\-ing the manner in which the \par servants of God met death, and thus to repress all manifestations of sympathy. \par The martyrs were fastened to stakes inside the huts, and stran\-gled, after which \par fire was applied, and the huts and the bodies were burnt together.19 \par Thirteen brethren and sisters who were apprehended at Hallewin, on information \par given by a priest, and committed to prison at Lille (then called Ryssel), were \par shortly after\-wards all burnt alive, at three separate times. Jan de Swarte, a \par minister, his wife, and four sons, were of the number. "When Jan de Swarte was \par apprehended, the two youngest sons were not at home, but came in during the \par time.a As they were approaching the house, the neighbors warned them, and told \par them who were in the house, and that their father and mother were arrested. The \par one said to the other, 'Let us not run away, but die with father and mother.' \par Meanwhile Jan de Swarte was led out of the house a prisoner, and seeing his sons \par said to them, 'Children, will you go with me to the New Jerusalem?' They said \par 'Yes, father, we will;' and they were led captive with them. All these were \par conducted prisoners together to Ryssel, and there strictly guarded in the \par castle. Jan was placed by himself in a dungeon called Paradise. It was so small \par that he could not stand upright in it, nor lie down at full length." \par \par "It happened one day, that several brethren and sisters (moved by love and \par compassion) came from outside the town, and stood over against the castle, \par calling out over the fortification, and comforting the prisoners. Amongst them \par was a brothebr named Herman. Being observed by one of the city officers, who had \par gone out secretly, he, also was apprehended." \par \par "After ten days' imprisonment, Jan de Swarte, his son Klaes, and four others, \par were executed. While going to death, the clock struck. Jan asked what it was \par o'clock. He was told four. On this he comforted himself, saying, 'By five \par o'clock we hope to be in our lodge, or rest."' \par \par A few days afterwards, Klaesken, Jan de Swarte's wife, with her three sons, and \par Herman, were burnt alive. The remaining two suffered a year's imprisonment, when \par they also were "cast alive into the fire, and burnt to ashes." \par The priest who had betrayed them "was very severely punished. For his flesh \par became so putrefied, that pieces fell off from his body, or were sometimes cut \par off, and no cure could be found for it . . . While he was lying ill, a man came \par to visit him. When the priest complained of his great misery, the man said tco \par him, 'It is the coals of the fire at Ryssel.' This greatly displeased the \par priest; but he was obliged to endure such scoffing, as well as the punishments \par with which God had visited him. He at last died most miserably, as was of old \par the case with Antiochus and Herod."20 \par \par I will add only one more case. Christian Langedul, with three others, were \par burned at Antwerp in 1567. In his letters to his wife he gives an account of the \par manner in which they were tortured:- \par \par "We were all four, one after the other, sorely racked, so that we have at \par present little inclination to write . . . Cornelius was the first taken: then \par Hans Symons . . . It was next my turn. You may conceive how I felt. As I \par approached the rack near the gentlemen, I was ordered to strip or to say where I \par lived, I looked sorrowful, as you may suppose. I said, 'Will you ask me any more \par questions besides that ?' They were silent. I then thought, 'I knodw how it must \par be; they will not spare me.' I therefore undressed, and gave myself up to the \par gentlemen, fully prepared to die. They now cruelly racked me. I think two cords \par fastened on my thighs and legs broke. They also drenched me with water, pouring \par it into my mouth and nose. After releasing me, they inquired if I would now \par speak. They entreated me; then menaced me; but I did not open my mouth. God had \par shut it. They then said, 'Give him another taste of it.' This they did, calling \par out, 'Away, away; stretch him another foot.' I thought, 'You can but kill me.' \par While thus lying stretched out, drawn by cords on my head and chin, and on my \par thighs and legs, they said, 'Speak, speak.' They now chatted with one another \par about the account which J. T. had prepared of my linen, which amounted to six \par hundred and fifty pounds, the sum it would fetch by auction . . . Again I was \par asked, 'Will you not speak ?' I kept my mouth closed. Theey said, 'Say where you \par live, and where your wife and children are.' But I said not a word. 'What a \par dreadful thing!' said they in French; but I replied not, for the Lord kept the \par door of my lips. After they had long tried to make me speak, they at last \par released me. \par \par "Matthew was tortured after me. He named his own house, and the street where we \par live. He also said that we lived in a gateway, and I think there is no other \par gateway in the street but ours. You had better, therefore, immediately remove, \par if you have not left, for I think the magistrates will go there. Let no one go \par to the house who is in any danger of apprehension. He also mentioned the house \par of R. T., and the street in which F. V. lives. Do immediately the best you can \par in this matter. He is very sorry that he did so. Cornelius and Hans did not \par disclose anything. \par \par "We were afraid that the margrave would come to torture Cornelius once more, and \fpar we also feared that we should again be tortured. We tremble much at the \par prospect, for the pain is frightful; we do not fear death near so much. \par Cornelius was so racked and scourged the second time that it required three men \par to carry him upstairs, who say that he could scarcely move a limb, only his \par tongue. He sent to us to say that if they come to him again he thinks that he \par must sink under it. As the margrave did not come yesterday, we expect him here \par today. The Lord help us! for the pain is excruciating!"21 \par \par While these horrible scenes were enacted, the Baptists of the Netherlands \par persevered in the faith. Neither fires nor floods appalled them. Menno Simon and \par other bold-spirited men risked their lives continually in the service of the \par Gospel. They were always traveling from place to place, and by their itinerant \par labors an immense amount of good was accomplished. Converts were baptized and \par added to the churches in every part of the country. The servants of God were \par confirmed in the faith, useful publications were scattered abroad, and \par Anabaptism, as it was called, like the bush which Moses saw, though it was \par "burned with fire, was not consumed." \par \par 1 Martyrology, pp. 40-44. \par 2 Ibid. P. 45. \par 3 Martyrology, i. p. 136. \par 4 Ibid. pp. 133, 134. \par 5 Martyrology, i. pp. 138-140. \par 6 Martyrology, p. 207. \par 7 Ibid. i. p. 364. \par 8 Ibid. ii. pp. 64-69. \par 9 Martyrology, pp, 269, 342. \par 10 Ibid. i. p. 207. \par 11 Martyrology, p. 262. \par 12 Ibid. p. 263. \par 13 Martyrology, p. 292. \par 14 Martyrology, ii. pp. 427-431. \par 15 Martyrology, ii. p. 93. \par 16 Ibid. ii. p. 108. \par 17 Martyrology, p. 143. \par 18 Ibid. pp. 250, 271, 272. \par 19 Martyrology, ii. p. 304. \par 20 Martyrology, pp. 338-341. \par 21 Martyrology, ii. pp. 426-438. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } hfroman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER VI. \par Biography of Menno Simon-Account of his Publications- \par Church Government among the Baptists-Missionary Excursions. \par \par WE propose now to give some account of Menno Simon, to whose labors the Baptists of Holland were so deeply indebted. \par \par This great man was born at Witmarsum, in Friesland, in the year 1505. Very \par little is known of his early life. It is not known where he studied; but it is \par evident, both from his writings and from the admissions of his opponent, that he \par was a first-rate scholar. Mosheim says, that he had acquired "learning enough to \par be regarded by many as an oracle." Though he was educated for the priesthood, he \par was entirely ignorant of the Scriptures, excepting such portions as are \par contained in the iMissal and the Breviary. Nay, more, he was not only ignorant \par but hostile, "speaking evil of things which he knew not," after the manner of \par the Romish priesthood of that age, who were irritated by the Reformers' constant \par appeal to the Word of God, and refused to admit it, maintaining that the \par authority of the Church was supreme. The fact that Luther and his coadjutors \par proposed to derive their religious views from the Bible, led these sapient \par priests to identify the Holy Book with heresy, and therefore to refrain from \par perusing it. So Menno Simon afterwards confessed. \par \par But he was a thinking man. Having been ordained in 1528, he became Vicar of \par Pingium, a village in Friesland. The celebration of the mass was of course a \par frequent duty. He had been taught to believe that when the priest uttered the \par words, "Hoc est corpus Mewn" (This is My body), the wafer was changed into the \par body of the Lord Jesus. His reason was shocked ajnd disgusted. Could these things \par be true? Did Christianity teach them? Such questions could not be answered \par unless he examined the original record. He determined to do so, and in the year \par 1530 he read the New Testament. The perusal opened his eyes. He renounced \par transubstantiation. Continuing to read, more enlightenment followed. As he \par learnt, he taught. He preached so differently that he began to be regarded as an \par evangelical minister. But as yet it was only light; spiritual life was wanting. \par We mentioned in a former section the martyrdom of Sicke Snyder, at Leeuwarden. \par Menno heard of it, and then for the first time was informed of the existence of \par the people called "Anabaptists." The effects produced on his mind, and the \par ultimate results, were thus stated by himself some years afterwards:- \par \par "It sounded very strange in my ears to of a person being re-baptized. I examined \par the Scriptures with diligence, and meditated on kthem earnestly; but could find \par in them no authority for infant-baptism. As I remarked this, I spoke of it to my \par pastor; an after several conversations he acknowledged that infant-baptism had \par no ground in the Scriptures. Yet I dare not trust so much to my under\-standing. \par I consulted some ancient authors, who taught me that children must by baptism be \par washed from their original sin. This I compared with the Scriptures, and \par perceived that it set at nought the blood of Christ. Afterwards I went to \par Luther, and would gladly have known from him the ground; and he taught me that \par we must baptize children on their own faith, because they, are holy. This also I \par saw was not according to God's Word. In the third place I went to Bucer, who \par taught me that we should bap\-tize children in order to be able the more \par diligently to take care of them, and bring them up in the ways of the Lord. But \par this, too, I saw was a groundless representatilon. In the fourth place, I had \par recourse to Bullinger, who pointed me to the covenant of circumcision; but I \par found, as before, that according to Scripture the practice could not stand. As I \par now on every side observed that the writers stood on grounds so very different, \par and each followed his own reason, I saw clearly that we were deceived with \par infant\-baptism." \par \par In 1530 Menno returned to Witmarsum, his native village, where he remained five \par years, discharging his duties as a Romish priest. "There," said he, "I preached \par and said much from the Word of God, but without any influence from the Spirit, \par or any proper affection for the souls of men; and I made, by these my sermons, \par many young persons, like myself, vain boasters, and empty talkers; but they had \par very little concern for spiritual things . . . I entered with ardor into the \par indulgence of youthful lusts; and like the generality of persons of similar \par pursuits, msought exclusively after gain, worldly appearance, the favor of men, \par and the glory of a name." Nevertheless, he continued to inquire after truth, and \par the Lord graciously guided and blessed him. As his views became clearer, his \par heart was affected, and at length all the marks of genuine conversion appeared. \par Then came a time of trial. Should he retain his position as a priest, or forsake \par all and follow Christ? "If I continue in this state," he exclaimed, "and do not \par to the utmost of my ability expose the hypocrisy of false teachers, and the \par impenitent and careless lives of men, their depraved baptism and supper, with \par their other superstitions, what will become of me?" True to his convictions, he \par faith\-fully and fearlessly proclaimed the Gospel. \par \par "I began," he said, "in the name of the Lord, to teach publicly from the pulpit \par the doctrine of true repentance; to guide the people in the narrow path; to \par testify con\-cerning nsins and unchristian behavior, and all idolatry and false \par worship; as also concerning baptism and the supper, according to the sense and \par fundamental prin\-ciples of Christ, as far as I at the time received grace from \par my God. Also, I warned every man against the Munster abominations in regard to a \par king, to polygamy, to a worldly kingdom, to the sword, &c., most faithfully, \par until the great and gracious Lord, perhaps after the course of nine months, \par extended to me His fatherly Spirit, help and mighty hand, so that I freely \par abandoned at once my character and fame among men, as also my antichristian \par abominations, mass, infant-baptism, loose and careless life, and all; and put \par myself willingly in all trouble and poverty, under the pressing cross of Christ \par the Lord. In my weakness I feared God. I sought pious people, and of these I \par found some, though few, in good zeal and doctrine. I disputed with the \par perverted; and some I gainedo through God's help and power; but the stiff-necked \par and obdurate I commended to the Lord. Thus has the gracious Lord drawn me \par through the free favor of His great grace. He first stirred in my heart. He has \par given me a new mind. He has humbled me in His fear. He has led me from the way \par of death, and through mere mercy has called me upon the narrow path of life into \par the com\-pany of His saints. To Him be praise for ever. Amen." \par \par This reference to the "Munster abominations" serves to point out the peculiarity \par of his circumstances. He was fully a Baptist in principle; but the outrageous \par conduct of the men of Munster (about whom we shall have to speak at large in a \par subsequent section) had exposed all persons bearing the Baptist name to \par unmerited opprobrium; in fact, no man's life was safe who attached himself to \par that body. Menno distinguished, however, between the precious and the vile. \par Repudiating the monstrous dogmas and ppretensions which characterized the Munster \par mania, against which he always earnestly protested, he embraced the sentiments \par held by the genuine Baptists, and joined one of their churches. This was in the \par year 1535. \par \par During the first year after his baptism, Menno lived in retirement, meeting with \par the church from time to time, and diligently employing all the means in his \par power for the increase of knowledge and piety. But he could not be hid. The \par Church recognized his talents for usefulness, and wisely determined to call him \par out to labor. We will again cite his own words.. \par \par "He who bought me with the blood of His love, and called me to His service, \par unworthy as I am, searches me, and knows that I seek neither gold, nor goods, \par nor luxury, nor ease on earth; but only my Lord's glory, my salvation, and the \par souls of many immortals. Wherefore I have had, now the eighteenth year, to \par endure such excessive anxiety, opqpression, trouble, sorrow, and persecution, \par with my poor feeble wife and little offspring, that I have stood in jeopardy of \par my life, and in many a fear. Yes, while the priests lie on soft beds and, \par cushions, we must hide ourselves commonly in secret corners. While they are at \par all nuptials and christenings, and at other times make themselves merry in \par public with fifes, drums, and various kinds of music, we must look out for every \par dog, lest he be one employed to catch us. Instead of being greeted by all as \par doctors and masters, we must be called Anabaptists, clandestine holders-forth, \par deceivers, and heretics. In short, while for their services they are rewarded in \par princely style, with great emoluments and good days, our reward and portion must \par be fire, sword, and death. \par \par "What now I, and my true coadjutors in this very difficult and hazardous \par service, have sought, or could have sought, all the well-disposed may easily r\par estimate from the work itself and its fruit . . . And through our feeble \par service, teaching, and simple writing, with the careful deportment, labor, and \par help of our faithful brethren, the great and mighty God has made so known and \par public in many cities and lands the word of true repentance, the word of His \par grace and power, together with the wholesome use of His holy sacraments; and has \par given such growth to His churches, and endowed them with such invincible \par strength, that not only have many proud hearts become humble, the impure chaste, \par the drunken temperate, the covetous liberal, the cruel kind, the godless godly; \par but also for the testimony which they bear, they faithfully give up their \par property to confiscation, and their bodies to torture and to death-as has \par occurred again and again to the present hour. These are no marks or fruits of \par false doctrine (with that God does not cooperate), nor under such oppression and \par missery could anything have stood so long, were it not the power and the word of \par the Almighty. Whether all the prophets, apostles, and true servants of God, did \par not through their service, produce the like fruits, we would gladly let all the \par pious judge." \par \par The issue was, that Menno became a Baptist minister. The last twenty-five years \par of his life were spent in toilsome and perilous efforts for the spread of the \par truth. Repeatedly compelled to change his abode, and living for the most part in \par a state of wandering and exile, his life was no doubt greatly embittered. Having \par married, too, at an early period of his ministry, his sufferings were increased \par by the exposure of his wife and children to the same distress as he himself \par endured. But he laboured on without fainting, and God abundantly blessed him. \par Let us listen to him once more. \par \par "Perhaps a year afterwards, as I was silently employing myself upon the Word of \part the Lord, in reading and writing, there came to me six or eight persons, who \par were of one heart and soul with me; in their faith and life (so far as man can \par judge) irreproachable; separated from the world, according to the direction of \par the Scriptures; subjected to the Cross of Christ; and bearing a hearty \par abhorrence, not only of the Munster, but also of all worldly sects, \par anathematizings, and corruptions. With much kind entreaty they urged me, in the \par name of the pious who were agreed with them and me in one spirit and sentiment, \par that I would yet lay a little to heart the severe distress and great necessities \par of the poor oppressed souls (for the hunger was great, and very few were the \par faithful stewards), and employ the talent, which, unworthy as I am, I had \par received from the Lord. \par \par "As I heard this I was very much troubled; anguish and fearfulness surrounded \par me. For on the one hand I saw my small gift; my want of erudiution; my weak and \par bashful nature; the extremely great wickedness, willfulness, perverse conduct, \par and tyranny of the world; the powerful large sects; the craftiness of many \par spirits; and the heavy cross, which, should I begin, would not a little press \par me. On the other side, I saw the pitiable extreme hunger, want, and necessity of \par the devout pious children; for I perceived clearly enough that they wandered, as \par the simple, forsaken sheep when they have no shepherd." \par \par "At length, after much prayer, I resigned myself to the Lord and His people, \par with this condition. They were to unite with me in praying to Him fervently, \par that, should it be His holy pleasure to employ me in His service to His praise, \par His fatherly kindness would then give me such a heart and mind as would testify \par to me with Paul, Woe is me if I Preach not the Gospel! but should His will be \par otherwise, that He would order such means as to permit the matter to rvest where \par it was. 'I For if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they \par shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father which is in heaven. For where \par two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them' \par (Matthew 18:19, 20)."1 \par \par Before his time the Baptists of Holland had been unable, from various causes, to \par realize, as completely as was to be desired, the advantages of church \par organization. Menno, instructed them in these matters, and in establishing \par regular government and discipline. It might be said that he exercised a sort of \par Apostolic supervision over them. At any rate, his labors and journeyings were \par Apostolical. "He traveled in West Friesland," says Mosheim, "the territory of \par Groningen, and East Friesland, then in Guelderland, Holland, Brabant, and \par Westphalia, and the German provinces, along the shores of the Baltic, and \par penetrated as far as Livonia, and gathewred an immense number of followers, so \par that he was almost the common father and bishop of all the Anabaptists."2 \par Such exertions could not fail to attract the special notice of the persecuting \par government of the Netherlands. A proclamation was issued, offering pardon (if \par the informer were a Baptist), the freedom of the country, and a large pecuniary \par reward, to any one who would deliver up Menno to the authorities.3 Sometimes he \par was in imminent danger of being seized. On one occasion a Christian brother, in \par whose house he had taken shelter, was apprehended, cruelly tortured, and then \par put to death, because he would not betray the servant of God. Another narrow \par escape is thus narrated by his daughter:- \par \par "A traitor had agreed, for a specified sum of money, to deliver him into the \par hands of his enemies. He first sought to apprehend him at a meeting; in which, \par however, he failed of success, and Menno escaped in a wonderful manxner. Soon \par after this, the traitor, in company with an officer, passed him in a small boat \par on the canal. But the traitor kept quiet till Menno had passed them to some \par dis\-tance, and had leaped ashore in order to escape with less danger. Then the \par traitor cried out, 'Behold, the bird has escaped us!' The officer chastised him, \par called him a villain, and demanded why he did not tell of it in time; to which \par the traitor replied, 'I could not speak: for my tongue was bound.' The lords \par were so displeased at this that they punished the traitor severely-a warning and \par lesson to all bloodthirsty traitors."4 \par \par At last Providence appeared for him. The Lord of Fresenburg, a territory between \par Holland and Lubeck, had frequently visited the Netherlands, had witnessed the \par perse\-cution of the Baptists, and had admired their piety and steadfastness. \par When they were driven from their homes, he allowed them to settle on his \par estates. Gyreat numbers availed themselves of the privilege. Flourishing \par settle\-ments were founded, and many Baptist churches established. There Menno \par also found a peaceful retreat, and pursued his labors without molestation. A \par printing establishment was founded there, whence his numerous works were issued. \par And there he died, on the 15th of January, 1561, in the village of Odesloe. His \par remains were deposited in his own garden. \par \par No account of the manner of his death has been pre\-served. But his "doctrine, \par purpose, and manner of life" were "fully known." The "end" of such a man was \par undoubtedly "peace." \par \par Menno Simon was a voluminous writer. His works have been collected and published in a handsome folio volume. We will mention the principal treatises contained in it. \par \par I. "An Evident Demonstration of the Saving Doctrine of Jesus Christ." In this \par work he discusses the following subjects:-1. The time of grace. 2. Repentance. \pzar 3. Faith, which he defines, "An embracing of the Gospel through the agency of \par the Holy Spirit." He shows that the believer relies upon Christ and His grace; \par that he embraces His promises; and that he is justified, not by works, but by \par faith, which is not of men, but the gift of God; and that this faith is not \par without fruits, but worketh by love. 4. Baptism. He defends the confining of \par baptism to believers from Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:16, and by the arguments \par usually adduced by Baptists; and replies to the arguments in favor of \par P\'e6dobaptism. In this chapter he employs a very severe style of writing. It was \par common to the authors of that and the next age. The Reformers, and after them \par the Puritans, treated their adversaries with very little courtesy; and certainly \par they received none from their opponents. 5. The Lord's Supper. 6. Secession from \par the Church of Rome. 7. The calling of ministers in the Church. 8. The doctrines \par{ to be preached by ministers, showing that the Scripture is the only rule of \par faith. 9. The life of ministers, and their support. He denies the lawfulness of \par ministerial stipends. This was one of his mistakes. In this chapter also he \par cautions magistrates, learned men, and the common people against false \par ministers, meaning those who had identified themselves with insurrections \par against the civil power. He shows that the only sword which the Christian ought \par to use is the sword of the Spirit, and that with this sword Christ so protects \par His Church that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. He also \par admonishes the Church, under persecution, to walk in the practice of all \par Christian virtues. \par \par II. "Fundamental Doctrines from the Word of God." This treatise closely \par resembles the first. He writes very clearly and fully on the spirituality of the \par kingdom of Christ, and contends that none but the regenerate are true member|s of \par the Church. \par \par III. "A Consolatory Admonition to the People of God under Persecution." Having \par adverted to the ordinary topics of consolation, he warns his brethren very \par earnestly against taking up arms in defense of religion. \par \par IV. "The Doctrine of Excommunication." It is shown that excommunication is \par designed to bring sinners to repentance, and preserve the Church in its purity. \par This is well. But when Menno goes on to maintain that the pious must withdraw \par altogether from the excommunicate, and have no dealings with them, and that \par excommunication dissolves all society between father and children, brothers and \par sisters, husbands and wives,-union with Christ by faith being infinitely more \par important than any earthly union,-we cannot but confess that his scheme was far \par harsher than the New Testament would warrant. There was much disputing on this \par subject between the men of severe measures and their moderate b}rethren; but the \par latter were in the minority during the period now under consideration. \par \par V. "Reply to Gellius Faber, Minister at Embden." All the peculiarities of the \par Baptists were stated and defended in this work. Faber had not only written \par against them, but had also stirred up persecution and inflamed the minds of the \par people. Hence Menno hits him hard. Faber, too, gives sturdy blows. They were \par both rough men. \par \par VI. "A Piteous Supplication of Poor Christians, addressed to Magistrates," &c. \par \par VII. "A Brief Vindication of Miserable Christians and Dispersed Strangers, &c., \par addressed to all Divines and Preachers in the Netherlands." In these two works \par \par Menno defends himself and his brethren against the accusations brought against \par them. He exposes the calumnies of their foes, and indignantly remonstrates with \par magistrates and ministers for allowing themselves to be led away by \par misrepresentations and li~es, invented for no other purpose than the \par accomplishment of the ruin of innocent people. \par \par VIII. The most interesting of all Menno Simon's works is the "Narration of his \par Secession from Popery," in which he traces and describes the various experiences \par through which he passed, and the struggles he endured ere he attained full \par deliverance.5 \par \par In common with the Baptists of that period generally, Menno Simon held that no \par Christian should undertake the office of magistrate, or bear arms, or bind \par himself by oath. Whatever may be thought of these sentiments now, it is evident \par that they originated in the views entertained by Baptists respecting the purity \par of the Church. Maintaining that a Church of Christ should consist exclusively of \par pious persons, they concluded, necessarily, that such persons would not be \par law-breakers, that they would abhor all violence, and that their word might be \par relied on. Among them, therefore, no magistrate would be required. Their \par principles would be incompatible with the employment of force, even in \par self-defense. It would be outrageous to call upon them to confirm any statement \par by an oath, since the word of true men ought always to be taken. All this may be \par admitted. Menno Simon and his friends seem to have forgotten, however, that they \par were living "in the world," and that there were certain duties incumbent on them \par as members of society. Yet these were harmless notions, and might have been \par borne with. They would have been borne with had forbearance been the temper of \par the age. \par \par It is manifest that the doctrinal opinions of the Baptists of this period \par harmonized, with few exceptions not of great moment, with those entertained by \par the Reformers of all persuasions. With regard to the constitution and government \par of Christian Churches, they and the Reformers materially differed. According to \par the lat€ter, infant-baptism formed the basis of Church membership, and the Church \par and the nation were identical. The Baptists, on the contrary, would admit no \par members to their churches but on personal profession of repentance and faith, on \par which profession the parties were baptized. All their subsequent arrangements \par were founded on these prerequisites. Every church was a family of believers. \par When they sat down at the table of the Lord, they felt that they were one in \par Christ and "members one of another." The Church, in their estimation, was a holy \par society. All the rule and discipline tended to the preservation of that \par holiness. So Baptists have thought and practiced from the beginning. \par \par We do not find any material difference between them and ourselves in regard to \par the organization and management of churches. The opposition they encountered was \par so violent that they were compelled to meet in secret, and at such times as they \par were able. Doubtless, whenever it was practicable, they spent the Lord's-day \par together in spiritual exercises, "according to the commandment." On these \par occasions, if ministers were present, they preached and taught, and administered \par the ordinance of the Lord's Supper: if no minister was present, there was mutual \par exhortation, with prayer and praise. Care was taken to ascertain who among them \par were possessed of suitable gifts; and these persons, after a season of \par probation, were solemnly set apart to the ministerial office, by prayer and the \par imposition of hands. Sometimes they sent out brethren on missionary tours, to \par gather together scattered disciples or comfort afflicted churches. This proved \par not unfrequently a perilous task. Several instances of martyrdom are recorded, \par resulting from the discharge of this duty. The itinerant missionary was \par apprehended as a suspected man; for the fact of his being a stranger, and often \par a forei‚gner, was sufficient to arouse suspicion. Examination disclosed the \par secret, and death followed. \par \par We will give a few extracts from the " Martyrology," which will illustrate this \par part of the subject. \par \par Joriaen Simons and Clement Dorks, together with Mary Jones, "fell into the hands \par of the tyrants at Haarlem," in 1557. "From the very gates of their prison they \par made known the Word of the Lord, for the reformation of all." When called on to \par declare their faith, they said "that they had been baptized on a confession of \par their faith, according to the command of Christ," and that "infant-baptism was \par not from God, but in opposition to His Word." They observed the Supper of the \par Lord "agreeably to the institution of Christ, after His own usage and blessing \par when with His Apostles." They "could not acknowledge the Pope and the Romish \par Church to be the Church of God." They acknowledged "no other punishment of \par offenders in ƒthe Church than evangelic excommunication, thereby to separate the \par bad from the good, that a pure Church might be presented to the Lord, in which \par there might be nothing impure or defiled."6 \par \par It was observed of two godly women who were beheaded at Ghent, in 1564, that \par "they had separated themselves (agreeably to the direction of the Holy \par Scriptures) from the Popish Church of Antichrist, as corrupted with many \par impurities, and filled with the unfruitful works of darkness, and doctrines and \par commandments of men, in opposition to the Holy Word of the Lord. They had also \par united themselves with the true members of Christ, and with them, according to \par their weak ability, endeavoured to observe the Lord's commandments and \par ordinances. They were therefore deprived of life by the persecutors and haters \par of the truth."7 \par \par In 1559, "Jan Bosch, commonly called Jan Durps, was a pious, worthy man, a \par linen-weaver by trade, livi„ng at Maestricht. Though the truth was very much \par obscured by the Papacy, yet the light of Divine grace shone into his mind, and \par genuine Gospel truth was brought home to him. He repaired to the Church of God, \par and yielded the obedience which Christ the Son of God prescribed and commanded. \par After he had for a season adorned his Christian calling, the Church ordained \par him, and the charge of it was entrusted to him, that by reading and exhortation \par he should serve them. After many refusals he consented, and discharged his duty \par with fidelity, and employed his talents to the best of his ability."8 \par \par "Jan de Swarte, a man of excellent character, from Nipkerke, and his wife and \par children, came to the knowledge of the truth, and were united to the Church of \par God. He was afterwards chosen and ordained to be a minister of the Church. In \par this office he, according to his ability, and in meekness, so conducted himself \par (not only as deacon …by caring for the poor, but also, according to the gift he \par had received from God, in the dispensation of the word of exhortation) that he \par became greatly endeared to all that knew him."9 We have noticed his martyrdom in \par a previous section. \par \par "In the year 1560, the brother Claes Felbinger, a locksmith, a willing servant \par of the Word of God (he was then on trial), was apprehended," and put to death. \par This brother "was called to the ministry of the Gospel in the year 1556, but had \par not received the imposition of hands."10 "In the year 1562, the brother \par Franciscus van der Sach, a native of Rovigo, in Italy, a minister of the Word of \par God (being still on probation), with another, his fellow-messenger, named \par Antonius Walsch, was. apprehended at Capo d'Istria." He was subsequently drowned \par at Venice, as has been before stated.11 \par \par The following cases illustrate the statement respecting the dangers attending \par missionary ex†cursions in those days. "In the beginning of the year 1536, \par Jeronimus Kels, of Kufstein, with Michiel Zeepsieder, of Walt, in Bremen, and \par Hans Overacker, of Etschland, were commissioned to go into the earldom of the \par Tyrol; but being come to Vienna, in Austria, they were seized, having been \par betrayed by the innkeeper with whom they lodged. While at supper, the people \par there sought to discern who they were by drinking their healths; and when they \par found out their views, by their declining to respond to the toasts, the landlord \par sent for paper, and wrote a letter in Latin, which, among other words, contained \par the following: 'Here are three persons, who, I think, are all Anabaptists.' They \par were arrested, and died in the fire at Vienna."12 In 1537, "Juriaen Vaser, by \par desire of some zealous brethren, was sent to Pogstall, in Austria, where he \par joyfully began to teach the Word of the Lord, notwithstanding that he was just \par come out of p‡rison at Metlyng. He gathered the faithful together, and formed a \par church agreeably to God's command. But he could not escape the foils of a crafty \par knave, who, feigning a desire to learn from him, as a minister, the nature and \par ground of the truth, brought with him many servants, whom he ordered to lay hold \par and capture this Juriaen Vaser when a suitable opportunity should occur. This \par was faithfully performed."13 Vaser was beheaded. In the year 1545, "Brother Hans \par Blietel, having been sent by the Church to Riet, in Bavaria, was there \par apprehended; for money had been offered by them of Riet to any one that should \par take him. There was in consequence a traitor who gave him good words, affected \par much zeal, wished ardently to be with him, and drew him to his house. The \par brother thought it was for the welfare of his soul, and went with him." The \par wretch endeavoured to extort money from him, and, failing in that, betrayed him \par to the magiˆstrates, who condemned him to the flames. "When the dear brother Hans \par reached the place of execution outside the city, he thought upon the Church, and \par called out with a loud voice, in the midst of the assembled people, asking if \par there was any one present who would have courage to inform the Church of God in \par Moravia, that 'I, Hans Blietel, have been burnt for the sake of the Gospel, at \par Riet, in Bavaria.' A zealous man, full of piety, then discovered himself. His \par zeal was inflamed by this question, and, as he could not get near Hans, he \par called out to him and said that he would tell and make known to the Church in \par Moravia that he had been burnt at Riet for the faith."14 \par \par 1 The above account is extracted from Menno Simon's Narrative of his Secession \par from Popery. \par 2 Ecclesiastical History, cent. xvi. sect. 3, part 2, chap. vi. sect. 8. \par 3 Martyrology, i. p. 242. \par 4 Martyrology, p. 241. \par 5 See Baptist Magazine, vol. x., pp. 361-368, 401-406 containing a Memoir of \par Menno Simon, by the late Rev. William Rowe, of Weymouth. \par 6 Martyrology, ii. p. 166. \par 7 Ibid. p. 357. \par 8 Martyrology, p. 240. \par 9 Ibid. p. 338. \par 10 Ibid. p. 279. \par 11 Ibid. p. 335. \par 12 Martyrology, i. p. 157. \par 13 Martyrology, p. 161. \par 14 Martyrology, p. 268. The Martyrology is an abridgment of a large folio \par volume, in Dutch, by T. J. van Braght, a Mennonite minister. The first edition \par was published at Dordrecht, in 1660; the second, illustrated by more than a \par hundred engravings, at Amsterdam, in 1685. A full translation of the work, by J. \par Daniel Rupp, was published at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, in an octavo volume of \par 1048 pages, in 1837. The late Rev. Benjamin Millard, of Wigan, was the author of \par the translation issued by the Hanserd Knollys Society. \par \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } Š So it \par was in England. In 1534, when Henry VIII. assumed the headship of the English \par Church, he issued two proclamations against heretics. The first referred to \par certain persons who had presumed to dispute about baptism and the Lord's Supper, \par some of whom were foreigners: these were ordered to depart the realm within \par eight or ten days. The second stated more explicitly that foreigners who had \par been baptized in infancy, but had renounced that baptism and had been \par re-baptized, had entered England, and were spreading their opinions over the \par kingdom. They were commanded to withdraw within twelve days, on pain of \par suffering death if they remained. Either some of them did remain, or others \par visited England the following years, for ten were burnt, by pairs, in different \par places, in 1535, and fourteen more in 1536. In 1538, six Dutch Baptists were \par detected and imprisoned; four of them bore faggots at St. Paul's Cross, and two \par we‹re burnt. Bishop Latimer refers to these circumstances in a sermon preached \par before Edward VI., in the year 1549. "The Anabaptists," says he, "that were \par burnt here in divers towns in England (as I heard of credible men, I saw them \par not myself), went to their death even intrepid, as ye will say, without any fear \par in the world, cheerfully. Well, let them go!"1 That good man was blind on the \par subject of religious freedom, as the Reformers generally were. He and his \par fellow-laborers might think for themselves; but if others ventured to do so, and \par thought themselves into Baptist principles, the fire was ready for them, and \par even Latimer could say, "Well, let them go!" Let us be thankful that the "times \par of that ignorance" have passed away. \par \par There is some reason to believe that a Baptist church existed in Cheshire at a \par much earlier period. If we may credit the traditions of the place, the church at \par Hill Cliffe is five hundred yeaŒrs old. A tombstone has been lately dug up in the \par burial-ground belonging to that church, bearing date 1357. The origin of the \par church is assigned, in the "Baptist Hand-Book," to the year 1523. This, however, \par is certain, that a Mr. Warburton, pastor of the church, died there in 1594. How \par long the church had been then in existence there are no written records to \par testify.2 \par \par Henry VIII. had a keen scent for heresy. He claimed to be an infallible judge in \par that matter, as free from error as the Pope himself. And so he was, no doubt; \par the one was as good as the other. Baptists were particularly distasteful to him. \par In the year 1538, Peter Tasch, a Baptist, was apprehended in the territories of \par the Landgrave of Hesse. It was discovered on searching him that he was in \par correspondence with Baptists in England, and expected soon to go thither in \par order to aid them in propagating their opinions. The Landgrave gave information \par to the King; who immediately appointed a Commission, of which Cranmer was \par chairman, charging the Commissioners to adopt severe measures against the \par alleged heretics if they should be detected, to burn all Baptist books, and, if \par they did not recant, to burn the Baptists themselves. They were not slow to obey \par the King's commandment. On the 24th of November, three men and one woman escaped the fire by bearing faggots at St. Paul's Cross; that is, they were brought \par before the people, assembled opposite the great cross outside St. Paul's \par Cathedral, and walked in proces\-sion, each with a bundle of faggots on the \par shoulder, to signify that they had deserved to be burnt; after which they \par con\-fessed and renounced their supposed errors. Three days after a man and a \par woman were committed to the flames in Smithfield. All these were natives of \par Holland. Fuller, the Church historian, writes of them in his peculiarly quaint \par style. He says: "DutcŽhmen flocked faster than formerly into England. Many of \par these had active souls; so that whilst their hands were busied about their \par manufactures, their heads were also beating about points of Divinity. Hereof \par they had many rude notions, too ignorant to manage them themselves, and too \par proud to crave the direction of others. Their minds had a by-stream of activity \par more than what sufficed to drive on their vocation; and this waste of their \par souls they employed in needless speculations, and soon after began to broach \par their strange opinions, being branded with the general name of Anabaptists."3 \par This is amusing enough. And yet it is a melancholy specimen of the ignorance in \par which some men, otherwise well informed and even learned, have been contented to \par remain. Instead of examining Baptist sentiments for themselves, they have taken \par them at second hand, and pronounced them "needless speculations" and "strange \par opinions." \par \par The hatred of Baptists was further shown by excepting them from general Acts of \par pardon. Such Acts were published in 1538, 1540, and 1550; but those who held \par that "infants ought not to be baptized" were excluded from the benefit. Thieves \par and vagabonds shared the King's favor, but Baptists were not to be tolerated. \par Protestantism nominally flourished in the reign of Edward VI. But there were \par many un-Protestant doings. The use of the reformed liturgy was enforced by the \par pains and penalties of law. Ridley, himself a martyr in the next reign, was \par joined in commission with Gardiner, afterwards notorious as a persecutor of \par Protestants, to root out Baptists. Among the "Articles of Visitation" issued by \par Ridley in his own diocese, in 1550, was the following: "Whether any of the \par Anabaptists' sect or other use notoriously any unlawful or private conventicles, \par wherein they do use doctrines or administration of sacraments, separating \par themselves from the rest of the parish?"4 It may be fairly gathered from this \par article that there were Baptist churches in the kingdom at that time. \par \par A Royal Commission was issued by Edward VI., empowering thirty-one persons \par therein named, Cranmer at the head and Latimer as one of its members, to proceed \par against all heretics and contemners of the Book of Common Prayer. The "wicked \par opinions" of the Baptists are specifically mentioned, and the Commissioners (or \par rather Inquisitors, for such they were) were directed, in case the persons \par accused should not renounce their errors, to deliver them up to the secular \par power, that is, to death. Joan Boucher, or "Joan of Kent," as she was sometimes \par called, was the first victim. She was a Christian lady, well known at Court, and \par very zealous in her endeavors to introduce Christian truth among its inmates. \par Strype says, "She was at first a great disperser of Tindal's New Testaments, \par tra‘nslated by him into English, and printed at Colen [Cologne], and was a great \par reader of Scripture herself; which books she also dispersed in the Court, and so \par became known to certain women of quality, and was more particularly acquainted \par with Mrs. Anne Ascue [Anne Askew, cruelly tortured, and afterwards burned alive, \par in the year 1546]. She used, for the more secrecy, to tie the books in strings \par under her apparel, and so passed with them into Court."5 But she maintained the \par opinion held by many of the foreign Baptists, that the Redeemer, though born of \par the Virgin Mary, and truly man, did not take flesh of the substance of her body. \par For this she was condemned to die. A year elapsed between the trial and the \par execution, during which many efforts were employed, but in vain, to convince her \par of her error. Archbishop Cranmer, Bishop Ridley, and others visited her \par frequently for that purpose. It was at length determined to burn her. The fi’nal \par sentence bears his name and that of Latimer. On the 2nd of May, 1550, Joan \par Boucher was burnt in Smithfield. Bishop Story preached on the occasion, and, as \par Strype says, "tried to convert her;" but his misrepresentations and calumnies \par were so gross that she told him he "lied like a rogue," and bade him "go and \par read the Scriptures." It was doubtless needful advice. \par \par John Rogers, who was the first martyr in Mary's reign, approved this execution. \par When some one remonstrated with him on the subject, and particularly urged the \par cruelty of the mode of death, he replied that "burning alive was no cruel death, \par but easy enough." Archdeacon Philpot, in his sixth examination before the \par Queen's Commissioners, Nov. 6, 1555, six weeks before his own martyrdom, said, \par "As for Joan of Kent, she was a vain woman (I knew her well), and a heretic \par indeed, well worthy to be burnt."6 It is distressing to record such utterances. \par In Edw“ard VI.'s time Hooper was appointed Bishop of Gloucester. His consecration \par was delayed for some months on account of his scruples against the Episcopal \par habits, which he justly regarded as Popish. He had learnt the truth, which is \par known now as an elementary principle, but then little understood, except by \par Baptists, that in the service of the Church nothing should be admitted for which \par we cannot adduce Apostolic precept or precedent, or which is contrary to any \par Apostolic teaching. He was unwilling to defer to Church authority or \par long-continued custom. Ridley was astonished at his brother's difficulties. In \par writing on the subject he affected to be very logical, and he was not sparing in \par rhetorical flourishes; but there was more sophistical declamation than either \par logic or rhetoric. Thus the Bishop writes: "If this reason should take place, \par 'The Apostles used it not, ergo it is not lawful for us to use it'-or this \par either, 'The”y did it, ergo we must needs do it'-then all Christians must have no \par place abiding, all must, under pain of damnation, depart with [part from] their \par possessions, as Peter said they did ['Behold, we have left all things,' &c.]; we \par may have no ministration of Christ's sacraments in churches, for they had no \par churches, but were fain to do all in their own houses; we must baptize abroad in \par the fields, as the Apostles did; we may not receive the holy communion but at \par supper, and with the table furnished with other meats, as the Anabaptists do now \par stiffly and obstinately affirm that it should be; our naming of the child in \par baptism, our prayer upon him, our crossing, and our threefold ab-renunciation, \par and our white chrisom [or vesture], all must be left, for these we cannot prove \par by God's Word that the Apostles did use them. And, if to do anything which we \par cannot prove they did be sin, then a greatest part is sin that we do daily in \p•ar baptism. What followeth then other things, than to receive the Anabaptists' \par opinion, and to be baptized anew? O, wicked folly and blind ignorancy!"7 \par Ridley's argument was, "If you take such ground, you had better become an \par Anabaptist at once. But that would be a shocking thing. Therefore you must admit \par in these things the authority of the Church, and yield submission to it." So, in \par utter contradiction to the principles of true Protestantism, did the Bishop \par reason. The other alternative, viz., that the Baptists were right, which ought \par to have been granted, he either had not eyes to see, or was not honest enough to \par admit. \par \par One point adverted to by Ridley may require explanation. The Baptists, according \par to him, taught that the Lord's Supper should be celebrated at the close of a \par meal. Their practice, it is to be supposed, agreed with the theory. They \par observed that the ordinance was instituted while our Lord and His Apo–stles were \par still at the Passover Supper-table; and they inferred that the Lord's Supper \par should be preceded by a meal, taken in common by the assembled disciples. We may \par think them mistaken, but this is clear, that the Baptists evinced therein their \par scrupulous regard to the directions, express or implied, of the Word of God. \par Posi\-tive institutions should be observed, in their judgment (and were they not \par right?), as nearly as possible in the exact manner in which they were enjoined. \par The original precept should be literally obeyed, the original precedents \par followed. This is the characteristic distinction of the Baptist body. Can it be \par controverted? \par \par George Van Pare, a Dutch Baptist, was burnt in Smithfield on the 13th of \par January, 1551. He was charged with Arianism; but it is testified that he was a \par man of fervent piety and active benevolence. His behavior at the stake was \par eminently Christian. The condemnatory sent—ence was signed by Cranmer, Ridley, \par and Coverdale! \par \par Whatever opinion we may entertain respecting the doctrinal views held by Joan \par Boucher and Van Pare, there can be no difficulty in deciding on the conduct of \par Cranmer and his associates. Nor need we seek excuses for them. It is customary \par to plead in their behalf the general prevalence, in that age, of Church and \par State; principles of the most ultra kind, and to maintain that at a time when \par everybody believed that the magistrate was bound to do the Church's bidding, \par and, therefore, to rid the country of those whom the Church might condemn, it \par could not be expected that any ecclesiastics would differ from their brethren, \par or be dis\-inclined to carry out the common policy. We are not disposed to admit \par the force of this reasoning. The Apostle Paul "verily thought within himself \par that he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth" (Acts \par 26:9); bu˜t neither did he, after he became a Christian, nor do we, who walk in \par the light of the nineteenth century, justify the desolation he caused at \par Jerusalem, on the ground of his ignorance and prejudice. He might and he ought \par to have known better, and it was his sin that he did not inquire impartially \par respecting Christianity before he persecuted it. So it was with Cranmer, Calvin, \par and the other Protestant persecutors. Rome had trained them in savageness. But \par she had also brought them up in the fooleries of her superstition, and \par instructed them to cleave to will-worship and merit. When they forsook those \par sandy foundations, that they might build on Christ, it was because they had \par learnt from the New Testament the doctrine of justification by faith. Why did \par they not also derive from the same New Testament the great truth that the \par kingdom of the Saviour is "not of this world," and that, therefore, the use of \par carnal weapons in its ™propagation or defense is absolutely forbidden? These \par truths were as fully taught by the Apostles as were the doctrines of faith and \par grace. The Baptists were clear on these subjects. They understood the nature and \par the limitations of magisterial rule. They anticipated Dr. Watts: \par \par "Let Caesar's dues be ever paid \par To Caesar and his throne; \par But consciences and souls were made \par To be the Lord's alone." \par \par They acted on their convictions, and withdrew from a corrupt church to worship \par God according to His Word. In doing so they committed no crime against the \par State. For that act they were responsible to God only. The State had no control \par over them. As long as they were peaceable subjects and obeyed the laws, they \par rightfully claimed protection. In regard to religion, they rightfully demanded \par freedom and independence. The Reformers had put forth the same demand in \par seceding from Rome. It is true that they coupled witšh it the false step of \par asking leave of the civil magistrate to secede, and having fallen into that \par error required that no one should secede from then, because the magistrate, as \par tutored by them, forbade it. But, we ask again, where was the New Testament all \par the while? and how was it that they did not see in it the spiritual Church, and \par the spiritual King, and the absolute unlawfulness of calling for "fire from \par heaven," or devising other mischief against those who differed from them? The \par Baptists saw all this. Cranmer and his party might have seen it. In refusing to \par see it they were guilty of treachery to Protestant principles. \par \par But they could not put down the Baptists, who grew and flourished in spite of \par them. Congregations were discovered at Bocking, in Essex, at Faversham, in Kent, \par and other places. Their number must have been considerable, as four ministers \par were arrested when the discovery was made. The names of th›e ministers were \par Humphrey Middleton, Henry Hart, George Brodebridge, and -- Cole. At the time of their apprehension they were assembled at Bocking. Besides the ministers, about \par sixty members of the congregation were apprehended. Their Christian organization \par appears to have been correct and complete. They met regularly for worship and \par instruction; the ordinances of the Gospel were attended to; contributions were \par made for the support of the cause; and so great was their zeal that those who \par lived in Kent were known to go occasionally into Essex to meet the brethren \par there-a journey of fourscore miles, which, in the sixteenth century, was no \par small undertaking. When they were brought into the ecclesiastical court they \par were examined on forty-six articles, and charged with Pelagianism and other \par errors. Their religious sentiments, or those imputed to them, would be now \par called Arminian. This, however, is clear, that they were "Anabaptistsœ." They \par held also "that we are not to communicate with sinners." In other words, they \par advocated believers' baptism, and contended for the purity of Christian \par churches. What became of the others we do not know, but Mr. Mid\-dleton was \par committed to prison, where he remained till the death of Edward VI. The Kentish \par members of these congregations suffered continual annoyance and persecution in \par various ways. Cranmer did all he could to suppress the Baptist movement. \par \par We cannot but regret that so little is known of this interesting band of \par disciples. Strype asserts that they "were the first that made separation from \par the Reformed Church of England, having gathered congregations of their own." As \par they confessed that they had not communed in the parish churches for two years, \par their separation must have taken place about the year 1548, which was before the \par Presbyterians or the Independents were known in England. The Baptists were the \par vanguard of the Protestant Dissenters in this country.8 \par \par There were many Baptists among the sufferers in Queen Mary's reign. Some endured \par painful imprisonments; some passed to heaven through the fire. Humphrey \par Middleton, one of the ministers mentioned above, was burnt at Canterbury, July \par 12, 1555. We should have known more about these good men had the historians of \par the times been more faithful. Even the venerable John Fox allowed his prejudices \par so far to influence him that he kept back information respecting Baptist \par martyrs. But "their record is on high." \par \par Bishop Bonner bestirred himself diligently. In his "Articles of Visitation," \par issued in the year 1554, he directed inquiry to be made, "whether there be any \par that is a Sacramentary or Anabaptist, or Libertine, either in reiterating \par baptism again, or in holding any of the opinions of the Anabaptists, especially \par that a Christian man or woman ought notž to swear before a judge, nor one to sue \par another in the law for his right, and that all things should be common."9 The \par last item, it is not necessary to say, was a calumny-or rather, perhaps, a \par misapprehension of the brotherly hospitality that prevailed among the Baptists. \par In a "Declaration to be published to the lay people of his diocese concerning \par their reconciliation," he affirmed that England had been "grievously vexed" and \par "sore infested" with "sundry sorts of sects of heresies," among which he \par expressly mentions "Anabaptists."10 Next year he published a book of homilies, \par in one of which he warned the people against the Baptists. "Certain heresies," \par said he, "have risen up and sprung in our days, against the christening of \par infants,"-a practice which "the most wholesome authority of the Church doth \par command."11 \par \par Bishop Gardiner was Chancellor of the University of Cambridge. In 1555 he \par published fifteen articŸles, which were to be signed by all persons desirous of \par enjoying the privileges of the University. The fourth was to this effect that \par "baptism is necessary to salvation, even for infants; that all sin, actual as \par well as original, is taken away and entirely destroyed, in baptism; and that the \par said baptism is never to be repeated."12 This language betrays the existence of \par Baptists in Cambridge, and the Bishop's fear lest persons holding their opinions \par should repair thither for education from other parts of the kingdom. \par \par Henry Hart, one of Humphrey Middleton's colleagues, was committed to the King's \par Bench Prison, London, with other Baptists. The prisons of the metropolis were \par crowded with Protestants at that time, many of whom, such as Bradford, Philpot, \par and others, glorified God in the flames. But the spirit of disputation was so \par powerful in them that there was hot controversy in the very gaols. Mr. Hart and \par his friends , as has been before observed, differed from other Reformers on what \par is called the Arminian question. Those differences led to fierce disputes, and \par occasioned consider\-able loss of temper. Ridley, Bradford, and Philpot were men \par eminent for piety; we venerate them to this day; their names will be fragrant in \par all time coming. But in their zeal for truth they sometimes forgot the claims of \par charity, and in reference to baptism they held and inculcated tenets of a truly \par un-Protestant character. Philpot must surely have felt the weakness of his cause \par when he pleaded thus "Since all truth was taught and revealed to the Primitive \par Church, which is our mother, let us all that be obedient children of God submit \par ourselves to the judgment of the Church for the better understanding of the \par articles of our faith and of the doubtful sentences of the Scripture. Let us not \par go about to show in us, by following any private man's interpretation upon ¡the \par Word, another spirit than they of the Primitive Church had, lest we deceive \par ourselves; for there is but one faith and one Spirit, which is not con\-trary to \par Himself, neither otherwise now teacheth us than He did them. Therefore let us \par believe as they have taught us of the Scriptures, and be at peace with them, \par according as the true Catholic Church is at this day."13 \par \par Notwithstanding the vigilant ferocity of Bonner and his associates, the Baptists \par held their ground in Kent and Essex, and it was found impossible to root them \par out. Commissioners were sent to Colchester in 1558, with full power to proceed \par against heretics; and they had entered on their duties with activity and ardor, \par hoping to make a thorough clearance, when, for some unexplained reason, a letter \par of recall was dispatched. Dr. Chedsey, one of the Commissioners, expressed his \par feelings on the occasion in the language of an inquisitor's regret. He was vexe¢d \par at the loss of his prey. "We be now," he said, writing to the Privy Council, "in \par the midst of our examination and articulation. And if we should give it off in \par the midst, we should set the country in such a roar, that my estimation, and the \par residue of the Commissioners, shall be for ever lost . . . Would to God the \par honorable Council saw the face of Essex as we do see! We have such obstinate \par heretics, Anabaptists, and other unruly persons here as never was heard of."14 \par Bradford, as we have said, was one of those who disputed, while in prison, with \par his fellow-sufferers. He was ingenuous enough to acknowledge that, though he \par regarded them as heterodox in their opinions, they were men of unquestionable \par and even signal piety: "He was persuaded of them, that they feared the Lord, and \par therefore he loved them." \par \par No sooner had Elizabeth ascended the throne than she began to display the \par despotic tendencies by which her £reign was distinguished. In that respect she \par closely resembled her father. She would reform, to a certain extent, but not so \par far as to allow her subjects to think and act for themselves. She would \par prescribe to them what they should believe, and how they should worship, under \par penalty of her high displeasure if they dared to go beyond the allotted bounds. \par The nation generally submitted in meekness. Some few chafed under the yoke, yet \par continued to wear it. Others remonstrated against ecclesiastical impositions, \par and asked for freedom in things indifferent. It seemed to them a monstrous \par thing, especially at a time when there were so few able and faithful ministers, \par to demand rigorous uniformity, not only in theological opinions, but also in the \par cut and wear of caps and gowns, and in liturgical services. But Elizabeth was \par not to be diverted from her purpose. She had made up her mind to go so far and \par no farther. And she was deter¤mined, as far as lay in her power, to check the \par progress of her subjects. The "Act of Uniformity," passed in the year 1559, \par declared her will, and defined their duty. The Puritan clergy grumbled, but the \par Queen said, "Silence!" And so it was. They must be silent or withdraw; and if, \par having withdrawn, they reduced their reforming principles to practice, they \par incurred all the terrors of the High Commission Court. \par \par It was not to be expected that Baptists would find any favor with Elizabeth. \par Many had fled from foreign countries to England, hoping to enjoy there the peace \par and freedom elsewhere denied them. They had settled chiefly in London and "other \par maritime towns." But the Queen would not suffer them to remain. A proclamation \par was issued September 2nd, 1560, declaring that her Majesty "willeth and chargeth \par all manner of persons, born either in foreign parts or in her Majesty's \par dominions, that have conceived any manner of ¥such heretical opinion as the \par Anabaptists do hold, and mean not by charitable teaching to be reconciled, to \par depart out of this realm within twenty days after this proclamation, upon pain \par of forfeiture of all their goods and chattels, and to be imprisoned and further \par punished as by the laws, either ecclesiastical or temporal, in such case is \par provided."15 This was a severe and cruel measure. In those days of slow \par traveling the proclamation would not reach some of the outposts till the twenty \par days had nearly expired; and the poor people would have little time to dispose \par of their immovable property, and of such goods as they could not conveniently \par take away with them. In all cases there was doubtless a great sacrifice. \par \par Bishop jewel supposed that the hated sectarians were effectually got rid of. \par Writing to Peter Martyr, under date of November 6, 1560, he said:-"We found at \par the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth a large a¦nd inauspicious corps of \par Arians, Anabaptists, and other pests, which I know not how, but as mushrooms \par spring up in the night and in darkness, so these sprang up in that darkness and \par unhappy night of the Marian times. These, I am informed, and I hope it is the \par fact, have retreated before the light of purer doctrine, like owls at the sight \par of the sun, and are now nowhere to be found; or, at least, if anywhere, they are \par no longer troublesome to our churches."16 But he was mistaken. Many Baptists \par contrived to elude the proclamation. Next year, Parkhurst, Bishop of Norwich, \par was complained of by Secretary Cecil for "winking at schismatics and \par Anabaptists."17 Six years after, 1567, "Articles of Visitation" were issued by \par Archbishop Parker, in which it was directed that inquiry should be made whether \par any persons did "say, teach, or maintain that children, being infants, should \par not be baptized."18 It is evident, therefore, that per§sons holding those views \par were still in the realm. And they continued to seek shelter in England from \par persecution, while the Queen and her minions were indefatigable in their \par attempts to ferret them out and drive them away. Another proclamation appeared \par in 1568, in which it is stated that "great numbers of strangers from the parts \par beyond the seas," some of whom were supposed to be "Anabaptists," did "daily \par repair to her Majesty's dominions, but that she did 'in nowise mean to permit \par any refuge' to them."19 Permitted or not, however, they were there, and they \par were neither idle nor unsuccessful. Collier, the ecclesiastical historian, says, \par "The Dutch Anabaptists held private conventicles in London, and perverted a \par great many."20 \par \par 1 Sermons, p. 160. Parker Society's Edition. \par 2 These statements are made on the authority of the Rev. A. Kenworthy, the \par present pastor of the church. \par 3 Church History, book v. sect. I, II. \par 4 Cardwell's Documentary Annals of the Church of England, i, p. 91. \par 5 Memorials of the Reformation, ii. p. 368. Edit. 1816. \par 6 Examinations and Writings, p. 55. Parker Society's Edition. \par 7 Reply to Bishop Hooper in Bradford's Letters, Treatises, &c., p. 382. Parker \par Society. \par 8 Strype's Memorials, ii. p. 381. Baptist Magazine, February, 1866, pp. \par 113-115. \par 9 Documentary Annals, ii. p. 156. \par 10 Documentary Annals, ii. p. 170. \par 11 Dr. Underhill's "Historical Introduction" to Tracts on Liberty of Conscience, \par p. 125. \par 12 Documentary Annals, i. p. 195. \par 13 Examinations and Writings, p. 273. \par 14 Strype's Memorials, v. p. 265. \par 15 Documentary Annals, i. p. 293. \par 16 Zurich's Letters, i. p. 92. Parker Society. \par 17 Documentary Annals, i. p. 338. \par 18 Ibid. p. 340. \par 19 Documentary Annals, p. 343. \par 20 Ecclesiastical History of England; vi. p. 162. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } ””ýh=ƒû#0507-Baptists in England{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER VII. \par Baptists in England-Proclamation of Henry VIII. -Latimer's Sermon before Edward VI.-Baptists excepted from "Acts of Pardon" -Royal Commissions against them-Ridley-Cranmer-Joan Boucher-Rogers-Philpot-Bishop Hooper's Scruples-George Van Pare-Protestant Persecutions Inexcusable-Congregations in Essex and Kent-Bonner-Gardiner-Disputations in Gaol- \par Queen Elizabeth's Proclamation against Baptists-Bishop Jewel-Archbishop \par Parker-Dutch Baptists. \par \par Wherever the Reformation prevailed, Baptist sentiments sprang up with it.‰ªar \par \par CHAPTER VIII. \par The Enormities Perpetrated at Munster and other Places-Injustice of ascribing \par them to Baptist Sentiments. \par \par Much has been said of the black deeds of Munster, in the year 1534, and of some \par transactions of a similar kind in Holland, about the same time. Perhaps he has \par been taught to consider those events as deeply disgraceful to the Baptist cause. \par We have no wish to throw a veil over that part of the history. Let the facts be \par set forth in all their horrid enormity, as P\'e6dobaptist historians have portrayed \par them. Then let them be fairly contemplated, in the light of impartial truth. \par \par The facts must first be stated. There had been fierce contests in Westphalia, \par between the Roman Catholic authorities and the Protestants. The former would \par have exterminated the latter, but their numbers and their power prevented it. \par Their superiority over their opponents was shown in the terms of the ag«reement \par which had been recently entered into between them and the Bishop of Munster, who \par was also its Prince. The Protestants secured for their worship the six parish \par churches, leaving to the Bishop and his co-religionists only the cathedral and a \par monastery. The Bishop, however, had left the city, not choosing to reside there \par under such circumstances. It could not be surprising that Munster became the \par resort of many religious fugitives whom persecution had driven from their homes, \par and who hoped to find a peaceful and safe refuge in that city. Nor could it be \par wondered at, in that age of excitement, that among the fugitives were found men \par of discordant and even outrageous opinions. Some of them were Baptists. Rothman, \par one of the Reformed preachers, and a man of high repute and great influence, \par embraced their views, and their numbers were daily increased, both by \par immigration and conversion. Just at that time, in January, 1534¬, Jan Matthys and \par Jan Bockelson arrived at Munster. They were fiery fanatics, strong in the belief \par that the restoration of all things was at hand, that the Lord's kingdom was to \par be established by the sword, that the saints were to take possession of the \par earth, and that they and their associates were the saints. Bernhard \par Knipperdolling, a wealthy burgher, invited them to his house, and entered into \par all their schemes. The fruits of their activity were soon manifest. Proselytes \par multiplied on every hand. At length, they had secured the adhesion of the \par majority of the inhabitants. Tumults and conflicts followed, and the result was \par the expulsion of all who would not favor the designs of Matthys and Bockelson. \par The remainder of the narrative shall be given substantially in the words of \par Ranke, the well-known modern historian : \par \par "The Anabaptists were thus not only the masters of the city, but its sole \par occupants. What the­ir adversaries had scrupled to do to them they inflicted with \par fanatical eagerness. They divided the city among themselves; and communities \par from different parts of the country took possession of the religious houses. The \par movable property of the exiles was collected together, and seven deacons, were \par appointed by Matthys to distribute it gradually to the faithful, according to \par their several necessities." \par \par All the pictures and statues in the cathedral, works of art generally, and even \par musical instruments, were destroyed. "The rule which had been laid down as to \par the property of the exiles was very soon applied to the possessions of the \par faithful. They were ordered, under pain of death, to deliver up their gold and \par silver, their jewels and effects, to the chancery, for the common consumption . \par . . While the idea of property was abolished, each man was to continue to \par exercise his craft. Regulations are extant, in which journe®ymen shoemakers and \par tailors are specially mentioned; the latter being enjoined to take heed that no \par new garment or fashion be introduced . . . Meat and drink were provided at the \par common cost; the two sexes, 'brethren and sisters,' sat apart from each other at \par meals; they ate in silence, while one read aloud a chapter of the Bible." \par \par Matthys being killed in a tumult, Bockelson took upon himself the management of \par affairs. He soon showed symptoms of the wildest fanaticism. At first he assumed \par the name and office of the prophet. He was a second Moses:-the people were the \par "new Israel:"-twelve elders were appointed to judge them. "Six were to sit to \par administer justice every morning and afternoon; the prophet Jan Bockelson was to \par proclaim their sentences to the whole people of Israel, and Knipperdolling to \par execute them with the sword." A table of laws was prepared, drawn chiefly from \par the books of Moses. Unconditional submiss¯ion was required. If any refused it, \par they were denounced as the "wicked," who were to be "rooted out of the earth," \par and Knipperdolling was authorized to put them to death at once, without trial. \par "Preceded by four heralds, with a drawn sword in his hand, he traversed the \par streets, carrying terror wherever he went." \par \par Bockelson's next step was to introduce polygamy. He married Matthy's widow, and \par many more women. The contagion spread. Rothman, the preacher, took four wives. \par All the females in the city were soon appropriated. \par \par The climax was reached when Bockelson procured him\-self to be appointed king. \par The Millennium, it was said, was just at hand. Christ would then reign with His \par saints over the whole earth for a thousand years. "The kingdom of Munster would \par endure until the commencement of that Millennium, and ought, therefore, to \par foreshadow it, and be an image of it." Bockelson declared "that in him the \par ki°ngdom announced by Christ was incontestably come; that he sat upon the throne \par of David. He wore round his neck a chain of gold, to which hung the symbol of \par his dominion-a golden globe, transfixed with two swords, the one of gold, the \par other of silver, above the handles of which was a cross." Thrice a week he \par appeared in the market\-place, thus attired, and administered justice. As he rode \par through the city all persons were required to fall on their knees at his \par approach. \par \par On one occasion when the Lord's Supper was celebrated by the whole population, \par Bockelson fancied that one of the persons present "had not on a wedding \par garment." He ordered him out, followed him, cut off his head, and then "returned \par cheerful and delighted to the feast." At another time, one of his wives having \par determined to leave him, he led her into the market-place, beheaded her with his \par own hands, and induced his other wives to dance round the corpse±, exclaiming, \par "To God alone in the highest be honor." \par \par It did not last long. The Bishop of Munster, aided by some of the German \par princes, besieged the city. Tremendous sufferings were endured by the \par inhabitants, and great numbers died of starvation. At length the city was taken \par by assault. A fearful carnage took place. Rothman and other leaders were killed. \par Bockelson, Knipperdolling, and another, were taken prisoners, and torn to death \par by red-hot pincers. The Baptists who remained alive were banished; not one was \par allowed, not even a woman, to live in Munster.1 \par \par While these things were taking place at Munster, similar outrages were attempted \par in Holland, particularly at Leyden and Amsterdam, in which cities certain \par Anabaptists (so called) endeavoured to effect revolutions, and to set up the new \par kingdom. Extravagance and immoralities marked their proceedings, as at Munster, \par but they were fortunately unsuccessf²ul. \par \par The question now arises, How far were the Baptists, as a religious body, \par responsible for these transactions? To this we reply:\-- \par \par 1. That not only among the Baptists, but also among other Reformers of that age, \par there were persons who were led away by wild notions and unaccountable \par delusions. It was a time of universal excitement-of new thoughts and new \par feelings. In the sudden transition from gross darkness to the blaze of noon-day \par it is not surprising that men's vision should prove feeble, imperfect, or even \par deceptive. Popery had chained down the mind: when the fetters were broken, it \par ought not to have been wondered at if a period of erratic and wayward movement \par followed. For our own part, we think that, under all the circumstances, the \par conduct of the Reform leaders was marvelously sober. \par \par 2. That although certain Baptists embraced millennarian and other absurd \par theories, the whole body cannot be³ held responsible for such things, since they \par were discountenanced by the majority. The fair representation would be, that \par some persons, professing Baptist sentiments, fell into these evils, but that the \par denomination as a whole was entirely free from them. They are properly enough \par ascribed by Brandt to "a new sect of enthusiastical Anabaptists" which arose at \par that time, widely differing from the "well-meaning" people who bore the same \par name.2 \par \par 3. That the men of Munster should have been treated as maniacs. Motley says of \par some who suffered at Amsterdam, that they were "furious lunatics, who certainly \par deserved the mad-house rather than the scaffold."3 The remark is as applicable \par to the Germans as to the Dutch. It was insanity produced by intense feeling, a \par phenomenon not unusual in times of excitement, from whatever cause that \par excitement may spring. Taught to abandon the old formalism, and to regard \par Christianity a´s essentially identified with life and power, and as requiring \par personal choice and action, the Baptists were conscious of an engagedness of \par heart in religion which was peculiar to such sentiments. The opposition they met \par with caused them to cling more closely to the truth, and to study it with \par greater earnest\-ness. Firmly believing the promises of Scripture, they looked \par forward to the triumph of New Testament principles; and that triumph, they \par foresaw, would occasion a complete revolution in society, and particularly a \par dissolution of the union between Church and State, since, in propor\-tion as \par their views prevailed, the right of the civil magis\-trate to interfere in \par religious matters would be denied, and such interference abolished. Then, \par persecution would cease, and the peaceful dominion of the Saviour would prevail. \par The majority of the Baptists were content to labor and suffer in the propagation \par of these truths, confiµdently expect\-ing their ultimate prevalence. They employed \par spiritual means for the accomplishment of a spiritual end. So far from allowing \par the use of carnal weapons in the cause of religion, they held all war to be \par unlawful. But some few, men of warm imagination and weak judgment, were \par over\-powered by their visionary hopes, and thought themselves authorized to \par establish a new government, on the ruin of the existing order of things. It was \par at first the fire of enthusiasm-then, frenzy-at last, stark madness. But it was \par a temporary mania, and soon subsided. The disorders and outrages which attended \par it, and the disturbances which ensued in various parts of Europe, must be \par ascribed solely to the individuals who were implicated in them. The Baptists in \par general were wholly free from participation in riot or rebellion. \par \par 4. That not only at Munster, but in many other places, there was a deadly \par struggle going on between despo¶tism, civil and religious, on the one hand, and \par freedom on the other. Numbers of the Germans were prepared to follow any leader \par who would show them the path of deliverance from their hateful bondage; nor were \par they very scrupulous as to the means that might be employed. Their efforts \par failed. As it happened in some instances that Baptists had taken the lead or \par acquired preeminence, they were made to bear all the discredit; and patriotic \par risings were stigmatized as Baptist insurrections, whereas, in fact, the \par majority of those who were termed rebels had no connection with the Baptists in \par a religious point of view. \par \par "It is observable, also, that the Baptist martyrs of this period frequently and \par indignantly rebutted the calumny cast upon them, and maintained that they were \par not answerable for the disgraceful doings at Munster and other places." \par \par "They also asked him [Brother Dryzinger, A.D. 1538], if it were true that ·if we \par should become numerous we would rise up against them and strangle them, if they \par would not join us? He told them, 'If we did so, we should be no Christians, but \par only such in name.'"4 \par \par Speaking of the Word of God, Hans, of Overdam (martyred A.D. 1550), said, "That \par is our sword; it is sharp and two-edged. But we are daily belied by those who \par say that we would defend our faith with the sword, as they of Munster did. The \par Almighty God defend us from such abominations!"5 \par \par "Were they not your people," said the wife of the Governor of Friesland, to \par Jaques Dosie, "that disgracefully and shamefully took up the sword against the \par magistrates at Amsterdam and Munster?" "Oh, no, madam," Jaques replied, "those \par persons greatly erred. But we consider it a devilish doctrine to resist the \par magistrates by the outward sword and violence. We would much rather suffer \par persecution and death at their hands, and whatever is appointed us to suffer."6 \par 5. We will only remark, in conclusion, that the history of these transactions \par has been written by enemies. We live in an age of impartial historical \par criticism. It is not improbable, therefore, that discoveries will yet be made, \par which will enable future historians to tell the tale of the so-called \par Anabaptists of Munster much more clearly and fully than their predecessors. \par At any rate, this is certain, that the atrocities and impurities perpetrated at \par Munster were not more justly traceable to Baptist sentiments, than the massacres \par of the Waldenses and the enormities of the Inquisition would be traceable to \par P\'e6dobaptism. \par \par \par 1 Ranke's History of the Reformation in Germany, book vi. chap. ix. \par 2 History of the Reformation, abridged, i. p. 38. \par 3 History of the Dutch Republic, i. p. 80. \par 4 Martyrology, i. p. 180. \par 5 Ibid. p. 335. \par 6 Ibid. p. 357. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } WÓWœi?¹%0600-THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD. \par \par \cf0 I.Baptists Persecuted by all other Sects-Liberal Policy of William, Prince \par of Orange-The "Union of Utrecht"-Differences of Opinion-Persecution in \par Moravia and in Switzerland \par \par II.Dutch Baptists Persecuted in England-Account of Hendrick Terwoort and \par Jan Pieters-Their Martyrdom-¹ùjIó0508-The Enormities at Munster{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE REFORMATION PERIOD\cf0\b0 \p©ºTheir Religious Sentiments-Whitgift's \par Invectives against the Baptists \par \par III.Severity of Elizabeth's Government-Bigotry of James I.-The Hampton \par Court Conference - Emigration - John Smyth's Church-Their \par Confessions-Bartholomew Legate-Extracts from Baptist Publications on \par Liberty of Conscience-The King's distress at their Increase \par \par IV.Character of Charles I.-Sufferings during his Reign-First Particular \par Baptist Church-Samuel Howe-Dr. Featley's Book-Baptist Confessions of \par Faith-Toleration hated by the Presbyterians-Their attempts to put down the \par Baptists-Milton's Lines-The Assembly of Divines-Outcry against \par Immersion-Parliamentary Declaration in favor of the Baptists-Fearful \par "Ordinance" against them-Their Activity during the Commonwealth and the \par Protectorate-Cromwell's Baptist Officers-The "Triers"-Baptists in Ireland \par \par V.Character» of Charles II. and James II.-Commencement of \par Persecution-Venner's Rebellion-Disclaimer by Baptists -Severe \par Sufferings-John James-Act of Uniformity-The Aylesbury Baptists- \par Benjamin Keach Pilloried-Conventicle Act-Five-Mile Act-Their Effects \par \par VI.History of the Broadmead Church, Bristol \par \par VII.Declaration of Indulgence-Confession of Faith-Fierce Persecution - \par Thomas Delaune -The Duke of Monmouth's Rebellion-Account of the \par Hewlings - Mrs. Gaunt-The Dark Time-Another Declaration of \par Indulgence-William Kiffin-Thc Glorious Revolution \par \par VIII.Principles and Practices of the Denomination-Human Tradition \par Renounced-Freedom of Conscience Demanded-Personal Piety requisite to \par Church Fellowship-Purity of Discipline-Cases cited-Mode of Public \par Worship-Plurality of Elders-Communion-Singing-Laying on of hands- \par The Sabbath \par \par IX.Biographical Notices-John Smyth, Thomas Helwys, and John \par Spilsbury----Henry Denne-Francis Cornwell, A.M.-Christopher \par Blackwood-Major-General Harrison-Col. Hutchinson \par \par X.Biographical Notices Continued- Henry Jessey, A.M.-John Canne- \par Vavasor Powell-Abraham Cheare \par \par XI.Biographical Notices Continued-John Toombes, B.D.-Francis \par Bampfield, A.M.-Henry D'Anvers-Edward Terrill-Dr. Du Veil-John \par Bunyan \par \par XII.Biographical Notices Continued-Thomas Grantham-Hanserd \par Knollys-Benjamin Keach-William Kiffin-Anecdotes \par \par XIII.Baptists in North America-Church at Providence-Baptists in \par Massachusetts - Persecuting Enactment against them-The Whipping of \par Obadiah Holmes-First Church at Holmes-First Church at Boston- \par Newport-Swansea-Other Churches-Roger Williams-Gregory Dexter- \par \f1\fs20 \f0\fs28 Obadiah Holmes-John Miles-Elias Keach \par } ½ects-Liberal Policy of William, Prince of \par Orange-The "Union of Utrecht"-Differences of Opinion-Persecution in Moravia, and in Switzerland \par \par I call this "The Troublous Period," because, while the Baptists were fast \par increasing in those parts of Europe in which they had already appeared, their \par history presents one continued scene of disturbance and suffering, inflicted, \par not only by the Papists, from whom nothing else could have been expected, but by \par their fellow-Protestants. The Episcopalians and Presbyterians of England, the \par Lutherans of Germany, and the Reformed in Switzerland, differing from one \par another, and refusing intercommunion, agreed in persecuting the Baptists. They \par were the "sect everywhere spoken against." It would have been well if the \par opposition had vented itself in hard words only; our forefathers would have \par borne these with Christian meekness, "not rendering evil for evil, or railing \par for railing." But t¾heir co-religionists persecuted them with relentless malice, \par even to the spoiling of their goods, imprisonment, and death. These things must \par not be concealed. We hold it to be the special duty of the historian to record \par with impartial and scrupulous accuracy the atrocities perpetrated by those who \par professed the principles of the Reformation. When a Papist persecutes, he acts \par in accordance with the well-known assumptions of the great apostasy; and, \par however we may deplore it, we do not wonder, for it is not in the nature of \par Popery to practice the charity of the Gospel. But Protestant persecution \par deserves to be branded with double infamy. It is an outrage on Protestant \par principles, and should be held up to universal reprobation. \par \par The fires of martyrdom were frequently lighted in Holland during the early part \par of this period. But the establishment of the Dutch Republic quenched them. The \par Prince of Orange understood the prin¿ciples of religious freedom, and availed \par himself of the opportunity which his position gave him to assert the natural \par rights of his countrymen and the claims of conscience. The Baptists had aided \par him in the struggle with Spanish tyranny. Their integrity and peaceableness \par could be trusted. He steadfastly and successfully resisted the endeavors of \par those who sought to exclude them from the general toleration. \par \par In 1572 a considerable sum of money had been carried to the Prince, who was then \par at Dillenberg, by J. Cortenbosch and Peter Bogaert, Baptists (the latter was a \par minister), as the offering of the brethren. They performed this service at the \par risk of their lives. When he asked them what he could do in return, they replied \par that all they wanted was a due share of his favour should he be established in \par the government. He assured them that all men should be regarded by him as \par equals, and that they had no cause for fear.1 À\par \par William, Prince of Orange; was a man of right noble spirit. "He resolutely stood \par out against all meddling with men's consciences, or inquiring into their \par thoughts. While smiting the Spanish Inquisition into the dust, he would have no \par Calvinist Inquisition set up in its place. Earnestly a convert to the reformed \par religion, but hating and denounc\-ing only what was corrupt in the ancient \par Church, he would not force men, with fire and sword, to travel to heaven upon \par his own road. Thought should be toll-free. Neither monk nor minister should \par burn, drown, or hang his fellow\--creatures, when argument or expostulation \par failed to redeem them from error. It was no small virtue in that age to rise to \par such a height. We know what Calvinists, Zwinglians, Lutherans, have done in the \par Netherlands, in Germany, in Switzerland, and, almost a century later, in New \par England. It is, therefore, with increased veneration that we regard this larÁge \par and truly Catholic mind." But it was 'impos\-sible for the Prince thoroughly to \par infuse his own ideas on the subject of toleration into the hearts of his nearest \par asso\-ciates. He could not hope to inspire his deadly enemies with a deeper \par sympathy. Was he not himself the mark of obloquy among the Reformers, because of \par his leniency to Catholics? Nay, more, was not his intimate counsellor, the \par accomplished Saint Aldegonde, in despair because the Prince refused to exclude \par the Anabaptists of Holland from the rights of citizenship? At the very moment \par when William was straining every nerve to unite warring sects, and to persuade \par men's hearts into a system by which their consciences were to be laid open to \par God alone-at the moment when it was most necessary for the very existence of the \par Fatherland that Catholic and Protestant should mingle their social and political \par relations, it was indeed a bitter disappointment for him to see Âwise statesmen \par of his own creed unable to rise to the idea of toleration. 'The affair of the \par Anabaptists,' wrote Saint Aldegonde, 'has been renewed. The Prince objects to \par exclude them from citizenship. He answered me sharply, that their yea was equal \par to our oath, and that we should not press this matter, unless we were willing to \par confess that it was just for the Baptists to compel us to a Divine service which \par was against our conscience.' It seems hardly credible that this sentence, \par containing so sublime a tribute to the character of the Prince, should have been \par indicted as a bitter censure, and that, too, by an enlightened and accomplished \par Protestant."2 \par \par Notwithstanding the ignorance and bigotry of those with whom he was associated, \par William held on his way. When the "Union of Utrecht," the foundation of the \par Dutch Commonwealth, was formed, it was expressly provided that "every individual \par should remain free in hiÃs religion, and that no man should be molested or \par questioned on the subject of Divine worship."3 \par \par This auspicious event took place in the year 1579. Then "the Churches had rest." \par From that time the Dutch Baptists, or Mennonites, as they have been commonly \par called, enjoyed a good measure of prosperity. Their numbers greatly increased. \par In those very cities where their predecessors were so cruelly butchered, they \par were held in high respect, and often discharged with credit the duties connected \par with the civic affairs to which they were appointed. Their scruples against \par oath-taking were met by substituting, in their case, a solemn affirmation, as is \par the practice now in England with regard to the Quakers and some other religious \par bodies. In lieu of personal service in the army they paid an annual tax. \par During their troubles it was impossible to carry into effect any educational \par plans. When peace was restored, the desirableness oÄf securing an educated \par ministry became a matter of earnest consideration. Sound views were entertained, \par and a college was established at Amsterdam, which has proved a great blessing to \par the denomination. \par \par Certain divergences of opinion among them occasioned bitterness of feeling, and \par estranged brethren from one another. These manifestations of human weakness are \par to be lamented. Their injurious effects were felt by all parties, and at length \par they agreed to bear with one another, and to cease to regard their differences \par as hindrances to mutual fellowship. Those differences related chiefly to the \par manner in which the human nature of the Saviour was produced, and to the effects \par of exclusion from the Church. As to the former, a resolution was passed at a \par Synod held in 1615, declaring that harmony on that subject was not essential. \par The harshness which characterized the discipline of the Churches in the early \par period of Åtheir history gradually gave way to a more Christian policy, and \par exclusion was not held, by the Mennonites in general, as involving the severance \par of domestic and social relations. There was another point on which they \par differed,-the washing of one another's feet,-which some of them regarded as an \par apostolical ordinance of perpetual obligation. This, too, was placed among \par things indifferent. But some of the Mennonites hold it to this day. \par \par The progress of the Baptists in the central countries of Europe is indicated by \par the number of publications on the baptismal controversy which issued from the \par press in the seventeenth century. There would have been no need of those works \par if P\'e6dobaptism had not been in danger. The concurrent testimony of the authors \par of that age proves that in the German States, in Prussia, and in Poland, Baptist \par principles were spreading among the people, in spite of continual efforts to \par suppress themÆ. \par \par In a former chapter we gave an account of the persecution of the Baptists in \par Moravia. They had re-entered that country, and lived without molestation for a \par number of years. Their industrious habits, combined with their honesty and \par integrity, commanded general respect. But the Jesuits, who had obtained complete \par control over the Emperor Ferdinand II., persuaded him that it would be for the \par glory of God and for his own welfare to expel them. They had done no wrong; they \par owed no arrears of taxes; they were loyal and peaceable; and the district in \par which they lived was improving fast under their good manage\-ment. But they were \par heretics. They would not wear the yoke of Rome, for they were the Lord's \par freemen. That was enough. The crime of thinking for one's self in matters of \par religion is unpardonable; it must be visited with the "great curse," and its \par perpetrators must be put out of the way. In this case extermination, whÇich would \par have been preferred, was impossible; it was not politic, and might not be safe, \par to attempt the destruction of from twenty to forty thousand of the best subjects \par of the kingdom. The milder measure of expulsion was resolved on, and the craft \par and cruelty of the Jesuits were strikingly displayed in carrying this into \par effect. It was summer, harvest time was near, and the vintage would follow \par shortly afterwards. Humanity would have dictated that if justice required the \par banishment of these men, they should have the opportunity of gathering in the \par produce of their labours, and so be provided with the means of sustenance for \par themselves and their families during the coming winter. But Jesuitism knows \par nothing of humanity. Goaded on by his spiritual advisers, Ferdinand issued an \par edict in the year 1621, declaring that his conscience would not permit him to \par allow the continuance of the heretics any longer in his dominions, andÈ ordering \par them all to depart, within three weeks and three days, on pain of death if they \par were found, even on the borders of the country, after the expiration of the \par allotted time. \par \par "Heaven had smiled on their harvest labours," says Robinson; "their fields stood \par thick with corn, and the sun and the dew were improving every moment to give \par them their last polish. The yellow ears waved a homage to their owners, and the \par wind whistled through the stems, and the russet herbage softly said, 'Put in the \par sickle, the harvest is come.' Their luxuriant vine-leaves, too, hung aloft by \par tendrils mantling over the clustering grapes like watchful parents over their \par tender offspring; but all were fenced by an imperial edict, and it was instant \par death to approach. Without leaving one murmur upon record, in solemn silent \par submission to the Power that governs the universe and causes 'all things to work \par together for good' to His creatÉures, they packed up and departed. In several \par hundred carriages they conveyed their sick, their innocent infants sucking at \par the breasts of their mothers who had newly lain in, and their decrepit parents \par whose work was done, and whose silvery locks told every beholder that they \par wanted only the favour of a grave. At the borders they filed off, some to \par Hungary, others to Transylvania, some to Wallachia, others to Poland; greater, \par far greater, for their virtue than Ferdinand for all his titles and for all his \par glory."4 \par \par Robinson adds, that "the Jesuit who executed this busi\-ness says ten thousand \par stayed in Moravia, and became Catholics." That may be set down as a glaring \par falsehood, for Baptists and the Church of Rome are the spiritual anti\-podes to \par each other. The truth is, that though the greater part obeyed the edict, some \par ventured to remain. They had to endure tremendous persecution for the first \par seven years, aÊfter which the activity of the bloodhounds slackened, and the \par Baptists were enabled to live in comparative peace. But freedom of worship was \par denied them. They met as they could, in small companies, in woods and caves and \par unfrequented places. God was with them. \par \par Protestant Switzerland was disgraced by unremitting opposition to the truth. The \par history of the Baptists in that country is a sad tale of woe. Swiss \par Presbyterians had won freedom for themselves, but they were determined not to \par grant it to others. It seemed as if the ghost of Zuingli haunted them, urging \par them on in their anti-Christian career. Notwithstanding all the efforts that had \par been made, the Baptists had multiplied among them, and it was impossible to \par drive them out. Many emigrated to Moravia, but the majority preferred to remain \par in their own homesteads; and they could not be silent and quiet. They felt that \par they had as much right as others to worship GodË according to their consciences, \par and they acted accordingly. When edicts were issued against them they said, "We \par ought to obey God rather than men," and refused to acknowledge the authority of \par the magistrate in things spiritual. If they were sent to prison, they broke out \par whenever they could get op\-portunity; if they were put in irons, in order to \par prevent escape, they made good use of the files with which their friends \par supplied them, and so extricated themselves, to the astonishment of their \par jailers; and on one occasion they contrived to throw a quantity of opium into \par their keepers' wine, and took leave of them while they slept. It was a most \par perplexing case. Both magistrates and clergy were at fault. The magistrates said \par to the clergy-"Answer these men's arguments-preach better-live better-make it \par im\-possible for our Swiss to become Baptists." The clergy re\-plied- "All we can \par do and say is in vain. Our people wilt listen to the heretics. You must inflict \par sharper punishments." \par \par They tried it. Some were sent to the galleys. John Landis, a Baptist minister, \par was put to death. All Baptists were required to leave the country. On their \par refusal their property was confiscated, and held by the Government for the \par benefit of such of their children or heirs as should con\-form to the established \par religion. All persons were forbidden to show them hospitality. The reader can \par easily imagine that such barbarous proceedings must have occasioned a vast \par amount of suffering. \par \par The preceding statements relate chiefly to Zurich. But the Baptists were \par similarly treated in Berne and in the other Cantons. "All men hated them."5 \par \par 1 Ottii Annales, ad. ann. 1572. \par 2 Motley's Rise of the Dutch Republic, ii. pp. 362, 206. \par 3 Ibid. p. 412. \par 4 Ecclesiastical Researches, p. 526. \par 5 Ottii Annales, passim. \par \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } ‚‚‚6c‚„0601-Baptists Persecuted by All Other Sects{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD \par \cf0\b0 \par \par CHAPTER I. \par Baptist Persecuted by all other S¼Î, a small congregation of Dutch Baptists \par convened in a private house, outside the City gates ("without Aldgate"), was \par interrupted by a constable while at worship, and twenty-five persons were taken \par before a magistrate, who committed them to prison, but released them after two \par days' confinement, on their giving bail for their appearance whenever summoned. \par Information being given to the Queen, a Royal Commission was issued to Sandys, \par Bishop of London, and some others, to examine the parties and proceed \par accordingly. They appeared before the Commissioners in pursuance of the summons. \par Their confession of faith was rejected, and they were required to subscribe to \par four articles, condemnatory of their own principles. \par \par "They proposed to us four questions," says one of the prisoners, "telling us to \par say yea or nay-" \par \par "1. Whether Christ had not taken His flesh and blood of the Virgin Mary? \par "We answered: 'He is the Son oÏf the living God.'" \par "2. Ought not little children to be baptized ? \par "We answered: 'Not so; we find it not written in Holy Scripture. \par "3. May a Christian serve the office of a magistrate? \par "We answered: 'That it did not oblige our consciences; but, as we read, we \par esteemed it an ordinance of God. \par "4. Whether a Christian, if needs be, may not swear? \par "We answered: That it also obliged not our consciences; for Christ has said, in \par Matthew, Let your words be yea, yea; nay, nay. Then we were silent. \par \par "But the Bishop said, that our misdeeds therein were so great that we could not \par enjoy the favour of God. O, Lord, avenge it not! He then said to us all, that we \par should be imprisoned in the Marshalsea." \par \par In the Marshalsea Prison (now called the "Queen's Bench"), to which they were \par then conveyed, many efforts were made, by the ministers of the Dutch Church and \par others, to persuade them to submit and recant. "Master Joris Ðcame to us and \par said, If we would join the Church, that is, the Dutch Church, our chains should \par be struck off and our bonds loosed. The Bishop, he said, had given him command \par so to do. But we remained steadfast to the truth of Jesus Christ. He is, indeed, \par our Captain, and no other; yea, in Him is all our trust. My dear brethren, and \par sweet sisters, let us persevere until we conquer. The Lord will then give us to \par drink of the new wine. O Lord, strengthen our faith. As we have received the \par Lord Jesus Christ, let us go forward courageously, trusting in Him." Five of \par them were overpowered, and consented to join the Dutch Church. They made a \par public recantation in St. Paul's churchyard, on the 25th of May, standing there \par before thousands of people, with faggots bound to, their shoulders, as in Popish \par times. A few days after the remainder appeared again before the Commissioners. \par "We remembered the Word of the Lord," says Gerrit vanÑ Byler, "'When they shall \par lead you before lords and princes, fear not what you shall say, for in that hour \par it shall be given you.' So we trusted in the Lord. The questions were again \par proposed, and subscription demanded; but we said, 'That we would cleave to the \par Word of the Lord."' Upon this they were declared to be incorrigible heretics, \par sentenced to death, and given over to the secular arm to be punished. \par \par Bishop Sandys was the spokesman on the occasion. The sentence accorded with his \par theology. In a sermon preached by him before the Parliament this passage occurs: \par "Such as teach, but teach not the good and right way; such as are open and \par public maintainers of errors and heresy; such, in the judgment of God, are \par thought unworthy to live. Let the false prophet die (Deut. xiii.5). Elias and \par Jehu did not think themselves imbrued, but rather sanctified, with such blood. I \par have no cruel heart; blood be far from me. I mind Ò[desire] nothing less. Yet \par needs must it be granted that the maintainers and teachers of errors and heresy \par are to be repressed in every Christian commonwealth."1 \par \par Fourteen women and a youth were put on board a vessel and sent out of the \par country. The youth was whipped from the prison to the wharf. The remaining five \par were consigned to Newgate, where they were put in heavy irons, thrust into a \par damp and filthy dungeon swarming with vermin, and not allowed to associate with \par other prisoners lest the thieves and murderers in the jail should be corrupted \par by Anabaptist contamination. One of their number, Christian Kernels, sank under \par the inhuman treatment. He died in the dungeon, after eight days' confinement. He \par was "released by death, trusting in God; his dying testimony filled us with \par joy." \par \par The Queen was entreated to spare them. But she resented such interference with \par her prerogative, and would only consent to Óa month's reprieve, and that in \par compliance with the intercession of John Fox, the Martyrologist, whose truly \par pathetic and eloquent letter to her Majesty on the subject has been often \par printed and generally admired. Admirable it was in some respects. It was a \par gushing forth of Christianized humanity, quite peculiar in that age of \par steel-clad religion. But good old John was still in the dark. He did not \par understand soul-freedom. According to him, Baptists had no right to hold and \par profess their opinions. They were ranked with those "fanatical sects" which "are \par by no means to be countenanced in a common\-wealth," but ought to be "suppressed \par by proper correction." He did not ask, therefore, for their release. All he \par complained of was "the sharpness of their punishment." He would have it changed. \par "There are excommunications, and close im\-prisonment; there are bonds; there is \par perpetual banish\-ment, burning of the hand, and whippingÔ, or even slavery \par itself." But "to roast alive the bodies of poor wretches, that offend rather \par through blindness of judgment than per\-verseness of will, in fire and flames, \par raging with pitch and brimstone," he denounced as "a hard-hearted thing, and \par more agreeable to the practice of the Romanists than the custom of the \par Gospellers." If, however, the Queen would not consent to recall the sentence, he \par implored her to grant "a month or two, in which we may try whether the Lord will \par give them grace to turn from their dangerous errors, lest, with the destruction \par of their bodies, their souls be in danger of eternal ruin."2 \par \par Fox wrote also to the prisoners, urging them to acknow\-ledge their errors, to \par give up their "frantic conceptions," and telling them that they had "disturbed \par the Church by their great scandal and offence." He sent them a copy of his \par letter to the Queen. In their reply to him, they say: "We are sorry, thaÕt you do \par not understand our matter, and that you have another opinion of us than we wish, \par since you think that by our curiosity and obstinacy we have not only given \par offence to the Church of God, but also provoked God himself, and frustrated our \par salvation. What reason you have thus to think of us we know not; nevertheless, \par we can assure you that we seek with our whole hearts to serve the one God and \par Christ in a good conscience, and to edify our neighbour, as far as in us lies. \par Therefore we gladly receive what the Holy Scripture testifies, and wish to be \par permitted to adhere to the plainness and simplicity of the Word of God, and not \par to be urged farther with subtle questions, which our feeble understandings are \par not able to comprehend, nor by Scripture to justify." \par \par The prisoners transmitted to the Queen a confession of their faith, accompanied \par by a " supplication," from which we take the following extract:- \par \par Ö"We testify before God and your Majesty, that were we in our consciences able by \par any means to think or understand the contrary, we would with all our hearts \par receive and confess it; since it were a great folly in us, not to live rather in \par the exercise of a right faith than to die, perhaps, in a false one. May it also \par please your Majesty in your wisdom and innate goodness to consider that it were \par not right, but hypocrisy in us to speak otherwise than with our hearts we \par believe, in order to escape the peril of temporal death; that it is impossible \par to believe otherwise than we in our consciences think; and also that it is not \par in our power to believe this or that, as evil-doers who do right or wrong as \par they please. But the true faith must be implanted in the heart of man by God; \par and to Him we daily pray that He would give us His Spirit, to understand His \par Word and Gospel." \par \par "Above all, it is evident to your Majesty that we ×have not sought to stir up any \par rebellions or seditions against your Majesty; but, much more, have daily \par besought the Lord for your happy reign, and the welfare both of your soul and \par body. Lastly, we have not endeavoured to spread our faith in the land. This we \par could not do, for we are only unlearned trades-people, unskilled in divinity." \par All was in vain. The Baptists remained firm. The Queen would not relent. On the \par 15th of July she signed the warrant for the execution of two of them, commanding \par the Sheriffs of London to burn them alive in Smithfield. \par \par A copy of the warrant is now before us. There is also before us a copy of the \par warrant for the burning of Arch\-bishop Cranmer, in Queen Mary's days. These \par warrants are substantially alike. In fact, they are almost couched in the same \par language, word for word. Mary, the Papist, dooming to death the Protestant, and \par Elizabeth, the Pro\-testant, ordering the execution of the ØBaptist, advance the \par same pretensions and adopt the same forms of speech. Both of them call their \par victims "heretics." Both assume to be "zealous for justice." Both are "defenders \par of the Catholic faith." Both declare their determination to "main\-tain and \par defend the Holy Church, her rights and liberties." Both avow their resolve to \par "root out and extirpate heresies and errors." Both assert that the heretics \par named in the warrants had been convicted and condemned "according to the laws \par and customs of the realm." Both charge the Sheriffs to take their prisoners to a \par "public and open place," and there to "commit them to the fire," in the presence \par of the people, and to cause them to be "really consumed" in the said fire. Both \par warn the Sheriffs that they fail therein at their peril. Herod and Pontius \par Pilate forgot their differ\-ences when they united in crucifying the Saviour. \par Papists and Protestants agree in murdering His followeÙrs.3 \par \par Hendrick Terwoort and Jan Pieters were the two whom the Queen appointed to \par death. Terwoort was a young man, about twenty-five years of age. He was a \par goldsmith, and in good circumstances. He was married some eight or ten weeks \par before his imprisonment. Pieters was aged, poor, and had nine children dependent \par on his daily toil. His first wife had been martyred at Ghent, in Flanders: his \par second wife was the widow of a martyr. A statement of his circumstances was laid \par before Sandys, in order to induce him to get permission for Pieters to leave the \par country, with his wife and children. But the Bishop was inaccessible to pity. \par On Lord's Day, the 17th of July, they were informed that the warrant for their \par execution had arrived. "Upon Tues\-day," says Gerrit Van Byler, "a stake was set \par up in Smith\-field, but the execution was not that day. On Wednesday, many people \par were gathered together to witness the death of our two friÚends, but it was again \par deferred. This was done to terrify, and draw our friends and us from the faith. \par But on Friday our two friends, Hendrick Terwoort and Jan Pieters, being brought \par out from their prison, were led to the sacrifice. As they went forth, Jan \par Pieters said, 'The holy prophets, and also Christ, our Saviour, have gone this \par way before us, even from the beginning, from Abel until now.'" A vast multitude \par had collected together on the occasion, but few of whom, probably, sympathized \par with the sufferers. Some preachers were sent to the place of execu\-tion to \par prevent the expression of sympathy by maligning them. One of them exclaimed, \par "These men believe not on God." "We believe," replied Pieters, "in one God, our \par Heavenly Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ His Son." When they were bound to \par the stake, the articles were again offered to them, and life and pardon promised \par if they would subscribe. Pieters answered for tÛhem both, "You have laboured hard \par to drive us to you, but now, when placed at the stake, it is labor in vain." One \par of the preachers said in excuse, "That all such matters were determined by the \par Council, and that it was the Queen's intention they should die." "But," rejoined \par Pieters, "you are the teachers of the Queen, whom it behooves you to instruct \par better; therefore shall our blood be required at your hands." No answer could be \par given to this. Fire was applied, and the souls of the martyrs ascended to God. \par \par "How utterly absurd," says the Dutch Martyrologist, "do all such cruel \par proceedings and sentences as are here seen appear, when contrasted with the \par Christian faith! The Christian host is described as sheep and lambs, sent forth \par among cruel and devouring wolves. Who will be able, with a good conscience, to \par believe that these English preachers were the true sheep of Christ, since in \par this matter they brought forth soÜ notably the fruit of wolves ?"4 \par \par This was a black affair. It was essentially unjust and cruel, and admitted of no \par palliation. These Baptists owed no allegiance to Elizabeth. They were not her \par subjects. They were refugees, and claimed her protection as exiles for \par religion's sake from their native land. They were living peaceably, doing harm \par to none. No rioting or disturbance was laid to their charge. All that could be \par alleged against them was that they did not go to the parish churches, but \par exercised Christian freedom, and worshipped God as they understood the \par Scriptures to teach them. For this they were burnt to death by a Protestant \par Queen. \par \par We are willing to believe that Elizabeth was influenced by her bishops. Sandys \par and Whitgift were furious against the Baptists. They misrepresented and \par calumniated them continually. They held them up to public scorn and indignation, \par as professing sentiments incompatiblÝe with the well-being of society. The Queen \par was instructed by these men to regard the Baptists as hostile to her royal \par authority. That was touching her in a tender part. The womanly heart was \par strangely hardened, and she refused to show mercy. \par \par Elizabeth could not plead ignorance respecting the sentiments of the Baptists. \par In the confession of faith which Terwoort and Pieters sent to her, a revised \par copy of which was signed by them the day before their martyrdom, they thus \par plainly stated their views:- \par \par "We believe and confess that magistrates are set and ordained of God, to punish \par the evil and protect the good; which magistracy we desire from our hearts to \par obey, as it is written in 1 Peter 2:13, 'Submit yourselves to every ordinance of \par man for the Lord's sake.' 'For he beareth not the sword in vain' (Romans 8:4). \par And Paul teaches us that we should offer up for all 'prayers, and intercessions, \par and giving of thÞanks; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all \par godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our \par Saviour, who desires that all men should be saved' (1 Tim. 2:1-4)He further \par teaches us 'to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, and \par to be ready to every good work' (Titus 3:1). Therefore we pray your Majesty \par kindly to understand aright our meaning; which is, that we do not despise the \par eminent, noble, and gracious Queen, and her wise councils, but esteem them as \par worthy of all honour, to whom we desire to be obedient in all things that we \par may. For we confess with Paul, as above, that she is God's servant, and that if \par we resist this power we resist the ordinance of God; for 'rulers are not a \par terror to good works, but to the evil.' Therefore we confess to be due unto her, \par and are ready to give, tribute, custom, honour, and fear, as Christ Himself has \par taught us, saying,ß I Render unto C\'e6sar the things that are C\'e6sars, and unto God \par the things that are God's' (Matthew 22:21). Since, therefore, she is a servant \par of God, we will kindly pray her Majesty that it would please her to show pity to \par us poor prisoners, even as our Father in heaven is pitiful (Luke 6:36). We \par likewise do not approve of those who resist the magistrates; but confess and \par declare, with our whole heart, that we must be obedient and subject unto them, \par as we have here set down."5 \par \par But it availed them nothing. They were Baptists. The Queen was told that the \par Baptists were incorrigible heretics, and that she would be doing God service if \par she put them to death. So she lighted again the flames of Smithfield. \par \par We have referred to Sandys and Whitgift. Their writings teem with invectives \par against the Baptists. In his controversy with Thomas Cartwright, the Puritan, \par Whitgift endeavoured to show that the arguments employeàd by Cartwright in \par defense of separation from the Church of England were similar to those used by \par the "Anabaptists," a sect which was "hated" by "all estates and orders of the \par realm." He collected a number of extracts from the writings of Zuingli, Calvin, \par Bullinger, and others, and adopted them as containing true descriptions of the \par opinions and practices of the "hated" party, adding observations of his own to \par the same effect. He says that they make contentions wheresoever they come; that \par the churches are disquieted by them, and magistrates contemned and despised; \par that "they do with as spiteful words and bitter speeches condemn the Church of \par England as they do the Papistical Church;" that they count all them as wicked \par and reprobate which are not of their sect; that they are "great hypocrites;" \par that they constantly "invent new opinions, and run from error to error;" that \par they are "stubborn and willful, wayward and froward, áwithout all humanity;" that \par they seek to "overthrow commonweals, and states of government;" that they \par "reject all authority of superiors;" that they seek "to be free from all laws, \par and to do what they list;" and, finally, that all this is "most true, and \par therefore no slander."6No comment on these monstrosities is required. They are \par fair specimens of the controversial style of the age. \par \par Doubtless, it was an unpardonable sin in the Baptists that they condemned the \par interference of the civil power with religion. They were remarkably clear on \par that subject. Whitgift unwittingly does them justice. He observes that they \par taught that "the civil magistrate hath no authority in ecclesiastical matters, \par and that he ought not to meddle in causes of religion and faith"-that "no man \par ought to be compelled to faith and religion" -and that "Christians ought to \par punish faults, not with imprisonment, not with the sword, or corporal \par punishment, but only with excommunication." These are scriptural truths, which \par the bishops aforesaid laboured to suppress, because their own nefarious \par proceedings were inconsistent with them. \par \par When Terwoort and Pieters were led out to die, Gerrit van Byler and Hans van \par Straten were left in Newgate, uncertain as to their fate. How long they remained \par there is not known. It is said that they were heavily ironed because they had \par endeavoured to escape by filing asunder the bars of their dungeon. At length \par they were discharged, probably because the Government were unwilling to incur \par the odium of another burning. \par \par 1 Sermons, p. 40. Parker Society. \par 1 Crosby's History of the Baptists, i. pp. 70-73. \par 1 Documentary Annals, i. pp. 201, 394. \par 1 Von Braght's Bloody Theatre, or Martyr's Mirror, translated by J. Rupp, pp. \par 915-929. \par 1 Bloody Theatre, as above. \par 1 Works, i. pp. 78-110. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } oo®5_‚Ü0602-Dutch Baptists Persecuted in England{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER II. \par Dutch Baptists Persecuted in England-Account of Hendrick Terwoort and Jan \par Pieters-Their Martyrdom-Their Religious Sentiments-Whitgift's Invectives against the Baptists \par \par During the persecution which raged in the Netherlands under the Duke of Alva, \par butcher-general of the Inquisition in that country, numbers fled to other parts \par of the Continent, or to England, for refuge and safety. In England, at any rate, \par they ought to have been safe. But the demon of persecution ruled here. In \par London, on the 3rd of April, 1575ÍäGovernment, that the Separatists of all \par classes were scattered about, and forced to hold their meetings in the utmost \par privacy. The Baptists, having been especially marked out for expulsion, could \par scarcely meet at all. Consequently, but little is known of them during the \par remainder of this reign. There is no doubt, however, of their continued \par existence. One writer refers to "Anabaptist Conventicles" in London and other \par places. Another intimates his suspicion that there were some, even in the Church \par of England, who held their sentiments. A congregation was discovered in London \par in 1588, whose views and practices point them out as "Anabaptistical." Strype \par says, that they were accustomed to meet together on Lord's Days, and listen to \par exhortations from the Word of God; that they dined together, collected money to \par pay for the food, and sent the surplus to such of their brethren as were in \par prison; that they used no form of prayer; åthat they refused to regard the Church \par of England as a true Church: that they denied the authority of the Queen, and of \par all magistrates, in religious affairs; and that they held it unlawful to baptize \par children. At a still later period a Baptist is mentioned as being in prison at \par Norwich, and in peril of death, solely on account of his religious opinions.1 \par \par James I. was as bigoted and despotic as Elizabeth. While in Scotland he had \par affected great zeal for Presbyterianism. When he subscribed the Solemn League \par and Covenant, in 1590, "he praised God that he was born in the time of the light \par of the Gospel, and in such a place, as to be king of such a Church, the \par sincerest [purest] kirk in the world. 'The Church of Geneva,' said he, 'keep \par Pasch and Yule [Easter and Christmas; what have they for them? They have no \par institution. As for our neighbour Kirk of England, their service is an evil-said \par mass in English; they want nothæing of the mass but the liftings. I charge you, \par my good ministers, doctors, elders, nobles, gentlemen, and barons, to stand to \par your purity, and to exhort the people to do the same; and I, forsooth, as long \par as I brook my life, shall maintain the same.'"2 But on his rising to the higher \par dignity of King of Great Britain he suddenly became enamored of Episcopacy. \par Kingcraft, in which he thought himself an adept, harmonized better with bishops \par than with presbyters. Bishops seemed to be the natural allies of sovereigns. "No \par bishop, no king," was James's motto. Like all new converts, he evinced \par remarkable fervor of attachment, and was ready to do anything on behalf of the \par cause. The Puritan clergy, that is those who wished for more liberty, and \par desired to assimilate the government of the Church to the Genevan model, asked \par for a hearing. The result was, the event known in history as the Hampton Court \par Conference. It was no conferencçe, however, for the King had made up his mind \par beforehand. His behavior was rude and overbearing. Nine bishops, with other \par dignitaries, appeared in support of the Church of England and of things as they \par were; Dr. Raynolds, with three other ministers, represented the Puritans. Their \par demands were comprised in four particulars : "1. That the doctrines of the \par Church might be preserved pure, according to God's Word. 2. That good pastors \par might be planted in all churches, to preach in the same. 3. That the Book of \par Common Prayer might be fitted to more increase of piety. 4. That Church \par government might be sincerely ministered, according to God's Word." In support \par of these requests, Dr. Raynolds adduced many weighty considerations, and argued \par with great modesty and forbearance, though often interrupted and insulted by the \par King. "Well, Doctor," said James, "have you anything else to offer?" "No more," \par Dr. Raynolds replied. "If this,"è rejoined the King, "be all your party have to \par say, I will make them conform, or I will harry them out of the land, or else \par worse."3 \par \par The Puritans saw that there was nothing to hope for from the Government, and \par took measures accordingly. Many crossed over to Holland. Among them were some of the Brownist persuasion, afterwards called Independents, and now \par Congregationalists. Churches of that order were established at Leyden, \par Amsterdam, and other places. Such as could not leave their own country \par worshipped God in private, and kept themselves quiet, hoping, though as it were \par against hope, for better times. Of that class were many Baptists. Enoch Clapham, \par a writer of that age, speaks of them as "leaving the public assemblies, and \par running into woods and meadows, and meeting in bye stables, barns, and haylofts \par for service."4 \par \par John Smyth had been a clergyman of the Church of England, and held the living of \par Gainséborough, Lincolnshire. On leaving that Church he became a minister among \par the Brownists, who esteemed him so highly that Bishop Hall calls him their \par "oracle in general." After a toilsome and perilous service of about fifteen \par years, during which he and his friends had suffered much from Elizabethan \par tyranny, it was deemed necessary to abandon the field, in order to preserve life \par and liberty. In the year 1606 he joined a party of emigrants who settled in \par Amsterdam. There they united with an English Church which had been formed some \par time before. But Mr. Smyth's connection with that Church was not of long \par duration. He had left "the Church of England for the Brownists, and now more \par mature reflection led him to take another step. The Brownists denied that the \par Church of England was a true Church, and therefore they re-ordained all \par ministers who went over to them from that Church, accounting its ordinances null \par and void. But they diêd not re-baptize. This appeared to Mr. Smyth an \par inconsistency. He thought that if the ordination was invalid, the baptism was no \par less so. Investigation followed, which was extended to the whole question of \par baptism, and issued in the conviction that believers are the only subjects of \par the ordinance, and that immersion is essential to it. Some of Mr. Smyth's \par friends shared in the conviction. There has been much dispute respecting the \par manner in which they proceeded, some maintaining that Smyth baptized himself and \par then baptized the others. It is a thing of small consequence. Baptists do not \par believe in Apostolic succession, as it is commonly held. But the probability is, \par that one of the brethren baptized Mr. Smyth, and that he then baptized the \par others. The number of these brethren soon increased greatly. A Church was \par formed, of which Mr. Smyth was chosen pastor. At his death, which took place in \par 1611, Mr. Thomas Helwys was appoëinted in his place. In the above-mentioned year, \par before Mr. Smyth's death, the Church published a Confession of Faith, in \par twenty-six articles. We will transcribe those which relate to the constitution \par of a Church, and to the ordinances. \par \par "10. That the Church of Christ is a company of faithful people, separated from \par the world by the Word and Spirit of God, being knit unto the Lord, and one unto \par another, by baptism, upon their own confession of the faith and sins" (1 Cor. \par 1:2; Eph. 1:1; 2 Cor. 6:17; 1 Cor. 12:13; Acts 8:37; Matthew 3:6). \par "11. That though in respect of Christ the Church be one, yet it consisteth of \par divers particular congregations, even so many as there shall be in the world; \par every of which congregation, though they be but two or three, have Christ given \par them, with all the means of their salvation, are the body of Christ, and a whole \par Church, and therefore may, and ought, when they are come together, to praìy, \par prophesy, break bread, and administer in all the holy ordinances, although as \par yet they have no officers, or that their officers should be in prison, or sick, \par or by any other means hindered from the Church" (Eph. 4:4; Matthew 18:20; Rom. \par 8:32; 1 Cor. 3:22, 12:27, 14:23; 1 Peter 4:10, 2:5). \par "12. That as one congregation hath Christ, so have all. And that the Word of God \par cometh not out from any one, neither to any one congregation in particular, but \par unto every particular Church, as it doth unto all the world. And therefore no \par Church ought to challenge any prerogative over any other" (2 Cor. 10:7; 1 Cor. \par 14:36; Col. 1:5, 6). \par "13. That every Church is to receive in all their members by baptism, upon the \par confession of their faith and sins wrought by the preaching of the Gospel, \par according to the primitive institution and practice. And, therefore, Churches \par constituted after any other manner, or of any persons, are not accoírding to \par Christ's testament" (Matthew 28:19; Acts 2:41). \par "14. That baptism, or washing with water, is the outward manifestation of dying \par unto sin, and walking in newness of life; and therefore in nowise appertaineth \par to infants" (Rom. 6:2, 3, 4). \par "15. That the Lord's Supper is the outward manifestation of the spiritual \par communion between Christ and the faithful, mutually to declare His death until \par He come" (1 Cor. 10:16, 17, 11:26). \par "19. That every Church ought, according to the example of Christ's disciples and \par primitive Churches, upon every first day of the week, being Lord's Day, to \par assemble together, to pray, prophesy, praise God, and break bread, and perform \par all other parts of spiritual communion, for the worship of God, their own mutual \par edification, and the preservation of true religion and piety in the Church (John \par 20:19; Acts 2:42, 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2). And they ought not to labor in their \par callings, accordinîg to the equity of the moral law, which Christ came not to \par abolish, but to fulfill" (Ex. 20:8, &c.). \par "20. That the officers of every Church or congregation are either elders, who by \par their office do especially feed the flock concerning their souls; or deacons, \par men and women, who by their office relieve the necessities of the poor and \par impotent brethren, concerning their bodies" (Acts 20:28; 2 Peter 5:2, 3; Acts \par 6:1, 4). \par "21. That these officers are to be chosen when there are persons qualified \par according to the rules in Christ's Testament, by election and approbation of \par that Church or congregation whereof they are members, with fasting, prayer, and \par laying on of hands; and there being but one rule for elders, therefore but one \par sort of elders" (2 Tim. 3:2, 7; Titus 1:6, 9; Acts 6:3, 4, 13:3, 14:23).5 \par \par Shortly after the publication of the Confession, Mr. Helwys, accompanied by most \par of the members of the Church, returneïd to England. They feared that if they \par remained longer abroad in a foreign country their conduct would be regarded as \par cowardice. They considered, too, the circumstances of the brethren who had \par continued in their own land, and who were "as sheep without a shepherd." So they \par went back to their native shores, and established themselves in London, meeting \par for worship in strict privacy. They had encountered a great risk in returning at \par such a time. The fires of persecution had been lighted again, and men burnt to \par ashes for heresy. On the 18th of March, 1612, Bartholomew Legate, an Arian, \par suffered at the stake in Smithfield; on the 11th of April, in the same year, \par Edward Wightman was put to death at Lichfield, in the same manner. This man, if \par the warrant for his execution may be believed, was a wholesale heretic, for he \par was charged with "the wicked heresies of Ebion, Cerinthus, Valentinus, Arius, \par Macedonius, Simon Magus, of Maneðs, Photinus, and of the Anabaptists, and other \par arch-heretics; and, moreover, of other cursed opinions, by the instinct of Satan \par excogitated, and heretofore unheard of." He maintained "that the baptism of \par infants is an abominable custom," and "that Christianity is not wholly professed \par and preached in the Church of England, but in part." There was his real \par delinquency. But the public, even in those days, would have protested against \par burning a man merely for his Baptist and anti-Church of England principles. It \par was found necessary, therefore, to blacken the victim to such an extent that he \par might appear perfectly hideous and fit only for the fire. But Bishop Neile, of \par Lichfield, and his coadjutors, who acted as Royal Commissioners on the occasion, \par were manifestly "forgers of lies." No sane man could possibly hold the \par multifarious opinions imputed to Wightman. Crosby appropriately remarks that \par "many of the heresies they charge ñupon him are so foolish and inconsistent, that \par it very much discredits what they say;" and that "if he really held such \par opinions he must either be an idiot or a madman, and ought rather to have had \par their prayers and assistance than be put to such a cruel death."6 \par \par Another person, said to be a "Spanish Arian," was also condemned to die; but so \par much sympathy had been expressed by the people at the other executions, that "he \par was suffered to linger out his life in Newgate, where he ended the same;" for \par "King James politically preferred," says Thomas Fuller, "that heretics \par hereafter, though condemned, should silently and privately waste themselves away \par in the prison, rather than to grace them, and amuse others, with the solemnity \par of a public execution, which in popular judgment usurped the honor of a \par persecution." Fuller had before observed that "such burning of heretics much \par startled common people," and that "the purblindò eyes of common judgments looked \par only on what was next to them (the suffering itself), which they beheld with \par compassion, not minding the demerits of the guilt, which deserved the same."7 \par \par Thus wrote a Protestant clergyman of the seventeenth century; but murder is \par murder, however perpetrated, whether by the sword, the fire, or the slower \par process of the dungeon. \par \par Though the Baptists were debarred the use of the pulpit, the press did them good \par service. Two tracts, published by them soon after the events just recorded, were \par honorable alike to their good sense and pious feeling. The first appeared in \par 1614. It was entitled, "Religion's Peace; or, a Plea for Liberty of Conscience," \par and is the earliest published work on the subject in the English language. Of \par the author, Leonard Busher, no account has been preserved. It may be gathered \par from the tract itself, that he had formerly belonged to the Brownists. He was \paró acquainted with the Greek original of the New Testament, and was a diligent \par student of the sacred volume. Two other tracts were written by him, which \par poverty prevented him from printing. One of these was entitled, "A Scourge of \par Small Cords, wherewith Antichrist and his Ministers might be driven out of the \par Temple of God!" the other, "A Declaration of certain False Translations in the \par New Testament." Our Authorized Version had been published but three years, and \par here was revision already threatened! Many of these works were very ably \par written, and if we had room for extracts from them, they would serve to show \par that our Baptist forefathers were distinguished for mental vigor and \par independence. They had shot ahead of their religious contemporaries, too many of \par whom, instead of sympathizing with them, caricatured their principles and \par excited popular fury against their persons. \par \par How severely the Baptists suffered in the reigôn of James I., may be gathered \par from a statement made by one of them in 1620. "Our miseries are long and \par lingering imprisonments for many years in divers counties of England, in which \par many have died and left behind them widows, and many small children; taking away \par our goods, and others the like, of which we can make good probation; not for any \par disloyalty to your Majesty, nor hurt to any mortal man, our adversaries \par themselves being judges; but only because we dare not assent unto, and practice \par in the worship of God, such things as we have not faith in, because it is sin \par against the Most High." This passage is taken from a tract entitled, "A most \par Humble Supplication of many of the King's Majesty's loyal subjects, ready to \par testify all civil obedience, by the oath of allegiance, or otherwise, and that \par of conscience; who are persecuted (only for differing in religion), contrary to \par Divine and human testimonies."8 After an intervaõl of several years, a parliament \par was about to assemble. The "Humble Supplication" was written on that occasion, \par and it was hoped that the patriotic men, who had signified their intention to \par seek redress of all grievances and the restoration of freedom, would hear the \par complaints of persecuted Christians. The treatise was probably written by the \par author of "Persecution Judged and Condemned;" but the arguments are more \par systematically arranged than in that work. \par \par "The author of these arguments against persecutions," says Roger Williams, "as I \par have been informed, being committed by some then in power close prisoner to \par Newgate, for the witness of some truths of Jesus, and having not the use of pen \par and ink, wrote these arguments in milk, on sheets of paper brought him by the \par woman, his keeper, from a friend in London, as the stopples of his milk bottle." \par "In such paper, written with milk, nothing will appear; but the way of reöading \par it by fire being known to this friend who received the papers, he transcribed \par and kept together the papers, although the author himself could not correct nor \par view what himself had written."9 \par \par This appeal was presented in vain. The persecution continued. Messrs. Dodd and \par Cleaver, two authors of the time, who published in partnership a pamphlet, in \par 1621, entitled, "The Patrimony of Christian Children," assign as reasons for \par engaging in this controversy, "that those of the contrary opinion were very \par industrious, and took great pains to propagate their doctrine; that divers \par persons of good note for piety had been prevailed upon by them; that several had \par entreated their help and assistance; and that they had been engaged already in \par private debates about this matter."10 Another person, writing in 1662, states, \par "that they [the Baptists] separated from the Church, and writ many books in \par defense of their principle÷s, and had multitudes of disciples; that it was their \par custom to produce a great number of Scriptures to prove their doctrines; that \par they were in appearance more holy than those of the Established Church."11 \par \par It would appear, therefore, that the Baptists were an active and growing body. \par This is further evident from a letter addressed to the clergy by Archbishop \par Abbot in 1622, in which he tells them that his Majesty was "much troubled and \par grieved at the heart, to hear every day of so much defection from our religion, \par both to Popery and Anabaptism, or other points of separation, in some parts of \par this kingdom;" and that he attributed these defections, in great measure, to the \par lightness, affectedness, and unprofitableness of that kind of preaching which \par bath been of late years too much taken up in court, university, city, and \par country. "The usual scope of very many preachers," it is added, "is noted to be \par a soaring up in poøints of divinity, too deep for the capacity of the people, or \par a mustering up of much reading, or the displaying of their own wit, or an \par ignorant meddling with civil matters, as well in the private of several parishes \par and corporations, as in the public of the kingdom, or a venting of their own \par distastes, or a smoothing up of those idle fancies, which in this blessed time \par of a long peace do boil in the brains of unadvised people; or lastly, a rude or \par indecent railing, not against the doctrines (which when the text shall occasion \par the same is not only approved, but much commended by his royal Majesty), but \par against the persons of Papists and Puritans. Now the people bred up with this \par kind of teaching, and never instructed in the catechism, and fundamental grounds \par of religion, are for all this airy nourishment no better than 'abras\'e6 tabul\'e6,' \par new table books, ready to be filled up with the manuals and catechisms of the \par Popish priests, or the papers and pamphlets of Anabaptists, Brownists, and \par Puritans."12 \par \par We think the King was right. The preachers of the day had not been educated, for \par the most part, in the best school, and knew not how to engage the sympathies of \par the people. Puritans and Baptists were much more likely to gain the popular ear. \par It was said of our Lord, that "the common people heard Him gladly." \par \par 1 Broadmead Records, Introduction, pp. lxxii. Ixxiii. \par 2 Neal's History of the Puritans, ii. p. 2. \par 3 Neal, ut sup. p. 10. \par 4 Crosby, i. p. 88. \par 5 Confessions of Faith (Hanserd Knollys Society), pp, 1-10. \par 6 History, i. p. 108, Appendix; pp. 1-7. \par 7 Church History, book x. cent. 17, sect. 14. \par 8 Tracts, p. 190. \par 9 Bloody Tenant of Persecution, p. 36. Hanserd Knollys Society. \par 10 Crosby, i. p. 141 \par 11 Ibid. p. 139. \par 12 Documentary Annals, ii. p. 204. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } ükü‚Ÿ C„½e0604-Character of Charles I{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\frú´5[‚è0603-Severity of Elizabeth's Government{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER III. \par Severity of Elizabeth's Government-Bigotry of James I.-The Hampton Court \par Conference-Emigration-John Smyth's Church-Their Confessions-Bartholomew Legate-Extracts from Baptist Publications on Liberty of Conscience-The King's Distress at their Increase \par \par So great was the severity of Elizabeth's ãûoman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER IV. \par Character of Charles I.-Sufferings during his Reign-First Particular Baptist \par Church-Samuel Howe-Dr. Featley's Book-Baptist Confessions of Faith-Toleration hated by the Presbyterians-Their Attempts to put down the Baptists-Milton's Lines-The Assembly of Divines-Outcry against Immersion-Parliamentary Declaration in favor of the Baptists-Fearful "Ordinance" against them-Their Activity during the Commonwealth and the Protectorate-Cromwell's Baptist Officers-The "Triers"-Baptists in Ireland \par \par Charles I. succeeded his father, James I., in 1625. In religion, he was a \par Romish Protestant. Politically, he believed in the one-man system of government, \par regarding the people as ciphers, and lost his life by pertinaciously laboring to \par put his belief in practicüe. Morally, he was made up of negations: he wanted \par principle, sincerity, and steadfastness. The Church of England used to call him \par a "martyr," but the annual service in commemoration of his death is now \par discontinued. We may call him a "martyr-maker." His reign, up to the time of the \par assembling of the Long Parliament, was distinguished by unremitting persecution \par of all dissenters from the Established Church, and of all who still remained in \par the Church, but scrupled conformity to some of its ceremonies and laws. The High \par Commission Court, first established by Queen Elizabeth, to which Court was \par entrustercise of the royal authority in things ecclesiastical, was in reality a \par Protestant Inquisition. It possessed absolute power to fine, impried the exson, \par and otherwise punish all alleged delinquents, and from its decisions there was \par no appeal. So severe were the proceedings of this tribunal, that great numbers \par fled the country týo avoid them; some to Holland, some to New England. \par The Baptists had their share in those sufferings, but the particulars have been \par imperfectly recorded. One case, casually mentioned in Neal's "History of the \par Puritans," may be regarded as an index of their condition. Among the ministers \par whose imprisonment for religion is noticed, the name of Mr. Thomas Brewer \par occurs,-"a Baptist preacher," whose confinement extended to fourteen years. What \par times were those, when a man was suffered to lie in jail fourteen years for \par being a "Baptist preacher!"1 \par \par In the year 1633, an event occurred which requires specific notice. This was the \par formation of the first Particular or Calvinistic Baptist Church in England. \par Hitherto the Baptists had favoured Arminian views. William Kiffin gives the \par following account: "There was a congregation of Protestant Dissenters of the \par Independent persuasion in London, gathered in the year 1616, whereof Mr. þHenry \par Jacob was the first pastor, and after him succeeded Mr. John Lathorp, who was \par their minister at this time. In this society several persons, finding that the \par congregation kept not to their first principles of separation, and being also \par convinced that baptism was not to be administered to infants, but to such only \par as professed faith in Christ, desired that they might be dismissed from that \par communion, and allowed to form a distinct congregation, in such order as was \par most agreeable to their own sentiments. The Church, considering that they were \par now grown very numerous, and so more than could in these times of persecution \par conveniently meet together, and believing also that those persons acted from a \par principle of conscience, and not obstinacy, agreed to allow them the liberty \par they desired, and that they should be constituted a distinct church; which was \par performed the 12th of September, 1633. And as they believed that baptiÿsm was not \par rightly administered to infants, so they looked upon the baptism they had \par received in that age as invalid; whereupon most or all of them received a new \par baptism. Their minister was Mr. John Spilsbury. What number they were is \par uncertain, because in the mentioning of the names of about twenty men and women, \par it is added, 'with divers others.'"2 \par \par As the time of enlarged freedom drew near, the tyrants increased in rage. \par Seventeen canons were passed by the Convocation of the clergy in the early part \par of 1640, the fifth of which was directed "against sectaries." Having ordered \par that Popish recusants who refused to conform should be ex\-communicated, and that \par the civil power should be requested to aid in carrying the sentence into effect, \par these words were added: "The synod decrees, that the canon above men\-tioned \par against Papists shall be in full force against all Ana\-baptists, Brownists, \par Separatists, and other sectaries, as far as they are applicable."3 \par \par An excommunicated person is forbidden what is called Christian burial. Samuel \par Howe, a Baptist minister, who died in prison about this time while under \par excommunica\-tion, was buried in the highway; interment in consecrated ground, so \par called, being refused. Mr. Howe was a popular preacher, but uneducated, and on \par that account, it seems, vilified by some, who were unable to distinguish between \par university learning and absolute ignorance; and who chose to regard those who \par had not received a college education as disqualified for the ministerial office, \par notwithstanding their religious attainments, or even their profound acquaintance \par with Scripture. In this latter respect Mr. Howe excelled most men. But in \par defending himself from their attacks, he certainly exceeded the bounds of \par moderation. In a Trea\-tise which he published, entitled, "The Sufficiency of the \par Spirit's Teaching, without Human Learning," he at\-tempted to show, not only that \par human learning is an insufficient guide in matters of religion, but that it is \par "dangerous and hurtful." The following lines appear on the title page:- \par \par "What How? how now? Hath How such learning found, \par To throw Art's curious image to the ground? \par Cambridge and Oxford may their glory now \par Veil to a Cobbler if they know but How." \par \par Nevertheless, Mr. Howe was a good and useful man. Roger Williams has this \par reference to him:-"Amongst so many instances, dead and living, to the \par everlasting praise of Christ Jesus, and of His Holy Spirit, breathing and \par blessing where He listeth, I cannot but with honorable testimony remember that \par eminent Christian witness and prophet of Christ, even that despised and yet \par beloved Samuel Howe, who being by calling a cobbler, and without learning (which \par yet in its sphere and place he honored), who yet, I say, by searching the Holy \par Scriptures, grew so excellent a textuary, or Scripture-learned man, that few of \par those high Rabbies that scorn to mend or make a shoe, could aptly or readily, \par from the Holy Scriptures, out-go him. And however (through the oppressions upon \par some men's consciences even in life and death, and after death, in respect of \par burying, as yet unthought of and unremedied), I say, however he was forced to \par seek a grave or bed in the highway, yet was his life, and death, and burial \par (being attended with many hundreds of God's people), honorable and (how much \par more on his rising again) glorious."4 The barbarity attending his burial was \par characteristic of the age. \par \par Immediately after the commencement of the contest between Charles I. and the \par Long Parliament, freedom in religion advanced with rapid strides. The chief \par restraints of law being removed by the abolition of the High Com\-mission Court \par and the downfall of the hierarchy, all parties claimed and exercised liberty of \par worship. The Baptists in\-creased very fast, greatly to the chagrin of the \par Presbyterian party, which was then in the ascendant. A book published in 1644, \par by Dr. Featley, may be taken as the exponent of the feelings entertained towards \par them. Dr. Featley had been engaged in a public disputation with the Baptists, \par and he printed an account of it, in which he claimed the victory. The book was \par entitled, "The Dippers Dipt, or the Anabaptists Ducked and Plunged over Head and \par Ears at a Disputation in Southwark." He calls the Baptists an illiterate and \par sottish sect-a lying and blasphemous sect-an impure and carnal sect-a bloody and cruel sect-a profane and sacrilegious sect. His malice is thus expressed in the \par "Epistle Dedicatory:"-"Of all heretics and schismatics, the Anabaptists ought to \par be most carefully looked unto and severely punished, if not utterly exterminated \par and banished out of the Church and kingdom . . . They preach, and print, and \par practice their heretical impieties openly; they hold their conventicles weekly \par in our chief cities and suburbs thereof, and there prophesy by turns . . . They \par flock in great multitudes to their Jordans, and both sexes enter into the river, \par and are dipt after their manner with a kind of spell, containing the heads of \par their erroneous tenets . . . And as they defile our rivers with their impure \par washings, and our pulpits with their false prophecies and fanatical enthusiasms, \par so the presses sweat and groan under the load of their blasphemies." We cannot \par help thinking that these are the words of a defeated champion, venting his spite \par against his opponents. \par \par Dr. Featley was a man of influence, and it was therefore judged expedient to \par furnish an antidote to his book. This was done by the publication of a \par Confession of Faith, on the part of seven London churches. It appeared in the \par year 1644, under the following title:-"The Confession of Faith of those churches \par which are commonly (though falsely) called Anabaptists; presented to the view of \par all that fear God, to examine by the touchstone of the Word of Truth as likewise \par for the taking off those aspersions which are frequently, both in pulpit and \par print (although unjustly) cast upon them." It was a fair digest of Baptist \par principles, showing that in all important points of theology, Christian \par ordinances and Church government excepted, the Baptists agreed with other \par evangelical Protestants. The compilers were particularly careful to state in \par full the views on magis\-tracy held by the churches, in order to disabuse men of \par the absurd notions still cherished by many, who were fain to charge the Baptists \par with revolutionary tendencies, similar to those of Munster. The concluding \par paragraph is admir\-ably written. It is as follows:-"Thus we desire to give unto \par Christ that which is His, and unto all lawful authority that which is their due; \par and to owe nothing to any man but love; to live quietly and peaceably, as it \par becometh saints, endeavoring in all things to keep a good conscience, and to do \par unto every man (of what judgment soever) as we would they should do unto us; \par that as our practice is, so it may prove us to be a conscionable, quiet, and \par harmless people (no ways dangerous or troublesome to human society), and to \par labour and work with our hands that we may not be chargeable to any, but to give \par to him that needeth, both friends and enemies, accounting it more excellent to \par give than to receive. Also we confess that we know but in part, and that we are \par ignorant of many things which we desire and seek to know ; and if any shall do \par us that friendly part to show us from the Word of God that we see not, we shall \par have cause to be thankful to God and them. But if any man shall impose upon us \par anything that we see not to be commanded by our Lord Jesus Christ, we should in \par His strength rather embrace all reproaches and tortures of men, to be stripped \par of all outward comforts, and, if it were pos\-sible, to die a thousand deaths, \par rather than to do anything against the least tittle of the truth of God, or \par against the light of our own consciences. And if any shall call what we have \par said heresy, then do we with the Apostle acknowledge, that, 'after the way they \par call heresy, worship we the God of our fathers,' disclaiming all heresies \par (rightly so called), because they are against Christ, and to be steadfast and \par immovable, always abounding in obedience to Christ, as knowing our labour shall \par not be in vain in the Lord."5 \par \par The seven churches by which this Confession was published, met in the following \par places, viz.:-Devonshire Square; Broad Street, Wapping; Great St. Helens; \par Crutched Friars; Bishopsgate Street; Coleman Street; and Glaziers' Hall. The \par first-mentioned church has existed from that time to the present. The others \par have been long extinct. \par \par We have said that Presbyterianism was in the ascendant. But the Presbyterians of \par the seventeenth century held toleration in abhorrence. It was in their eyes the \par quintessence of all heresy. \par \par The great Richard Baxter says:-"My judgment in that much disputed point of \par liberty of religion, I have always freely made known. I abhor unlimited liberty \par and toleration of all, and think myself easily able to prove the wickedness of \par it."6 \par \par The President of the Scotch Parliament writes thus to the Parliament of England \par (Feb. 3, 1645):-"It was expected the honorable Houses would add their civil \par sanction to what the pious and learned Assembly leave advised; and I am \par commanded by the Parliament of this kingdom to demand it, and I do in their \pa r names demand it. And the Parliament of this kingdom is persuaded, that the piety \par and wisdom of the honorable Houses will never admit toleration of any sects or \par schisms contrary to our Solemn League and Covenant."7 \par \par The London Presbyterian clergy bear their testimony against "the error of \par toleration, patronizing and promoting all other errors, heresies, and \par blasphemies whatsoever, under the grossly abused notion of liberty of \par conscience;" and add that they consider it a great grievance, "that men should \par have liberty to worship God in that way and manner as shall appear to them most \par agreeable to the Word of God, and no man be punished or discountenanced by \par authority for the same." "We, the ministers of Jesus Christ," say they, "do \par hereby testify to our flocks, to all the kingdom, and to the reformed world, our \par great dislike of Prelacy, Erastianism, Brownism, and Independency; and our utter \par abhorrency of Anti-Scripturi sm, Popery, Arianism, Socinianism, Arminianism, \par Antinomianism, Anabaptism, Libertinism, and Familism; and that we detest the \par fore-mentioned toleration, so much pursued and endeavoured in this kingdom, \par accounting it unlawful and pernicious."8 \par \par The Lancashire ministers declare their "harmonious consent" with their brethren \par in London as follows:-"A toleration would be putting a sword into a madman's \par hands; a cup of poison into the hand of a child; a letting loose madmen with \par firebrands in their hands, and appointing a city of refuge in men's consciences \par for the devil to fly to; a laying a stumbling block before the blind; a \par proclaiming liberty to the wolves to come into Christ's fold to prey upon the \par lambs: neither would it be to provide for tender consciences, but to take away \par all conscience."9 \par \par These sentiments were reduced to practice as far as possible. In 1645 an \par Ordinance of Parliament was published, en acting "that no person be permitted to \par preach, who is not ordained a minister, either in this or some other Reformed \par Church, except such as, intending the ministry, shall be allowed for the trial \par of their gifts, by those who shall be appointed thereunto by both Houses of \par Parliament." The Ordinance was to be sent to Sir Thomas Fairfax, with the \par "earnest desire and recommendation" of the Houses, that it should be "duly \par observed in the Army."10 The Baptists were particularly aimed at; because there \par were great numbers of preachers among them, and they were of course destitute of \par ordination, in the Presbyterian sense of the word. Next year the Corporation of \par the City of London interfered in the matter, by presenting a memorial to \par Parliament, called "The City Remonstrance," in which they prayed, "that some \par strict and speedy course might be taken for the suppressing all separate and \par private congregations; that all Anabaptists, Br ownists, Heretics, Schismatics, \par Blasphemers, and all other sectaries, who conform not to the public discipline \par established, or to be established, by Parliament, may be fully declared against, \par and some effectual course settled for proceeding against such persons; and that \par no person disaffected to the Presbyterial government, set forth or to be set \par forth by Parliament, may be employed in any place of public trust."11 But the \par Baptists and others in the army procured a counter-petition, which was very \par numerously signed, "applauding the labors and successes of the Parliament in the \par cause of liberty, and praying them to go on with managing the affairs of the \par kingdom according to their wisdom, and not to suffer the free-born people of \par England to be enslaved on any pretence whatever, nor to suffer any set of people \par to prescribe to them in matters of government or conscience."12 Nevertheless, \par the intolerant principle prevailed; and in December, 1646, a second \par Parliamentary Ordinance appeared, forbidding all unordained persons to "preach \par or expound the Scriptures in any church, or chapel, or any other public place," \par and directing that all ministers, or others, who should "publish or maintain, by \par preaching, writing, printing, or any other way, anything against, or in \par derogation of, the Church government which is now established by authority of \par both Houses of Parliament," should be apprehended, and "due punishment" \par inflicted on them.13 Many Baptists suffered under this ordinance, by \par imprisonment and otherwise. Had it been rigidly executed, there would have been \par extensive disturbances of the public peace, for the intolerance of the \par Presbyterian party excited general disgust and loathing. Milton's thoughts and \par feelings on the subject were expressed with more force than elegance There is \par stinging truth in his lines entitled, "On the new Forcers of Conscience under \par the Long Parliament":- \par \par "Because you have thrown off your Prelate lord, \par And with stiff vows renounced his Liturgy, \par To seize the widowed whore Plurality \par From them whose sin you envied, not abhorred; \par Dare ye for this adjure the civil sword \par To force our consciences that Christ set free, \par And ride us with a classical hierarchy \par Taught ye by mere A. S. and Rutherford? \par Men, whose life, learning, faith, and pure intent, \par Would have been held in high esteem with Paul, \par Must now be named and printed Heretics \par By Shallow Edwards and Scotch what d'ye call: \par But we do hope to find out all your tricks, \par Your plots and packing worse than those of Trent, \par That so the Parliament \par May with their wholesome and preventive shears \par Clip your phylacteries, though bauk your ears, \par And succor our just fears, \par When they shall read this clearly in your charge, \par New Presbyter is but old Priest writ large."14 \par \par These Presbyterian outrages were also exposed by Samuel Richardson, one of the \par Pastors of the Calvinistic or Particular Baptist church, the formation of which \par has been mentioned. Mr. Richardson's pamphlet was entitled:-"The necessity of \par Toleration in matters of religion; or, certain questions propounded to the \par Synod, tending to prove that corporal punishments ought not to be inflicted upon \par such as hold errors in religion, and that in matters of religion men ought not \par to be compelled, but have liberty and freedom." The "questions" are such as no \par persecutor, Roman Catholic or Protestant, Episcopalian or Presbyterian, could \par satisfactorily answer; and the observations interspersed are so pithy and \par pungent, that the good cause must have derived great benefit from the \par publication. "Sit still quietly," the author says, "and be humbled, for your \par folly in calling persecution discipline and just deserved censure; and in \par calling your priesthood and presbytery a holy order, and yet are but the Pope's \par priesthood. And we had as good be under the Pope, as under your presbyterian \par check . . . You would all be tolerated, and would have none tolerated but \par yourselves; you would suffer none to live quietly and comfortably, but those of \par your way. Is this to do as you would be done by?"15 \par \par The Assembly of Divines sat from 1643 till 1649. Their Confession of Faith and \par Catechisms will live as long as theological literature lasts. With the exception \par of those portions in which religious liberty, Church government, and Christian \par baptism are treated, they are invaluable. The Assembly not only sustained \par infant-baptism, but also enjoined sprinkling as the mode of administering the \par ceremony. It was a close division: twenty-five were for the injunction of \par sprinkling, twenty-four against it. That majority of one was obtained by Dr. \par Lightfoot's influence, to whose authority as an Oriental scholar and biblical \par critic great deference was paid. The minority were not willing to legislate on \par the subject, and would have left it to the option of ministers. But it seems \par that there was a dread of possible consequences; for if any infants should be \par immersed, a suspicion might get abroad that sprinkling was insufficient. This \par might lead to the conclusion that those who had been only sprinkled ought to be \par baptized. The inquiry might then be extended to adults, and so the interests of \par the Baptists might be furthered. It was judged prudent to prevent all this by \par positive enactment. \par \par There was a wonderful outcry against immersion. Even Baxter allowed himself to \par use expressions which might be laughed at, were it not for the melancholy fact \par that in his case (for he could not be ignorant on the subject) prejudice and \par passion prevailed over Christian charity, and impelled him to adopt a course \par which in his sober moments he must have condemned. Take a specimen or two:-"That which as a plain breach of the sixth commandment, Thou shalt not kill, is no \par ordinance of God, but a most heinous sin. But the ordinary practice of baptizing \par over head, and in cold water, as necessary, is a plain breach of the sixth \par commandment; therefore it is no ordinance of God, but a heinous sin, and, as Mr. \par Craddock shows in his book of Gospel liberty, the magistrate ought to restrain \par it, to save the lives of his subjects." . . . "In a word, it is good for nothing \par but to dispatch men out of the world that are burdensome, and to ranken \par churchyards. I conclude, if murder be a sin, then dipping ordinarily over head \par in England is a sin; and if those who make it men's religion to murder \par themselves, and urge it upon their consciences as their duty, are not to be \par suffered in a commonwealth, any more than highway murderers; then judge how \par these Anabaptists, that teach the necessity of such dipping, are to be \par suffered." Poor Baxter! Had he never read the ninth commandment?16 \par \par Samuel Oates's case is another illustration of the intense hatred against \par everything Baptist which was at that time indulged in. This excellent minister, \par who was for some time pastor of one of the London churches, was much blessed in \par his labors. While engaged in a home missionary tour in the county of Essex, in \par the year 1646, his preaching was attended with such success, that hundreds were \par converted and baptized. One of the converts having died a few weeks after, Mr. \par Oates was actually committed to prison, put in irons, and indicted for murder. \par It would seem hardly creditable that this charge could be seriously entertained; \par but malice and bigotry stick at nothing. Mr. Oates's persecutors were \par disappointed, as it clearly appeared on the trial that the young woman baptized \par was in good health for some time after her baptism. The jury returned a verdict \par of "not guilty;" but the attempt to destroy a Christian minister by such means \par was an ugly symptom.17 \par \par Verily the times were odd and strange! The same Parliament which denounced \par preachers who had not been regularly ordained, and ordered the magistrates to \par seize them, issued, in the following year, a declaration in favour of the \par Baptists! How it came to pass I know not. Perhaps some thought that they had \par gone too far, and honestly desired to retrace their steps; or possibly the \par growing numbers and influence of the denomination inspired a salutary fear, \par especially as it was known that there were many Baptists in the army. These \par words were found in the "Declaration," issued March 4, 1647:-"The name of \par \par Anabaptism hath indeed contracted much odium, by reason of the extravagant \par opinions and practices we abhor and detest. But for their opinion against the \par baptism of infants, it is only a difference about a circumstance of time in the \par administration of an ordinance, wherein in former ages, as well as this, learned \par men have differed both in opinion and practice. And though we could wish that \par all men would satisfy themselves, and join with us in our judgment and practice \par on this point, yet herein we hold it fit that men should be convinced by the \par Word of God, with great gentleness and reason, and not beaten out of it with \par force and violence."18 \par \par It was but a momentary gleam of light. As if terrified at what they said- \par "They back recoiled \par E'en at the sound themselves had made;" \par \par and in May, 1648, they passed a law more fearfully barbarous than any which had \par for a long time found a place in the statute book. We refer to the "Ordinance of \par the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, for punishing blasphemies and \par heresies." By this law it was enacted that all persons found guilty of Atheism, \par Deism, or Socinianism, and refusing to abjure, should suffer death as in case of \par felony. If they abjured, they were to remain in prison till they found sureties \par that they would not maintain their errors any more; then, if they afterwards \par recanted, and were convicted a second time, they were to be executed. It was \par also enacted that all persons convicted before two justices of the peace, of \par maintaining and defending certain specified opinions held by Papists, Arminians, \par Antinomians, Quakers, or Baptists, should be ordered to renounce their errors in \par the parish church, and in case of refusal, to be committed to jail till they \par should find sureties that they would not maintain or defend such opinions any \par more. This was equivalent to a sentence of imprisonment for life. The Baptist \par sentiment condemned was thus expressed:-"That the baptizing of infants is \par unlawful, or such baptism is void, and that such persons ought to be baptized \par again;" it is added, "and in pursuance thereof shall baptize any person formerly \par baptized." Even the Episcopalians were included in the condemnation, for the \par same penalties were provided for those who should maintain "that the Church \par government by presbytery is Antichristian or unlawful."19 \par \par It is no apology for this vile law, that it was practically a dead letter, and \par was intended to terrify or prevent rather than to punish. The good sense and \par Christianity of the people would not suffer it to be executed; but the \par Presbyterians, whose handiwork it was, were fully prepared for the experiment, \par if power had been entrusted to them. Here again we see "old priest writ large." \par During the Commonwealth the Baptists evinced much zealous activity in the cause \par of the Saviour. The ministers were indefatigable, the people fervent and \par steadfast. If now and then the fervor evaporated into fanaticism, or something \par like it, and if diversity of opinion on comparatively minor points caused a \par multiplication of small parties, an excuse may be found in the peculiar \par circumstances of the times. And surely it was better that the waters should be \par in motion, or even troubled, than that they should be stagnant and corrupted. We \par are not required to defend all the measures adopted by our forefathers, any more \par than to employ their quaint modes of speech. But it would be well for us to \par imitate their diligence, their prayerfulness, their strict regard to the \par authority of the Saviour, their indefatigable endeavors for mutual edification. \par They laboured "in season, out of season." Those of them who were in Cromwell's \par army took care not to blink their principles there. Prayer and preaching were \par duly attended to, by officers as well as by privates. A serious, orderly \par deportment prevailed. In camp and in garrison they observed good dis\-cipline; in \par the field their prowess was unquestioned. They were the Havelocks of the \par seventeenth century. \par \par Under the Protectorate the Baptists were not only un\-molested, but prosperous. \par Some of them disapproved of the new Government, preferring the Commonwealth; and some joined the Fifth Monarchy men, who held visionary notions respecting the \par kingdom of Christ. Hence the Pro\-tector was thought to look coolly on them, and \par to wish to lessen their influence, particularly in the army. But the main body \par were satisfied with the existing order of things, and diligently improved their \par opportunities. \par \par Crosby has republished a letter from some Baptists in the army to the Protector, \par in which they accuse him of de\-signing to get rid of them, or, as they expressed \par it, "to purge the army of the Anabaptists." They were not very careful in the \par choice of words. These are some of the "queries" they put to "his \par Highness":-"Whether your Highness had come to the height of honor and greatness \par you are now come to, if the Anabaptists, so called, had been so much your \par enemies as they were your friends?" "Whether the Anabaptists were ever \par unfaithful, either to the Commonwealth in general, or to your Highness in \par par\-ticular? And if not, then what is the reason of your in\-tended dismission?" \par "Whether the Anabaptists may not as justly endeavor to eat out the bowels of \par your Govern\-ment, as your Highness may endeavor to eat them out of their \par employments?" "Whether the Anabaptists did not come more justly into their \par employments in the army, than your Highness into the seat of government?" \par "Whether the Anabaptist will not be in a better condition in the day of Christ, \par that keeps the covenant with God and men, than your Highness will be if you \par break with both?" "Whether an hundred of the old Anabaptists, such as marched \par under your command in '48, '49, '50, &c., be not as good as two hundred of your \par new courtiers, if you were in such a condition as you were at Dunbar in \par Scotland?" "Whether your Highness's conscience was not more at peace, and your \par mind more set upon things above, when you loved the Anabaptists, than it is now, \par when you hate their principles, or their service, or both?" "Whether your \par Highness's court is not a greater charge to this nation than the Anabaptists in \par the army? And if so, whether this be the ease which you promised the people?"20 \par This is plain dealing. But Cromwell accomplished his purpose, as regarded his \par own regiment, the principal officers in which were dismissed, avowedly because \par they were Baptists. The probability is that they were strong republicans, and \par were afraid of the old tyranny. \par \par The discontents of the Irish Baptists, some of whom objected to the \par Protectorate, regarding the title of "Lord Protector" as "applicable to God \par alone," were allayed by a judicious letter addressed to them by Messrs. Kiffin \par and Spilsbury. It is inserted in the volume of "Confessions of Faith," published \par by the Hanserd Knollys Society.21 \par \par Three Baptist ministers (John Toombes, Henry Jessey, and Daniel Dyke) were \par appointed "Triers," that is, they were members of a committee so called, \par constituted by the Government for the examination of candidates for Church \par livings, and the removal of "ignorant and scandalous" clergymen. The ministers \par above mentioned, and several more, accepted the charge of parishes. We do not \par vindicate their consistency, in consenting to receive tithes and other payments, \par by which parish ministers are supported in the Church of England; but the \par impartial reader will give due weight to the considerations which have been \par alleged in their defense, viz.:-that the scarcity of qualified ministers \par warranted them in taking this step, as they were thereby put in a position to \par preach the Gospel to thousands who would have been otherwise destitute of the \par means of grace; that they were bound to no forms and ceremonies, and allowed to \par conduct worship in whatever manner they pleased; and that some of them retained \par their own churches, and continued to minister to them, occupying the parish \par pulpits on only one part of the Lord's-day. \par \par Statistics were not much thought of in those days. We are unable to furnish an \par exact account of the number of Baptist churches in England at the time of the \par Restoration. It may suffice to remark that there were churches of our \par denomination in about thirty English counties, and that they were numerous in \par Wales. The principal churches in Ireland were in Dublin, Waterford, Kilkenny, \par Clonmel, Cork, and Limerick. \par \par 1 Neal, ii. p. 329. \par 2 Crosby, i. p. 1. \par 3 Ibid. p. 151. \par 4 The Hireling Ministry none of Christ's, p. ii. quoted in Ivimey's History of \par the Baptists, i. p. 155. \par 5 Confessions of Faith, pp. 13-48. \par 6 Ivimey, i. p. 169. \par 7 Neal, iii. p. 310. \par 8 Neal, p. 390. \par 9 Crosby, i. p. 190. \par 10 Crosby, i. p. 192. \par 11 Ibid. p. 184. \par 12 Neal, iii. p. 328. \par 13 Crosby, i. p. 194. \par 14 Todd's Milton, vi. pp. 92-97. "Bauk," for "both," means to "spare," to "leave \par untouched." "The mild and gentle parliament will content itself with only \par clipping away your Jewish and persecuting principles."-Warburton. \par 15 Tracts, p. 284. \par 16 Ivimey, i. p. 193. \par 17 Crosby, i. p. 236. \par 18 Crosby, i. p. 196. \par 19 Crosby, i. pp. 199-205. \par 20 Crosby, iii. pp. 231-242. \par 21 Pp. 322-326. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } s-John James-Act of \par Uniformity-The Aylesbury Baptists-Benjamin Keach Pilloried-Conventicle Act-Five Mile Act-Their Effects \par \par We are now entering upon a dark time. The reigns of Charles II. and James II. \par were inglorious in all respects. These kings were despicable as men, despotic as \par rulers. In religion, the first was a hypocrite, the second a bigot. The former \par was traitorous to British interests, for the sake of his pleasures and his \par pride; the latter was willing to offer up British freedom on the altar of the \par Papacy. Martyrdom, in various forms, gained fresh laurels while they occupied \par the throne of which they were utterly unworthy. \par \par Charles II. had pledged his royal word at Breda, before his restoration, "that \par no man should be disquieted or called in question for differences of opinion in \par matters of religion, which did not disturb the peace of the kingdom." Like a \par true son of his father, he broke his promise. I t was doubt\-less given with a \par mental reservation which a Jesuit would applaud. \par \par The Savoy Conference, like the Hampton Court Confer\-ence in the reign of James \par I., was a mere sham. The design was, first to cheat and then to insult. The \par Episco\-palians and Presbyterians who attended the Conference, held their \par meetings, and partially discussed the points at issue, but without any good \par result. No Baptists were there. The Conference was opened April 15, 1661, and \par was closed July 25, in the same year. \par \par The religious condition of the kingdom was very peculiar. "Ignorant and \par scandalous" ministers had been ejected by wholesale during the Commonwealth and \par under the Pro\-tectorate. Their successors were a motley group. The majority were \par Episcopalians, but there were many Presby\-terians, some Independents, and a few \par Baptists. A large number of the Presbyterians would have submitted to the \par restored establishment, if! they had been allowed to retain discretionary power \par with reference to portions of the ritual. They particularly objected to wearing \par the surplice; to the sign of the cross in baptism; to kneeling at the Lord's \par Supper; to the indiscriminate administration of the Lord's Supper to sick \par persons; to the form of absolution; to the language of the burial service; and \par to the declaration required of all clergymen that there was nothing in the \par Common Prayer Book, the Book of Ordination, or the Thirty-nine Articles, \par contrary to the Word of God. But the temper of the times was rigid and fierce. \par The hierarchical party, flushed with victory, and confident of complete success, \par refused all consideration. They would not abate a jot, except in matters of the \par most trivial importance. A few verbal alterations were made in the Liturgy; a \par new edition of the Prayer Book was published, containing forms of prayer for the \par 30th of January and the 29"th of May, with other additions; and the Parliament, \par subservient to the wishes of the King and the priesthood, passed the "Act of \par Uniformity," which came into operation August 24, 1662. \par \par The reader is now prepared for a tale of woe. The history of our denomination \par from 1660 to 1688 is not so much a history of progress as of endurance. \par Persecution commenced immediately after the King's return. The clergymen ejected \par during the Commonwealth and the Protectorate, with the exception of such as had \par "justified the late King's murder, or declared against infant-baptism," were \par restored to their livings by Act of Parliament. Though the High Commission Court \par was not re-established, it was presumed that the old laws of Elizabeth were in \par force again, and magistrates in every part of the kingdom were eager to execute \par them. \par \par The Baptists saw the storm coming, and took measures accordingly. They asked for \par no indulgence, n#o emoluments. They sought no office. All they wanted was freedom \par of worship. They recognized but one course of action in things civil: they were \par prepared to be obedient subjects. With these views they approached the throne. \par First, a petition was presented to the King, July 26, 1660, setting forth the \par sufferings inflicted on the churches in Lincolnshire. "We have been much \par abused," they say, "as we pass in the streets, and as we sit in our houses; \par being threatened to be hanged if but heard praying to our Lord in our own \par families, and disturbed in our so waiting upon Him, by uncivil beating at our \par doors and sounding of horns; yea, we have been stoned when going to our \par meetings; the windows of the place where we have met have been struck down with \par stones: yea, [we have been] taken as evil-doers, and imprisoned, when peaceably \par met together to worship the Most high in the use of His most precious ordinances \par . . . And as if all $this were too little, they have, to fill up their measure, \par very lately indicted many of us at the sessions, and intend, as we are informed, \par to impose on us the penalty of twenty pounds [each], for not coming to hear such \par men as they provide us."1 Accompanying this was a Confession of Faith, drawn up \par by Thomas Grantham, said to be "owned and approved by more than twenty \par thousand." Another petition, entitled, "The humble petition and representation \par of the sufferings of several peaceable and innocent subjects, called by the name \par of Anabaptists, inhabitants in the county of Kent, and now prisoners in the jail \par of Maidstone, for the testimony of a good conscience," dated January 25, 1661, \par not only represented the case of the prisoners, but of their brethren in the \par county of Kent, who were already suffering severely.2These petitions produced no \par favorable results. The King, indeed, replied to the first, "That it was not his \par mind %that any of his good subjects who lived peaceably should suffer any trouble \par on account of their opinions in point of religion," and he made fair promises. \par But the work of violence still went on. Some of the principal Baptist ministers \par were lodged in prison during the year 1660. In November of that year John Bunyan \par entered Bedford jail, which was destined to be his abode for twelve years. In \par every part of England power was leagued with cruelty and lawlessness for the \par extermination of freedom. \par \par The ridiculous affair called "Venner's Rebellion" occurred on the 7th January, \par 1661. Thomas Venner preached in a small meeting-house in Coleman Street, London. \par \par He "warmed his admirers with passionate expectations of a fifth universal \par monarchy under the personal reign of King Jesus upon earth, and that the saints \par were to take the kingdom themselves." On the day above mentioned, about fifty of \par them marched out of their meeti&ng-house, well armed, "with a resolution to \par subvert the present government or die in the attempt." In the tumult that \par followed, they lost about half their number. The remainder surrendered. "Venner \par and one of his officers were hanged before their meetinghouse door, January 19, \par and a few days after nine more were executed in divers parts of the city." A \par proclamation was issued the day after the insurrection prohibiting all meetings \par of Baptists, Quakers, and Fifth Monarchy men, for religious worship, unless in \par the parish churches, or in private houses, and then limited to "the persons \par there inhabiting." The reason assigned was, that the parties above mentioned had \par met under religious pretexts, but in reality for treacherous purposes; and the \par insurrection gave a plausible color to the proceeding. But the proclamation, \par though not issued till after the rebellion, had been ordered five days before; \par and the rebellion was eagerly 'laid hold of in justification of the act, which \par was manifestly an unauthorized stretch of power. That, however, gave little \par concern to Charles II. or his unscrupulous advisers. The document was a \par characteristic specimen of Stuart knavery and audacity.3 \par \par The Baptists hastened to disclaim all sympathy with Venner. A "Humble Apology of \par some commonly called Anabaptists, in behalf of themselves, and others of the \par same judgment with them, with their protestation against the late wicked and \par most horrid treasonable insurrection and rebellion," signed by thirty ministers \par and others, at the head of whom were William Kiffin and Henry Denne, was \par presented to the King the day after the outbreak. But none of their number were \par compromised, and Venner himself had declared that if he succeeded "the Baptists \par should know that infant-baptism was an ordinance of Jesus Christ."4 \par Two publications were issued in 1661. The objects of both were( the same, namely, \par to establish the iniquity of persecution, to claim for the Baptists the rights \par of religious freedom, and to declare their willingness, as loyal subjects, to \par obey the King and his officers in all things lawful. \par \par The first was entitled, "A Plea for Toleration of Opinions and Persuasions in \par Matters of Religion, differing from the Church of England." It was written by \par "John Sturgion, a member of the baptized people." The reasons against \par persecution are concisely given, and are expressed in a bold, nervous style. \par The second pamphlet was entitled, "Sion's groans for her distressed; or, sober \par endeavors to prevent innocent blood," &c. The names of seven Baptist ministers \par are appended to the "Epistle to the Reader." They were all sufferers as well as \par laborers. One of them, Joseph Wright, spent no less than twenty years in prison \par for the truth's sake. The others were, Thomas Monck, who laboured in \par Bucki)nghamshire; George Hammon and William Jeffrey, who laboured in Kent; \par Francis Stanley, who laboured in Northamptonshire; William Reynolds, who \par laboured in Lincolnshire; and Francis Smith. \par \par It is not likely that the King saw these or any other publications in which the \par principles of the Baptists were explained and advocated. Nor is it probable \par that, had he seen them, they would have induced him to change his policy. \par Immediately after Venner's insurrection, Hanserd Knollys and many more were \par apprehended and lodged in Newgate and other large prisons. "Above four hundred," \par says Crosby, "were crowded into Newgate, besides many more in the other prisons \par belonging to the city and parts adjacent." Vavasor Powell, then preaching in \par Wales, was treated in the same manner, and many of his brethren in the \par principality shared his fate. Throughout the kingdom the Baptists were exposed \par to outrage. "They have been haled from their peac*eable habitations," says John \par Sturgion, "and thrust into prisons, almost in all counties in England, and many \par are still detained, to the utter undoing of them\-selves and families, and most \par of them are poor men, whose livelihood, under God, depends upon the labour of \par their hands. So that they lie under a more than ordinary calamity, there being \par so many thrust into little rooms to\-gether, that they are an annoyance each to \par other, especially in the City of London, where the Lord Mayor crowds them very \par close together, that it hath been observed, the keepers have complained they \par have had too many guests. And whilst they suffer there, some of their wives and \par tender babies want bread at home."5 \par \par The execution of John James was a horrible illustration of royal malice. John \par James was a Sabbatarian Baptist. His meeting-house was in Bulstrake Alley, \par Whitechapel, London. On the 19th October, 1661, he was dragged from his pulpit+ \par and committed to Newgate, on the charge of uttering treasonable words against \par the King. The principal witness against him was one Tipler, a journeyman \par pipe-maker, a man whose character was so well known, that the magistrate before \par whom Mr. James was taken refused to receive his deposition, unless some other \par witness would corroborate it. Others were found, who confirmed Tipler's \par testimony; but one of them afterwards confessed that "he had sworn against Mr. \par James he knew not what." In fact, there can be little doubt that the witnesses \par were suborned, probably bribed, to commit perjury. There is the more reason to \par believe this, because when the Lieutenant of the Tower read the information laid \par against Mr. James in the presence of his congregation, and asked them how they \par could hear such doctrines, they all replied, "that they never heard such words, \par as they shall answer it before the Lord, and they durst not lie." But the dea,th \par of the victim was predetermined. It was no difficult matter to procure a verdict \par against him. He was tried and convicted on the 19th of November, and sentenced \par the next day to be hanged, drawn, and quartered. \par \par So flagrant was the injustice, that his wife was advised by her friends to \par present a petition to the King for his life, setting forth the facts which have \par been mentioned, and entreating his Majesty's interposition. But they had \par miscalculated. Charles treated the heart-broken woman with gross brutality. \par "With some difficulty she met the King, and presented him with the paper, \par acquainting him who she was. To whom he held up his finger, and said, 'Oh! Mr. \par James-he is a sweet, gentleman;' but following him for some further answer, the \par door was shut against her. The next morning she attended again, and an \par opportunity soon presenting, she implored his Majesty's answer to her request. \par Who then replied, 'That -he was a rogue, and should be hanged.' One of the lords \par attending him asked him of whom she spake. The King answered, 'Of John James, \par that rogue; he shall be hanged; yea, he shall be hanged.'"6 \par \par On the 26th of November, Mr. James was dragged, after the manner of traitors, \par from Newgate to Tyburn, the place of execution. His behavior under these awful \par circumstances was dignified and Christian. In his address to the multitude, \par referring to his denominational sentiments, he said, "I do own the title of a \par baptized believer. I own the ordinances and appointments of Jesus Christ. I own \par all the principles in Hebrews 6:1, 2." He charged his friends to continue their \par religious assemblies, at all risk. His closing exhortations were remarkably \par solemn and impressive, reminding the people of the days of the old martyrs. \par "This is a happy day," said one of his friends. "I bless the Lord," he replied, \par "it is so." When all was ready, h.e lifted up his hands; and exclaimed, with a \par loud voice, "Father, into Thy hands I commit my spirit." So he died. His \par quarters were placed over the city gates, and his head was set upon a pole, \par opposite the meetinghouse in which he had preached the Gospel.7 \par \par We have mentioned the Act of Uniformity. It received the royal assent on the \par 19th of May, 1662, and came into operation on the 24th of August following. By \par this Act, five things were required of all ministers then in possession of \par livings, as essential to their continuance in the Establishment. 1. \par Re-ordination, if they had not been episcopally ordained before. 2. A \par declaration of "unfeigned assent and consent to all and everything contained in \par the Book of Common Prayer, and administration of the sacraments, and other rites \par and ceremonies of the Church" (a new and corrected edition of which was then \par published, but which great numbers of the clergy could not possibl/y see before \par the time specified), affirming that there was nothing in it contrary to the Word \par of God; with a promise to use the prescribed form and no other. 3. An oath of \par canonical obedience and subjection to the bishop. 4. Abjuration of the Solemn \par League and Covenant. 5. A declaration of the unlawfulness of taking up arms \par against the King and Government upon any pretence whatsoever. \par \par The interval that elapsed between the time when the Act was passed, and the day \par on which it was to take effect, was a period of anxious suspense, both to the \par people and their ministers. It was a trial of character. Some came to an \par immediate decision, and left their livings before the ap\-pointed day; others \par waited till the time had expired; and when at length the 24th of August came, \par there were found more than two thousand worthy, learned, pious ministers, ready \par to say, "We ought to obey God rather than men." And they acted on the princ0iple. \par Regardless of conse\-quences, they sacrificed all to truth and to God, and cast \par themselves on Providence for supply and defense, exhibit\-ing to the world and to \par future ages a noble example of dis\-interested virtue and conscientious \par integrity. The loss which they sustained was by no means trivial. They were not \par only forbidden to exercise their ministry under severe penalties, but they were \par left without any visible means of subsistence. No provision was made for them, \par no mercy was shown to them: on the contrary, one persecuting decree was followed \par by another, and the governing powers seemed only to be engaged in racking their \par brains to devise some new method of vexing and tormenting their more worthy \par fellow-countrymen. \par \par On the list of the ejected ministers stand the names of Richard Baxter, John \par Howe, Joseph Alleine, John Owen, Stephen Charnock, John Flavel, and many more, \par whose writings are still renderi1ng service to the cause of God. About thirty of \par the ejected belonged to the Baptist denomi\-nation. The Church of England \par sustained a blow from that ejectment from which she has scarcely yet recovered. \par Her best men were driven away. Uniformity was the idol set up, and all who would \par not bow down to it were sacri\-ficed without mercy. \par \par The hand of power was heavy on the Nonconformists in every part of England. In \par Buckinghamshire the persecu\-tion raged with intolerable fierceness. So numerous \par were the prisoners, that the magistrates were obliged to hire two large houses \par for their accommodation, the county jail being too small. On one occasion, in \par 1664, the Baptist minister of Aylesbury and eleven of his congregation were \par seized, among whom were two women. They were placed before the justices at the \par Quarter Sessions, and advantage was taken of the 35th of Queen Elizabeth to \par require them either to conform to the Church of2 England and take the oaths of \par allegiance and supremacy, or to abjure the realm; and they were told that if \par they would not do either, they would be declared guilty of felony, and sentence \par of death would be passed on them. Unawed by this prospect, they replied, that as \par they could not comply with the requisitions, they threw themselves on the mercy \par of the court; on which they were sentenced to be hanged, and sent back to jail \par till the day of execution. The sentence would have been executed, had not \par measures been promptly taken to lay the case before the King, and obtain his \par interference. The son of one of the condemned persons hastened to London, and by \par the assistance of William Kiffin procured an interview with the Lord Chancellor, \par who immediately proceeded to the King. Implacable as Charles had proved himself \par to be in John James's case, he saw that the wholesale murder contem\-plated at \par Aylesbury would bring his government3 into dis\-repute, and might stir up \par resentment not easily to be ap\-peased. He was willing enough to worry his \par subjects into submission, or at least to attempt to do so, by confiscation and \par the dungeon; but the thought of sacrificing twelve lives at once to the demon of \par intolerance was too shocking, even for Charles II. A reprieve was placed in the \par hands of the applicant, and at the next assizes his Majesty's pardon was \par produced by the presiding judge, and the prisoners were released. \par \par Let us now give an instance of interference with the freedom of the press. \par Benjamin Keach, a Baptist minister, wrote a small book for children, entitled, \par "The Child's In\-structor; or, a New and Easy Primer." In the catechetical \par portion of the book Baptist sentiments were inculcated. It was affirmed that \par "believers, or godly men and women only, who can make confession of their faith \par and repentance," should be baptized. The personal rei4gn of the Saviour on earth \par for a thousand years, held at the time by some Bap\-tists, was taught. And, which \par was peculiarly offensive, Mr. Keach said, that "Christ's true ministers have not \par their learning and wisdom from men, or from universities, or human schools; for \par human learning, arts and sciences, are not essential to the making of a true \par minister; but only the gift of God, which cannot be bought with silver or gold. \par \par And also, as they have freely received the gift of God, so they do freely \par administer; they do not preach for hire, for gain or filthy lucre; they are not \par like false teachers, who look for gain from their quarters, who eat the fat, and \par clothe themselves with the wool, and kill them that are fed: those that put not \par into their mouths they prepare war against. Also, they are not lords over God's \par heritage; they rule them not by force and cruelty, neither have they power to \par force and compel men to belie5ve and obey their doctrine, but are only to \par persuade and entreat; thus is the way of the Gospel, as Christ taught them." \par For this he was indicted at the assizes. The language of the indictment may \par amuse the reader. "Thou art here indicted by the name of Benjamin Keach, of \par Winslow, in the county of Bucks, for that thou, being a seditious, heretical, \par and schismatical person, evilly and maliciously disposed, and disaffected to his \par Majesty's government of the Church of England, didst maliciously and wickedly, \par on the first day of May, in the sixteenth year of the reign of our sovereign \par lord the King, write, print, and publish, or cause to be written, printed, and \par published, one seditious and veno\-mous book, entitled, 'The Child's Instructor; \par or, a New and Easy Primer;' wherein are contained, by way of question and \par answer, these damnable positions, contrary to the Book of Common Prayer, and the \par Liturgy of the Church of England."6 \par \par The trial took place October 9, 1664. Chief justice Hyde, afterwards Lord \par Clarendon, presided, and conducted himself with a malignity wholly unbefitting \par his office. Under his direction, a verdict of "Guilty" was recorded, and the \par judge then proceeded to pass sentence, in the following terms:-"Benjamin Keach, \par you are here convicted for writing, printing, and publishing a seditious and \par schismatical book, for which the court's judgment is this, and the court doth \par award: That you shall go to jail for a fortnight, without bail or mainprise; and \par the next Saturday to stand upon the pillory at Aylesbury, in the open market, \par for the space of two hours, from eleven of the clock to one, with a paper upon \par your head with this inscription:-'For writing, printing, and publishing a \par schismatical book, entitled, "The Child's Instructor ; or, a New and Easy \par Primer."' And the next Thursday to stand in the same manner, and for the same 7 \par time, in the market of Winslow; and there your book shall be openly burnt, \par before your face, by the common hangman, in disgrace of you and your doctrine. \par And you shall forfeit to the King's Majesty the sum of twenty pounds, and shall \par remain in jail until you find sureties for your good behavior, and appearance at \par the next assizes, there to renounce your doctrines, and make such public \par submission as shall be enjoined you." \par \par The punishment of the pillory was abolished by Act of Parliament in the year \par 1837. The instrument so called was an upright frame placed on a scaffold, upon \par which the offender stood, his head appearing through one hole of the frame, and \par his hands fixed in two others. As this punishment was generally reserved for \par persons guilty of perjury and other infamous crimes, the mob were accustomed to \par pelt them with rotten eggs or various kinds of filth, and even with stones and \par brickbats, so that death 8sometimes ensued. To such an exposure the Lord Chief \par justice of England delivered up a worthy minister of the Gospel. The sentence \par was duly carried into execution, and the sheriff, who was himself a fierce \par opposer of the truth, took care that the judge's directions should be obeyed to \par the very letter. \par \par It was market-day at Aylesbury. The town was thronged. People flocked thither \par from all parts of the country to see the new and strange spectacle. But though \par many of them were prepared to deride and sneer, the usual expressions of popular \par indignation were wanting. Hitherto the pillory had been reserved for the vilest \par criminals. But Mr. Keach was a good man, and a preacher of the Gospel. They \par could not find it in their hearts to pelt him.8 \par \par Precisely at eleven o'clock he was placed in the pillory. Many friends attended \par him, and stood around the instrument of torture for the purpose of sympathy and \par encouragemen9t. And there, too, stood his wife, and "frequently spoke in \par vindication of her husband, and of the principles for which he suffered." A true \par "helpmeet!" \par \par "Good people," said he, "I am not ashamed to stand here this day, with this \par paper on my head; my Lord Jesus was not ashamed to suffer on the cross for me; \par and it is for His cause that I am made a gazing-stock. It is not for any \par wickedness that I stand here, but for writing and publishing His truth." "No!" \par exclaimed an Episcopal clergyman, who was standing by; "it is for writing and \par publishing errors." "Sir," replied Mr. Keach, "can you prove them errors?" He \par would have answered, but he was too well known by the multitude. "One told him \par of his being pulled drunk out of a ditch. Another upbraided him with being \par lately found drunk under a haycock. At this all the people fell to laughing, and \par turned their diversion from the sufferer in the pillory to the drunken priest; : \par insomuch that he hastened away with the utmost disgrace and shame." \par \par When the uproar had subsided, the voice from the pillory was heard again. Having \par somehow slipped one of his hands out of the hole, he took his Bible from his \par pocket and said, "Take notice, that the things which I have written and \par published, and for which I stand here this day a spectacle to men and angels, \par are all contained in this book." The jailer snatched the book from him, and \par replaced his hand in the hole. \par \par Still the voice came from the pillory. "A great concernment for souls was that \par which moved me to write and publish those things for which I now suffer, and for \par which I could suffer far greater things than these. It concerns you therefore to \par be very careful, otherwise it will be very sad with you, at the revelation of \par the Lord Jesus from heaven; for we must all appear before His tribunal." \par The officers interposed, and he was compell;ed to be silent for a time. But again \par he ventured. "Oh! did you but experience the great love of God, and the \par excellences that are in Him, it would make you willing to go through any \par sufferings for His sake. And I do account this the greatest honor that ever the \par Lord was pleased to confer upon me." \par \par The sheriff was furious, and declared that he should be gagged if he did not \par hold his tongue. So he refrained from speaking. Yet he could not forbear \par uttering these few words:-"This one 'yoke' of Christ, which I can experience, is \par 'easy' to me, and a 'burden' which He doth make 'light.'" \par \par When the two hours had expired, he was released, and "blessed God with a loud \par voice for His great goodness unto him." \par \par That day week he was exposed to the same indignity at Winslow, where he lived, \par and bore it with equal patience and manliness. There also his book was publicly \par burnt, according to the sentence.9 \par \plteration of government, either in \par Church or State." The Earl of Southampton justly observed, that this was an oath \par which "no honest man could take." But those ministers who refused to take it \par were forbidden to go within five miles of any city or town that sent members to \par Parliament, or within five miles of any place where they had formerly ex\-ercised \par their ministry, before their ejectment. The fine for every offence was forty \par pounds. They were also declared "incapable of teaching any public or private \par schools:" fine, forty pounds. And in addition to the fines, any two justices of \par the peace might "commit the offender to prison for six months." \par \par The object of this inhuman Act was to silence the ministers, or compel them to \par conform for fear of starvation. "But the body of Nonconformist ministers refused \par the oath, choosing rather to leave their habitations, their relations and \par friends, and all visible support, than dest?roy the peace of their consciences. \par Those ministers who had some little estate or substance of their own retired to \par remote and obscure villages, or such little market towns as were not \par corporations, and more than five miles from the places where they had preached; \par but in many counties it was difficult to find such places of retirement, for \par either there were no houses un\-tenanted, or they were annexed to farms which the \par ministers were not capable of using, or the people were afraid to admit the \par ministers into their houses, lest they should be sus\-pected as favorers of \par nonconformity. Some took advantage of the ministers' necessities, and raised \par their rents beyond what they were able to give. Great numbers were thus buried \par in obscurity; but others, who had neither money nor friends, went on preaching \par as they could, till they were sent to prison, thinking it more eligible to \par perish in a jail than to starve out of one, especi@ally when by this means they \par had some occasional relief from their hearers, and hopes that their wives and \par children might be supported after their death. Many who lay concealed in distant \par places from their flocks in the day-time, rode thirty or forty miles to preach \par to them in the night, and retired again before daylight. These hardships tempted \par some few to conform" (says Mr. Baxter), "contrary to their former judgments; but \par the body of Dissenters remained steadfast to their principles, and the Church \par gained neither reputation nor numbers."11 \par \par The Conventicle Act having failed to accomplish its purpose, and the time \par specified for its operation having expired, a severer law was passed in the \par spring of 1670. All persons attending conventicles were to be fined five \par shillings for the first offence, ten shillings for the second; the preachers \par were to be fined twenty pounds for the first offence, forty pounds for the \parA second; the owners of the houses, barns, buildings, or yards, in which the \par meetings were held, were to be fined twenty pounds each time; the fines were to \par be "levied by distress and sale of the offender's goods and chattels;" the money \par was to be divided into three parts-one-third for the King, one-third for the \par poor, and "the other third to the informer or his assistants, regard being had \par to their diligence and industry in discovering, dispersing, and punishing the \par said conventicles;" and in case of the poverty of the ministers, the fines \par imposed on them were to be levied "on the goods and chattels of any other \par present." Any justice of the peace refusing to carry the Act into execution was \par to be fined five pounds; and it was expressly declared, "That all clauses in the \par Act should be construed most largely and beneficially for the suppressing of \par conventicles, and for the justification and encouragement of all persons to be \parB employed in the execution thereof."12 \par \par If the first Act scourged the Dissenters with whips, the second was a scorpion \par plague. They were plundered and imprisoned without remorse. To their disgrace be \par it spoken, Archbishop Sheldon and many of the bishops exerted themselves in \par every possible way to enforce the Act. They sent circulars to the clergy, \par directing them to stimulate and aid the civil authorities: and some of the \par bishops went in person to the places where meetings were supposed to be held, in \par order to encourage the constables, or insure the rigorous discharge of their \par duty. \par \par The activity of the informers was excited by the promised share of the \par penalties. Their infamous trade became lucrative; and many of them amassed large \par sums, mercilessly filched from the servants of God. A more degrading and \par detestable occupation cannot well be imagined. They spent their time in prowling \par about the retired streeCts and bye-lanes of towns, or in exploring the recesses \par of woods, and wild, desolate places, if haply they might hear the voice of \par singing or prayer, or watch the movements of some straggler hastening to join \par his brethren. With savage glee they darted upon the secret assemblies, gloating \par over their confusion and distress, and specially rejoicing when they seized the \par preacher, because of the heavier fine. They accompanied the constables when they \par executed warrants of distress on property; and they attended the sales of the \par goods seized, taking care to get bargains for themselves. They scrupled not to \par take the bed from under the sick. They robbed children of their bread, whose \par fathers were languishing in prison. The law created their calling, and \par encouraged them in diligently pursuing it. Magistrates urged them on. Clergymen \par and country squires applauded their cleverness, and judges on the bench \par commended them for their zealD. There was an unholy alliance against truth and \par righteousness, in which the titled and the learned were willing to associate \par themselves with the meanest, the wickedest, and the most brutal of men. \par \par The prisons were crowded. Families were ruined. Houses were desolated. Estates \par were impoverished or abandoned. Numbers fled their native shores, and sought in \par Holland or in the American wilderness for "freedom to worship God." \par We will give the details of one case. On Lord's-day, the 29th of May, 1670, the \par Baptists of Lewes, in Sussex, met for worship in a house about a mile from the \par town. Two persons watched them and became informers. The minister was fined \par twenty pounds, and forty of the hearers five shillings each; but as the minister \par was poor, his fine was imposed on five members of the congregation. All the \par fines were recovered by levying distresses on property, which was done \par forthwith. \par \par Walter Brett was a Egrocer; his fine, six pounds five shillings. The constables \par took from him two barrels of sugar, which cost him more than fifteen pounds. \par Thomas Barnard was fined six pounds five shillings, and his brother five pounds \par five shillings. Six cows were taken from them, worth twenty-seven pounds. \par Richard White, brazier, was fined three pounds fifteen shillings; for which, \par brass kettles and other articles were seized, the value of which was upwards of \par ten pounds. \par \par John Tabret's fine was two pounds fifteen shillings; a cow was taken for it. \par John Price and his wife were fined ten shillings, to pay which sum four cheeses \par were taken. Price told the constables that "he never sold anything to so great \par an advantage, for this would bring him an hundred fold." (See Matthew 19:29.) \par The same system of excessive and heartless distraint was pursued in levying the \par fines of five shillings each upon the other hearers. Five pairs of shoes were \par taken from one shoemaker; three pairs from another; three hats from a \par haberdasher; a horse from a butcher; the sheets from a poor mason's bed, and his \par wife's under-apparel-and so on. \par \par Shortly after this a meeting was held in a house about three miles from Lewes. \par The owner was fined twenty pounds, and to meet it they took from him the whole \par of his stock, being six cows, two young bullocks, and a horse.13 \par \par 1 Ivimey, i. p. 276. \par 2 Tracts on Liberty of Conscience, pp. 297-308. \par 3 Documentary Annals, ii. p. 302. Tracts, pp. 313-316. Neal's Puritans, iv. \par p. 310. \par 4 Crosby, ii. p. 65. Confessions of Faith, &e., pp. 343-348. \par 5 Tracts, p. 328. \par 6 Crosby, ii. p. 17. \par 7 Ivimey, i. pp. 325-327. \par 8 See Frontispiece. \par 9 Crosby, ii. pp. 186-208. \par 10 Neal, iv. p. 394. \par 11 Neal, iv. p. 402. \par 12 Ibid. p. 426. \par 13 Ivimey, i. pp. 366-377. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } 4!4‹!"U‚•}0606-History of the Broadmead Church{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER VI. \par History of the Broadmead Church, Bristol \par \par Perhaps we shall obtain a clearer view of the actual condition of the Baptists \par in the rG‚Â7!_…„0605-Character of Charles II and James II{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER V. \par Character of Charles II. and James II.-Commencement of Prosecution-Venner's \par Rebellion-Disclaimer by Baptists-Sever SufferingHeign of Charles II. from the history of one church than from any other \par source. We are fortunately furnished with such a history. The records of the \par church at Broadmead, Bristol, have been published by the Hanserd Knollys \par Society, and more recently in "The Bunyan Library." We will give an extract from \par the narrative. \par \par This church was founded in 1640. The members met regularly for worship, whether \par they could obtain the services of a minister or not, the gifted brethren helping \par by prayer and exhortation. In 1651, Mr. Ewins, who had been a minister in the \par Episcopal Church, became their pastor. Under his ministry the church prospered. \par In addition to the Lord's-day exercise, they met on Thursday evenings in private \par houses for free conference on the Scriptures and mutual exhortation. These \par meetings were found very profitable. \par \par But in 1661 their troubles began. On the 27th of July in that year, Mr. Ewins \par was apprehIended while preaching. He was released on the 25th of September \par following, and immediately recommenced his work. Next year he endured another \par short imprisonment. A heavier trial came upon them in 1663. Mr. Ewins and \par several others were arrested on the 4th of October, and indicted at the quarter \par sessions for a riot. Various fines were imposed (Mr. Ewins was fined \'a350), and \par the parties were adjudged to lie in prison till the fines were paid. So the \par prison became the parsonage till the following September, when a compromise was \par effected, and on payment of part of the money the prisoners were released. Mr. \par Ewins had not been idle, however. The people were accustomed to gather around \par the prison, and their pastor preached to them from the window of the room which \par he occupied, on the fourth story. "The word of the Lord was precious in those \par days." \par \par Hitherto they had met in a "chapel called the Friars" but now they were J\par compelled for a time to worship in private houses. The constables frequently \par disturbed them, and many were imprisoned and fined. Sometimes, when they learnt \par that the officers were coming, they evaded them by taking refuge in a cellar, \par and sometimes by climbing, into a garret. Still they resolutely kept up their \par assemblies. "In the year 1665," they say, "we had many disturbances, and divers \par imprisoned, but the Lord helped us through it." Their firmness was remarkably \par shown by a resolution passed to the effect, that those who absented themselves \par from worship through fear should be dealt with as disorderly members. The names \par of all the members were engrossed on parchment, and the roll was called once a \par month, when they met for the Lord's Supper, "to see who doth omit their duty." \par Not many were willing to expose themselves to church censure; but now and then a \par case occurred, and the delinquents were excluded "for neglect\-ing thKeir duty of \par assembling, through fear." \par \par When the plague broke out in Bristol, in 1666, a stop was put to the \par persecution. There was peace for four years. In 1667 the Church obtained another \par "public meeting-\-place." It was "a large warehouse, up one pair of stairs." Mr. \par Ewins died April 26th, 1670. In the following month the police made their \par appearance again, and took some members of the congregation to the magistrates, \par who fined them. This was repeated several Lord's-days; but they secured the \par preacher by breaking a hole in the wall, so that he could stand in a room of the \par adjoining house, and preach without being seen. Thus their enemies were baffled. \par The opposition becoming more violent, they adopted another course. They nailed \par up the doors of the meeting-house; and "we were fain," the record states, "to \par meet in the lanes and highways for several months." \par \par Another interval of tranquility was enjoyed. TLhey in\-vited Mr. Thomas \par Hardcastle, who had been preaching some time in London, to become their pastor. \par He was in prison when the invitation reached him. After his release he visited \par the Church, and subsequently accepted the charge, in 1671. In that year they \par procured "the meeting-house at the lower end of Broadmead, where the heretics \par called Quakers had formerly used to meet; it being four great rooms made into \par one square room, about sixteen yards long and fifteen yards broad." There Mr. \par Hardcastle preached upwards of three years without any disturbance. \par \par But in 1674 there came a new bishop to Bristol, "one Guy Carleton"-"though aged \par and gray, a violent man against good people that separated from that which he \par called the Church." . . . "He resolved to destroy all our meet\-ings, and said he \par would not leave a track of a meeting in Bristol; but would make us all come to \par Church, as he called it." With him was leagued GMeorge Hellier, a lawyer, who \par took up the trade of an informer, and found it more lucrative than his \par profession. He spent the Lord's-days in going from one meeting-house to another, \par in search of prey. His chief object was to seize the minister, partly in the \par hope of suppressing the meetings thereby, and partly for the sake of the heavy \par fine. Mr. Hardcastle was apprehended Feb. 4th, 1675, and committed to jail for \par six months. But the meetings were not discontinued, although arrests took place \par nearly every Lord's-day. In order to protect the preacher, a curtain was \par prepared, by which, when drawn, a portion of the room was separated. About fifty \par persons could sit behind the curtain, the preacher being placed among them, \par undistinguished. Care was taken that a number of "women and maids" should sit on \par the staircase, "so that the informers could not quickly run up." By this \par contrivance, whenever Hellier and his minions were approNaching, notice, was \par given, the curtain was drawn, the service ceased, and the whole congregation, \par according to a preconcerted arrangement, commenced singing a psalm. When the \par informers entered at such a time, they were utterly confused. It was impossible \par to tell who had been preaching; and singing psalms was no crime. But "justice \par had fallen in the streets," and they rarely failed to drag away some of the \par congregation to prison, and to procure the infliction of fines upon them. \par \par Mr. Hardcastle was released from prison at the end of six months; but, on the \par second Lord's-day after his release, he was apprehended while preaching, and \par sent to jail again. During this second term of imprisonment he wrote a weekly \par letter to the Church, which was read at the Lord's-day meetings. These letters \par have been preserved. They are admirably adapted to the instruction and comfort \par of a people under such trying circumstances. And they weOre much needed. Towards \par the end of the year the meetings were "grown very poor and lean, through fines, \par imprisonments, and constant worrying of us every day." On one occasion the \par bishop himself was among the constables! \par \par From the beginning of 1676 to the middle of 1680 there was a lull in the storm. \par Mr. Hardcastle died in 1678, and was succeeded by Mr. George Fownes in \par September, 1679. \par \par Interruption of their worship was resumed in July, 1680, and continued at times \par through that year and the next. In December, 1681, Mr. Fownes and a large number \par of the brethren were seized and sent to prison. He preached to them there. \par Twenty-four of them were brought up at the quarter sessions, and obliged to give \par bail for their appearance when called on to answer an indictment for a breach of \par the peace, with which they were most unrighteously threatened. Mr. Fownes was \par detained, but the brethren were determined to test thPe legality of his \par imprisonment, and procured a writ of habeas corpus, by which means his cause was \par taken to the Court of King's Bench in London, and he was ultimately discharged, \par although he was still prevented by the operation of the Five Mile Act from \par preaching in public. \par \par The years 1682 and 1683 were the darkest times to our brethren. They held their \par meetings in private houses, in the fields, or in the woods, wherever they could \par best escape the vigilance of the authorities. Mayor, aldermen, and constables \par could hardly have gone to Church at all in those years, for all their time was \par spent in hunting after Dissenters' meetings. A few brief extracts from the \par records will show how our ancestors fared. \par \par 1682. \par January 29.-The Church met at four different places. Many of them "went in \par the afternoon on Durdham Down, and got into a cave of a rock towards Clifton, \par where brother Thomas Whinnell preached toQ them." \par \par March 12.-"Met in the fields by Barton Hundred, and Mr. Samuel Buttall of \par Plymouth preached in the fore-part of the day, and brother Whinnell in the \par evening. It was thought there were near a thousand persons in the morning." \par \par March 19.-"Met in the lanes beyond Baptist Mills." \par \par April 13.-"Met in the rain in a lane." \par \par April 20.-"A day of prayer, from nine till five in the evening, at Mr. \par Jackson's, over the Down, in peace." \par \par May 4.-"Information was brought to a petty session for Gloucestershire, against \par brother Jennings, for preaching in the lanes, and a warrant granted for levying \par five pounds, or else goods, or person." \par \par June 11.-"Brother Fownes being come from London, but not daring to come into the city because of the Corporation Act, met with us, and preached in Kingswood, \par near Scruze Hole, under a tree, and endured the rain." \par \par July 2.-"Our pastor preached in another plaRce in the wood. Our friends took much \par pains in the rain, because many informers were ordered out to search ; and we \par were in peace, though there were near twenty men and boys in search." \par \par July 16.-"Brother Fownes first, and Brother Whinnell after; preached under a \par tree, it being very rainy." \par \par August 20.-"Met above Scruze Hole, in our old place, and heard brother Fownes \par preach twice in peace. Brother Terril had caused a workman to make banks on the \par side of the hill to sit down on, several of them like a gallery; and there we \par met also on the 27th, in peace. On both days we sang a psalm in the open woods." \par "On the 7th of December we met for our lecture at Mr. Shuter's, on Redcliffe \par Hill, in peace, taking a great deal of care in going and coming, the women \par wearing neither white aprons nor patterns." \par \par 1683. \par January 21.-"We met at eight in the morning, and though there were seven \par on horseback and twentSy on foot to seek after us, we escaped, having broken up \par at ten." \par \par March.-"This week about 150 Dissenters were convicted by our recorder, on the \par statute of 23rd Eliz., for \'a320 a month, for not coming to church." \par \par March 25.-Mr. Fownes, though "very ill, went to the meetings in the wood; but \par after three quarters of an hour we were surrounded by horse and foot, the former \par in ambush." Mr. Fownes was arrested, and sent to Gloucester jail for six months. \par \par April 22.-"We went out at four in the morning, and were in peace." \par \par November 14.-"A day of prayer, having some hours together in the wood, between \par London and Sodbury Road: the enemy came upon us unawares, and seized about eight persons; but the brethren escaped to admiration. The bushes were of great \par service to us." A number of the sisters were taken: "they got justice \par Fitz-Herbert to come, and upon examination he could get little out of them, and \par could nTot learn who was the preacher; so they were let go." \par \par December 20.-"Watkins, the marshal, and others, went with warrants from justice \par Herbert to brother John Morgan, in Temple Street, and took his yarn and what \par goods they could find, for seven pounds ten shillings. And the day before took \par away Margaret Seymour's trunk and clothes, with about thirty pounds, for seven \par pounds odd money, for being at our meeting in the fields." \par \par December 30.-"Being a hard frost, and snow on the ground, we met in the wood, \par and though we stood in the snow the sun shone upon us, and we were in peace." \par \par 1684. \par March 4.-"We took our sad state into consideration; and brother Terrill \par signified, that our duty lay in three things:-1st. To watch over one another, \par that none draw back to the world's worship. 2nd. That every one sanctify the \par Lord's-day. 3rd. That we endeavour to edify one another as members, and also do \par what we can forU others' souls. And, considering what is above, and that writs \par are daily expected to levy \'a320 a month, \'a3240 per annum a man, upon us, for not \par coming to church, or imprison us if it be not be paid, there being thirteen \par brethren present, we agreed to have circular meetings at five places, where the \par brethren were to exercise their gifts, and twice in a day, at nine in the \par morning, and at one in the afternoon. These five places were.-1st, brother \par Dickson, or Davis; 2nd, brother Clark or Robert Lewis; 3rd, brother Whinnell; \par 4th, brother Ellis or J. Cornish; 5th, brother Terrill. And also three places \par for prayer and repetition; viz. brother Gwilliam's, brother Bodenham's, brother \par Reeve's. And because some might be sick or otherwise detained, we appointed six \par or seven to a place, and the first four were to be taken in, and that those that \par were shut out were to go to the places of repetition. And none were to go to a \par place bVut once a day, and not to the same place every Lord's-day; but round, so \par they came to the same once in five weeks. And by this means near one hundred \par might hear every Lord's-day, and in a few weeks have the benefit of all the \par Church's gifts. And besides, brother Whinnell would repeat again at some house \par in the evening, and on week-days at other places. Thus we kept within the law, \par which allowed four besides the family. And on the ninth of March we began this \par circular meeting." \par \par April 10.-"Brother Warren was fined \'a310 for a riot, being at a meeting near Roe \par Gate, and fees 47s., which he paid in the hall at Gloucester. But Lugg was \par forsworn in it, for he swore it was on the 27th, and it was on the 29th day that \par the meeting was. Old brother Cornish was bound to appear again next sessions, \par and several others. Some were fined 40s. and their fees, and released. Sister \par Fowles was put in prison at Gloucester. Some were finWed five marks, as Mr. Jos. \par Wey; some \'a35, as the justices pleased, and to lie in prison till paid. About \par this time Pug Read died miserably, being an informer about twenty years old; had \par his skull broke, as was said, by one of his companions; he was one that broke \par into Mr. Terrill's house." \par \par September 16.-"Several of our brethren, brother Hunt, ,William Dickason, &c., \par and many more, were summoned by the apparitor to the bishop's court, for not \par receiving the Lord's Supper." \par \par October 7.-"Nearly twenty more friends were indicted for eleven months' not \par coming to church." . . . "And brother Fownes being brought into court, was by \par Powell, the chairman, called a ringleader, turbulent, seditious, and told he \par must find six hundred pounds' bail to appear next sessions at Bristol, and be of \par good behavior, or lie in prison." \par \par October 10.-"New mayor and sheriff being chosen, James Twyford, sheriff, \par threatens to find out our little meetings, and he would be like death,-spare \par none." \par \par 1685. \par January 13.-"At the quarter sessions, brother Fownes was treated as \par before, and justice Powell, the chairman, told him, Sir Richard Hart, of \par Bristol, should say he was a dangerous man. So they still kept him there at \par Gloucester, prisoner." \par \par "On the 29th of November, 1685, our pastor, brother Fownes, died in Gloucester \par jail, having been kept there for two years and about nine months a prisoner, \par unjustly and maliciously, for the testimony of Jesus and preaching the Gospel." \par He was originally committed for six months, but they would not release him \par unless he would give bond for his good behavior, which meant, that he would not \par preach again. This, of course, he would not do. \par \par Thus the enemy prevailed, and the servants of God were brought low. Truly, they \par were "perilous times." \par \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } YTimes New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER VII. \par Declaration of Indulgence-Confession of Faith-Fierce Persecution-Thomas \par Delaune-The Duke of Monmouth's Rebellion-Account of the Hewlings-Mrs. Gaunt-The Dark time-Another Declaration of Indulgence-William Kiffin-The Glorious Revolution \par \par There were some intervals of rest during this period. King Charles was bent on \par removing the restrictions imposed on Roman Catholics, and on several occasions \par the severity of the persecution was relaxed, in the hope that some general \par measure would be introduced in Parliament embracing all parties. In 1672, he \par issued a "Declaration of Indulgence," by which in the exercise of the \par prerogative the operation of the penal enactment was suspended during the royal \par pleasure. Many Nonconformist ministers availed themselves Zof it, and took out \par licenses to preach. \par \par But the Dissenters generally refused to receive the "Declaration," declaring it \par an unlawful exercise of the prerogative, and fearing the consequences that might \par follow the admission of Roman Catholics to power. They did more. They submitted \par without a murmur to the Test Act, which was passed in 1673, and by which all \par persons who accepted office of any kind under Government were required to take \par the Lord's Supper according to the rites of the Church of England, and to \par subscribe a declaration against transubstantiation. The primary object of that \par Act was the exclusion of Roman Catholics from power, and that being \par accomplished, it was expected that the door would be opened to Protestant \par Dissenters, by a repeal of the test so far as they were concerned. But bigotry \par kept the door shut till the year 1828, and the Lord's Supper was all that time \par "an office key, a picklock to a p[lace." \par \par In the midst of the uncertainties and perils of the times, a meeting of \par ministers and delegates was summoned in 1675, to consider the propriety of \par taking steps for the education of candidates for the ministry. Whether the \par meeting was held or not, we are unable to say; but the proposal itself, under \par those circumstances, indicates moral courage as well as enlightened views. \par Two years after, a Confession of Faith was published, under the following \par title:-"A Confession of Faith, put forth by the elders and brethren of many \par congregations of Christians (baptized upon profession of their faith) in London \par and the country. With an Appendix concerning baptism." \par \par In doctrinal points the language of the Assembly's Confession is for the most \par part adopted, while on baptism and Church government the views of our \par denomination are very clearly and fully expressed. The alleged grounds of \par infant-baptism are critically\ examined in the Appendix, and their insufficiency \par proved. "Let it not therefore be judged of us (because much hath been written on \par this subject, and yet we continue this our practice different from others) that \par it is out of obstinacy; but rather, as the truth is, that we do herein, \par according to the best of our understandings, worship God, out of a pure mind, \par yielding obedience to His precept, in that method which we take to be most \par agreeable to the scriptures of truth and primitive practice . . . It would not \par become us to give any such intimation as should carry a semblance that what we \par do in the service of God is with a doubting conscience, or with any such temper \par of mind, that we do thus for the present with a reservation that we will do \par otherwise hereafter upon more mature deliberation; nor have we any cause so to \par do, being fully persuaded that what we do is agreeable to the will of God. Yet \par we do heartily propose this], that if any of the servants of our Lord Jesus \par Christ shall, in the spirit of meekness, attempt to convince us of any mistake, \par either in judgment or practice, we shall diligently ponder his arguments, and \par account him our chiefest friend that shall be an instrument to convert us from \par any error that is in our ways; for we cannot wittingly do anything against the \par truth, but all things for the truth."1 \par \par This is thoroughly Baptist language. So we have always held and professed. We \par are "ready to give an answer to any man that asketh us a reason of the hope that \par is in us," and we trust that we shall ever be thankful to any man who will \par convince us of error or show us "a more excellent way." \par \par The persecution raged furiously in the latter years of the reign of Charles II. \par It seemed to be the settled policy of the Court to crush the Nonconformists. \par Informers fattened on them. Judges and magistrates encouraged the informer^s, and \par were in their turn urged to greater diligence and zeal in their infamous career \par by the clergy, even by bishops. Some of the Nonconformists were cited to the \par spiritual courts, and excommunicated, which was tantamount to ruin, as an \par excommunicated person was out of the protection of the law. Others were \par prosecuted for attending conventicles or for not going to church, and their \par pro\-perty was seized for the payment of fines. So numerous were these cases, \par that in the small town of Uxbridge and its neighborhood (fifteen miles from \par London) "two hundred warrants of distress were issued." The ministers, \par particu\-larly, were hunted down like wild beasts. Many of them were under the \par necessity of selling their household furni\-ture and books in order to provide \par food for their starving families. It has been estimated that property to the \par amount of two millions sterling in value was taken from the Non\-conformists \par during_ the reigns of Charles II. and James II. \par \par The prisons were crowded, and great numbers died in confinement-as really put to \par death-murdered-as if they had been hanged or shot. We will select one instance. \par Thomas Delaune was a native of Ireland. His parents were Roman Catholics. The \par gentleman on whose estate they lived noticing in young Delaune an aptness for \par study, sent him to a friary at Kilcrash, about seven miles from Cork, for \par education. Having remained there nine years, he obtained a situation at \par Kingsale, as clerk to a Mr. Bampfield, who was largely engaged in the pilchard \par fishery. Mr. Bampfield's efforts were blessed to his conversion from Popery and \par sin. After some years he found it necessary to leave Ireland, his religious zeal \par having excited persecution. He settled ultimately in London, as a schoolmaster, \par and was well known as a pious, learned, and exemplary man. He enjoyed the \par friendship of Benjamin Keach, Wil`liam Kiffin, and other Baptist ministers, by \par whom he was much esteemed. \par \par Dr. Benjamin Calamy, one of the royal chaplains, pub\-lished a sermon, entitled, \par "A Scrupulous Conscience." He challenged the Nonconformists to a discussion of \par the points at issue between the Church of England and themselves, and invited \par them to propose their doubts and difficulties, that the truth might be \par ascertained. Mr. Delaune accepted the challenge, and wrote his "Plea for the \par Nonconformists," in which the subject is handled with consummate ability. "The \par Book," says Defoe, "is perfect in itself. Never author left behind him a more \par finished piece; and I be\-lieve the dispute is entirely ended. If any man ask \par what we can say, why the Dissenters differ from the Church of England, and what \par they can plead for it-I can recom\-mend no better reply than this. Let them \par answer in short, Thomas Delaune, and desire the querist to read the book." \para Before the work was finished at press, it was seized by a king's messenger, and \par its author lodged in jail. He was first "committed to Wood Street Compter, and \par lodged among the common-side prisoners, where he had a hard bench for his bed, \par and two bricks for his pillows." Thence he was removed to Newgate, and placed \par among the felons, whose "horrid company," as he wrote to Dr. Calamy, gave him "a \par perfect representation of that horrid place which you describe when you mention \par hell." He was afterwards allowed to associate with prisoners of a better sort. \par Before his trial he appealed to Dr. Calamy for friendly interference on his \par behalf. The doctor, as he reminded him, had invited discussion, and in writing \par the book he had but responded to his challenge. But instead of the treatment \par which one scholar ought to expect from another, he was cast into prison. He \par "would fain be convinced by something more like divinity than Newgate." "I hadb \par some thoughts," he said, in another communication, "that you would have \par performed the office of a divine, in visiting me in my place of confinement; \par either to argue me out of my doubts, which your promised Scripture and reason, \par not a mittimus or Newgate, could easily do. To the former I can yield. To the \par latter it seems I must. This is a severe kind of logic, and will probably \par dispute me out of this world."-But Dr. Calamy was deaf to his appeal, and \par ungenerous enough to abstain from exercising any influence in favour of his \par opponent. \par \par Mr. Delaune was tried at the Old Bailey in January, 1684, for "a certain false, \par seditious, and scandalous libel against the King and the Book of Common Prayer." \par He entreated that the question might be thoroughly and fairly examined. "I \par desire," he said, "that the entire paragraphs may be read, from which the crimes \par charged against me are inferred. If fragments only be produced, fcrom which no \par perfect sense can be deduced, I shall be unfairly dealt with. The coherence of \par sense in a continued discourse, not scraps and broken pieces of sentences, can \par demonstrate the scope of an argument. If what I have written be true, it is no \par crime, unless truth be made a crime. If false, let Dr. Calamy or any of the \par guides of your Church confute me (as he promised in his sermon aforesaid), by \par good Scripture and good reason; then will I submit. If the latter method be not \par taken, I must repeat it, 'tis very hard, my lord, 'tis very hard." \par \par No doubt it was "hard, very hard." But Jeffreys was on the bench. A verdict of \par "guilty" was recorded, and the sentence ran thus:-"Thomas Delaune fined a \par hundred marks, and to be kept prisoner, &c., and to find good security for his \par good behavior for one whole year afterwards; and that the said books and \par seditious libels by him published shall be burnt with fire before the Royadl \par Exchange, London." \par \par The sentence consigned him to a slow and painful martyrdom. We quote Defoe \par again, who wrote a recommendatory preface to the seventeenth edition of the \par "Plea:-" \par \par "The expensive prosecution, depriving him of his livelihood, which was a grammar \par school, and long imprisonment, had made him not only unable to pay, his fine, \par but unable to subsist himself and his family." \par \par "He continued in close confinement in the prison of Newgate about fifteen \par months, and suffered there great hardships by extreme poverty, being so entirely \par reduced by this disaster, that he had no subsistence but what was contributed by \par such friends as came to visit him." \par \par "His behavior in this distress was like the greatness of mind he discovered at \par his trial. And the same spirit which appears in his writings appeared in his \par conversation, and supported him with invincible patience under the greatest \par eextremities. But long confinement and distresses of various kinds at last \par conquered him. He had a wife and two small children, all with him in the prison, \par for they had no subsistence elsewhere. The closeness and inconvenience of the \par place first affected them, and all three, by lingering sorrow and sickness, died \par in the prison. At last, worn out with trouble, and hopeless of relief, and too \par much abandoned by those who should have taken some other care of him, this \par excellent person sank under the burden, and died there also. We cannot refrain \par saying that such a champion, of such a cause, deserved better usage. And it was \par very hard that such a man, such a Christian, such a scholar, and on such an \par occasion, should starve in a dungeon; and that the whole body of Dissenters in \par England, whose cause he died for defending, should not raise him \'a366 13s. 4d. to \par save his life." \par \par "Had I been a minister," said John Sharp, pastorf of the Baptist Church at Frome, \par Somersetshire, soon after the Revolution of 1688, "I would have taken a horse, \par and rode till my skin was off, but I would have got the money to pay his fine."2 \par \par "I am sorry to say," Defoe observes, "he is one of near eight thousand \par Protestant Dissenters that perished in prison in the days of that merciful \par Prince, King Charles II., and that merely for dissenting from the Church in \par points which they could give such reasons for as this 'Plea' assigns; and for no \par other cause were stifled, I had almost said murdered, in jails, for their \par religion." \par \par Soon after the accession of James II., the Duke of Monmouth's rebellion broke \par out, and involved great numbers in ruin. Some Baptists were compromised in it. \par That was not to be wondered at. James II. was a Papist and a tyrant. He was \par known to be a cold-hearted, blood-thirsty man. It was not believed that the \par liberties of England would gbe safe in his keeping. Besides this, some of the \par insurgents regarded Monmouth as the legitimate son of Charles II., and therefore \par the rightful heir to the throne; while others deemed it better to overlook the \par stain of his birth, and thus to secure a Protestant succession, than to expose \par the kingdom to the misrule of a Popish despot. Had the enterprise succeeded, \par they would have been applauded as patriots: by its defeat, their names were \par handed down to posterity as traitors. Numbers of them suffered the vengeance of \par the law. The brutal judge, Jeffreys, presided at the trials, and hurried off his \par victims to the gibbet by the shortest process, and with all the glee of a \par practiced butcher. \par \par The fate of two young men excited unusual commiseration. Benjamin and Thomas \par Hewling were grandsons of William Kiffin, whose daughter their father had \par married. The father having died, Mr. Kiffin took charge of the family, and \par ahssisted the surviving parent in giving them an excellent education and \par training. William was at a seminary in Holland when the Duke of Monmouth planned \par his ill-fated expedition. He accompanied the Duke to England. Benjamin, \par "conversing with those that were under great dissatisfaction, seeing Popery \par encouraged, and religion and liberty like to be invaded, did furnish himself \par with arms, and went to the said Duke." After the disastrous battle of Sedgemoor, \par the two brothers attempted to escape by sea, but were driven back by contrary \par winds, and compelled to land and surrender themselves prisoners. After a short \par confinement in Exeter jail, they were conveyed to London, where they were lodged \par in Newgate, and remained there three weeks, when they were sent back to the West \par for trial. \par \par Their grandfather laboured hard to save them. Everything was venal in those \par days. "It being given out," says Mr. Kiffin, "that the King would imake only a \par few who had been taken examples, and would leave the rest to his officers, to \par compound for their lives, I attempted with my daughter, their mother, to treat \par with a great man, agreeing to give him three thousand pounds if he would obtain \par their deliverance. But the face of things was soon altered, so that nothing but \par severity could be expected. Indeed, we missed the right door, for the Lord Chief \par Justice [Jeffreys], finding that agreements were made with others, and so little \par attention paid to himself, was the more provoked to use all manner of cruelty to \par the poor prisoners, so that few escaped, and amongst the rest those two young \par men were executed."3 \par \par Their sister was indefatigable in her endeavors on their behalf. When all other \par means had failed, she determined to present a petition to the King. "For this \par purpose she was introduced by Lord Churchill, afterwards the celebrated Duke of \par Marlborough. Wjhile they waited in the ante-chamber for admittance, standing near \par the chimney-piece, Lord Churchill assured her of his most hearty wishes of \par success to her petition. 'But, madam,' said he, 'I dare not flatter you with any \par such hopes, for that marble is as capable of feeling compassion as the King's \par heart.'"4 \par \par So it proved. The King's heart was hard as adamant. The Hewlings were executed: \par William, at Lyme, September 12th 1685; Benjamin, at Taunton, on the 30th of the \par same month. How they spent the last few days of their lives, and how they died, \par has been admirably told by their sister, from whose narrative I will give a \par brief abstract. \par \par "At Salisbury, the 30th of August, I had the first opportunity of conversing \par with them. I found them in a very excellent composure of mind, declaring their \par experience of the grace and goodness of God to them in all their sufferings, in \par supporting and strengthening and provikding for them, turning the hearts of all \par in whose hands they had been, both at Exeter and on shipboard, to show pity and \par to favour them, although since they came to Newgate they were hardly used, and \par now in their journey loaded with heavy irons and more inhumanly dealt with. They \par with great cheerfulness professed that they were better, and in a more happy \par condition, than ever in their lives, from the sense they had of the pardoning \par love of God in Jesus Christ to their souls, wholly referring themselves to their \par wise and gracious God to choose for them life or death, expressing themselves \par thus:-'Anything what pleaseth God; what He sees best, so be it. We know He is \par able to deliver, but if not, blessed be His name; death is not terrible now, but \par desirable.'" \par \par "The sixth of September, Mr. Benjamin Hewling was ordered to Taunton, to be \par tried there. Taking my leave of him, he said, 'Oh! blessed be God for \par afflictionls. I would not have been without them for all this world.'" \par \par "I remained still at Dorchester, to wait the issue of Mr. William Hewling, to \par whom, after trial, I had free access, and whose discourse was much filled with \par admirings of the grace of God which had been manifested towards him in calling \par him out of his natural state. He said, God by His Holy Spirit did suddenly seize \par upon his heart when he thought not of it, in his retired abode in Holland, as it \par were secretly whispering in his heart, 'Seek ye My face,' enabling him to answer \par His gracious call and to reflect upon his own soul, showing him the evil of sin \par and the necessity of Christ, from that time carrying him on to a sensible \par adherence to Christ for justification and eternal life. Hence he found a spring \par of joy and sweetness beyond the comforts of the whole earth." \par \par "When I came to him the next morning, when he had received news that he must die \par the nextm day, and in order to it was to be carried to Lyme that day, I found him \par in a more excellent, raised, and spiritual frame than before. He was satisfied, \par he said, that God had chosen best for him. 'He knows what the temptations of \par life might have been. I might have lived and forgotten God; but now I am going \par where I shall sin no more. Oh, it is a blessed thing to be freed from sin and to \par be with Christ ! Oh ! how great were the sufferings of Christ for me, beyond all \par I can undergo! How great is the glory to which I am going It will soon swallow \par up all our sufferings here !'" \par \par "As they passed through the town of Dorchester to Lyme, multitudes of people \par beheld them with great lamentations, admiring his deportment at his parting with \par his sister. Passing on the road, his discourse was exceedingly spiritual, taking \par occasion from everything to speak of the glory they were going to. Looking at \par the country as he passed, he saind, 'This is a glorious crea\-tion, but what then \par is the paradise of God to which we are going. It is but a few hours, and we \par shall be there, and be for ever with the Lord.'" \par \par "At Lyme, just before they went to die, reading John 14:8, he said to one of his \par fellow-sufferers, 'Here is a sweet promise for us-'I will not leave you \par comfortless, I will come unto you. Christ will be with us to the last!' One \par taking leave of him, he said, 'Farewell till we meet in heaven. Presently we \par shall be with Christ. Oh, I would not change conditions with any one in this \par world. I would not stay behind for ten thousand worlds.'" \par \par "Afterwards he prayed for three-quarters of an hour with the greatest fervency, \par exceedingly blessing God for Jesus Christ, adoring the riches of His grace in \par him, in all the glorious fruits of it towards him, praying for the peace of the \par Church of God, and of these nations in particular; all with such eminenot \par assistance of the Spirit of God as con\-vinced, astonished, and melted into pity \par the hearts of all present, even the most malicious adversaries, forcing tears \par and expressions from them; some saying, they knew not what would become of them \par after death, but it was evident he was going to great happiness." \par \par "When just departing out of the world, with a joyful countenance, he said, 'Oh, \par now my joy and comfort is that I have a Christ to go to;' and so sweetly \par resigned his spirit to Christ." \par \par "An officer who had shown so malicious a spirit as to call the prisoners \par 'devils,' when he was guarding them down, was now so convinced that he \par afterwards told a person of quality that he was never so affected as by his \par cheerful carriage and fervent prayer, such as he believed was never heard, \par especially from one so young; and said, 'I believe, had the Lord Chief justice \par been here, he would not have let him die.'" \par p \par "The sheriff having given his body to be buried, although it was brought from \par the place of execution without any notice given, yet very many of the town, to \par the number of two hundred, came to accompany him; and several young women of the best of the town laid him in his grave in Lyme church-yard, September 13th, \par 1685." \par \par "When I came to Taunton to Mr. Benjamin Hewling, he expressed himself to this \par effect:-'We have no cause to fear death, if the presence of God be with us; \par there is no evil in it, the sting being taken away. It is nothing but our \par ignorance of the glory the saints pass into by death which makes it appear dark \par to ourselves or our relations; if in Christ, what is this world that we should \par desire an abode in it? It is all vain and unsatisfying, full of sin and misery.' \par He also intimated his own cheerful expectations soon to follow (he had just \par heard of his brother's death), discovering then and all along greaqt seriousness \par and sense of spiritual and eternal things, complaining of nothing in his present \par circumstances but want of a place of retirement to converse more uninterruptedly \par with God and his own soul; saying that his lonely time in Newgate was the \par sweetest in his whole life." \par \par "When there was a general report that no more should die, he said, 'I do not \par know what God hath done contrary to our expectations; if He doth prolong my \par life, I am sure it is all His own, and by His grace I will wholly devote it to \par Him.' But on the 29th of September, between ten and eleven at night, we found \par the deceitfulness of this re\-port, they being then told that they must die the \par next morning, which was very unexpected as to the suddenness of it. But herein \par God glorified His power, grace, and faithfulness, in giving suitable support and \par comfort by His blessed presence, which appeared upon my coming to him at that \par time and findingr him greatly composed. He said, 'Though men design to surprise, \par God doth and will perform His Word, to be a very present help in trouble.'" \par "The next morning, when I saw him again, his cheerful\-ness and comfort were much \par increased, waiting for the sheriff with the greatest sweetness and serenity of \par mind . . . With a smiling countenance, he discoursed of the glory of heaven . . \par . His hope and comfort still increasing, with the assurance of an interest in \par that glorious inheritance to the possession of which he was now going, he said, \par 'Death was more desirable than life, and he would rather die than live any \par longer here.' . . . Then, reading the Scriptures and musing with himself, he \par intimated the great comfort which God conveyed to his soul in it; saying, 'Oh, \par what an in\-valuable treasure is this blessed Word of God! In all con\-ditions \par here is a store of strong consolation.' One desiring his Bible, he said, 'No, \par this shalls be my companion to the last moment of my life.'" \par \par "Thus praying together, reading, meditating, and con\-versing of heavenly things, \par they waited for the sheriff, who, when he came, void of all pity and civility, \par hurried them away, scarcely suffering them to take leave of their friends. \par Notwithstanding this, and the doleful mourning of all about them, the joyfulness \par of his countenance was increased. Thus he left the prison, and thus he appeared \par in the sledge, where they sat about half-an-hour before the officers could force \par the horses to draw; at which they were greatly enraged, there being no visible \par obstruction from weight or way. At last the mayor and sheriff haled them \par forward, themselves, Balaam-like, driving the horses." \par \par "When they came to the place of execution, which was surrounded with spectators, \par many that waited their coming said, that when they saw him and them come with \par such cheerfulness and joy, andt evidence of the presence of God with them, it \par made death appear with another aspect. They first embraced each other with the \par greatest affection; then, two of the elder persons praying audibly, they joined \par with great seriousness. Then he [Benjamin] required leave of the sheriff to pray \par particularly; but he would not grant it, and only asked him whether he would \par pray for the King. He answered, 'I pray for all men.' He then requested that \par they might sing a hymn. The sheriff told him it must be with the rope round \par their necks; which they cheerfully accepted, and sung with such heavenly joy and \par sweetness that many who were present said it both broke and rejoiced their \par hearts. Thus in the experience of the delightfulness of praising God on earth, \par he willingly closed his eyes on a vain world, to pass to that eternal \par enjoyment." \par \par "All present of all sorts were exceedingly affected and amazed. Some officers \par who had befuore insultingly said, 'Surely these persons have no thoughts of \par death, but will find themselves surprised by it,' now acknowledged that they saw \par he and they had something extraordinary within, which carried them through with \par so much joy. Others said that they were so convinced of their happiness that \par they would be glad to change conditions with them. The soldiers in general, and \par all others, lamented exceedingly, saying, 'It was so sad a thing to see them so \par cut off, that they scarcely knew how to bear it.' Some of the most malicious in \par the place, from whom nothing but railing was expected, said, as they were \par carried to their grave in Taunton church, 'These persons have left sufficient \par evi\-dence that they are now glorified spirits in heaven.' A great officer also \par in the King's army, has often been heard to say, 'If you would learn to die, go \par to the young men of Taunton.'"5 \par \par The execution of Mrs. Gaunt was another horrvible affair. It is one of the \par blackest in the catalogue of crimes with which James II. stands charged in \par history. \par \par Elizabeth Gaunt was a Baptist lady, resident in London. Her life was a series of \par charitable acts. She was constantly engaged in visiting the jails, and \par administering succour according to her means, to the distressed and unfortunate. \par On the discovery of the Rye House plot, one Burton, who was deeply implicated in \par it, and for whose apprehension a reward of \'a3100 was offered, found shelter in \par her house. She assisted him to escape to Holland, where he lived some months. He \par returned to England with the Duke of Monmouth, and was at the battle of \par Sedgemoor. After wandering about some time, he obtained concealment in the house \par of John Fernley, a barber, in Whitechapel, London. Fernley was a poor man; but, \par though he knew of the reward that had been offered for Burton's apprehen\-sion, \par he would not betray whim. Much as he wanted money, his honour was not to be sold. \par That noble feeling cost him his life. The wretch Burton learnt that the King was \par peculiarly exasperated against those who harbored traitors. He informed against \par both his protectors. They were both brought to trial and convicted. Fernley was \par hanged; Mrs. Gaunt was burned alive, that being then the punishment of females \par for this offence. The only witnesses against her were the villain Burton and her \par own maid-servant: but the girl was ignorant of Burton's character and position, \par and could only testify to the concealment, so that the law's demand, requiring \par two witnesses, was not satisfied. But the judge who presided at the trial \par over-ruled the exception taken on this account, and a verdict of "guilty" was \par brought in, in opposition to right. The good woman suffered the terrible \par punishment in such a manner as to excite strong sympathy in her favour. Bishop \par Burnet saysx, "She died with a constancy, even to cheerfulness, that struck all \par who saw it. She said, charity was a part of her religion as well as faith; this \par at worst was feeding an enemy. So she hoped she had reward with Him, for whose \par sake she did this service, how unworthy soever the person was who made so ill a \par return for it. She rejoiced that God had honored her to be the first that \par suffered by fire in this reign, and that her suffering was a martyrdom for that \par religion which was all love. Penn, the Quaker, told me that he saw her die. She \par laid the straw about her for burning her speedily, and behaved in such a manner \par that all the spectators melted in tears."6 \par \par This execution took place, October 23rd, 1685. When she left the prison for the \par place of burning, Mrs. Gaunt gave a paper to the keeper of Newgate, from which \par we extract the following paragraphs:- \par \par "Let none think hard, or be discouraged at what hath happened uynto me; for He \par doth nothing without cause in all that He hath done unto me, He being holy in \par all His ways, and righteous in all His works; and it is but my lot, in common \par with poor desolate Zion at this day. Neither do I find in my heart the least \par regret for anything I have done in the service of my Lord and Master, Jesus \par Christ, in securing and succoring any of His poor sufferers that have showed \par favour, as I thought, to His righteous cause; which cause, though it be now \par fallen and trampled on, yet it may revive, and God may plead it at another time \par more than ever He hath yet done, with all its opposers and malicious haters. And \par I desire to bless His holy name that He hath made me useful in my generation, to \par the comfort and relief of many desolate ones; that the blessing of many who were \par ready to perish hath come unto me, and I have helped to make the widow's heart \par leap for joy. And I bless His holy name that in all this,z together with what I \par was charged with, I can approve my heart to Him, that I have done His will, \par though it doth cross man's." \par \par Having mentioned several persons engaged in the prosecution, whose malice and \par cruelty had aggravated her sufferings, she proceeds:-"All which, together with \par the great one of all [James II.], by whose power all these and multitudes more \par of cruelties are done, I do heartily and freely forgive, as against me: but as \par it is done in an implacable mind against the Lord Jesus Christ and His righteous \par cause and followers, I leave it to Him Who is the avenger of all such wrong, and \par Who will tread upon princes as upon mortar, and be terrible to the kings of the \par earth."7 \par \par The darkest time in the history of the Dissenters during this period was the \par interval between the autumn of 1685 and the summer of 1686. Macaulay \par says:-"Never, not even under the tyranny of Laud, had the condition of the \{par Puritans been so deplorable as at that time. Never had spies been so actively \par employed in detecting congregations. Never had magistrates, grand juries, \par rectors, and churchwardens been so much on the alert. Many Dissenters were cited \par before the ecclesiastical courts. Others found it necessary to purchase the \par connivance of the agents of the Government by presents of hogsheads of wine, and \par of gloves stuffed with guineas. It was impossible for the sectaries to pray \par together without precautions such as are employed by coiners and receivers of \par stolen goods. The places of meeting were frequently changed. Worship was \par performed sometimes just before the break of day, and sometimes at dead of \par night. Round the building where the little flock was gathering together, \par sentinels were posted, to give the alarm if a stranger drew near. The minister, \par in disguise, was introduced through the garden and back-yard. In some houses \par there were| trap-doors, through which, in case of danger, he might descend. Where \par Nonconformists lived next door to each other, the walls were often broken open, \par and secret passages were made from dwelling to dwelling. No psalm was sung; and \par many contrivances were used to prevent the voice of the preacher, in his moments \par of fervor, from being heard beyond the walls. Yet, with all this care, it was \par often found impossible to elude the vigilance of informers. In the suburbs of \par Lon\-don, especially, the law was enforced with the utmost rigor. Several opulent \par gentlemen were accused of holding conventicles. Their houses were strictly \par searched, and distresses were levied to the amount of many thousands of pounds . \par . . Dissenting ministers, however blameless in life, however eminent for \par learning and abilities, could not venture to walk the streets for fear of \par outrages, which were not only not repressed, but encouraged by those whose duty \par it }was to preserve the peace. Some divines of great fame were in prison. Among \par these was Richard Baxter. Others, who had, during a quarter of a century, borne \par up against oppression, now lost heart, and quitted the kingdom. Among these was \par John Howe."8 \par \par Then the King suddenly changed his policy. Assuming power to suspend the laws, \par by the exercise of the royal pre\-rogative, he first caused licenses to be \par issued, which pro\-tected the parties holding them from all persecuting \par annoy\-ances, and permitted them to re-occupy their places of worship; and this \par was followed, in April, 1687, by the celebrated "Declaration of Indulgence," \par removing, during his Majesty's pleasure, all restraints on Nonconformity, \par whether Protestant or Popish. The design of these acts was the establishment of \par Popery, but it was cloaked by a pretended regard for liberty of conscience. \par Some few of the Baptists were induced to join in an address to the Ki~ng, \par thanking him for this unlooked-for freedom. The majority, however, viewed his \par proceedings as altogether unconstitutional, and would not compromise themselves \par by taking any step which might be construed as an admission of their legality. \par While they availed them\-selves of the newly-acquired liberty, they regarded it \par as the restoration of a right of which they had been unjustly deprived, and not \par as the bestowment of a boon. \par \par Hoping thereby to gain assistance in carrying into effect his ulterior purposes, \par James II. courted the Dissenters. Among them was William Kiffin. The King had \par taken away the charter of the City of London, and had under\-taken to remodel the \par government of the city by arbitrary appointments of his own. "Kiffin," says \par Noble, in his Memoirs of the House of Cromwell, "was personally known both to \par Charles and James; and when the latter of these princes, after having \par arbitrarily deprived the city of the old charters, determined to put many of the \par Dissenters into the magistracy, under the rose he sent for Kiffin to attend him \par at Court. When he went thither, in obedience to the King's commandment, he found \par many lords and gentlemen. The King immediately came up to him, and addressed him with all the little grace he was master of. He talked of his favour to the \par Dissenters, in the court style of this season, and concluded by telling Kiffin \par that he had put him down as an Alderman in his new charter. 'Sir,' replied \par Kiffin 'I am a very old man, and have withdrawn myself from all kind of business \par for some years past, and am incapable o doing any service in such an affair to \par your Majesty in the city. Besides, sire,' the old man went on, fixing his eyes \par steadfastly on the King, while the tears ran down his cheeks, 'the death of my \par grandsons gave a wound to my heart, which is still bleeding, and will never \par close but in the grave.' The King was deeply struck by the manner, the freedom, \par and the spirit of this unexpected rebuke. A total silence ensued, while the \par galled countenance of James seemed to shrink from the horrid remembrance. In a \par minute or two, however, he recovered himself enough to say, 'Mr. Kiffin, I shall \par find a balsam for that sore,' and he immediately turned about to a lord in \par waiting."9 \par \par It is known what followed. The English were not to be cajoled. They had no taste \par for Popery and arbitrary power. The deliverer came. The tyrant fled. The \par persecution ceased. Thanks be to God for the revolution of 1688. \par \par \par 1 Confessions of Faith, &c., p. 232. \par 2 Ivimey, ii. p. 556. \par 3 Life of Kiffin, p, 63. \par 4 Ibid, p. 64. \par 5 Life of Kiffin, pp. 66-78. \par 6 History of his Own Times, iii. p. 62. \par 7 Ivimey, i. pp. 456-458. \par 8 History of England, vol. i. chap. v. \par 9 Vol. ii. p. 463. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } y¦ $m‚Ë70608-Principles and Practice of the Denomination{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\b0 \par \cf0 \par \par CHAPTER VIII. \par Principles and Practice of the Denomination-Human Tradition Renounced-Freedom of Conscience Demanded-Personal Piety requisite to Church Fellowship-Purity of Discipline-Cases Cited-Mode of Public Worship-Plurality of Elders-Communion-Singing-Laying on of Hands-The Sabbath \par \par Having thus brought down the history of the English Baptists to the end of the \par "troublous" period, we will close this portion of the narrative by a few \par observations on the character and state of the denomina‚¿_#I„ÿ0607-Declaration of Indulgence{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 X‚tion, and some \par biographical notices of the principal ministers. \par \par The distinguishing principle of the Baptists was clearly discerned by our \par British forefathers, and consistently maintained. They owned no master but \par Christ, no rule but His Word. Hence they were Protestants. When Protestants \par required submission to human forms, whether the Common Prayer-book or the \par Directory, they withdrew and became Dissenters. Differing from other Dissenters \par on some important points, they separated themselves, following the light of the \par Word, and endeavoring to render strict obedience to all the Lord's injunctions. \par They acknowledged no authority in any "traditions of the Elders." They abhorred \par all "will-worship." They claimed the right to profess what they believed, and to \par reduce their faith to practice, and they demanded that all others should be \par allowed to exercise the same right; for religious freedom, in its broadest \par sense, wƒas regarded by them as the inalienable patrimony of all mankind. No \par ex\-ceptions were made. The magistrate was bound, in their judgment, to protect \par all, and to interfere with none, how\-ever foolish, superstitious, or perilous to \par souls their opinions might be deemed, so long as they obeyed the laws in things \par civil, and refrained from disturbing the peace of society. As we have before \par remarked, they were in this respect far in advance of other religious \par communities, the Friends only excepted; and they had published their sentiments \par before the Friends were known. \par \par Closely allied to these views was their requirement of true piety as an \par indispensable pre-requisite to Church membership. Whenever infant baptism is an \par introduction, directly or indirectly, to the fellowship of the Church, the \par process of corruption is at work. In national establish\-ments it is unavoidable. \par No such communities can be pure. But Baptists have al„ways maintained that \par religious character is essential to union with a Christian Church. The measures \par they adopt, in accordance with New Testa\-ment precepts and precedents, afford \par the best guarantee for purity. They open the doors to the godly; all besides are \par excluded. If they are sometimes mistaken in their judgments-if, now and then, a \par fanatic or a hypocrite creeps in undetected-they are reminded that even in \par Apostolic times such cases occurred, and they take the earliest opportunity of \par expelling the intruder. \par \par The discipline of the English Baptist Churches was in harmony with their \par doctrines. It was a commentary on a Corinthians 6:17. As they would not \par knowingly admit any to fellowship, who were not the subjects of regenerating \par grace, so they placed members under censure, or excluded them, for immorality, \par or any unscriptural or disorderly conduct, without respect of persons. We will \par adduce a few examples il…lustrative of their care in this matter. \par The Broadmead Church would not admit Mrs. Bevis to fellowship, "by reason of her \par selling of drink, and some defects in her conversation about her husband's debts \par that he had contracted." The same church has this record of "Sister \par Watkins:"-"Tidings came to the ears of the church, that she walked disorderly \par and scandalously in the borrowing of money, up and down, of many persons-of some ten shillings, of some twenty shillings, of some more, some less, as she could \par get them to lend-and took no care to pay it again, promising people and not \par performing, spending much if not most of her time going up and down; and so did \par not work, or but little, to endeavour honestly to live, and eat her own bread. \par And thus, she walking disorderly and scandalously in borrowing, contrary to the \par rule (2 Thess. 3:6, 10, 12), the church, after her crime was declared, and \par proved to her face by divers in the church, a†nd that they had heard she had so \par served some not of the congregation, they consented all universally to withdraw \par from her. Then the ruling elder, Brother Terril, declared to her, before the \par church, how that for her so sinning against the Lord, she rendered herself among \par the wicked ones, as Psalm 37:21, and, therefore, the church, in faithfulness to \par the Lord and to her soul, must withdraw from her, seeing she had by several of \par the members been admonished once and again, and by several together witnessing \par against her evil in so doing; yet she had lately done the like, so that there \par was a necessity upon them to do their duty. And also acquainted her that if the \par Lord should hereafter give her repentance of the evil that she should reform to \par the satisfaction of the congregation, they should be willing to receive her into \par full communion again. And then the sentence, by the said ruling elder, was \par passed upon her, viz.: That in t‡he name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the \par authority He had given to the Church, we did declare that Sister Watkins, for \par her sin of disorderly walking, borrowing and not paying, making promises and not \par performing, and not diligently working, was withdrawn from, and no longer to \par have full communion with this church, nor to be partaker with them in the holy \par mysteries of the Lord's Supper, nor privileges of the Lord's house [that is 'if \par she doth come to the meeting, not to be suffered to stay when any business of \par the church is transacted']; and the Lord have mercy upon her soul."1 \par \par The Fenstanton Church made an order, "that if any members of the congregation \par shall absent themselves from the assembly of the same congregation upon the \par first day of the week, without manifesting a sufficient cause, they shall be \par looked upon as offenders and be proceeded against accordingly," and "it was \par desired that if any member should atˆ any time have any extraordinary occasion to \par hinder them from the assembly, that they would certify the congregation of the \par same beforehand, for the prevention of jealousies, &c." Several members were \par excluded by the same church, at different times, for marrying irreligious \par persons, or such as were not "members of the congregation." Joan Parker was \par excommunicated for "absenting from the assembly of the congregation," for \par "running from her service, without the consent either of her master or dame, and \par letting herself to another man," and for "contemning all reproof." John Blows, a \par preacher, was not only absent on a day appointed for fasting and prayer, but was \par that day "at a great football play, he being one of the principal appointers \par thereof." Being called to account for it, he was at first disposed to justify \par himself, but at length confessed that he had been wrong, and "promised to \par abstain from the like for time to come.‰" Nevertheless, as he had "dishonored the \par Lord," "grieved the people of God," and "given occasion to the adversary to \par speak reproachfully," it was resolved that "he should not be suffered to preach, \par until further fruits meet for repentance did appear."2 \par \par The church at Warboys withdrew from Mary Poulter, "for forsaking the assembling \par with the Church and neglecting holy duties, and walking disorderly in pride and \par vanity; "and from John Christmas, "for not loving Ann his wife as he ought, and \par for speaking hateful and despising words against her, giving her occasion to \par depart from him by his unkindness" But "John Christmas, afterwards sending for \par Ann his wife again and promising amendment, after her coming again to him, \par desired to be a partaker with the Church, in holy duties, was joined in \par fellowship again." "Mary Drage, for sundry times dissembling with the church, \par and out of covetousness speaking things very untrue, atŠ length it being plainly \par proved against her in her hearing, and she having little to say for herself, was \par withdrawn from." "Thomas Bass, for telling of lies and swearing, was withdrawn \par from." "Ellen Burges, for lying and slandering of her relations, and counting \par them and her mother witches, which we have no ground to believe, was withdrawn \par from."3 \par \par The church at St. Alban's withdrew from "brother Osman," because one day in \par harvest time "he did very shamefully with others betray his trust, and left his \par work, his master not being there, and went to an alehouse, where he spent most \par part of the day sinning against God and spending his money, which should relieve \par his family, unto excessive drinking." A few months afterwards he "did, in the \par presence of the congregation, publicly declare his fall, acknowledge his sin, \par and manifest great trouble for the same. The church gladly embraced him again, \par believing that God had‹ given him repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth; \par he was admitted to his membership." "Sister Searly was by the church accused as \par to matter of fact. In the first place, she selling strong water let a person \par drink to excess; secondly, did give herself in marriage to a wicked drunkard, \par contrary to the rule of our Lord, who saith, 'Let her marry to whom she will, \par only in the Lord;' thirdly, and was married in the national way with common \par prayer, with all the Romish ceremonies to it. All these things being considered, \par the church did think it their duty to withdraw their communion, and yet she \par lieth under admonition."4 \par \par Their religious services were simple. When the pastor was present, he preached; \par but in the times now under review, he was often in jail, or was compelled to \par hide himself from the pursuers. Then, prayer and exhortation occupied the time; \par any brother who felt disposed was at liberty to exhort. GeneralŒly, however, \par there was a sermon by a ruling elder, or by some gifted brother. Singing was not \par commonly practiced: many of the Baptists refused to join in that part of \par worship. In some of the churches the Lord's Supper was observed weekly, or \par whenever they could meet unmolested on the Lord's-day: in most the monthly \par observance prevailed. \par \par There was a plurality of elders in many of the churches. As numbers increased, \par they judged it conducive to profit to increase the number of teachers, and thus \par avoid the inconvenience and loss which must accrue from placing a large church \par under the care of a single pastor. Probably there were not more than a hundred \par and fifty churches in England during this period, and many of them were small. \par But there were two or more pastors at Bedford, at Luton, at Farringdon, at St. \par Alban's, at Portsmouth, at Bessel's Green, at Ashford [four]; at Glazier's Hall, \par Devonshire Square, and Mile End Green, London; at Norwich, at Hooknorton, at \par Bridgewater, at Bristol, and doubtless at other places. This shows a very \par commendable care for the spiritual interests of the Church. \par \par In some of the churches there were "ruling elders," sometimes called "teachers," \par who preached when their services were required, and presided at the church \par meetings in the absence of the pastor. In the Broadmead Church, Thomas Jennings, \par who appears to have been an ordained minister, was the "usual administrator" of \par baptism; but any preacher, ordained or not, might baptize. \par \par Strict communion was practiced in the majority of the churches, none but \par baptized believers being admitted to the Lord's table. In some, however, the \par want of baptism was not regarded as a bar to fellowship, if there was \par satisfactory evidence of piety. The Broadmead Church, the churches at Bedford, \par Luton, Gamlingay, Hitchin, Tottlebank, and many in Wales-especiallŽy those \par founded by Vavasor Powell-were so constituted. \par \par Under the Commonwealth and the Protectorate, the freedom which was enjoyed was \par improved by the churches. Itinerating excursions were frequently made by \par acceptable preachers, whose aim was not so much to proselytize men to their sect \par as to convert them to God. Great numbers were converted by their \par instrumentality. And the stated labours of many of the pastors were extensively \par blessed. The good work prospered in these days. \par \par Freedom implies the right to differ. We must not be surprised at the lack of \par uniformity among our ancestors. There were controversies among them, which were \par not always carried on with courtesy and forbearance. These qualities were but \par little valued in the seventeenth century. The greatest virulence was displayed \par in the disputes about doctrines. The advocates of Arminianism contended with the \par Calvinists. The former charged the latter with uncharitableness, and were in \par their turn accused of latitudinarianism. Each looked on the other with a \par jaundiced eye. This controversy has ceased to rage. There have been tacit \par concessions on both sides, or, at least, an abandonment of certain extreme \par views-perhaps it would be better to say, incautious expressions. \par The question of communion was another cause of agitation. Bunyan's gentle temper \par was sadly ruffled by it. His zeal for open communion led him to speak in such \par disparaging terms of "water baptism" as no other writer of our denomination in \par that age would have ventured to employ. He was ably answered by D'Anvers and \par Kiffin. \par \par Singing in worship was another subject of dispute. Strange as it may appear to \par us, many good men refused to join in it or to allow it. Benjamin Keach had great \par difficulty in introducing the practice in the church under his care. He wrote a \par book in defense of his views, entitled, "The Breach repaired in God's Worship; \par or, Singing of Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs proved to be a Holy Ordinance \par of Jesus Christ." Ivimey observes, that, "in the present day, when this practice \par is universal, it will appear unaccountable that our forefathers should require \par arguments to prove the following particulars, viz.:-What it is to sing; that \par there can be no proper singing without the voice; 'tis not simple heart-joy, or \par inward rejoicing, without the voice, a metaphorical singing mentioned in \par Scripture; no mental singing, as there is no mental praying! the essence of \par singing no more in the heart or spirit, than the essence of preaching, &c.; \par singing is a musical modulation or tuning of the voice, &c., &c.,-with a number \par of other particulars equally curious, and, to us, self-evident. Crosby \par says:-'Though he had very great success in this controversy, yet it brought upon \par him much trouble and ill-will. When he wa‘s convinced that singing the praises of \par God was a holy ordinance of Jesus Christ, he laboured earnestly and with a great \par deal of prudence and caution to convince his people thereof; and first obtained \par their consent to the practice of it at the conclusion of the Sacrament in the \par Lord's Supper, and had but two of the brethren in the church who opposed him \par therein. After his church had continued in this practice about six years, they \par further consented to practice the same on public thanksgiving days, and \par continued therein about fourteen years; and then, by a regular act of the \par church, in a solemn manner agreed to sing the praises of God on every Lord's \par day, excepting about five or six persons who dissented therefrom: and if I am \par not mistaken, this was the first church that thus practiced this holy ordnance. \par But, so far was Mr. Keach, or the church, from imposing on the consciences of \par those few that dissented (though the churc’h then consisted of some hundreds), \par that they agreed to sing when prayer was concluded after the sermon; and, if \par those few who were not satisfied could not stay the time of singing, they might \par freely go out and the church would not be offended at them; for they did not \par look upon singing the praises of God as an essential of communion, nor for the \par being, but for the comfort and well-being of a church.' Notwithstanding this \par care and consideration, however, the malcontents would not yield. They withdrew, \par and founded another church, upon the same principles, singing only excepted; so \par difficult was it to remove long-standing prejudices."5 \par \par Laying on of hands after baptism was practiced by some, but strongly objected to \par by others, and sometimes churches differing from each other on this subject \par refused inter-communion. In a Confession of Faith prepared by the General \par Baptists, and presented to Charles II. in 1660, the follo“wing is the twelfth \par article:-"That it is the duty of all such who are believers baptized to draw \par nigh unto God in submission to that principle of Christ's doctrine, to wit, \par prayer and laying on of hands, that they may receive the promise of the Holy \par Spirit (Heb. 6:1, 2; Acts 8:12, 15, 17; 2 Tim. 1:6), whereby they may mortify \par the deeds of the body (Rom. 8:13), and live in all things answerable to their \par professed intentions and desires, even to the honour of Him who hath called them \par out of darkness into His marvelous light."6 Thomas Grantham, a celebrated \par minister in that connection, thus explains it:-"That as God has promised to give \par the Holy Spirit to all that are called of the Lord, so He hath appointed a \par solemn way wherein His servants and handmaids are to wait upon Him for the \par reception thereof, which way is the prayers of the Church, performed by her \par ministers or pastors with laying on of hands, and this, as a princip”le of \par Christ's doctrine, belonging to them in the minority of their Christian state."7 \par The practice was first introduced about the year 1645. \par \par Some few believed in the perpetuity of the Jewish sabbath, but the majority \par observed the first day of the week, in common with Christendom in general. \par Here and there, a church observed the washing of feet, and had a love-feast \par before the Lord's Supper. \par \par But, though in these and some other points the English Baptists were not \par altogether agreed among themselves, in one thing there was entire union. They \par were of one mind in resisting Anti-Christianism, even "unto blood." They were \par united in pleading for the rights of conscience, and they shrank not from \par suffering. They could not all subscribe to the same confession, nor take part in \par the same ceremonies; but they were "of one heart and one soul" in readiness to \par "endure all things" for the truth's sake. The plunderings and imprisonments they \par suffered were frightful, and will never be fully known. Some of their ministers \par were very cruelly dealt with. Francis Bamfield was eight years in Dorchester \par jail, and spent the last year of his life in Newgate, where he died. John Miller \par was confined ten years in the same jail. Henry Forty was twelve years in prison \par at Exeter. John Bunyan was in Bedford jail twelve years. Joseph Wright lay in \par Maidstone jail twenty years. George Fownes died in Gloucester jail. Thomas \par Delaune, and many other servants of God, died in Newgate.8 \par \par 1 Broadmead Records, 211, 413. \par 2 Fenstanton Records, pp. 126, 169, 244. \par 3 Ibid. pp. 274, 278. \par 4 Ivimey, ii. p. 177. \par 5 History, ii. pp. 373-375. \par 6 Confessions of Faith, &c., p. 113. \par 7 Fenstanton Records, p. 157\-. \par 8 For fuller particulars the reader is referred to Dr. Evans's Early English \par Baptists (Bunyan Library). \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } –ill now proceed to give some account of the principal Baptist worthies of the \par seventeenth century. \par \par It is much to be regretted that we know so little of the personal history of \par John Smyth, Thomas Helwys, and John Spilsbury. All the information we have been \par able to gather respecting Mr. Smyth has been already communicated. We are not \par able to add much respecting Mr. Helwys, whose settlement in London has been \par recorded in a former section. He wrote several small treatises, which were much \par prized. His sentiments on persecution, and on the unlawfulness of the \par magistrate's interference in religious affairs, were so unacceptable to John \par Robinson, the celebrated Independent minister, to whose church the New England \par Pilgrims had belonged, that he published a reply, showing that, though he and \par his friends suffered so much from that interference, they were not willing to \par give it up. Mr. Robinson held that the magistrate might "u—se his lawful power \par lawfully for the furtherance of Christ's kingdom and laws." He observed:- "It is \par true they [the magistrates] have no power against the laws, doctrine, and \par religion of Christ; but for the same, if their power be of God, they may use it \par lawfully, and against the contrary."1 This is a surrender of the whole case. Mr. \par Helwys's views, which were fully expressed in Persecution Judged and Condemned, \par were far sounder and more Scriptural. Crosby says, "How long Mr. Helwys lived, \par and continued the elder of this church of Baptists in London, I cannot find. The \par books wrote against them at this time show that they went on with great courage \par and resolution; and, notwithstanding the severities used against them by the \par civil power, increased very much in their numbers."2 \par \par Neither can we satisfy curiosity respecting Mr. John Spilsbury, the pastor of \par the first Particular or Calvinistic Baptist Church, which met in B˜road-street, \par Wapping, London. We can only say that his signature is affixed to the Confession \par of Faith published in 1646, and to sundry other public documents, the last being \par the "Humble Apology of some commonly called Anabaptists," presented to Charles \par II. in 1660, as a disclaimer of sympathy with Venner's insurrection. We observe \par that, though he joined William Kiffin in a letter to the Baptists in Dublin, \par persuading them to submit quietly to the Protectorate, he afterwards united with \par a number of others in an address to Cromwell, earnestly protesting against his \par assumption of the kingly title. It may be concluded that Mr. Spilsbury was a man \par of influence in the denomination. How long he lived after the Restoration does \par not appear. Hercules Collins became pastor of the church in Broad-street in \par 1677. Whether he was Mr. Spilsbury's immediate successor, we have not the means \par of deciding. \par \par HENRY DENNE was a man o™f note. He was educated in the University of Cambridge, where he acquired a respectable standing. Having received ordination from the Bishop of St. David's, about the year 1630, he was presented to the living of \par Pyrton, in Hertfordshire, which he held for ten years, greatly to the profit of \par the inhabitants, by whom he was justly esteemed as an instructive and faithful \par preacher. In 1641 he was appointed to preach at a visitation held at Baldock, \par and he determined to embrace the opportunity of exposing the evils which had \par long grieved and vexed him, particularly "the sin of persecution, the vices of \par the clergy, and the corruptions in doctrine and worship which he apprehended to \par be in the Established Church." His text was John 5:35. After an ingenious \par introduction, he proceeded to execute his purpose, and laid on the lash quite \par freely. The pride and covetousness of the clergy, their pluralities, their \par neglect of duty by non-residence, and šother evils, were held up to view, and \par reformation boldly demanded. "I must call upon those in authority," he said, "to \par make diligent search after these foxes. If the courts had been so vigilant to \par find out these as nonconformable ministers, surely by this time the church would \par have been as free from them, as the land from wolves. But they have preferred \par the traditions of men before the commandments of Almighty God. I tell you that \par conformity hath ever sped the worse for their sakes, who breaking the \par commandments of God think to make amends with conformity to the traditions of \par men."3 \par \par We cannot be surprised at hearing that soon after this he announced his change \par of sentiments. In the early part of 1643, he was baptized by Mr. Thomas Lamb, \par pastor of the church in Bell Alley, Coleman Street, London. His gifts were \par thankfully recognized by the church, and by their direction he engaged in a \par mission to the counties ›of Staffordshire and Cambridgeshire, where he preached \par the Gospel with great success and formed many churches. This roused the ire of \par the Presbyterian authorities. He was arrested and imprisoned at Cambridge. By \par the interference of a friend, his case was brought before Parliament, in order \par to which he was removed to the Peterhouse, Aldersgate Street, London. The \par notorious Dr. Featly was in the same prison, as a royalist. Mr. Denne challenged \par him to a disputation. They met and fought, in the usual way, with propositions \par and syllogisms, till the doctor was tired, and withdrew from the conflict. Mr. \par Denne carried on the war with his pen, and published a reply to Dr. Featly's \par famous book, The Dippers Dipt, &c. He was soon released, and was appointed \par Minister of Eltisley parish, Cambridgeshire, from which place, as a center, he \par itinerated in various directions, preaching and baptizing. In 1645 he visited \par the county of Kent, andœ his labours were blessed to many. \par \par The opposition Mr. Denne met with issued in his leaving Eltisley. He then \par entered the army, and served several years. But he did not desist from \par preaching, nor was it necessary, for praying and preaching were no strange \par things among the Parliamentary soldiers. "Cornet Denne" was his military title, \par but "Parson Denne" was the appellation by which he was known among his \par associates. We cannot say whether he saw any fighting or not, nor in what parts \par of England the regiment to which he was attached was from time to time \par quartered. The only recorded event is his narrow escape from death as a \par mutineer. In May, 1649, he took part in a mutiny of the troops, partly \par occasioned by the men's unwillingness to join the expedition to Ireland, and \par partly by discontent with the existing state of affairs. Prompt measures were \par taken, and the revolt was quelled; but Mr. Denne and three others were sentenced \par to be shot. \par \par "Cornet Denne, being a man of parts, and one who has been esteemed for piety and \par honesty, received his sentence with great manliness and fortitude of spirit, yet \par with so much relenting and acknowledgment of the just hand of God, the justice \par of the sentence, and his submission thereunto, that he seemed to rejoice with \par willingness to suffer under so righteous a sentence, and he professed openly, \par that although his heart could not accuse him of an evil meaning, yet he was \par convinced of the evil of the action, and dangerous consequences of it; that if \par they had but continued three or four days longer, the land had been plunged in \par misery and ruin." Cornet Tompson and Corporals Church and Perkins were shot; and \par "Cornet Denne being called out, came with much composure of spirit, expecting to \par die, but the general having commanded the Lieutenant-general Cromwell to let him \par know at the place of execution žthat his excellency had extended mercy to him, he \par soberly and suddenly replied, 'I am not worthy of such a mercy; I am more \par ashamed to live than afraid to die' weeping bitterly."4 He afterwards \par endeavoured to repair the mischief by publishing a pamphlet in which the origin \par and objects of the mutiny were stated, and the deplorable consequences which \par would have followed if it had not been suppressed were faithfully set forth. \par It is not likely that he continued long in the army after this. We next find him \par in his place as a member of the church at Fenstanton, in 1653, taking part in \par certain disciplinary proceedings. At one of their meetings, Henry Denne began to \par speak, saying, "Brethren, I desire you to consider the Word of Christ, saying, \par Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the \par Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; teaching them to observe whatsoever things I have \par commanded you, and lo! I am with youŸ alway, even unto the end of the world \par (Matthew 28:19); which last words are often used by us, yet I think not too \par often. But I desire that we may seriously consider the former, viz., Go, teach \par all nations, baptizing them, &c. [or] as Mark saith, Go, preach the Gospel to \par every creature: and so, whether we are not as much bound to observe them as any. \par And if it appeareth that we are, then I pray consider whether we are not in a \par great fault, in being so negligent in sending forth persons to divulge the \par Gospel, in those many places that are ignorant thereof. Truly, I conceive that \par we are much to blame, and especially seeing there are many towns hereabouts that \par have no teacher; and who can tell but that the Lord may work in this \par opportunity."5 The result was that Mr. Denne and another member were sent out on \par a missionary excursion, an account of which was given to the church on their \par return. Next year he went again into Kent,  and spent some time at Canterbury. \par His labours there were so acceptable that the church invited him to settle among \par them. The Fenstanton Church consented, appointed another brother to attend him \par on the journey, and "money and horses were provided for them." He arrived in \par safety, and was received with gladness. "He is provided of an house," the \par Canterbury Church said, in a letter to that at Fenstanton, dated February 19th, \par 1655, "and we doubt not of a comfortable being and subsistence amongst us."6 He \par was regarded as one of the chief men of the denomination. In 1658 he was engaged \par in a disputation on baptism with Dr. Gunning, a celebrated divine of the day, \par afterwards bishop, successively, of Chichester and Ely. It was held in the \par church of St. Clement Dane's, Strand, and was attended by some thousands of \par persons. Mr. Denne published an account of it, and soon after baptized the lady \par at whose instance the disputation took p¡lace. Her doubts were removed by Mr. \par Denne's arguments. \par \par Nothing more is known of Mr. Denne, except the publication of two small \par pamphlets. His signature appears among those to the Humble Apology, &c., issued \par after Venner's insurrection. Crosby supposes that he died in the year 1661, and \par states that an episcopal clergyman composed the following epitaph for his tomb:- \par \par "To tell his wisdom, learning, goodness unto men, \par I need to say no more-but here lies Henry Denne."7 \par \par FRANCIS CORNWELL, A.M., was educated at Emmanuel College, Cambridge. \par \par Neal says that "he was one of the most learned divines that espoused the cause of the \par Baptists." This took place under singular circumstances. Mr. Cornwell was vicar \par of Marden, Kent, where he had refused to conform to certain ceremonies imposed \par by Archbishop Laud, and for his refusal was committed to Maidstone jail. While \par there, a woman who visited him intimated t¢hat she had some doubts respecting the \par lawfulness of infant baptism. He endeavoured to remove them by the best \par arguments he could think of, but failed to satisfy her. This led him to further \par enquiry, the result of which was, that he abandoned infant baptism, and was \par baptized by Mr. William Jeffery, an eminent Baptist minister. After his release \par from prison, he was called on to preach a sermon at a meeting of ministers at \par Cranbrook. This was in 1644. He chose for his text Mark 7:7, and "took the \par liberty of declaring his sentiments freely on this point; and told them \par Pedobaptism was an anti-Christian innovation, a human tradition, and a practice \par for which there was neither precept nor true deduction from the Word of God."8 \par Much discussion followed, and great indignation was manifested; but Mr. C. \par Blackwood, one of the ministers present, who had taken down the sermon in \par shorthand, having promised to furnish a reply to it, the£ further consideration \par of the subject was postponed till their next meeting. Instead of replying, \par however, Mr. Blackwood followed Mr. Cornwell's example, finding it impossible to \par refute him, and was also baptized by Mr. Jeffery. Mr. Cornwell was very zealous \par for Baptist principles. His work on baptism, entitled, A Vindication of the \par Royal Commission of King Jesus, was distributed among the members of the House \par of Commons, and produced great excitement. He soon left the Establishment, and \par formed a Baptist Church in the neighborhood of Cranbrook, over which he presided \par till his death. \par \par CHRISTOPHER BLACKWOOD was an able preacher. He was born in 1606, graduated at Cambridge in 1624, and became curate of Rye, in Sussex. When he embraced Baptist principles, he became pastor of a church which met at Spillshill House, near Staplehurst, Kent. After laboring there some years, he went into the army, accompanied the forces sent to Ireland, and was fo¤r some time pastor of a church at Dublin, exercising, as it would seem, a general superintendence over the \par other Baptist Churches in that country. In a letter sent to Secretary Thurloe, \par in the year 1655, he is styled, "The Oracle of the Anabaptists in Ireland." He \par appears to have returned to England about the time of the Restoration, as his \par name is affixed to the Baptist declaration against Venner's rebellion. In 1661 \par he went to Holland, where he remained a year. Shortly after his return he \par resumed his residence in Dublin, where he died in 1670. He was a learned man, \par well read in the fathers. Both he and Mr. Cornwell were warm advocates of \par soul-freedom, and protested in their writings against the intolerance of the \par Presbyterian party. His first publication was entitled, The Storming of \par Antichrist in his two Last and Strongest Garrisons,-Compulsion of Conscience and \par Infants' Baptism.9 \par \par MAJOR-GENERAL HARRISON was one of¥ Cromwell's best soldiers, and for a time enjoyed his entire confidence. He commanded the troop of horse appointed to \par convey Charles I. from the Isle of Wight to Hurst Castle. He was one of the \par King's judges. He assisted Cromwell in dissolving the Long Parliament. He was a \par member of the Council of State under the Commonwealth. But he was a stern \par repub\-lican, and therefore entirely opposed to the Protectorate. He had also \par embraced Fifth Monarchy principles. On these accounts Cromwell degraded him and \par placed him in confinement. At the Restoration he was excepted from clemency. Ten \par of the regicides (as the King's judges were called) were hanged, drawn, and \par quartered. Major-General Harrison was one of them. He suffered with great \par calm\-ness and intrepidity, declaring at the place of execution "that he was \par fully persuaded that what he had done was the cause and work of God, which he \par was confident God would own and raise up again, how¦ much soever it suffered at \par that time." \par \par Mr. Ivimey says that "though Major-General Harrison was a Baptist at the time of \par his trial and execution, yet he was not at the period of the King's death;" and \par that "there is no evidence of any Baptist being among the King's judges."10 This \par is not quite clear. Thurloe, in his State Pacers, referring to Harrison's \par refusal submit to the Protectorate, in December 1654, calls him "the most \par eminent man of the Anabaptist party." He could scarcely have been worthy of that \par appellation if he had not been for some time connected with the Baptist \par denomination. \par \par Harrison is generally described by historians as a fanatic. It is certain that \par he was an impulsive being, and somewhat tinctured with vanity. But there can be \par no doubt that he was sincerely and soberly in earnest, although it may be \par admitted that he was a singular man even in those singular times. We must not \par me§asure the seventeenth century by the nineteenth. A modern writer says of \par Harrison: "For the integrity of his life, and the Christian heroism with which \par he endured a cruel and ignominious death, he may deservedly be classed, if he \par may not challenge priority, with a More, a Russell, a Sydney."11 \par \par Here is an extract from a letter written by him to Cromwell on occasion of his \par taking the command of the army sent to invade Scotland in 1650:-"Oh ! that a \par spirit of faith and supplication may be poured forth on you and your army! There \par is more to be had in this poor simple way than even most saints expect. My Lord, \par let waiting upon Jehovah be the greatest and most considerable business you have \par every day; reckon it so, more than to eat, sleep, or counsel together. Run aside \par sometimes from your company, and get a word with the Lord. Why should you not \par have three or four precious souls always standing at your elbow, with whom you \pa¨r might now and then turn into a corner? I have found refreshment and mercy in \par such a way. Ah! the Lord of compassion own, pity your burdens, care for you, \par stand by and refresh your heart each moment! I would I could in any kind do you \par good. My heart is with you, and my poor prayers to my God for you." In a former \par part of the letter he had said, "I doubt not your success; but I think faith and \par prayer must be the chief engines."12 \par \par Cromwell loved such talk. "In such spirit," says Carlyle, "goes Oliver Cromwell \par to the wars. 'A God-intoxicated man,' as Novalis elsewhere phrases it. I have \par asked myself, if anywhere in modern European history, or even in ancient \par Asiatic, there was found a man practicing this mean world's affairs with a heart \par more filled with the idea of the Highest! Bathed in the eternal splendors,-it is \par so he walks our dim earth. This man is one of few. He is projected with a \par terrible force out of the ete©rnities, and in the times and their arenas there is \par nothing that can withstand him."13 \par \par COLONEL HUTCHINSON was a man of noble mind and warm heart. He is immortalized in the Memoirs written by his widow, and well known to all students of English history. It is valuable, on historical accounts, as elucidating sundry misty \par paragraphs in other writers. But its great charm consists in the exquisite \par delineations of character with which it abounds. Mrs. Hutchinson gives us a full \par length portraiture of her excellent husband, drawn, it is true, with the hand of \par affection, and therefore some may be disposed to deem it flattering; but there \par is such an air of truthfulness in the narrative that it is impossible to doubt \par the general correctness of the picture. There are also many discriminating \par sketches of other persons who figured prominently in the scenes of that struggle \par for freedom which Clarendon calls "The Great Rebellion." \par \par Thªe Colonel was for some time Governor of Nottingham, under the Parliament. He \par afterwards sat in the House of Commons, where he was always listened to with \par great respect. Having been one of the King's judges, he was in great peril at \par the Restoration. But he had powerful connections, and he had conciliated the \par regard of his enemies by acts of moderation and kindness when he was in office. \par His life was spared; yet he was treated as a suspected person, whom any one \par might vex and annoy with impunity, and whom, on any pretext, the Government \par might put in durance. So it proved. He was suddenly apprehended, on a charge of \par complicity in some treasonable plot, and committed to the Tower, whence he was \par conveyed to Sandown Castle, near Deal. There was no legal investigation-no \par trial. The accusation was utterly false: but it was determined to put him out of \par the way. The keen air of the sea-coast was ill-suited to the delicate state of \par h«is health; added to which, the accommodations of the prison were of the most \par miserable kind. The physician declared that "the place killed him." He died in \par confinement, September 11, 1664. \par \par Mrs. Hutchinson has given an account of the manner in which she and her husband \par were converted to Baptist principles. It occurred at Nottingham in the year \par 1647. \par \par "When formerly the Presbyterian ministers had forced him, for quietness' sake, \par to go and break up a private meeting in the cannonier's chamber, there were \par found some notes concerning P\'e6dobaptism, which were brought into the governor's \par lodgings; and his wife having then more leisure to read than he, having perused \par them and compared them with the Scriptures, found not what to say against the \par truths they asserted, concerning the misapplication of that ordinance to \par infants; but being then young and modest, she thought it a kind of virtue to \par submit to the judgme¬nt and practice of most Churches, rather than to defend a \par singular opinion of her own, she not being then enlightened in that great \par mistake of the National Churches. But in this year she, happening to be with \par child, communicated her doubts to her husband, and desired him to endeavour her \par satisfaction; which while he did, he himself became as unsatisfied, or rather \par satisfied against it. First, therefore, he diligently searched the Scriptures \par alone, and could find in them no ground at all for that practice; then he bought \par and read all the eminent treatises on both sides, which at that time came thick \par from the presses, and was still more satisfied of the error of the P\'e6dobaptists \par After this, his wife being brought to bed, that he might, if possible, give the \par religious party no offence, he invited all the ministers to dinner, and \par propounded his doubt and the ground thereof to them. None of them could defend \par their practice w­ith any satisfactory reason, but the tradition of the Church \par from the primitive times, and their main buckler of federal holiness, which \par Tombes and Denne had so excellently overthrown. He and his wife then, professing \par themselves unsatisfied with the practice, desired their opinions, what they \par ought to do. Most answered, to conform to the general practice of other \par Christians, how dark soever it were to themselves; but Mr. Foxcraft, one of the \par assembly, said, that except they were convinced of the warrant of that practice \par from the Word, they sinned in doing it: whereupon that infant was not baptized. \par And now the governor and his wife, notwithstanding that they forsook not their \par assemblies, nor retracted their benevolences and civilities from them, yet were \par they reviled by them, called fanatics and Anabaptists, and often glanced at in \par their public sermons. And not only the ministers, but all their zealous \par sectaries, conceived implacable malice against them upon this account; which was \par carried on with a spirit of envy and persecution to the last, though he, on his \par side, might well have said to them, as his Master said to the old Pharisees: \par 'Many good works have I done among you: for which of these do you hate me?'"14 \par \par 1 Tracts, p. 92. \par 2 History, i. p. 275. \par 3 Crosby, i. 298-301 \par 4 Fenstanton Records, Introductory Notice, pp. xii., xiii. \par 5 Fenstanton Records, p. 71. \par 6 Ibid. p. 135. \par 7 History, i, p. 306. \par 8 History, i. p. 346. \par 9 See Baptist Magazine for June, July, August, and September, 1867, for a \par valuable collection of letters written by Mr. Blackwood. \par 10 History, i. p. 293. \par 11 Burton's Diary, by Rutt, iv. p. 432, note. \par 12 Fenstanton Records, pp. 315-317. \par 13 Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, ii. p. 173. \par 14 Memoirs of Col. Hutchinson, pp. 299-301. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } cîcÒ&Sƒ£s0610-Biographical Notices Continued{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER X. \par Biographical Notices Continued-Henry Jessey, A.M.-Joh¯Ë&%?ƒ–0609-Biographical Notices{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER IX. \par Biographical Notices-John Smyth, Thomas Helwys, and John Spilsbury-Henry \par Denne-Francis Cornwell, A.M.-Christopher Blackwood-Major-General \par Harrison-Colonel Hutchinson \par \par I w•°n Canne-Vavasor \par Powell-Abraham Cheare \par \par Henry Jessey, A.M., was a native of Yorkshire, and the son of an Episcopal \par clergyman. Having been carefully prepared for University studies, he entered St. \par John's College, Cambridge, in the seventeenth year of his age, and continued \par there six years. He was a hard student. In addition to a competent knowledge of \par classics and mathematics, he acquired great proficiency in Hebrew and Rabbinical \par lore, and was well skilled in Syriac and Arabic. \par \par He was converted to God while at the University-a rare occurrence at that time. \par After his ordination, he officiated, for a short time, in a country parish, but \par was removed on account of his nonconformity to some of the rites and services \par enjoined. In 1637, he became the pastor of an Independent church in London. He \par had not been long there when the Baptist controversy broke out among them. Many \par of his congregation withdrew and join±ed Baptist churches. Being led thereby to \par study anew the points in debate, he was convinced of the unlawfulness of \par sprinkling, announced the fact to his people in 1642, and for two years dipped \par the children that were brought to him. Further thought and inquiry issued in the \par conviction that believers only are the proper subjects of baptism. Before he \par took the final step, he conferred with Dr. Goodwin, Philip Nye, and other \par eminent ministers of the Independent persuasion, but their arguments for infant \par baptism failed to give him satisfaction. He followed the dictates of conscience, \par was baptized by Hanserd Knollys in June, 1645, and became the pastor of a church \par which is supposed to have met in Woodmonger's Hall, London. He laboured there \par till his death. \par \par Mr. Jessey was a hard student. He continued to be so all his days. Biblical \par criticism was his principal study. A large amount of his time was devoted to a \par revisi²on of our authorized version of the Scriptures. Crosby gives the following \par account of his labours in this department:- \par \par "Besides his constant labours in the work of the ministry, there was another \par profitable work wherein his soul was engaged, and in which he took great pains \par for divers years, and this was no less than the making a new and more correct \par translation of the Holy Bible." \par \par "He was very industrious, in the first place, to under\-stand fully those \par languages in which it was written: the Hebrew and Greek Testaments he constantly \par carried about him, frequently calling one his 'sword and dagger,' and the other \par his 'shield and buckler.' And besides the Hebrew and Greek, he studied the \par Syriac and Chaldee dialects, which the unlearned Jews spoke in their captivity. \par But, notwith\-standing his qualifications in this and many other respects, he had \par not the vanity to think this a work fit for any single man to encou³nter with, \par and, therefore, sent letters to many learned men of this and other nations, \par desiring their assistance and joint labours with him in this great design. And, \par by his persuasions, many persons of great note for their learning, faithfulness, \par and piety, did engage in it; particularly Mr. Rowe, the Hebrew professor of \par Aberdeen, took great pains with him herein. The writer of Mr. Jessey's life says \par that he made it the master study of his life, and would often cry out, 'Oh! that \par I might see this done before I die!'" \par \par "In that book there is a specimen given of the errors he took notice of in the \par present translation, the rules he observed in correcting them, and the progress \par that was made in this work." \par \par "It appears that it was almost completed, and wanted little more than the \par appointing commissioners to examine it, and authorize its publication, which was \par what he always intended, and of which he had from ´the first some assurances \par given him. But the great turn that was given to public affairs, both in Church \par and State, by the Restoration, caused this great and noble design to prove \par abortive."1 \par \par Under the Protectorate, Mr. Jessey was appointed one of the "Triers." He \par officiated also at St. George's Church, Southwark, every Lord's-day morning, \par preaching to his own people in the afternoon, and at other places during the \par week. \par \par Being an unmarried man, he was able to gratify his benevolent disposition to a \par large extent. His charities were very liberally bestowed. About thirty families \par were chiefly sustained by him. Applications for aid pressed upon him daily, and, \par if they were deserving, he seldom refused them. On one occasion he interested \par himself in behalf of the poor Jews resident in Jerusalem, who had fallen into \par great destitution through the failure of customary remittances from Europe. He \par succeeded µin enlisting the sympathies of London merchants and others, and \par remitted upwards of 300\'a3 for their relief. \par \par On account of the high esteem in which he was held, and his well-known learning \par and admirable judgment, his opinion was frequently sought on a great variety of \par subjects. Such demands on his time were thereby occasioned, that he affixed the \par following notice to his study door:- \par \par "Amice, quisquis huc ades; \par Aut agito paucis, aut abi: \par Aut me laborantem adjuva." \par "Whatever friend comes hither, \par Despatch in brief, or go, \par Or help me busied too." \par By Henry Jessey \par \par After the Restoration, Mr. Jessey was quickly ejected from St. George's Church. \par Twice he suffered imprisonment. But he did not live to see the "great and sore \par troubles" of the times of Charles II. and his brother. He died September 4th, \par 1663, and was followed to his grave by thousands of mourners. \par \par "He spent his last ¶days and nights in searching his heart, humbling his soul, \par extolling free grace, and exhorting all about him to keep close to God, to \par persevere in faith, and prepare for trials; adding, for their encouragement, the \par long experience he had had of the goodness of the Lord in all times and \par conditions. The last evening but one before his departure, having a mind to \par walk, he was led about the room, and often repeated this expression, 'God is \par good; He doth not lead me whither I would not, as He did Peter: good is the Lord \par to me.' Being soon tired, he sat down on his bed, and one who sat by him said, \par 'They among whom you have laboured can witness that you have been a faithful \par servant of Christ; making His glory your utmost end, for the good of their \par souls.' But he replied, 'Say no more of that; exalt God-exalt God.' He spent the \par first part of his last night in blessing God and singing praises to His name, \par and fell asleep about ele·ven o'clock. Waking again between two and three, he \par fell into a wonderful strain of abasing himself, and admiring the love of God, \par 'that He, should choose the vilest, the unworthiest, and the basest,' which last \par word he repeated many times, and then cried out, 'Oh, the unspeakable love of \par God, that He should reach me, when I could not reach Him!' And when the cordial \par ordered for that night was brought, he said, 'Trouble me not-upon your peril, \par trouble me not!' He was then as if he had seen some glorious vision, or had been \par in a rapture . . . The last words he was heard to speak were these:-'He counted \par me worthy.' And when the sound of his words ceased, his lips were observed still \par to move, and he seemed to be inwardly adoring that God whom, in his health, he \par served, feared, and praised, and made his boast of continually; whose law he \par preached, and whose goodness he proclaimed. Such was his habitual sense of the \par goodness of¸ God, that, when he met an acquaintance, it was a common thing for \par him (after the usual salutations) to say, 'Verily God is good-blessed be His \par name-stick to Him.' . . . He was so great a Scripturist, that if one began to \par rehearse any passage, he could go on with it, and name the book, chapter, and \par verse where it might be found. The original languages of the old and New \par Testaments were as familiar to him as his mother tongue."2 \par \par JOHN CANNE Was another worthy champion of the truth. He was born about the year 1590, and for a short time ministered in the English Church. In 1621 he was \par chosen pastor of a church which afterwards met in Deadman's Place, Southwark, \par and which had been formed but a little time before. The church met at first \par stealthily in private houses, to avoid persecution, which at length became so \par fierce that Mr. Canne found it necessary to withdraw from England for a time. He \par fixed his residence in Amsterdam, wh¹ere he was chosen pastor of "the ancient \par English Church." In that city he published, in 1634, his work entitled, The \par Necessity of Separation, justifying dissent from the Church of England, and \par enforcing that duty. During a visit to England in 1641, he formed the church in \par Broadmead, Bristol. He returned to his pastoral duties at Amsterdam, but visited \par his native land again after the death of Charles I., and probably spent several \par years, wholly or partially, in England. It appears that he was dissatisfied with \par the Protectorate, and as he was a man whose influence might be dreaded, he was \par not suffered to propagate his opinions undisturbed. He was banished from Hull, \par where he had been preaching for some time, and after some wanderings fixed his \par residence in London. Having embraced Fifth Monarchy principles, although he had \par no sympathy with the political schemes of their advocates, he was apprehended, \par in April, 1658, at a meetºing held in Cole\-man-street, and committed to prison, \par but acquitted on his trial. Once more he sought refuge in Amsterdam, and \par exercised his ministry there till his death, in the year 1667. \par \par Though Mr. Canne was a "baptized man," as he is styled in the records of the \par Broadmead Church, he maintained and practiced open communion. The Rev. Charles \par Stovel, of London, who edited The Necessity of Separation, for the Hanserd \par Knollys Society, says, in a letter to the author, recently received:-"I see \par nothing in his works to indicate a very decided baptistical zeal. I should judge \par that he was, separating from all hierarchies, a free communionist, in the widest \par meaning of that designation that could comport with fellowship in vital \par religion." \par \par Believing that "Scripture is its own best interpreter," he prepared an edition \par of the Bible, with marginal references, judiciously selected, and excellently \par adapted to assist» thoughtful enquirers in the search for truth. It was first \par published in Amsterdam in 1644, and afterwards, repeatedly, both in that city \par and in England. The Rev. Christopher Anderson says:-"The first English Bible, \par with Scriptural references on the margin throughout, was prepared and printed in \par that city [Amsterdam] by John Canne. He proceeded on the principle, that \par 'Scripture is the best interpreter of Scripture,' and his parallels, therefore, \par are parallels of sense, and not of sound, as too many have been since his day . \par . . A good reprint would a very valuable and saleable book."3 \par \par VAVASOR POWELL has not been inappropriately termed "the Whitfield of Wales." \par \par This excellent man was born at Knocklas, in Radnorshire, in the year 1617. He \par received a good education, and was well skilled in the learned languages; but he \par was such a wild youth that even his young associates called him dux omnium \par malorum-leader in al¼l mischief. Nevertheless, he was considered in those times \par good enough for a clergyman, and was accordingly ordained, and admitted to a \par curacy, although, as he afterwards confessed, he "slighted the Scriptures, and \par was a stranger to secret and spiritual prayer, and a great profaner of the \par Sabbath." But he did not long continue in this state. God "called him by His \par grace." The books and sermons of Puritan ministers were blessed to his \par conversion. Having left the Established Church, and joined the Nonconformists, \par he engaged in ministerial labour with great zeal. He was an eloquent and popular \par preacher, and had the honour to be persecuted with no small malice. On one \par occasion, when he had been preaching at a house in Brecknockshire, he was \par seized, together with sixty or seventy of his hearers, by a rude mob, who placed \par their prisoners in the church, as it was too late at night to take them to a \par magistrate. Mr. Powell improved½ the opportunity, and preached in the church at \par midnight from Matthew 10:28. Next morning they went to the magistrate, who was \par not at home when they arrived. Mr. Powell thought that time ought not to be \par wasted, and there\-fore preached again, greatly to the chagrin of his worship, \par who found his house so unceremoniously turned into a con\-venticle. His daughter \par was impressed by the sermon, and interceded for the release of the prisoner, \par which was reluc\-tantly granted. \par \par The opposition was so violent that, in 1642, Mr. Powell went to London, where he \par preached to many congregations with much acceptance. Next year he settled at \par Dartford, in Kent, and was "blessed with great success in his labours, being \par instrumental in bringing many souls to Christ, and gathering a congregation in \par that town." After remaining there nearly three years, he was strongly urged to \par return to Wales, the number of faithful ministers in that countr¾y being then \par very small. He went accordingly, in 1646, and spent fourteen years in his native \par land, traveling from place to place, preaching incessantly, and planting \par churches. "He frequently preached in two or three places in a day, and was \par seldom two days in a week throughout the year out of the pulpit,-nay, he would \par sometimes ride a hundred miles in a week, and preach in every place where he \par might have admittance, either night or day; so that there was hardly a church, \par chapel, or town-hall in all Wales where he had not preached, besides his \par frequent preaching in fairs and markets, upon mountains and in small villages; \par for, if he passed at any time through any place where there was a concourse of \par people, he would take the opportunity of preaching Christ and recommending to \par them the care of their souls, and another world."4 \par \par In 1649 he was appointed one of the Commissioners, under authority of an Act \par passed "f¿or the better propagation and preaching of the Gospel in Wales, for the \par ejecting of scandalous ministers and schoolmasters, and redress of some \par grievances." He discharged his duty in that office honestly and conscientiously, \par though it occasioned him much ill-will. The good effects were apparent in every \par part of the principality. \par \par After the Restoration, Vavasor Powell became a marked man. Such representations \par were made against him, that in August, 1660, orders were issued by government to \par suppress his congregations. In the following January, immediately after Venner's \par insurrection, he was thrown into prison, with many more, and continued there \par nine weeks, when, at the coronation, a general pardon was granted, and he was \par released. \par \par But the term of freedom was short. Preach he would, notwithstanding all \par prohibition. It was impossible to stop him unless he was shut up in jail, and \par there was no difficulty aboutÀ that in the days of Charles II. Upon a vague \par charge of "sedition, rebellion, and treason," preferred by the High Sheriff of \par Montgomeryshire, he was arrested. The Sheriff had no evidence to produce, and \par the prisoner ought to have been released at the Sessions, but a pretext was \par found for detaining him, because he refused to take the oaths of allegiance and \par supremacy. Soon after he was taken to London, and appeared before the King and \par Council, by whom he was committed to the Fleet Prison, where he remained nearly \par two years. For twelve months he was not allowed to leave his chamber, under the \par window of which was a dunghill. His health was so impaired by the noisome \par effluvia, that he never thoroughly recovered. From the Fleet he was conveyed to \par Southsea Castle, near Portsmouth, and was confined there five years more. At the \par end of that time he obtained his liberty by a writ of habeas corpus. Crosby \par remarks that this took placÁe "upon the removal of Chancellor Hyde" [Lord \par Clarendon], implying that the imprisonment was altogether illegal, and that the \par Chancellor had illegally prevented the victim, as well as many others, from \par regaining their liberty. \par \par Mr. Powell repaired immediately to Wales, and recommenced preaching. He was not \par permitted to labour long. One George Jones, an episcopal clergyman, and a man of \par infamous character, lodged a false information against him, to the effect that \par several of his congregation went armed to their meetings, as if for the purpose \par of resisting the authorities. This was levying war! Again the minister of Christ \par was shut up in jail. The charge could not be substantiated. Then they tendered \par the oaths. He refused to take them, and offered to give bail for his appearance \par at the next Sessions. His request was denied, and he was remanded to prison. A \par writ of habeas corpus was again obtained, and he was taken beforÂe the Court of \par Common Pleas, in London: yet, although the court unanimously decided that "the \par return was false and illegal," they committed Mr. Powell, in defiance of all law \par and justice, to the Fleet Prison, where he lay till his death, October 17th, \par 1670. \par \par The Lord was with him there, and gave him "songs in the night." Nor was he even \par there wholly useless. He had opportunities for intercourse with his brethren, \par and he could use his pen for the advancement of the cause. One of the last acts \par of his life was a correspondence with the Broadmead Church, respecting Mr. \par Hardcastle, who afterwards became their pastor. It was singularly illustrative \par of the hardness of the times. Vavasor Powell, a prisoner, recommends to the \par church a ministering brother, himself a prisoner! \par \par "We are appointed and commanded," he observed, "to be partakers of the \par afflictions of the Gospel (1 Thess. 3:3). To be some of the forwardestà therein \par is an honour, which I perceive God is calling you to; therefore rejoice, and so \par much the more as tribulations abound (2 Cor. 7:4). Our trials are like to be \par sharp, but it is to be hoped so much the shorter. However, what are the worst \par and greatest we can endure here, in comparison of the weight of glory, and crown \par of righteousness, prepared and reserved for those who continue faithful to the \par end? An interest in God through Christ, His presence with, power under, Spirit \par in, and promises to us, are sufficient to carry us comfortably through fire and \par water; herein let us remember one another, and all the Israel of God, who are in \par several countries now intended by men to be sheep for the slaughter, though the \par thought of the Lord may be otherwise."5 \par \par "During the time of his last illness," says Crosby, "though his physician \par ordered he should be kept from speaking much, yet so zealously was he affected \par for thÄe glory of God, and with the love of Christ, that neither his pains, \par bodily weakness, nor the tender advice of friends, could possibly restrain him; \par but he would, notwithstanding all, break forth into high and heavenly praises, \par sometimes by prayer, and sometimes by singing." \par \par "His patience under all his pains was very great. He would under the greatest \par pain bless God, and say, he would not entertain one bad thought of God for all \par the world. The sight of the pardon of sin, and reconciliation with God, was so \par clear, and without interruption, even to the last, that it was as a fire in his \par bosom till he spake of it: and very hardly would he be restrained at any time: \par and when he had spent his strength in speaking, then would he compose himself to \par get a little more strength, that he might go on to speak further of the grace of \par God towards him, and to give reasonable advice to all about him; and so \par continued till God took aÅway his strength and speech from him."6 \par Among the publications issued by him were two, which were probably written in \par jail. One was entitled, "The Bird in the Cage, Chirping;" the other, "The \par Sufferer's Catechism." \par \par ABRAHAM CHEARE was not a scholar, but he was one of the working, suffering men of the seventeenth century, whom the Lord honored and blessed. He was a native of Plymouth, and was by trade a fuller. Whether he had been a minister in one of the P\'e6dobaptist denominations, or whether his preaching abilities showed \par themselves immediately after his conversion, we are not able to decide. This \par only is recorded, that he was invited to the pastorate of the church at Plymouth \par in the same year in which he was baptized, viz. 1648. Though the Baptists in \par that town were "a poor despised people," they were respectably numerous, the \par invitation of Mr. Cheare being signed by one hundred and fifty members. It is \par probable that many of thÆem resided in the neighboring villages, and that Mr. \par Cheare had a somewhat extensive diocese. He was a diligent and faithful \par observer. After thirteen years of peaceful labours, during which many souls were \par converted, and a good degree of religious prosperity was enjoyed by the church, \par Mr. Cheare entered on his course of sufferings. In 1661 he was confined for \par three months in Exeter jail, for "encouraging religious assemblies." Referring \par to this imprisonment, in a letter written some time afterwards, he says:-"Some \par from our neighboring parts are sent to the place of ancient experience [the \par prison], where they have a stock of prayers and presence to begin upon; they \par begin on straw, learning to endure hardness as good soldiers. The Lord make that \par Word good to them which often hath been, in that dace, sweet to me (Ex. 23:25; \par Eccl. 4:14.)." \par \par The Act of Uniformity was the death-knell of Christian freedom. Not only the \paÇr ejected ministers, but all others who refused obedience, were subjected to \par persecution. Mr. Cheare became again an occupant of Exeter jail, and lay there \par three years, "enduring great inhumanities from merciless jailors," yet enjoying \par the consolations of religion in an eminent degree. Writing to a friend, who had \par known something of persecution, he says:-"I received yours of the 11th of the \par seventh month, and in it a testimony of teaching and supporting grace and \par presence continued to you abroad, which He is pleased not to deny His poor worms \par here, in these holes of the earth, where violence hath thrust us in as so many \par slaughter-houses of men; but over-ruling grace makes them as the \par presence-chambers of the great King, where He brings and feasts His favorites \par with the best things, and proclaims among them, 'Thus shall it be done to them \par whom the King delights to honour.' This honour have not all, that yet are \par saints; muchÈ less have any this mercy, who either through the fear or formality \par of their unconverted souls are enforced shamefully to put off that profession \par which hypocritically they did put on in a day of seeming prosperity; not but \par these walls, as a draw-net, do enclose bad and good; but at length a discovery \par is made more manifest; he chooseth in this furnace of affliction, a week in a \par prison giving plainer discovery of a man's spirit than a month in a church." \par \par He was released in 1665, and returned to his work, but had scarcely entered on \par it when his enemies obtained an order for his perpetual banishment. He was \par placed on the small island of St. Nicholas, whence he had a full view of his \par former abode, and doubtless often gazed on it with sadness. But he was not \par alone. Other Christian friends shared his exile. Their discomforts were many; \par the military guard which was constantly in attendance prevented them from \par engaging in religious exercises; and Mr. Cheare had the additional trial of a \par severe attack of illness, which lasted nine months, and brought him to the brink \par of the grave. Yet, though "cast down," he was not "destroyed." Divine comforts \par sustained him, and the sympathy of his brethren on the mainland was practically \par shown in contributions for his support. They were not long needed Another \par illness came on, under which he rapidly sank. At even-tide it was light. His \par dying experience afforded a beautiful illustration of the power of the Gospel. \par It cheered those who watched around his bed, and the published record edified \par many. He exchanged exile for a heavenly home, March 5, 1668.7 \par \par 1 History, i. p. 313. \par 2 Palmer's Nonconformist's Memorial, i, p. 133. \par 3 Annals of the English Bible, ii. p. 559. \par 4 Crosby, i. 376. \par 5 Broadmead Records, p. 108. \par 6 History, i. p. 380. \par 7 Ivimey, ii. pp. 103-116. \par \f1\fs20 \par } Ê the \par satisfaction of all concerned. About the year 1631, he obtained the living of \par Leominster, in Herefordshire, where he preached and laboured ten years. His zeal \par for "a reformation in the Church, and the purging out of all human inventions in \par the worship of God," exposed him to the fury of anti-reformers. When the King's \par forces occupied Leominster, Mr. Tombes was driven out of the place, and most of \par his property plundered. After a short stay in Bristol, he repaired to London, \par where he preached, first in Fenchurch-street, and afterwards in the Temple \par Church. But he had been studying the subject of baptism for several years. \par \par Doubts respecting the authority of infant-baptism troubled him while he held his \par lectureship at Oxford. He sought satisfaction with great earnestness and \par diligence. The Scriptures were carefully examined; the best writings on both \par sides were read; and frequent conferences were held with learned Ëministers, for \par which there was ample opportunity at that time, as the Assembly of Divines was \par then sitting. But his scruples took faster hold of him, and at length he yielded \par to the conviction of the unscripturalness of infant-baptism. Dismission from his \par situation in the Temple followed the publication of one of his works on the \par subject. He then retired into the country, and became minister of Bewdley, \par Worcestershire. There, in 1646, he was baptized, and formed a Baptist church, to \par which he ministered separately, still retaining the charge of the parish; but \par the want of sympathy between him and the people occasioned his removal, and he \par returned to Leominster, at which place he closed his public ministry, soon after \par the Restoration. We have before stated, that he was appointed one of the Triers \par in Cromwell's time. The terms of uniformity were too hard for him. He withdrew \par into private life. "Having not long before married Ìa rich widow at Salisbury, by \par whom he enjoyed a good estate, he resolved to live in rest and peace in his old \par age."1 The latter part of his life was spent in communion with the Church of \par England, although he refused to accept any benefice or dignity, or to occupy any \par public position. With singular inconsistency, as it seems to us, he still wrote \par against infant-baptism. \par \par Mr. Tombes wrote fourteen treatises on baptism. The principal one was entitled, \par Antip\'e6dobaptism, or a full review of the dispute about Infant-Baptism. \par \par FRANCIS BAMPFIELD, A.M., was one of the "excellent of the earth" in those days. \par \par He received his education at Wadham College, Oxford, where he spent upwards of \par seven years in the pursuit of knowledge. About the year 1639, he entered the \par ministry of the Church of England. The celebrated Bishop Hall ordained him. \par Shortly afterwards he obtained a living in Dorsetshire, and a prebendal stall iÍn \par Exeter Cathedral. In 1655 he removed to Sherborne, where he labored, as in his \par former location, with exemplary diligence, and was greatly endeared to the \par people of his charge. \par \par But he had long been dissatisfied with the National Establishment. The \par corruptions and abuses inherited from Rome were not to be borne with. They could \par not, in his opinion, be classed among "things indifferent," for they struck at \par the authority of the Redeemer, as sole Head of the Church, and were totally \par inconsistent with the spirituality of His kingdom. The enactment of the Act of \par Uniformity, in 1662, brought Mr. Bampfield to a decision. He took leave of His \par flock, and commenced preaching as a Nonconformist. \par \par In less than a month he was committed to prison, and there, too, he preached the \par Gospel. His imprisonments were numerous. One of them lasted eight years. He was \par then an inmate of Dorchester jail, where he continued his miniÎsterial efforts, \par and had the happiness of forming a church. He preached in jail almost every day. \par As soon as he was liberated, he resumed his public work, itinerating in several \par counties. In March, 1676, he became pastor of a Sabbatarian Baptist church \par meeting in Pinner's Hall, London, which had been gathered by his \par instrumentality. In the record of the formation of this church, it is stated \par that "the persons who then agreed to join together in church-communion, \par according to the order of the Gospel, under the conduct of the said Mr. Francis \par Bampfield, as their pastor, laid their church state upon the only sure \par foundation, and agreed to form and regulate it by the only certain rule and \par measure, expressing the nature and constitution of this church in the following \par terms:-'We own the Lord Christ to be the one and only Lord and Lawgiver to our \par souls and consciences; and we own the Holy Scriptures of truth as the one and. \pÏar only rule of faith, worship, and life, according to which we are to judge in all \par cases.' Accordingly, these principles were subscribed by the pastor and divers \par brethren on behalf of the rest."2 \par \par This was his last station. Here he met with the usual disturbances, the \par congregation being often broken up by the officers of mis-called justice. On \par February 17th, 1683, while he was preaching, a constable entered and interrupted \par him. "I have a warrant from the Lord Mayor to disturb your meeting," said the \par constable. "I have a warrant from Jesus Christ to go on," replied the preacher, \par and was proceeding with his discourse, when he was seized and taken, with six of \par his brethren, to the Lord Mayor, who fined them ten pounds each. Nevertheless, \par they met again in the afternoon, but were compelled to separate, on which they \par retired to Mr. Bampfield's residence, where he finished the exercises of the \par day. That day week he was appÐrehended once more, and committed to Newgate. At \par the next Quarter Sessions he and several others were placed at the bar, and the \par oath of allegiance was tendered to them. They declined to take it, because it \par was understood to comprise an obligation to conform to the Church of England, to \par which they could not bind themselves; whereupon the Recorder passed sentence to \par this effect:-"That they were out of the protection of the King's majesty; that \par all their goods and chattels were forfeited; and that they were to remain in \par jail during their lives, or during the King's pleasure." It was not "the King's \par pleasure " to release them. Death in jail was a common thing during the reigns \par of Charles II. and James II. Mr. Bampfield died in Newgate, February 16th, 1684, \par being in the seventieth year of his age. \par \par He was a learned man and a hard student. The titles of two of his works seem to \par indicate that he had embraced the views whichÑ were afterwards more fully \par developed by Mr. Hutchinson, and are so often referred to in Parkhurst's Hebrew \par and Greek Lexicons. The one is:-All in One; All useful sciences and profitable \par arts ire one book of Jehovah-\'c6loim, copied out, and commented upon in created \par Beings, comprehended and discovered in the fullness and perfection of Scripture \par knowledge, 1677: folio. The other is:-The House of Wisdom. The House of the Sans of the Prophets: an House of exquisite inquiry; and of deep Research; where the \par mind of Jehovah-\'c6loim in the Holy Scriptures of Truth, in the original words and \par phrases; and their proper significancy, is diligently studied, faithfully \par compared, and aptly past together for the further promoting and higher \par advancement of Scripture knowledge, of all useful Arts, and profitable Sciences, \par in one Book of Books, the Word of Christ, copied out, and commented upon in \par created Beings, 1681: folio. \par \par HENRY ÒD'ANVERS is best known as an author, his Treatise on Baptism being \par regarded as the most learned and complete work which at that time had been \par published on the subject. The full title is:-A Treatise on Baptism; wherein that \par of Believers and that of Infants is examined by the Scriptures, with the history \par of both out of Antiquity; making it appear that Infants' Baptism was not \par Practiced for nearly four hundred years after Christ; with the fabulous \par traditions and erroneous grounds upon which it was, by the Pope's Canons (with \par Gossips, Chrysm, Exorcism, Baptizing of Bells, and other Popish Rites), founded: \par and that the famous Waldensian, and other British Churches, Lollards, and \par Wicklifians, and other Christians, witnessed against it: with the History of \par Christianity among the Ancient Britons and Waldensians. Mr. D'Anvers had been a \par colonel in the Parliamentary army, and was some time Governor of Stafford. While \par he held that ofÓfice he became a Baptist. He was very strenuous for laying on of \par hands after baptism. He was reputed to be a Fifth Monarchy man, and it appears \par evident that he expected the personal reign of the Redeemer upon earth. In 1675 \par he was apprehended and committed to the Tower-probably on suspicion of \par treasonable prac\-tices, which Venner's insurrection had led the Government to \par connect with Fifth Monarchy principles-but as no specific charge was brought \par against him, he was released on bail. It is stated by Crosby that he was one of \par the elders of a Baptist church, near Aldgate, London. When he was chosen to that \par office does not appear. In the reign of James II. he united with some others in \par consultations and plans relative to the Duke of Monmouth's enterprise, and was \par so far compromised thereby that he was compelled to flee to Holland, where he \par died in 1686. The high esteem in which he was held by the principal Baptists of \par that peÔriod is shown by a "Vindication" of his work referred to above, to which \par were appended the names (among others) of Hanserd Knollys, William Kiffin, and \par Thomas Delaune. \par \par Mr. D'Anvers' complicity in the Monmouth rebellion will be differently judged of \par according to men's political views. That James II. was a tyrant, and that he \par deserved expulsion, no one now doubts; but where the obligation to entire \par submission ceases, and the lawfulness of resistance begins, has not yet, we \par believe, been decided. We who have lived all our days in sunshine, are but ill \par qualified to criticize the behavior of those who endured the peltings of the \par storm. \par \par We have read with intense interest the Records of the Baptist Church in \par Broadmead, Bristol. For those Records we are indebted to Mr. EDWARD TERRILL, who was for eighteen years a ruling elder of that church. He was bap\-tized in the \par year 1658, chosen to the office of elder in 1667, andÕ died in 1685. During the \par harassing persecutions through which the church passed, he was truly its earthly \par mainstay. His house was open for worship whenever it was deemed more prudent to \par meet in a private manner. When the pastor was in prison or compelled to be \par absent, he was ready to occupy the post of labour and of danger. He was wise in \par council, kindhearted to the poor, and fertile in expedients to baffle \par persecutors, and provide for the church's spiritual wants. A Dissenter and a \par Baptist from conviction, he stood firm to his principles, though despoiled of \par his property, and not unfrequently committed to prison for maintaining them. In \par many instances, when tyrant-magistrates thought that they might stretch their \par power with impunity, he checked their violence by employing the best legal \par advisers, and thus securing the church from unlawful oppression. In a word, he \par lived for the cause, and his memory is blessed. \par \Öpar Having acquired considerable property by his marriage, he resolved to devote it \par to the Lord. By a deed executed in 1678, he placed a large portion-perhaps the \par whole-of his estates in the hands of trustees, the income derivable therefrom to \par become available, as it should seem, after the death of his widow, and to be \par expended on the education of young men for the ministry. This was done, he said, \par for the glory of God, and the propagation of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus \par Christ, and for the true love and affection he hath and beareth unto the \par congregation of which he is a member. With this object in view, he directed that \par \'a3100 a year should be paid to "a holy learned man, well skilled in the tongues, \par viz., Greek and Hebrew, and doth own and practice the truth of believers' \par baptism, as a pastor or teacher to the congregation." The pastor thus employed \par was to spend three and a half days in each week in the instruction of young m×en, \par not exceeding twelve, members of any baptized congregation in or near Bristol. \par Ten pounds a year were also to be paid to any four of the students whose friends \par might be unable to support them. These benefactions may be said to have laid the \par foundation of Bristol College. By them, Mr. Terrill's usefulness is perpetuated. \par The history of Dr. Du VEIL is extremely interesting. He was a native of France \par and of Jewish extraction. His parents were probably in affluent circumstances, \par as it is evident that he received a very liberal education. The study of the \par prophetical writings of the Old Testament convinced him of the Messiahship of \par Jesus. When he avowed that conviction, and his determination to embrace \par Christianity, his father was so enraged that he attempted to kill him, and would \par have accomplished his purpose had he not been prevented by some persons present. \par Du Veil joined the Roman Catholic Church, and soon became an eloØquent and \par popular preacher. He acquired considerable fame also as an author, by a \par Commentary on the Gospels of Mark and Luke, in which he displayed much learning \par and controversial tact. The University of Anjou bestowed on him the degree of \par D.D., and he was urged to enter into the lists with the Huguenots, whose \par powerful defenses of Protestant truths gave no small trouble to Roman \par ecclesiastics. He engaged in preparation for that work, but found to his \par astonishment that Protestantism was a purer form of Christianity than he had yet \par been acquainted with. Honestly following his convictions, he withdrew from \par France to Holland, since his life would have been in danger had he continued in \par the former country, and publicly abjured Popery. Shortly afterwards he proceeded \par to England, where he was received with great respect and liberally befriended by \par many prelates and dignitaries of the English Church. \par \par He was ordained Ùto the ministry in that Church. In 1679 he published, A Literal \par Explication of Solomon's Song, and, in the following year, A Literal Exposition \par of the Minor Prophets. These works greatly enhanced his reputation. The Bishop \par of London (Dr. Compton) was so pleased with them, that he offered every \par encouragement to the learned author to continue his biblical researches, and \par gave him the free use of his library for that purpose. This led to another and \par final change. In the Bishop's library he found the works of Baptist authors, and \par the perusal of them convinced him that the Baptists were in the right. A pious \par young woman, a servant in the Bishop's family, introduced him to the .church \par with which she was connected, and of which the Rev. John Gosnold was pastor. Dr. \par Du Veil was baptized by him, and joined the church, by that act separating \par himself from the rich and powerful, by whose means he would most probably have \par obtained ecclÚesiastical advancement. In 1685 his Literal Explanation of the Acts \par of the Apostles was published. This is a valuable commentary. It has been \par reprinted by the Hanserd Knollys Society. \par \par We have been unable to obtain further information respecting Dr. Du Veil. \par Whether he preached after he became a Baptist, or confined himself to literary \par labour, is not recorded in any works to which we have had access. Doubtless he \par devoted his talents to the diffusion and defense of the truth, and it may be \par inferred that he was usefully employed. It is not often that we meet with such a \par case. There have been many in all ages who have seen the light, but failed to \par follow it, through fear of poverty or suffering. Dr. Du Veil was not one of that \par class. Every change placed him lower in a worldly point of view; but that did \par not move him. Truth was to be embraced, and conscience obeyed at all risks. \par Peace to his memory! \par \par JOHN BUNYÛAN'S reputation is world-wide. He was truly a God-taught man. His \par "Pilgrim" tells his tale in nearly all languages, and it is listened to with \par rapt interest and admiration by men of every clime, and of all varieties of \par mental culture. It is the peasant's food and the philosopher's luxury. \par \par The history of his life is so well-known, that it is quite unnecessary to \par reproduce it here. We will only give a chronological note or two. John Bunyan \par was born at Elstow, Bedfordshire, in the year 1628. He was converted to God in \par 1653, and soon after began to preach. On the 13th of November, 1660. he was \par committed to Bedford jail for "teaching men to worship God contrary to the law." \par There, with no other aids than the Bible and Foxe's Book of Martyrs, he wrote \par the Pilgrim's Progress, and other works which have immortalized his name. He was \par released in December, 1672, and spent the remainder of his life in manifold \par labours for the cÜause of Christ. As pastor of the church at Bedford, to which \par office he was chosen December 21st, 1671, while yet a prisoner, "he was instant \par in season, out of season," and the Church greatly flourished under his ministry. \par When he visited London, people flocked in crowds to hear him: three thousand \par persons were known to be assembled for that purpose at seven o'clock in the \par morning. Not unfrequently the learned and the great were among them. Charles II. \par once asked Dr. Owen how it was that he was so fond of hearing a tinker preach. \par "May it please your majesty," the doctor replied, "had I the tinker's abilities \par for preaching, I would gladly relinquish all my learning." \par \par He had been engaged in a Christian work when he fell under the death-stroke. A \par profligate son had so offended his father that he threatened to disinherit him. \par Bunyan effected a reconciliation. He had been to Reading on this benevolent \par errand, and was returning home through London, when he was attacked by fever, \par caused by exposure to heavy rain on his journey, and died at a friend's house \par after a few days' illness. This was in August, 1688, about three months before \par the landing of William, Prince of Orange, afterwards William III. How his heart \par would have been gladdened, could he have witnessed his nation's deliverance! \par One of the last treatises which he prepared for the press was entitled, Of \par Antichrist and his Ruin. It expresses, in his own plain and nervous style, those \par sentiments respect\-ing Popery and religious freedom which Baptists have ever \par maintained. \par \par We may indulge in a pardonable pride when we boast of John Bunyan as one of us. \par We have no name more honored. But we will not attempt to write his eulogy. His \par works praise him, and will praise him as long as the Church of God abides. \par \par 1 Crosby, i. p. 290. \par 2 Ivimey, i. p. 170. \par \f1\fs20 \par } ÐÐ¥X'S‚Êm0611-Biographical Notices Continued{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER XI. \par Biographical Notices Continued-John Tombes, B.D.-Francis Bampfield, A.M.-Henry D'Anvers-Edward Terril-Dr. Du Veil-John Bunyan \par \par JOHN TOMBES, B.D., was an eminently learned man. His writings in defense of \par believers' baptism were numerous and weighty. Educated at Magdalen Hall, Oxford, \par he was appointed to the "Catechetical Lecture" in that Hall, on the death of his \par tutor, when he was but twenty-one years of age, and discharged the duty toÉß-Benjamin \par Keach-William Kiffin-Anecdotes \par \par I have given some account of the principal ministers of our denomination in \par England who died before the glorious Revolution. The names of several others, \par who survived that event, will be recorded here, because their labors as public \par men must be chiefly referred to the period now under review. \par \par THOMAS GRANTHAM was for many years the principal minister among the General Baptists. He was baptized at Boston, Lincolnshire, in the year 1652, and almost immediately afterwards commenced his ministerial labours. In 1656 he became pastor of a church at North Elm Chapel. The petition presented to Charles II. in the early part of his reign, said to be "approved by more than 20,000," was \par written by him. He was several times imprisoned, and otherwise annoyed, for his \par principles and practices as a Baptist. So highly esteemed was he by his \par brethren, that in 1666 he was removed from the pastoral office and aàppointed \par "messenger," in which capacity he laboured many years, founding churches in \par Lincolnshire, Norfolk, Warwickshire, and other counties, and exercising a \par general superintendence over the interests of the denomination. He finally \par settled at Norwich, where he died, January 17, 1692. \par \par Mr. Grantham wrote some useful works, chiefly in explanation or defense of \par Baptist sentiments. The largest Was a folio volume, entitled "Christianismus \par Primitives."1 \par \par HANSERD KNOLLYS was a native of Chalkwell, in Lincolnshire. While pursuing his studies at the University of Cambridge, he experienced a change of heart, having \par become acquainted with "several gracious Christians, then called Puritans," \par whose conversation was blessed to him. In 1629 he was ordained by the Bishop of \par Peterborough. At Humberstone, where he lived several years, he was accustomed to \par preach three and even four times on the Lord's-day, besides sermons on saiánts' \par days and at funerals. But scruples and doubts agitated his mind. At length he \par reached the conviction that his position in the Church of England was not in \par accordance with the New Testament, and he renounced his ordination, resolving \par not to preach any more till he had "received a clear call and commission from \par Christ to preach the Gospel." \par \par During his silence he underwent much mental distress, which was removed by the \par instrumentality of Mr. Wheel\-wright, one of the Puritan ministers. He then \par recom\-menced preaching. "I began to preach the doctrine of free grace, according \par to the tenor of the new and everlasting Covenant, for three or four years \par together, whereby very many sinners were converted, and many believers were \par established in the faith." \par \par The persecution was so fierce that he joined the emi\-grants who were at that \par time flocking to New England, and arrived at Boston in the spring of 1638. He â \par was not allowed to remain there, the ministers having unaccount\-ably judged him \par to be an Antinomian, and desired the magistrates to send him away. But he found \par a home at Dover, on the Piscataqua, where he preached with much acceptance \par upwards of three years. Cotton Mather, having referred to "ministers from other \par parts of the world," who had arrived in New England, says:-"Of these there were \par some godly Anabaptists, as namely, Mr. Hanserd Knollys (whom one of his \par adversaries called Absurd Knowless), of Dover, and Mr. Miles of Swansley. Both \par of these have a respectful character in the churches of this wilderness."2 It is \par observable that Mr. Knollys' arrival was in the spring of 1638. Roger Williams' \par baptism did not take place till the winter of that year. \par \par Mr. Knollys returned to England about the close of 1641. He settled in London, \par where he gained his livelihood by teaching a school. His next employment was \par thaãt of chaplain in the Parliamentary army. When he left the army he established \par himself again in London as a schoolmaster, and preached in the churches as he \par found opportunity. His labours were very acceptable to the people, but were so \par disapproved of by the Assembly of Divines, because he preached against national \par churches, that he withdrew from connection with them, and opened a meeting-house \par in Great St. Helen-street, where he commonly had a congregation of a thousand \par hearers. A Baptist church was formed there, over which he was ordained pastor in \par 1645. He held that office till his death, in 1691, though he was often \par prevented, by the operation of unjust laws, from fulfilling its duties. On \par several occasions he found it necessary to retire into the country for a while, \par and during the hottest period of the persecution he left England, and lived two \par or three years in Germany and Holland. He had his share also of "bonds and \par äimprisonments." But God graciously sustained him. His religious enjoyments \par abounded, and his labours were eminently successful. \par \par "My wilderness, sea, city, sad prison mercies," he observes, "afforded me very \par many and strong consolations. The spiritual sights of the glory of God, the \par divine sweetness of the spiritual and providential presence of my Lord Jesus \par Christ, And the joys and comforts of the holy and eternal Spirit, communicated \par to my soul, together with suitable and seasonable Scriptures of truth, have so \par often and so powerfully revived, refreshed, and strengthened my heart in the \par days of my pilgrimage, trials, and sufferings, that the sense,-yea the life and \par sweetness thereof,-abides still upon my heart, and hath engaged my soul to live \par by faith, to walk humbly, and to desire and endeavour to excel in holiness to \par God's glory and the example of others. Though, I confess, many of the Lord's \par ministers and some oåf the Lord's people have excelled and outshined me, with \par whom God hath not been at so much cost, nor pains, as He hath been at with me. I \par am a very unprofitable servant, but yet by grace I am what I am." \par Mr. Knollys gives the following account of his recovery from a dangerous \par illness. We shall copy it without comment:- \par \par "Two learned, well-practiced, and judicious doctors of physic had daily visited \par me, and consulted several days together, and I was fully persuaded that they did \par what they possibly could to effect a cure, and knew also that God did not \par succeed their honest and faithful endeavors with His blessing. Although God had \par given a signal and singular testimony of His special blessing by each of them \par unto other of their patients, at least sixteen, at the same time, I resolved to \par take no more physic, but would apply to that holy ordinance of God, appointed by \par Jesus Christ, the great Physician of value, in James 5:1æ4, 15:-'Is any sick \par among you? let him call for the elders of the Church, and let them pray over \par him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith \par shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed \par sins, they shall be forgiven him:'-and I sent for Mr. Kiffin and Mr. Vavasor \par Powell, who prayed over me, and anointed me with oil in the name of the Lord. \par The Lord did hear prayer, and heal me; for there were many godly ministers and \par gracious saints that prayed day and night for me (with submission to the will of \par God), that the Lord would spare my life, and make me more serviceable to His \par Church, and to His saints, whose prayers God heard; and as an answer to their \par prayers I was perfectly healed, but remained weak long after." \par \par As the poverty of the church prevented them from pro\-viding adequately for his \par support, Mr. Knollys continued in his employment as a schoolmastçer almost to the \par close of life. His efforts were so successful that he realized consi\-derable \par property. Reviewing his history some time after his wife's death (which took \par place in 1671), he says:-"To my eldest son I had given sixty pounds per annum \par during life, which he enjoyed about twenty-one years ere he died. To my next son \par that lived to be married I gave the full value of two hundred and fifty pounds \par in money, house, school, and household goods, and left him fifty scholars in the \par school-house. To my only daughter then living I gave upon her marriage, above \par three hundred pounds in money, annuity, plate, linen, and household stuffs, and \par left her husband fifty scholars in the said school-house, in partnership with my \par said son. To my youngest son that lived to be married I gave more than three \par hundred pounds sterling; besides, it cost me sixty pounds in his apprenticeship, \par and forty pounds afterwards. Thus my Heavenly Faèther made up my former losses \par with His future blessings, even in outward substance, besides a good increase of \par grace and experience, in the space of the forty years that I and my dear \par faithful wife lived together. We removed several times, with our whole family; \par whereof, once from Lincolnshire to London, and from London to New England; once \par from England into Wales, twice from London into Lincolnshire; once from London \par to Holland, and from thence into Germany, and thence to Rotterdam, and thence to \par London again. In which removings I gained great experiences of God's \par faithfulness, goodness and truth, in His great and precious promises; and I have \par gained some experience of my own heart's deceitfulness and the power of my own \par corruptions, and the reigning power of Christ, and His captivating and subduing \par my sins-making conquests of the devil, world, and sin, and then giving me the \par victory, and canting me to triumph, and to bleéss His holy name . . . I would not \par want those experiences and teachings that my soul hath enjoyed for all that I \par ever suffered." \par \par Among the works published by Mr. Knollys was a Grammar of the Latin, Greek, and \par Hebrew languages. It was written in Latin.3 \par \par Mr. Knollys died September 19th, 1691. He was in the ninety-third year of his \par age. The "Hanserd Knollys Society," founded in the year 1845, for the \par republication of the works of early Baptist authors, was named after him. \par Knollys, Keach, and Kiffin might be called "the first three" among the Baptist \par ministers of those days. Their talents and characters gave them influence, which \par appears to have been wisely exerted for the benefit of the denomination. They \par were honored while living, and their "memory is blessed." \par \par BENJAMIN KEACH'S sufferings have been detailed in a former section. He was \par twenty-four years of age when he endured the pillory. Born in 1640ê, he was \par converted in his fifteenth year, and commenced preaching, at the invitation of \par the Church, three years afterwards, though he did not undertake a pastoral \par charge till 1668, when he was chosen pastor of a church in Southwark. He \par remained there till his death. \par \par An occurrence during his journey to London illustrates the state of society and \par the deficiency of the police arrangements at that time. Mr. Keach, his wife, and \par three children were traveling to London by the stage-coach. On their way they \par were attacked by a band of highwaymen, who robbed the passengers of all their \par money and valuables, leaving Mr. Keach, who had just sold his effects for the \par purpose of settling in London, and had the proceeds of the sale in his pocket, \par in a state of utter destitution. But friends relieved his immediate necessities, \par and assisted him in bringing an action against the county for the amount of his \par loss, in which he sucëceeded. Such a procedure would be accounted strange in \par these days. \par \par Mr. Keach's labours were much blessed. For four years the church over which he \par presided met in private houses, often changing the place of assembly to avoid \par the pursuit of informers. In 1672, when Charles II. issued a "Declaration of \par Indulgence," a meeting-house was erected for the church. It was enlarged several \par times, as the congregation increased, and at length was capable of accommodating \par nearly a thousand persons. \par \par Preaching was not the whole of his work. Mr. Keach was a voluminous writer. Some \par of his works were "polemical," some "practical," some "poetical." The \par "polemical" treated of various subjects, then warmly discussed-including the \par laying on of hands, the lawfulness of singing in public worship, the authority \par of the Christian Sabbath, and baptism. On the last-mentioned theme he wrote \par frequently, and with great earnestness. The ì"practical" portion of his works \par comprised, besides minor productions, his Tropologia; or, Key to Open Scripture \par Metaphors; his Gospel Mysteries Unveiled; or, an Exposition of all the Parables; \par and his Travels of True Godliness, and Travels of Ungodliness. The first two \par were bulky books, which were rather distinguished for ingenuity than for just \par criticism. They have been reprinted several times, but, however valuable in a \par devotional or experimental point of view, cannot be recommended as models of \par sound exegesis. The two others are somewhat in Bunyan's style. They are still \par prized by serious readers. The most important of his "Poetical" compositions \par was, Zion in Distress; or, the Groans of the Protestant Church, first published \par in 1666. This was written, as he says in the Preface, because "he perceived \par Popery was ready to bud, and would, if God prevented not, spring up afresh in \par the land." After the Revolution, his prolifíic pen produced another poem, \par entitled, Distressed Sion Relieved; or, the Garment of Praise for the Spirit of \par Heaviness. He also published a collection, entitled, Spiritual Melody, \par containing nearly three hundred hymns. \par \par Mr. Keach's constitution was weak, and his illnesses were frequent. In 1689 his \par life was despaired of; his physicians had exhausted their skill; and his \par relatives took leave of him, expecting his departure to be near at hand, when, \par as Crosby relates, "the Reverend Mr. Hanserd Knollys, seeing his friend and \par brother near to all appear\-ance expiring, betook himself to prayer, and, in an \par earnest and very extraordinary manner, begged that God would spare him and add \par unto his days the time granted unto His servant Hezekiah. As soon as he ended \par his prayer, he said, 'Brother Keach, I shall be in heaven before you,' and \par quickly after left him. So remarkable was the answer of God to this good man's \par prayîer, that I cannot omit it; though it may be discredited by some, there are \par yet living incontestable evidences of the fact;-for Mr. Keach re\-covered of that \par illness, and lived just fifteen years after\-wards; and then it pleased God to \par visit him with that short sickness which put an end to his life." He died July \par 18, 1704, in the sixty-fourth year of his age. \par \par The historian Crosby was a member of the church under Mr. Keach's pastoral care. \par His delineation of the cha\-racter of his pastor was the result of personal and \par close observation. It is manifestly a picture from life, and is worthy of \par preservation. \par \par "To collect every particular transaction of this worthy minister's life cannot \par be expected at such a distance of time; nay, even to collect all that was \par excellent and amiable in him is too great a task to be now undertaken. I shall \par only observe that he was a person of great integrity of soul; a Nathanael \par ïindeed; his conversation not frothy and vain, but serious, without being morose \par or sullen. He began to be religious early, and continued faithful to the last. \par He was not shocked by the fury of his persecutors, though he suffered so much \par from them for the cause of Christ. Preaching the Gospel was the pleasure of his \par soul, and his heart was so engaged in the work of the ministry, that from the \par time of his first appearing in public to the end of his days his life was one \par continued scene of labour and toil. His great study and constant preaching \par exhausted his animal spirits and enfeebled his strength, yet to the last he \par discovered a becoming zeal against the errors of the day. His soul was too great \par to recede from any truth that he owned, either from the powers or flatteries of \par the most eminent. He discharged the duties of his pastoral office with unwearied \par diligence, by preaching in season and out of season, visiting those under hisð \par charge, encouraging the serious, defending the great truths of the Gospel, and \par set\-ting them in the clearest light. How low would he stoop for the sake of \par peace! And how would he bear the infirmities of his weak brethren! that such as \par would not be wrought upon by the strength of reason might be melted by his \par condescension and good nature. He was prudent as well as peaceable; would \par forgive and forget injuries, being charitable as well as cautious. He was not \par addicted to utter hard censures of such as differed from him in lesser matters, \par but had a love for all saints, and constantly exer\-cised himself in this, to \par keep a conscience void of offence towards God and towards man. He showed an \par unwearied endeavor to recover the decayed power of religion, for he lived what \par he preached, and it pleased God so to succeed his endeavors that I doubt not but \par some yet living may call him their father whom he hath begotten through the \par Gospel. He affected no unusual tones nor indecent ges\-tures in his preaching. \par His style was strong and mascu\-line. He generally used notes, especially in the \par latter part of his life; and if his sermons had not the embellishments of \par language which some boast of, they had this peculiar advantage, to be full of \par solid divinity, which is a much better character for pulpit discourses than to \par say they are full of pompous eloquence and flights of wit. It was none of the \par least of his excellent qualifications for the ministerial work, that he I knew \par how to behave himself in the house of God, in regard to the exercise of that \par discipline which is so necessary to a Christian society. With patience and \par meekness, with gravity and prudence, with impartiality and faithfulness, did he \par demean himself in his congregation; and with prudence in conduct did he manage \par all their affairs upon all occasions."4 \par \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } œbœÊZ)cƒ”a0612b-Biographical Notices Concluded part 2{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS TIMES \par Chapter XII continued \par \cf0 \par WILLIAM KIFFIN is the last we shall name of the Baptist worthies of this period. \par His is a truly honorable name. He was one of the merchant-princeòšJ(c‚´A0612a-Biographical Notices Concluded part 1{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS PERIOD\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER XII. \par Biographical Notices Concluded-Thomas Grantham-Hanserd KnollysÞós of London, and \par had won his wealth by honest industry. He sought also to win souls with wisdom \par and earnestness, answerable to the greatness of the undertaking. Like Mordecai \par of old he was "accepted of the multitude of his brethren, seeking the wealth of \par his people, and speaking peace to all his seed" (Esther 10:3). \par William Kiffin was a native of London. He was born in the year 1616. When he was \par nine years of age, he lost both his parents by the Plague, which at that time \par raged violently in London, and was himself "left with six plague sores" upon \par him, so that "nothing but death was looked for" by his friends. It pleased God \par to restore him and to bless him with long life. His conversion took place in \par early youth. The instructive and powerful ministry of those times was the means \par of implanting conviction in his soul, and ultimately of establishing him in the \par faith. An extract from his autobiography may be here cited:- \par ô"At the end of the year 1632, it pleased God to bring Mr. John Goodman to \par London. I attended upon his ministry and found it very profitable. Delivering \par his judg\-ment about the way of God's dealings in the conversion of sinners, he \par showed that the terrors of the law were not of necessity to be preached to \par prepare the soul for Christ, because in the nature and tendency of them they \par drove the soul further off from Christ; answering very many objec\-tions and \par Scriptures produced by other ministers to prove the contrary. This was of great \par use to me, so far as to satisfy me that God hath not tied Himself to any such \par way of converting a sinner, but according to His good pleasure took several ways \par of bringing a soul to Jesus Christ. I had for some time seen the want of Christ, \par and believed that it was by Him only I must expect pardon; and had also seen the \par worth and excellencies that were in Him above all other objects; so that I now õ\par felt my soul to rest upon and to trust in Him."5 \par \par Again: "About this time [1634] I became acquainted with several young men that \par diligently attended the means, to whom it had pleased God to make known much of \par Himself and His grace. These, being apprentices as well as I, had no \par opportunities of converse but on the Lord's-days. It being our constant practice \par to attend the morning lecture, which began at six o'clock, both at Cornhill and \par Christ Church, we appointed to meet together an hour before, to spend it in \par prayer and communicating what experiences we had received from the Lord to each \par other; or else to repeat some sermon we had previously heard. After a little \par time, we also read some portion of Scripture, and spake from it according as it \par pleased God to enable us. In these exercises I found very great advantage, and \par by degrees did arrive to some small measure of knowledge, finding the study of \par the Scriptures vöery pleasant and delightful to me; which I attended to as it \par pleased God to give me opportunities."6 \par \par The young man became an independent inquirer, prepared to follow the leadings of \par truth, regardless of consequences. Observing that some excellent ministers had \par gone into voluntary banishment rather than conform to the Church of England, he \par was induced to examine the points in dispute between that Church and her \par opponents, and this issued in his joining the Nonconformists. He had been five \par years a member of the Independent church, then under the care of Mr. Lathorp, \par when, with many others, he with\-drew, and joined the Baptist church, the first \par in England of the Particular Baptist order, of which Mr. Spilsbury was the \par pastor. Two years after that, in 1640, a difference of opinion respecting the \par propriety of allowing ministers who had not been immersed to preach to them (in \par which Mr. Kiffin took the negative side), occa÷sioned a separation. Mr. Kiffin \par and those who agreed with him seceded, and formed another church, which met in \par Devonshire Square. He was chosen pastor, and held that office till his death, in \par 1701,-one of the longest pastorates on record. \par \par Mr. Kiffin was extensively engaged in mercantile pur\-suits, trading chiefly with \par Holland, and acquired large pro\-perty. His standing in society, and his \par well-known inte\-grity of character, gave him influence, and he often exerted it \par for the protection and relief of sufferers. It was much in his favour, too, in \par those changeful and stormy times, that he stood aloof from all political \par agitation. He never troubled himself with party disputes, nor interfered in the \par intrigues and cabals of politicians. He was a good citizen of the Commonwealth; \par he submitted to the Protectorate; he honored the King. His policy was, and so he \par advised his brethren, to yield obedience to the existing goverønment, in things \par civil, whatever might be the form of that govern\-ment. Hence he was held in high \par esteem by all parties, and great deference was shown him. \par \par Charles II. was always in want of money, and cared not by what means it was \par obtained. It is said that on one occasion he sent for Mr. Kiffin, and asked the \par loan of forty thousand pounds. The Baptist merchant replied that he had not then \par so large a sum at his command, but that, if his Majesty would accept ten \par thousand pounds as a gift, he was heartily welcome. The King took the money, and \par Kiffin, as he was accustomed to say, saved thirty thousand pounds by his \par liberality; for Charles would have forgotten to pay the debt. \par \par Several attempts were made to involve the good man in trouble. He was summoned \par before the Lord Mayor, during the Protectorate, for preaching against infant \par baptism, but the prosecution was not pressed: had it been, Cromwell would \par probùably have quashed it. On some occasions, after the Restoration, he endured \par brief imprisonments, pending investigation. At one time, he was charged with \par uttering treasonable words in a sermon; at another, by means of a forged letter, \par with being privy to an insurrectionary design; at another, with having hired two \par men to kill the King. But his innocence was so clearly apparent that he escaped. \par Doubtless it was by "the good hand of God" upon him. "My Lord Arlington hath \par told me," he observes, "that though, in every list of disaffected persons \par brought him, who ought to be secured, my name was always amongst them, yet the \par King would never believe anything against me; my Lord Chancellor also (the Earl \par of Clarendon) being very much my friend."7 \par \par In 1679, when the Conventicle Act was renewed in a severer form, an attempt was \par made to bring Mr. Kiffin under its lash. "It pleased the Lord," he says, "that \par the laws now began to búe put in execution against Dissenters; and, as I was \par taken at a meeting, I was prosecuted, for the purpose of recovering from me \par forty pounds. This sum I deposited in the hands of the officer; but finding some \par errors in the proceedings, I overthrew the informers on the trial. Though the \par trial cost me thirty pounds, it had this advantage-that many poor men who were \par prosecuted upon a similar charge were by this means relieved, the informers \par being afraid to proceed against them."8 \par \par Four years after, they tried again, but with no better success. "It pleased the \par Lord, presently after the death of my wife, that I was again prosecuted by the \par informers for three hundred pounds, the penalties of fifteen meetings. They had \par managed this matter so secretly, as to get the record in court for the money; \par but, finding there were some errors also in that record, they moved the court, \par judge Jenner being on the bench, to amend the recorûd. Some of my friends who \par were in court, moved that I might be heard before the order was made. In this \par way I came to the knowledge of the prosecution, and having employed able \par counsel, they pleaded that the record could not be mended; and, after several \par hearings before the court, the informers let the suit fall."9 \par Had there been more Kiffins in England at that time, the informers' trade would \par have been less gainful. Persecutors reveled in ill-gotten riches. They will at \par length appear before a "judgment seat" where there will be found no "errors in \par the record." \par \par A portion of Mr. Kiffin's domestic history is thus narrated:- \par "It pleased God to take out of the world to Himself my eldest son, which was no \par small affliction to me and my dear wife. His obedience to his parents and \par forwardness in the ways of God were so conspicuous as made him very amiable in \par the eyes of all who knew him. The grief I felt for his loss diüd greatly press me \par down, with more than ordinary sorrow; but in the midst of my great distress, it \par pleased the Lord to support me by that blessed word being brought powerfully to \par my mind (Matthew 20:25), 'Is thine eye evil, because I am good? Is it not lawful \par for Me to do what I will with Mine own?' These words did quiet my heart, so that \par I felt a perfect submission to His sovereign will, being well satisfied that it \par was for the great advantage of my dear son, and a voice to me to be more humble, \par and watchful over my own ways. \par \par "My next son being but of a weak constitution, and desirous of traveling, I sent \par him with the captain of a ship, an acquaintance, who was bound to Aleppo. \par Fearing that in his voyage and travels he was in danger of being corrupted by \par those of the Popish religion, I sent a young man, a minister, with him, to \par defend him from anything of that kind. But I was greatly prevented, for this \par minisýter left him and the ship at Leghorn, and went to Rome; by which means I \par was, to my sorrow, disappointed. On my son's return home, when at Venice, he met \par with a popish priest, and being forward to discourse with him about religion, \par the priest, to show his revenge, destroyed him by poison. As to the minister's \par name, I forbear to mention it, he being yet alive. 'I pray God that this sin may \par not be laid to his charge.'"10 \par \par Here is a fine trait of the good old Protestantism. William Kiffin would not \par have acted like some of the moderns, who send their children to Roman Catholic \par schools. So solicitous was he for his son's preservation from the insidious \par error, that he was content to incur a double expense on his tour rather than \par risk his spiritual safety. All Honor to him; and honored let him be, too, for \par his forbearance. The name of the minister who se unaccountably deserted his \par charge will never be known on earth. Kiffin þwould not expose him to obloquy, \par though he richly deserved it. Kiffin was a disciple of the "meek and lowly" One. \par About three years after the last-mentioned affliction, the good man lost his \par wife, who died October 2nd, 1682. He records the event in his usual strain. "It \par pleased the Lord," he says, "to take to Himself my dear and faithful wife, with \par whom I had lived nearly forty-four years, whose tenderness to me and \par faithfulness to God were such as cannot, by me, be expressed, as she constantly \par sympathized with me in all my afflictions. I can truly say, I never heard her \par utter the least discontent under all the various providences that attended \par either me or her; she eyed the hand of God in all our sorrows, so as constantly \par to encourage me in the ways of God: her death was the greatest sorrow to me that \par ever I met with in the world."11 \par \par We have given a full account in a previous section of the affliction that befell \ÿpar Mr. Kiffin in the death of his grandsons, the Hewlings. That wound was never \par healed; it smarted till his dying day. \par \par In 1687, James II. published a "Declaration of liberty of conscience," assuming \par for that purpose a power to dispense with the laws of the land by an exercise of \par the royal prerogative. Some of the Dissenters, and among them a few Baptists, \par were so delighted at the prospect of freedom and equality, that they gratefully \par accepted the proffered boon, and presented addresses to the King on the \par occasion, expressing in strong terms their sense of obligation to him. But Mr. \par Kiffin and the majority of his brethren were not to be beguiled. They saw that \par the measure was wholly unconstitutional, since laws can neither be made, \par repealed, nor suspended, but by the united legislature; and they were convinced \par that James's real design was to bestow political power on the Roman Catholics, \par and ultimately to make Popery rampant. They abstained, therefore, from any \par demonstration, and awaited the issue of events. \par \par When the King deprived the City of London of its charter, and displaced its \par magistrates, Mr. Kiffin was appointed one of the new aldermen. His account of \par the transaction is as follows:- \par \par "A little time after, a great temptation attended me, which was, a commission \par from the King to be one of the aldermen of the City of London. I used all the \par means I could to be excused by some lords near the King; and also by Sir \par Nicholas Butler, and Mr. Penn, but all in vain. They said that they knew I had \par an interest that would serve the King; and although they knew my sufferings had \par been very great, by the cutting off my two grandsons, and losing their estates, \par yet it should be made up to me, both as to their estates, and also in what \par honour and advantage I could reasonably desire for myself." \par \par "But I thank the Lord those proffers were no snare to me, being fully possessed \par in my judgment that the design was the total ruin of the Protestant religion, \par which, I hope I can say, was and is dearer to me than my life. I re\-mained \par without accepting the office, from the time I received the summons to take it, \par about six weeks, until the Lord Mayor, Sir John Peake, in court said, I ought to \par be sent to Newgate; and in a few days after, I understood it was intended to put \par me into the Crown Office, and to pro\-ceed with all severity against me. Which, \par when I heard, I went to the ablest counsel for advice (one that is now a chief \par judge in the nation), and stating my case to him, he told me my danger was every \par way great; for if I accepted to be an alderman, I ran the hazard of five hundred \par pounds [that being the penalty for taking office without first re\-ceiving the \par Lord's Supper according to the forms of the Church of England]; and if I did not \par accept, as the judges then were, I might be fined by them, ten, or twenty, or \par thirty thousand pounds, even what they pleased. So that I thought it better for \par me to run the lesser hazard of five hundred pounds, which was certain, than be \par exposed to such fines as might be the ruin of myself and family. Yet did I \par forbear taking the place of alderman for some time, when the aldermen then \par sitting agreed to invite the King to dinner on the Lord Mayor's Day, and laid \par down fifty pounds each alderman to defray the charge; which made some of them \par the more earnest for my holding, and they Were pleased to tell me I did forbear \par [in order] to excuse my fifty pounds. But to prevent any such charge against me, \par I desired a friend to acquaint my Lord Mayor and the court, that I should \par deposit my fifty pounds with them, yet delaying accepting the office-which I \par accordingly sent them. When the Lord Mayor's Day came, and the dinner prepared \par for the King, I the next day understood that there were invited to the feast the \par Pope's nuncio, and several other priests, that dined with them, which, had I \par known they had been invited, I should hardly have parted with my fifty pounds \par towards that feast; but the next court-day I came to the court and took upon me \par the office of alderman. In the commission I was also a justice of the Peace and \par one of the lieutenancy; but I never meddled with either of those places, neither \par in any act of power in that court, touching causes between man and man, but only \par such things as concerned the welfare of the city, and the good of the orphans, \par whose distressed condition called for help, although we were able to do little \par towards it . . . Having been in that office about nine months, I was discharged \par from it, to my very great satisfaction . . . My reason for giving this brief \par account of these things is, that you all may see how good the Lord hath been to  \par prevent those designs, then in hand, to destroy both our religion and our \par liberties, and I heartily desire that both myself and all others concerned may \par acknowledge the great goodness of God therein, that He may have the glory of all \par our delivering mercies." \par \par Thus wrote the Christian patriot. We see here the meek dignity of religion. \par Mr. Kiffin died December 29, 1701, in the eighty-sixth year of his age. \par He was generally regarded as the chief man in the denomination. That is, his \par excellent character, and the position which he occupied, gave him influence \par among his brethren, and rendered his advice and co-operation desirable. His name \par is connected with all the public proceedings of the body for half a century. If \par the Court wished to conciliate the Baptists, application was made to Kiffin. If \par country churches required aid or counsel, they seemed naturally to ask his \par interference, and fully confided in his discretion and integrity, knowing that \par he would honestly endeavour to do right. \par \par He was an eminently good man. We cannot but admire the quiet composure and \par filial submission of soul with which he recorded even the most painful events of \par his life. "It pleased the Lord"-such was the habitual expression of his views \par and feelings. Whether the reference was to mercy or to judgment-to \par manifestations of blessing-to persecuting malice-to domestic sorrow-to storms \par and perils-or to joyful deliverance-still, the language was the same-"It pleased \par the Lord." Thus he possessed his soul in patience, and "endured as seeing Him \par who is invisible." \par \par We might tell of other excellent men whom God raised up in the "Troublous \par Period," and by whom the churches were edified. There were John Gosnold, Joseph \par Wright, George Hammond, Samuel Taverner, Henry Forty, Benjamin Coxe, Nehemiah Coxe, D.D., William Collins, Hercules Collins, and many more. But "time would fail." We must bring this period to a close. \par \par Our historians have preserved some interesting anecdotes, illustrative of the \par times. We will transcribe a few. \par \par George Hammond was the pastor of a church at Canterbury, and preached frequently \par in the neighboring villages. He was once overtaken by a storm, and took shelter \par under a tree. While there, another person joined him, who in the course of \par conversation said that he was an informer, and that he had heard there was to be \par a conventicle in the neighborhood, at which he meant to be present. "I am a \par man-taker also," said Mr. Hammond. "Are you so?" replied the informer; "then we \par will go together." They reached the house, and sat some time among the people. \par "Here are the people," said Mr. Hammond, "but where is the minister? Unless \par there is a minister we cannot make a conventicle of it, and therefore either you \par or I must preach." The informer declined of course, and Mr. Ham\-mond preached, \par much to the man's astonishment. The sermon was blessed to him, and he became a \par Christian. \par \par In the early part of his ministry Nehemiah Coxe lived at Cranfield, in \par Bedfordshire. He was committed to prison for preaching the Gospel. When brought \par to his trial, he pleaded in Greek, and on examination answered in Hebrew. The \par judge called for the indictment, and found him de\-scribed as "Nehemiah Coxe, \par Cordwainer," at which he expressed his astonishment, no doubt thinking it \par exceed\-ingly strange that a shoemaker should be a learned man. Mr. Coxe insisted \par on his right to plead in what language he chose, and, as none of the lawyers \par could speak Greek or Hebrew, the case was necessarily dismissed. "Well," said \par the judge to the learned counsel before him, "the cord\-wainer has wound you all \par up, gentlemen." \par \par Jeremiah Ives, who was thirty years pastor of a church in the Old Jewry, London, \par was celebrated for his tact and power as a disputant. Charles II. heard of him, \par and invited him to Court to hold a discussion with a Roman Catholic priest, who \par was told that his opponent was a clergy\-man of the Church of England. Mr. Ives \par was persuaded to assume that character by appearing in clerical attire. In the \par course of the dispute he argued, that notwith\-standing the authorities which \par might be adduced in favor of Romish opinions and practices, and the \par plausibilities which might be urged in their defense, they could not be \par sustained, because they were entirely unknown in the Apostolic age. That \par argument, the priest replied, would be of equal force against infant baptism, \par which was also unknown in the Apostolic age. Mr. Ives admitted it, intimating \par that he rejected infant baptism on the same ground; whereupon the priest \par abruptly closed the discussion, saying that he had been cheated: he had supposed \par that  he was disputing with a Church of England clergyman, whereas they had \par brought him "an Anabaptist preacher." The King and his courtiers were highly \par amused. \par \par In those days, preachers were often obliged to disguise themselves, that they \par might not be recognized by the informers. "It is said that Bunyan, to avoid \par discovery, went from a friend's house disguised as a carter, with his white \par frock, wide-awake cap, and whip in his hand, to attend a private meeting in a \par sheltered field or barn." Andrew Gifford, of Bristol, adopted similar \par expedients, at one time appearing as an officer, at another as a gentleman. "Did \par you not meet me last night," he said one day to a friend, "going through \par Lawford's Gate? Why did you not speak to me?" "I did not see you, sir." "Did you \par not meet a tinker?" "Yes, sir." "That was me," said Mr. Gifford. \par \par An old memoir of Bunyan contains the following:-"Being to preach in a church in \par a co untry village (before the restoration of King Charles) in Cambridgeshire, \par and the people being gathered together in the churchyard, a Cam\-bridge scholar, \par and none of the soberest of them neither, enquired what the meaning of that \par concourse of people was, it being upon the week-day; and being told that one \par Bun\-yan, a tinker, was to preach there, he gave a boy two pence to hold his \par horse, saying he was resolved to hear the tinker prate, and so went into the \par church to hear him. But God met with him there by His ministry, so that he came \par out much changed, and would by his good will hear none but the tinker for a long \par time after, he himself becoming a very eminent preacher in that county \par afterwards." \par \par "It happened," says Crosby, "that the magistrates of Sevenoaks sent some \par officers to the congregation meeting at Brabourn, who took all the men from \par thence and carried them to the town, where by an order they were kept prisoners \par all night. On the morrow, when the justices met together, the prisoners were had \par before them and examined, and after some little discourse with them were \par dismissed. They all with one heart, full of wonder and joy, returned to the \par place from whence they were taken, to return thanks to God for this so \par unexpected a deliverance. When they came to the place, to their great surprise \par and inexpressible joy, they found the women, there, who had not departed from \par the house, but had sent that evening, the night, and morning, in prayer to God \par on their behalf." \par \par 1 Tayler's History of the General Baptists, i. pp. 308-316. \par 2 Magnalia, book iii. p. 243 (Ed. 1855). \par 3 Ivimey, ii. pp. 347-359 \par 4 Ivimey, ii. pp. 360-368. \par 5 Ivimey's Life of Kiffin, p. 9. \par 6 Ibid, p. 13. \par 7 Life, p. 46. \par 8 Ibid, p. 58. \par 9 Life, p. 59. \par 10 Life, p. 56. \par 11 Life, p. 58. \par \fs20 \par }  ew of these people," says Cotton Mather, \par "have been among the planters of New England from the beginning, and have been \par welcome to the communion of our churches, which they enjoyed, reserving their \par particular opinions unto themselves."1 \par \par Roger Williams's preaching at Salem, prior to his banishment, of which an \par account will be hereafter given, was distasteful to some of his hearers, because \par he continually testified against the assumption of power in things religious by \par the magistrate, and they said that he inculcated principles "tending to \par Anabaptism." This probably meant nothing more than that he taught the \par individuality of religion, and laid such stress on personal piety, as essential \par to union with the Church, as seemed inconsistent with the P\'e6dobaptist theory of \par membership. It is certain that he had not then professed Baptist sentiments. \par But shortly after his settlement at Providence, the whole subject of baptism  \par came under consideration and discussion. How it originated; and in what way the \par inquiry was carried on, we know not. The result was, however, that in 1638, \par twelve men declared themselves Baptists in principle. Then the question arose, \par How were they to be baptized, since they had no minister? They might have sent \par to England for one; but the application might not have been successful, and it \par would have involved an expense which they were ill-prepared to meet; besides \par which, a long delay would have occurred. In this dilemma they adopted the only \par expedient that seemed likely to meet the case. One of their number, Thomas \par Holliman, was chosen to baptize Mr. Williams, who then baptized the others.2 A \par church was immediately formed, of which Mr. Williams became pastor. But he soon \par vacated the office; some thinly after the lapse of only a few months; while \par others are of opinion that he resigned when he embarked for England to procure a \par charter for the colony, and that it was on that occasion Mr. Chad Brown was \par chosen as his successor. On his return from England he refrained from fellowship \par with the Church, and lived in an isolated religious condition, preaching the \par Gospel to the Indians as he found opportunity, but refusing to participate in \par the ordinances. He had embraced a, singular notion, which is thus stated by one \par of his biographers:-"He denied that any ministry now exists, which is authorized \par to preach the Gospel to the impenitent, or to administer the ordinances. He \par believed that these functions belonged to the Apostolic race of ministers, which \par was interrupted and discontinued when the reign of Antichrist commenced, and \par which will not, as he thought, be restored, till the witnesses shall have been \par slain and raised again (Rev. 11:11) . . . He says in his Hireling Ministry None \par of Christ's, published in 1652:-'In the poor small span of my life, I desired to \par have been a diligent and constant observer, and have been myself many ways \par engaged, in city, in country, in courts, in schools, in universities, in church, \par in Old and New England, and yet cannot, in the holy presence of God, bring in \par the result of a satisfactory discovery, that either the begetting ministry of \par the Apostles or messengers to the nations, or the feeding or nourishing ministry \par of teachers, according to the first institution of the Lord Jesus, are yet \par restored and extant. The only ministry which, in my opinion, now exists, is that \par of prophets, i.e. ministers, who explain religious truths, and bear witness \par against error.'"3 \par \par The second Baptist church in Rhode Island was formed at Newport, in 1644, by Dr. \par John Clark and eleven others. Dr. Clark became the pastor: he resigned the \par pastorate in 1651, and accompanied Roger Williams to England on business \par connected with the charter of the colony. He was succeeded by Obadiah Holmes. \par A second church was formed at Newport, in 1656, by twenty-one persons, who \par seceded from the first church on account of the use of psalmody, to which they \par objected, the "restraints on the liberty of prophesying,"-particular \par redemption,-and the indifference shown by the church to the laying on of hands, \par a practice regarded by the seceders as essential. William Vaughan was the first \par pastor. \par \par Four additional churches were organized in Rhode Island during this period, \par viz., North Kingston, 1665; Seventh Day Baptists, Newport, 1671; South Kingston, \par 1680; Dartmouth (afterwards removed to Tiverton), 1685. \par \par Year after year, more Baptists emigrated from England to Massachusetts, and, as \par a matter of course, openly avowed their sentiments. "The Anabaptists," says \par Winthrop, "increased and spread in Massachusetts." Various methods were adopted \par to annoy them, which so far produced the desired effect that many of them left \par the country, and took refuge among the Dutch in the State of New York. But \par others remained, who, it would seem, took no pains to conceal their views, \par naturally concluding that those who had fled from England to gain religious \par freedom would concede to their fellow-Christians what they sought for \par themselves. But the New Englanders were very imperfectly instructed in this \par matter. They still held the Establishment principle, and dreamed that the Jewish \par theocracy was to be perpetuated in Christian states. An Act was passed for the \par banishment of Baptists. It was easier to banish than to convince them. Here is a \par copy of the Act:- \par \par "Forasmuch as experience hath plentifully and often proved that, since the first \par rising of the Anabaptists, about one hundred years since, they have been the \par incendiaries of commonwealths, and the infectors of persons in main matters of \par religion, and the troublers of churches in all places where they have been, and \par that they have held the baptizing of infants unlawful, have usually held other \par errors or heresies therewith, though they have (as other heretics used to do) \par concealed the same, till they spied out a fit advantage and opportunity to vent \par them, by way of question or scruple; and whereas divers of this kind have, since \par our coming into New England, appeared amongst ourselves, some whereof (as others \par before them) denied the ordinance of magistracy, and the lawfulness of making \par war, and others the lawfulness of magistrates, and their inspection into any \par breach of the first table [that is, the first four of the Ten Commandments]; \par which opinions, if they should be connived at by us, are likely to be increased \par amongst us, and so must necessarily bring guilt upon us, infection and trouble \par to the churches, and hazard to the whole commonwealth; it is ordered and agreed, \par that if any person or persons, within this jurisdiction, shall either openly \par condemn or oppose the baptizing of infants, or go about secretly to seduce \par others from the approbation or use thereof, or shall purposely depart the \par congregation at the ministration of the ordinance, or shall deny the ordinance \par of magistracy, or the lawful right and authority to make war, or to punish the \par outward breaches of the first table, and shall appear to the court willfully and \par obstinately to continue therein, after due time and means of conviction,-every \par such person or persons shall be sentenced to banishment."4 \par \par This Act was passed November 13th, 1644. That same year Roger Williams had \par published his immortal book, The Bloody Tenet of Persecution for Cause of \par Conscience Discussed. It was a bitter pill to John Cotton, the minister, and to \par the magistrates who were so ready to do his bidding. They gnashed their teeth at \par Williams, as he passed through Boston on his way from England to Rhode Island, \par but they durst not bite-they could not even scratch him; their claws were pared; \par they stood in awe of the men at home. So Williams got safe to his free colony; \par but "a poor man by the name of Painter" was "tied up and whipt" because he would \par not have his child sprinkled! \par \par There was a pressure on the Baptists in Massachusetts. They were few and \par fearful. Can we wonder at it? It was no small trial to be driven beyond the \par bounds of civilization in those days. We hear but little of them for seven \par years, and then it is whipping again! William Witter, an aged Baptist, lived at \par Lynn. The distance, coupled with his infirmities, prevented him from enjoying \par Christian fellowship with his brethren of the church at Newport, to which he \par belonged. There were other brethren in the same neighborhood. A pastoral visit \par was resolved on. Dr. John Clark, pastor of the church, accompanied by Obadiah \par Holmes, a ministering brother, and by another brother of the name of Crandal, \par repaired to Lynn for that purpose, and proposed to hold a meeting with the \par brethren on the Lord's Day. They were assembled, and Dr. Clark had commenced his \par discourse, when the constables made their appearance, charged to apprehend the \par intruders, and keep them safely till the next day. They obeyed their orders, and \par the meeting was broken up. Next day the Puritan magistrates committed them to \par prison, and, about a fortnight after, the Court of Assistants adjudged Dr. Clark \par to pay a fine of twenty pounds, Mr. Holmes a fine of thirty pounds, and Mr. \par Crandal five pounds. Some friends paid Dr. Clark's fine. Mr. Crandal was \par released on promise to appear the next court-day. There was some talk about a \par disputation on baptism between Dr. Clark and the clergy of Boston, who had \par intimated a willingness to meet him, but it came to nothing. \par \par Mr. Holmes's fine was the heaviest, most probably on account of the \par circumstances mentioned in the sentence, presently to be quoted. He would not \par allow the fine to be paid for him, nor would he pay it himself. But he must \par either pay or be "well whipt." So ran the sentence. It is a curiosity, and \par should be preserved:- \par \par "The sentence of Obadiah Holmes, of Seaconk, the 31st of the fifth month, 1651." \par "Forasmuch as you, Obadiah Holmes, being come into this jurisdiction about the \par gist of the fifth month, did meet at one William Witter's house, at Lynn, and \par did here privately (and at other times), being an excommunicated person, did \par take upon you to preach and baptize upon the Lord's Day, or other days, and \par being taken then by the constable, and coming afterward to the assembly at Lynn, \par did, in disrespect to the ordinance of God and His worship, keep on your hat, \par the pastor being in prayer, insomuch as you would not give reverence in veiling \par your hat, till it was forced off your head, to the disturbance of the \par congregation, and professing against the institution of the Church, as not being \par according to the Gospel of Jesus Christ; and that you, the said Obadiah Holmes, \par did, upon the day following, meet again at the said William Witter's, in \par contempt to authority, you being then in the custody of the law, and did there \par receive the sacrament, being excommunicate, and that you did baptize such as \par were baptized before, and thereby did necessarily deny the baptism before \par administered to be baptism, the churches no churches, and also other ordinances \par and ministers, as if all was a nullity; and did also deny the lawfulness of \par baptizing of infants; and all this tends to the dishonor of God, the despising \par the ordinances of God among us, the peace of the churches, and seducing the \par subjects of this commonwealth from the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and \par perverting the straight ways of the Lord; the Court doth fine you thirty pounds, \par to be paid, or sufficient sureties that the said sum shall be paid by the first \par day of the next Court of Assistants, or else to be well whipt : and that you \par shall remain in prison till it be paid, or security given in for it." \par " By the Court," \par " INCREASE NORVEL." \par \par The sentence was passed in July. Mr. Holmes was kept in prison till September, \par when he was publicly whipped, and so barbarously "that in many days, if not some \par weeks, he could take no rest but as he lay upon his knees and elbows, not being \par able to suffer any part of his body to touch the bed whereon he lay." His own \par account of the affair, in a letter addressed to Messrs. Spilsbury, Kiffin, and \par other Baptists in London, is deeply affecting, but too long for transcription \par here. He tells the brethren how he declined the proffered kindness of his \par friends, who "came to visit him, desiring him to take the refreshment of wine \par and other comforts," having resolved "not to drink wine nor strong drink that \par day, until his punishment was over," lest the world should say "that the \par strength and comfort of the creature had carried him through;"-how he withdrew \par to his chamber, to seek strength from the Lord, and "prayed earnestly that He \par would be pleased to give him a spirit of courage and boldness, a tongue to speak \par for Him, and strength of body to suffer for His sake, and not to shrink or yield \par to the strokes, or shed tears, lest the adversaries of the truth should \par thereupon blaspheme and be hardened, and the weak and feeble-hearted \par discouraged;" how he attempted at the place of suffering to address the people, \par but was prevented by the magistrate in attendance; and how graciously he was \par strengthened to endure the pain. "As the man began to lay the strokes upon my \par back, I said to the people, 'Though my flesh should fail, and my spirit should \par fail, yet my God would not fail.' So it pleased the Lord to come in, and to fill \par my heart arid tongue as a vessel full, and with an audible voice I broke forth, \par praying unto the Lord not to lay this sin to their charge, and telling the \par people that now I found He did not fail me, and therefore now I should trust Him \par for ever, who failed me not; for in truth, as the strokes fell upon me, I had \par such a spiritual manifestation of God's presence, as the like thereof I never \par had nor felt, nor can with fleshly tongue express; and the outward pain was so \par removed from me that indeed I am not able to declare it to you; it was so easy \par to me that I could well bear it, yea, and in a manner felt it not, although it \par was grievous, as the spectators said, the man striking with all his strength \par (yea, spitting in his hands three times, as many affirmed) with a three-corded \par whip, giving me therewith thirty strokes. When he had loosed me from the post, \par having joyfulness in my heart and cheerfulness in my countenance, as the \par spectators observed, I told the magis\-trates, 'You have struck me as with \par roses,' and said more\-over, 'Although the Lord hath made it easy to me, yet I \par pray God it may not be laid to your charge.'" Mr. Holmes then proceeds to state \par that John Hazel and John Spur, who expressed their sympathy by shaking hands \par with him after it was over, were sentenced "to pay forty shillings or be whipt;" \par and that a surgeon who dressed his wounds was inquired after as if he had \par committed some crime. But "it hath pleased the Father of mercies," he adds, "to \par dis\-pose of the matter, that my bonds and imprisonment have been no hindrance to \par the Gospel, for before my return some submitted to the Lord and were baptized, \par and divers were put upon the way of inquiry. And now, being advised to make my \par escape by night, because it was reported there were warrants forth for me, I \par departed; and the next day after, while I was on my journey, the constable came \par to search the house where I had lodged; so I escaped their hands, and was, by \par the good hand of my Heavenly Father, brought home again to my near relations, my \par wife and eight children, the brethren of our town and Providence having taken \par pains to meet me four miles in the woods, where we rejoiced together in the \par Lord."5 \par \par "Bonds and imprisonment" awaited all Baptists in New England. They met for \par worship as they were able, and constantly testified against infant baptism, for \par which they were harassed by the courts without mercy. In 1665 they ventured to \par form themselves into a church at Charlestown, near Boston. This church was \par afterwards removed into the city, and considered the first Boston church. Its \par early history was one long tale of vexation and annoyance, inflicted, there is \par too much reason to believe, at the instigation of the ministers. Thomas Gould, \par the founder of the church, was ordered, with two others, after a year's \par imprisonment, to "depart out of the jurisdiction." This occasioned the removal \par of the church, for some time, to Noddle's Island, in Boston Harbor,-now East \par Boston. \par \par The Congregational clergy, by whom the magistrates were instigated, were proof \par against all influence or entreaty. Nothing softened them. When a number of \par persons, some of them men of high standing in the colony, petitioned for lenity \par to the Baptists, they were fined for petitioning. A letter of remonstrance from \par England, signed by Dr. Goodwin, Dr. Owen, Philip Nye, John Caryl, and other \par eminent divines, failed to produce any effect. Even the king's interference was \par in vain. A royal letter, "requiring that liberty of conscience should be allowed \par to all Protestants," and that "no good subjects should be subjected to fines and \par forfeitures for not agreeing in the Congregational way," was disregarded. When \par the Baptists, encouraged by this interposition, repaired for worship to a \par meeting-house which they had built, its doors were nailed up, and they were \par forbidden to open them, "at their peril." But they insisted on their rights, \par pleaded the king's authority, and at length were allowed to meet in peace. \par Thomas Gould was the first pastor of the Boston church. Isaac Hull succeeded \par him, with whom John Russell was for a short time associated. John Emblem, who \par was sent for from England, became co-pastor with Mr. Hull in 1684 \par We have given full particulars respecting the churches already mentioned, on \par account of the interesting circumstances connected with their early history. The \par remaining portion of American statistics for this period may be com\-pressed into \par a small space. \par \par \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } VVžV*Y‚¼c0613a-Baptists In North America part 1{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS TIMES \par \cf0\b0 \par \par CHAPTER XIII. \par Baptists in North America-Church at Providence-Baptists in \par Massachusetts-Persecuting Enactment against them-The Whipping of Obadiah \par Holmes-First Church at Boston-Newport-Swansea-Other Churches-Roger \par Williams-Gregory Dexter-Obadiah Holmes-John Miles-Elias Keach \par \par I now proceed to give some information respecting the introduction of Baptist \par principles into America. There were Baptists among the first emigrants to New \par England; but their number must have been small, as no effort was made for some \par time to set up separate worship. "Some f  y; but at last \par they yielded, and the church lived. \par \par A church was formed at Kittery, Maine, in 1682, but it died in its infancy. A \par church was organized at Charleston, South Carolina, in 1683. There were two \par churches in Pennsylvania:-Cold Spring, founded in 1684; Pennepek, in 1688. In \par the same year a church was established at Middletown, New Jersey. \par In 1688, the Baptist denomination in North America comprised thirteen churches \par only. Seven were in Rhode Island, two in Massachusetts, one in South Carolina, \par two in Pennsylvania, and one in New Jersey. Times have greatly changed since \par then! There are now upwards of thirteen thousand churches! The "little one" has \par literally "become a thousand!" \par \par We conclude this chapter with a brief biographical sketch of Roger Williams, \par whose name has been already men\-tioned. \par \par Very little is known of the early life of this great man. It is supposed that be \par was a nativ!e of Wales, and that he was born in the year 1599. Sir Edward Coke, \par as tradition states, observed his attention at church, where he was accustomed \par to take notes of the sermons, and liberally took charge of his education, \par thinking that he would prove in future years an able lawyer. This was a \par providential interposition, for Williams's parents were poor, and, had it not \par been for Sir Edward's generosity, he would have remained in humble life all his \par days. Having received a good classical education, he "commenced the study of the \par law, at the desire and under the guidance of his generous patron, who would \par naturally wish to train his pupil to the honorable and useful profession which \par he himself adorned. The providence of God may be seen in thus leading the mind \par of Mr. Williams to that acquaintance with the principles of law and government, \par which qualified him for his duties as legislator of his little colony. But he \par probably soo"n found that the study of the law was not congenial to his taste. \par Theology possessed more attractions to a mind and heart like his. To this divine \par science he directed his attention, and received episcopal orders. It is stated \par that he assumed, while in England, the charge of a parish; that his preaching \par was highly esteemed, and his private character revered."6 \par \par But Roger Williams's mind was not formed for such subjection as the Church of \par England requires of its members. He understood Christian freedom too well to \par continue under the heavy yoke of an established church. Nor did he conceal his \par views. He had "presented his arguments from Scripture" to Messrs. Cotton and \par Hooker, who afterwards followed him to New England, "why he durst not join with \par them in the use of Common Prayer." Whether he was driven out by violence, or \par whether he voluntarily withdrew from the communion of the Church of England, \par cannot now be ascertain#ed. This only is certain, that he left his native \par country, in search of Evangelical liberty, and landed at Boston on the 5th of \par February, 1630-31. \par \par He had been but a few weeks in the colony, when he was invited by the church at \par Salem to become assistant to their minister. Mr. Skelton. He complied, and \par laboured there for a short time, when, in consequence of the opposition of the \par Boston people, he left for Plymouth, and preached there two years. Returning to \par Salem, and gladly received by the church in that place, he remained with them \par till his banishment. \par \par Mr. Williams had been disappointed by the aspect of affairs in New England. He \par found that the colonists had set up a government of a theocratic kind; that none \par were admitted to the exercise of civil rights unless they were members of one of \par their churches; and that the offences against religion were punishable by the \par magistrate. These things he abhorred, $and he testified his dislike from the very \par commencement of his residence. There was much jangling and disputation, and no \par small amount of high-handed oppression on the part of the colonial authorities. \par At length, sentence of banishment was passed upon Mr. Williams. It was thus \par expressed:- \par \par "Whereas, Mr. Roger Williams, one of the elders of the church at Salem, hath \par broached and divulged divers new and dangerous opinions against the authority of \par magistrates; as also writ letters of defamation, both of the magistrates and \par churches here, and that before any conviction, and yet maintaineth the same \par without any retractation; it is therefore ordered, that the said Mr. Williams \par shall depart out of this jurisdiction within six weeks now next ensuing, which, \par if he neglect to perform, it shall be lawful for the governor and two of the \par magistrates to send him to some place out of this jurisdiction, not to return \par any more %without license from the Court." \par \par Such were the "tender mercies" of the New England Puritans of those days. They \par had resisted the magistrate at home by refusing to obey him in things \par ecclesiastical, and, in consequence, had gone into exile; and now they banished \par their ministering brother for the very offence which they had themselves been \par guilty of. It seemed as if their boasted love of freedom was only a love of \par freedom for themselves, conjoined with the assumption of power to take it away \par from others. \par \par This sentence was passed November 3rd, 1635. Six weeks were allowed Mr. Williams for his removal. But he could not be silent. Meetings were held at his house, where he discoursed in his usual manner, much to the annoyance of the \par magistrates, who concluded that the only way to stop him would be to ship him \par off for England in a vessel then lying in the harbor. He heard of their design, \par and prevented its execution by fligh&t. In the month of January, 1635-6, he left \par his home, and for fourteen weeks wandered about, exposed to the rigors of the \par seasons-sometimes in an open boat, sometimes in the woods-"not knowing what \par bread or bed did mean." At last he pitched his tent at Seekonk, where he \par purchased land of the Indians, and began to build and plant. Yet even there the \par spirit of persecution followed him. The place was supposed to be within the \par colony of Plymouth, and the magistrates of that town were afraid of those of \par Boston; so they requested him to go further off. Again he sallied forth on \par pilgrimage, accompanied by some of his friends who had joined him. "As they \par approached the little cove, near Tockwotton, now Indian Point, they were saluted \par by a company of Indians with the friendly interrogation, What cheer?7-a common \par English phrase, which they had learned from the colonists. At this spot they \par probably went on shore, but they did not lon'g remain there. They passed round \par Indian Point and Fox Point, and proceeded up the river on the west side of the \par peninsula, to a spot near the mouth of the Moshassuck river. Tradition reports \par that Mr. Williams landed near a spring which remains to this day. At this spot \par the settlement of Rhode Island commenced. \par \par 'Oh, call it holy ground, \par The soil where first they trod; \par They have left unstained, what there they found, \par Freedom to worship God.' \par \par To the town here founded, Mr. Williams, with his habitual piety, and in grateful \par remembrance of God's merciful providence to him in his distress, gave the name \par of PROVIDENCE."8 \par \par Three years after, Mr. Williams avowed himself a Baptist, as has been already \par stated, and assisted in forming a Baptist church, of which he was the first \par pastor. The noble principles he had so fearlessly inculcated were adopted by the \par new colony, and embodied in its constitutio(n. The first settlers in Providence \par signed the following covenant:- \par \par "We, whose names are here under-written, being desirous to inhabit in the town \par of Providence, do promise to submit ourselves, in active or passive obedience, \par to all such orders or agreements, as shall be made for public good of the body, \par in an orderly way, by the major consent of the present inhabitants, masters of \par families, incorporated together into a township, and such others as they shall \par admit into the same, only in civil things." \par \par When the charter was obtained, a code of laws was prepared, of which these are \par the closing words: "Otherwise than thus, what is herein forbidden, all men may \par walk as their consciences persuade them, every one in the name of his God. AND \par LET THE LAMBS OF THE MOST HIGH WALK IN THIS COLONY, WITHOUT MOLESTATION, IN THE NAME OF JEHOVAH THEIR GOD, FOR EVER AND EVER." \par \par Under the influence of certain new views of re)ligion which he had embraced, Mr. \par Williams did not resume his connection with the church when he returned from \par England, but lived apart. Yet his was no idle life. He preached the Gospel among \par the scattered settlers; he promoted, in various ways, the temporal and spiritual \par welfare of the Indians; he was the adviser and friend of all the inhabi\-tants; \par he took an active part in the government of the colony, of which he was \par repeatedly chosen President. In 1651, he visited England a second time on its \par behalf, and obtained a confirmation of the original charter. The uniform justice \par and kindness with which he treated the Indians so impressed them, that when, on \par occasion of "King Philip's War," they attacked the colony, in 1676, and "Mr. \par Williams took his staff, and went to meet them,"-endeavoring to dissuade them \par from their enter\-prise, on the ground that the number and power of the English \par would prove overwhelming,-one of the *chiefs said: "Well, let them come-we are \par ready for them. But, as for you, Brother Williams, you are a good man. You have \par been kind to us many years-not a hair of your head shall be touched."9 \par Mr. Williams, like many other true patriots, died poor. For several years before \par his death, he was mainly depen\-dent upon his children. \par \par He died in the early part of the year 1683, in the 84th year of his age. No \par record of his last illness, and of the state of his mind at that time, has been \par furnished. There can be no doubt, however, that he was fully prepared for the \par event. In a letter addressed to Governor Bradstreet, at Boston, dated May 6th, \par 1682, after referring to recent intelligence from England, he says:-"All these \par are but sublunaries, temporaries, and trivials. Eternity (O eternity!) is our \par business." In less than a year from that time he had entered eternity. His body \par "was buried with all the solemnity the colony was able to show." His spirit \par rejoiced in perfect purity and freedom. \par \par So little is known of Williams's successors at Providence, and of most of the \par other pastors of the churches founded in this period, that it is not worth while \par to give mere lists of names and dates. \par \par \par 1 Magnalia, book vii. chap. ii. \par 2 It was not, perhaps, generally known that Hanserd Knollys was at that time \par preaching at Dover, and that his services might have been obtained. \par 3 Knowles's Memoir of Roger Williams, p. 171\-. \par 4 Benedict (Ed. 1848), p. 370. \par 5 Ivimey, ii. pp. 208-211. \par 6 Knowles's Memoir, p. 24. \par 7 A poem called, "What Cheer?" by the Hon. Judge Durfee, would be read with \par interest. It refers to the incidents above briefly narrated. It was re-published \par in England some years since, with a Recommendatory Preface by the Rev. John \par Eustace Giles. \par 8 Knowles, p. 102. \par 9 Knowles, p. 354. \par \fs20 \par } ’’æ7+YÌ%0613b-Baptists In North America part 2{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE TROUBLOUS TIMES \par Chapter XIII continued \par \cf0\b0 \par \par In 1663, the church at Swansea, Massachusetts, was con\-stituted by John Miles, \par who had just come from Swansea, Wales, with some of his brethren. The place \par where they ultimately settled was called after that which they had left. \par Meetings of the Baptists had been held there for thirteen years before, but no \par church had been founded. The Mas\-sachusetts government tried to strangle the \par church in its infancy, and actually fined all the members five pounds each for \par worshipping God contrary to the order established in the colon \par Controversy-Effects of High Calvinism on the Particular \par Baptists-Commencement of Revival-Fuller and Sutcliffe-State of the \par Denomination in England-Foreign and Home Missions \par \par II. Biographical Notices-Dr. John Gale-John Skepp-John Brine-Dr. \par Gill-John Macgowan-Robert Robinson-Robert Hall, Sen.-John Ryland- \par The Stennetts-Benjamin Beddome - Samuel Pearce - John Piggott - The \par Wallins-Dr. Andrew Gifford-Mordecai Abbott, Esq.-Thomas and John \par Hollis-Miss Steele-Mrs. Seward \par \par III.Progress of the Denomination in North America-Sufferings in New \par England-Mrs. Elizabeth Backus-Mrs. Kimball-Virginia-Whitefield's \par Preaching-The "New Lights"-First Churhes in Different States- \par Philadelphia Association-Other Associations-Correspondence with London \par Ministers-Great Revivals-Brown University-Nova Scotia-New \par Brunswick-Canada \par \par } ‹-e‚Ÿ90701a-General Character of the Period part 1{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe103.Œj,7™/0700-THE QUIET PERIOD{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\tx3780\cf1\f0\fs28 THE QUIET PERIOD. \par \cf0 \par I. General Character of the Period-Baptist General Assembly in \par London-Questions-Particular Baptist Fund-Baptist Board-The \par Deputies-The Widows' Fund-The Book Society-Bristol College-Dr. \par John Ward-Toleration Act-Schism Bill-Dissenters excluded from \par Office-Restrictions-Relief-Decline of the General Baptists-Communion ,/3{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 The Quiet Period, Chapter I \par \cf0\b0 \par \par CHAPTER I. \par General Character of the Period-Baptist General Assembly in \par London-Questions-Particular Baptist Fund-Baptist Board-The Dissenting \par Deputies-The Book Society-Bristol College-Dr. John Ward-Toleration Act-Schism Bill-Dissenters excluded from Office-Restrictions-Relief-Decline of the General Baptists-Communion Controversy-Effects of High Calvinism on the Particular Baptists-Commencement of Revival-Fuller and Sutcliffe-State of the Denomination in England-Foreign and Home Missions \par \par I have named this the "Quiet Period," because it was not only a time of rest, \par persecution having ceased, but also a time of stillness-of slumber-of \par comparative inaction. The excitement had passed away. A season of exhaustion \par succeeded, in which 0there was little power or even will to engage in any \par religious enterprise. It seemed as if there must be an interval allowed for the \par gathering of strength, ere the churches could enter the field of labour which \par was opening before them. It is true that there had been displays, marvelous \par displays, of moral force, that had startled and confounded the tyrants of the \par age, and had brought to remembrance the best days of the old martyrdoms; and it \par might have been supposed that the power thus gained would be employed in the \par work of the Lord with success equally marvelous, after the obstructions were \par removed out of the way. But strength to endure is very different from strength \par to labour. If the conflict issues in death, the supernatural energy holds out to \par the end, and the triumph is complete. If, on the other hand, the struggle \par ceases, so that a calm succeeds to the storm, a reaction takes place, and it has \par not unfrequently happe1ned that a state of spiritual languor has followed a time \par of sore trial. Other considerations might be adduced, chiefly drawn from the \par history of the Church, tending to illustrate and confirm this remark. But \par whether the explanation be admitted or not, the fact in the present instance is \par suffi\-ciently obvious. The Baptist interest in England fell into decline after \par the Revolution. Liberty did not bring life. The sunshine had for a time a \par withering effect. After the lapse of more than sixty years after the close of \par the perse\-cution the denomination was found to have decreased. "There is no \par reason to doubt," says Ivimey, "that our churches were far more prosperous and \par numerous at the Revolution in 1688, than at this period [1753], sixty years \par afterwards; so that prosperity had indeed slain more than the sword."1 \par \par A General Assembly was convened in London, in 1689, at which ministers or \par delegates from upwards of one hu2n\-dred churches were present. The meetings \par continued nine days, from the third to the twelfth of September. The object was \par to unite the churches together, that by a com\-bination of their energies certain \par useful purposes might be subserved, besides the benefit which might be expected \par to result from brotherly communication. It was particularly recommended to raise \par a fund, by "freewill offerings," and yearly, quarterly, monthly, or even weekly \par contributions, "the proceeds of which were to be devoted to the following \par objects, viz.:-the assistance of such churches as were not "able to maintain \par their own ministry," so that their ministers might be "encouraged wholly to \par devote themselves to the great work of preaching the Gospel;" the sending of \par ministers "where the Gospel hath or hath not yet been preached, and to visit the \par churches;" and the furtherance of the wishes of "those members that shall be \par found in any of the aforesa3id churches that are disposed for study, have an \par inviting gift, and are sound in fundamentals, in attaining to the knowledge and \par understanding of the languages, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew." \par \par Various questions were proposed at this meeting, and the opinions and advice of \par the brethren sought; from which it appears that commendable care was exercised \par in the matter of discipline. We furnish an extract or two:- \par \par "Question. Whether, when the Church have agreed upon the keeping of one day, \par weekly or monthly, besides the first day of the week, to worship God and perform \par the necessary services of the Church, they may not charge such persons with evil \par that neglect such meetings, and lay them under reproof, unless such members can \par show good cause for such their absence?" \par "Answer. Concluded in the affirmative (Heb. 10:25)." \par "Q. What is to be done with those persons that will not communicate to the \par necessary expenses of th4e churches whereof they are members, according to their \par ability?" \par "A. Resolved, that, upon clear proof, the persons so offending, as aforesaid, \par should be duly admonished; and, if no reformation appears, the Church ought to \par withdraw from them (Eph. 5:3; Matthew 25:42; 1 John 3:17)." \par "Q. Whether it be not necessary for the elders, ministering brethren, the \par messengers of the churches, to take into their serious consideration those \par excesses that are found among their members, men and women, with respect to \par their apparel?" \par "A. In the affirmative:-That it is a shame for men to wear long hair, or long \par periwigs, and especially ministers (1 Cor. 11:14), or strange apparel (Zeph. \par 1:8); that the Lord reproves the daughters of Zion, for the bravery, \par haughtiness, and pride of their attire, walking with stretched-out necks, wanton \par eyes, mincing as they go (Isa. 3:16), as if they affected tallness, as one \par observes upon their s5tretched-out necks; though some in these times seem, by \par their high dresses, to out-do them in that respect . . . We earnestly desire \par that men and women whose souls are committed to our charge may be watched over \par in this matter, and that care be taken, and all just and due means used, for a \par reformation herein; and that such who are guilty of this crying sin of pride, \par that abounds in the churches as well as in the nation, may be reproved; \par especially considering what time and treasure is foolishly wasted in adorning \par the body, which would be better spent in a careful endeavour to adorn the soul; \par and the charge laid out upon those superfluities, to relieve the necessities of \par the poor saints, and to promote the interest of Jesus Christ. And though we deny \par not but in some cases ornaments may be allowed, yet whatever ornaments in men or \par women are inconsistent with modesty, gravity, sobriety, and prove a scandal to \par religion, openin6g the mouths of the ungodly, ought to be cast off, being truly \par no ornaments to believers, but rather a defilement."2 \par \par Similar meetings were held in London for several successive years. The \par difficulties of transit in those days, with other considerations, led to an \par alteration, by which Bristol was substituted for London every alternate year. At \par length those general gatherings were discontinued, and Associations of a smaller \par kind were instituted, similar to those now held; but we are inclined to think \par that the arrangements were not of a permanent character. The Western Association \par was an exception. That body has remained till the present day. The others \par gradually ceased to exist, and new Associations were afterwards organized. A \par large majority of those now existing were constituted or revived in the present \par century. \par \par The churches in London and its vicinity were larger and wealthier than those in \par other parts 7of the kingdom. It is pleasing to observe that they were liberally \par disposed, and that the country churches were indebted to them for very valuable \par assistance. They originated the Particular Baptist Fund, which was established \par in 1717, and which still exists. Its objects were, the relief and aid of \par ministers whose incomes were insufficient for their support, and the \par encouragement of candidates for the ministry, by helping them to purchase books \par or to pursue their studies. Large sums were contributed for the establishment of \par the Fund, both by the churches and by individuals, and considerable additions \par have been since made by donations and legacies. The interest of the funded money \par constitutes the income, which is further increased by the proceeds of annual \par collections. In 1869 the income was \'a33,232 1s. 1d. This institution has rendered \par most important service to the denomination. The General Baptists established a \par Fund of 8the same kind in 1726. \par \par The ministers living in London and its vicinity formed themselves into a \par society, January 20th, 1723-4, which has continued till now. The original \par purposes of the society are thus adverted to by Mr. Ivimey:-"They gave their \par opinion and advice in any matters of difficulty in the churches that were \par referred to them by both parties; they received applications from the country \par ministers to assist them from the Baptist Fund; they sanctioned and recommended \par cases of building and repairing meeting-houses in the country, and to be \par collected for in London; they watched rigorously over the purity of the members \par composing the Board, whether it related to charges of immoral conduct, or of \par erroneous principles; they received to their friendship ministers upon their \par being settled as pastors in the churches, and young ministers who were \par introduced by the pastors of the respective churches which had called the9m to \par the ministry; and they appear to have generally acted in a body in assisting \par destitute churches, and at the ordination of ministers-to have very strictly \par discouraged separations in the churches-and to have affectionately supported \par each other against traducers."3 The society is now called, "The Baptist Board." \par Certain other organizations from which the Baptists derived benefit were \par composed of the various bodies of Protestant Dissenters, with whom they united \par on these occasions. \par \par The General Body of Protestant Dissenting Ministers of the Three Denominations \par was constituted in the year 1727. It consists of all approved ministers of the \par Presbyterian, Independent, and Baptist Denominations, resident within ten miles \par of the cities of London and Westminster. The objects for the promotion of which \par they are associated are not very strictly defined; but they may be said to \par embrace whatever affects the welfare of the: Protestant Dissenting interest, in \par its general or political aspects. Many advantages have resulted from this \par Association. It is the privilege of this body to present addresses in person to \par the Sovereign on important occasions, such as the accession, royal marriages, \par deliverances from danger, great victories, restoration of peace, and the like. \par At such times the King or the Queen is seated on the throne, attended by the \par great officers of State. The first opportunity of the kind was the accession of \par King William and Queen Mary. Mr. Ivimey has preserved in his "History" copies of \par the addresses presented in the period now under review, and up to the year 1820, \par with the royal replies. \par \par When the general body was formed, in 1727, forty-five Baptist ministers joined \par it; the present number is about sixty-four. \par \par Another association, formed in 1732, has proved exceedingly useful. We refer to \par the body of Deputies, ap;pointed to defend the civil rights of Dissenters. Two \par gentlemen are sent by each congregation of the three Denominations in and about \par the Cities of London and Westminster. They meet annually, and at such other \par times as may be needful. An Executive Committee is chosen from the Body once a \par year, to manage its affairs. The objects of this combination are, the \par maintenance of rights and privileges, the prevention of encroachments on the \par same, the redress of grievances, and the removal of restrictions and burdens \par incompatible with religious freedom. \par \par Another society in which Baptists united with other denominations was the "Book \par Society," originally called, "The Society for Propagating Religious Knowledge \par among the Poor." It was instituted in 1750. The object of the society is stated \par to be "the gratuitous distribution and sale of Bibles and Testaments, and other \par books of established excellence, and the publication of originccruing therefrom to be yearly applied, after his decease, \par "to the education of two young men or more, at a Scotch university or elsewhere, \par with a view to the ministry, preference being given to Baptists." Dr. Ward was a \par member of the congregation in Little Wild Street, London. He died in 1758. Some \par of our most celebrated men have enjoyed the benefit of his useful benefaction. \par It is now administered by five trustees, all of whom are Baptists. \par We will now call attention to the history of religious freedom during this \par period. \par \par Although the sufferings of Protestant Dissenters ceased with the Revolution, \par their position was far from satisfactory. The Toleration Act, passed in 1689, \par legalized their assemblies, under certain restrictions presently to be \par mentioned; but the boon was very grudgingly granted. William III. did not grudge \par it; he would have removed all restraints, had not the bigotry of the age \par prevented him.? In Queen Anne's time the High Tory party attained such power and \par influence that measures were taken to place the iron heel once more on the \par Dissenters. The Schism Bill provided-"That no person in Great Britain or Wales \par shall keep any public or private school or seminary, or teach or instruct youth, \par as tutor or schoolmaster, that has not first subscribed the declaration to \par conform to the Church of England, and has not obtained license from the \par respective diocesan or ordinary of the place; that under failure of so doing, he \par may be committed to prison without bail or mainprise; and that no such license \par shall be granted before the party produces a certificate of his having received \par the sacrament according to the communion of the Church of England, in some \par parish church, within a year before obtaining such license, and hath subscribed \par the oaths of allegiance and supremacy." It was further provided, that if any \par person so licensed should "knowingly or willingly resort to any Conventicle," or \par "teach any other Catechism than what is set forth in the Common Prayer," his \par license should be void, and he should suffer three months' imprisonment. This \par iniquitous enactment passed both Houses, notwithstanding strenuous opposition, \par received the royal assent, and was to go into operation August 1st, 1714. On \par that very day Queen Anne died, the House of Brunswick ascended the throne, and a \par new policy was inaugurated. The Act was never allowed to be put into execution, \par and in 1719 it was formally repealed. \par \par But during all this period the Dissenters were excluded bylaw from office and \par employment under the Crown and in corporations. Communion with the Church of \par England was a necessary pre-requisite. Several endeavors were made for the \par repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, but always unsuccessfully. \par \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } Aon of the City of London meanly took advantage of their position to filch money from them. As no man who was not a member of the Church of England could take any office in a Corporation, and as it was well known that Dissenters would not "qualify" (as it was called) by taking the \par Sacrament, a bye-law was passed, imposing a fine of 400l. on every citizen who \par should refuse to serve as Sheriff when nominated by the Lord Mayor, or 600l. \par when elected by his fellow-citizens. This being done, Dissenters were, from year \par to year, nominated or chosen, and then compelled to pay the fines, which were \par appropriated to the rebuilding of the Mansion House. The sum of 15,000l. had \par been wrung from them in this manner: it was high time to put a stop to the \par unjust exaction. In 1754, three Dissenters (Messrs. Stratfield, Sheafe, and \par Evans) were elected to the Sheriffs' office. The Committee of Dissenters \par encouraged them to refuse payment of the fine, on the groundB of the illegality \par of the bye-law. For this they were sued in the Sheriffs' Court, and condemned. \par The judges reversed the decision, whereupon the Corporation took up the cause, \par by writ of error, to the House of Lords, where the question was gravely and ably \par argued. By that time two of the defen\-dants had died, and the death of Mr. \par Evans, the survivor, who was in the eighty-second year of his age, was daily \par expected. Lord Mansfield, the Chancellor, espoused the cause of justice, and \par nobly vindicated the rights of Dis\-senters, at the same time censuring the \par course adopted by the Corporation in terms of indignant severity. The House \par confirmed the action of the Judges, February 4th, 1767; and so the oppression \par ceased for ever. Mr. Evans, we may add, who had persevered for thirteen years in \par his re\-sistance to wrong, received the news of the successful issue as he lay on \par his death-bed. \par \par It is pleasant to record thCat no Protestant Dissenters were implicated in the \par rebellions of 1715 and 1745. During the first, there were riotous proceedings in \par various parts of the kingdom, when those who were friendly to the exiled dynasty \par raised the ecclesiastical war-cry that "the Church was in danger," and wreaked \par their fury on Dissenting meet\-ing-houses and other property. The Baptists lost \par two places of worship on that occasion. The breaking out of the second rebellion \par was the signal for loyal and patriotic demonstrations. The Dissenters took up \par arms in defense of their King; several of their distinguished men received \par commissions; and it was confessed that the vigor dis\-played by them tended \par powerfully to repress the discon\-tented, and to embolden the friends of the \par royal house. But they had incurred the penalties of the law by pre\-suming to \par serve the King without first going to church, and taking the Sacrament; and, \par ridiculous as it may aDppear, it was absolutely necessary to pass an Act of \par Indemnity, graciously releasing them from the penal con\-sequences of their \par loyalty and zeal! \par \par It has been stated that freedom of worship was granted to Dissenters "under \par certain restrictions." They might worship when and where they pleased, but it \par was necessary to register their meeting-houses at the Quarter Sessions, and \par their ministers were required to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and \par to subscribe the doctrinal Articles of the Church of England (but the Baptists \par were not called on to subscribe the 27th article, which treats of infant \par baptism). The latter requisition was peculiarly offensive to them, not because \par they did not generally believe the doctrines enunciated in the Articles, but \par because they repudiated the authority of the State to demand subscription. In \par addition to this, Dissenting schoolmasters were still subject to penalties \par (noEtwithstanding the repeal of the Schism Bill), if they taught school without \par first signing a declaration of conformity to the Church of England. These \par grievances remained unredressed till the year 1779. \par \par An attempt to remove them was made in the year 1772, and a Bill for that purpose \par passed the Commons, but was rejected by the Lords. Only one bishop voted for it. \par Another attempt was made the next year, with a similar result. On that occasion \par the Archbishop of York charged the Dissenting ministers with being "men of close \par ambition." "This is judging uncharitably," replied Lord Chatham, "and whoever \par brings such a charge without evidence defames." His lordship paused for a \par moment, and then added: "The Dissenting ministers are represented as men of \par close ambition;-they are so, my lords; and their ambition is to keep close to \par the college of fishermen, not of cardinals-and to the doctrines of inspired \par Apostles, not to the deFcrees of interested and aspiring bishops. They contend \par for a Scriptural and spiritual worship-we have a Calvinistic creed, a Popish \par liturgy, and Arminian clergy. The Reformation has laid open the Scriptures to \par all; let not the bishops shut them up again. Laws in support of ecclesiastical \par power are pleaded, which it would shock, humanity to execute. It is said \par religious sects have done great mischief when they were not kept under \par restraints; but history affords no proof that sects have ever been mis\-chievous \par when they were not oppressed and persecuted by the ruling Church."4 \par \par "Christian liberty!" exclaimed Robert Robinson, "thou favorite offspring of \par heaven; thou first-born of Christianity! I saw the wise and pious servants of \par God nourish thee in their houses, and cherish thee in their bosoms! I saw them \par lead thee into public view; all good men hailed thee; the generous British \par Commons caressed and praised thee, and Gled thee into an upper house, and \par there-there didst thou expire in the holy laps of spiritual lords!"5 \par In 1774 Mr. Robinson (he was pastor of the Baptist church at Cambridge) \par published a work which probably influenced the public mind on this subject, and, \par prepared the way for the repeal of the obnoxious enactments. We refer to his \par Arcana, or the Principles of the late Petitioners to Parliament for Relief in \par the matter of Subscription. The book was written in the form of letters, and the \par subjects discussed were-Candour in Controversy-Uniformity in Religion-The Right of Private Judgment-Civil Magistracy Innovation-Orthodoxy-Persecution-Sophistry. \par \par Incomparable wit sparkled in this work. No Churchman could read it without being \par ashamed of the intolerance of his spiritual rulers. \par \par At length, even the bishops were mollified. One of their number, Dr. Ross, \par Bishop of Exeter, in a sermon before the House of Lords on the 30th ofH January, \par 1779, expressed his wish that relief might be afforded to Dissenters. The hint \par was taken. A bill was speedily introduced, which passed both Houses without much \par difficulty, by which subscription to the Articles was abolished, and instead of \par it ministers were required to sign the following declaration:-"I, A. B., do \par solemnly declare, in the presence of Almighty God, that I am a Christian, and a \par Protestant, and as such that I believe that the Scriptures of the Old and New \par Testaments, as commonly received among Protestant Churches, do contain the \par revealed will of God; and that I do receive the same as the rule of my faith and \par practice." Dissenting schoolmasters also obtained the desired relief. \par \par We have narrated these transactions, in all which the Baptists were concerned in \par common with other Protestant Dissenters, in order to put the reader in \par possession of some facts which ought not to be lost sight of. PersecIution in its \par violent forms existed no longer; but there were men still to be found, and the \par race is not yet extinct, who gladly embraced every opportunity of venting their \par spite against those who chose to think and act for themselves in matters of \par religion. Let us be thankful that this ill-conditioned tribe is dwindling away. \par A sad degeneracy had taken place among the General Baptists, who, as the reader \par is doubtless aware, adopt Arminian views, the Particular Baptists being \par denominated Calvinistic. Arianism had crept in among them, and with it certain \par other errors. The loss of life followed the obscuration of light. \par \par Anti-Evangelical sentiments and practices prevailed to such an alarming extent, \par that the sound-hearted of that denomination felt the necessity of withdrawment. \par They peaceably withdrew in the year 1770, and formed the "New Connexion of \par General Baptists." The blessing of God followed the movement. The new Jbody thus \par constituted is now the General Baptist Denomination, the Arianised churches \par having for the most part fallen into Socinianism, or become extinct. \par \par The Communion controversy was revived. Nothing had been published on the subject since the time of Charles II., when Bunyan advocated free communion, and Kiffin replied to him. In 1771 Robert Robinson wrote a pamphlet entitled, The General Doctrines of Toleration applied to Free Communion. Messrs. Ryland, of \par Northampton, and Turner, of Abingdon, men of note and power published essays, \par maintaining the same views. They were answered by Abraham Booth, whose Apology for the Baptists was the most masterly production that had yet appeared on that side of the question. No other publications on the subject were issued for many \par years. \par \par We have remarked that the denomination had evidently fallen into a state of \par religious declension almost immediately after the restoration of freedom. The \par stKatistics prove this. To whatever other causes the condition of affairs may be \par ascribed, there can be little doubt that the paralyzing influence of the \par doctrinal sentiments entertained by many of the ministers must be regarded as \par mainly contributing to the result. John Brine and Dr. Gill were chief men in the \par denomination for nearly half a century. They were Supralapsarians, holding that \par God's election was irrespective of the fall of man. They taught eternal \par justification. Undue prominence was given in their discourses to the teachings \par of Scripture respecting the Divine purposes. Although they themselves inculcated \par practical godliness, and so were not justly liable to the charge of \par Antinomianism, there is reason to fear that numbers of those who imbibed their \par doctrinal views kept out of sight, or but feebly urged, the obligation of \par believers to personal holiness. And this is certain, that these eminent men, and \par all their foLllowers, went far astray from the course marked out by our Lord and \par His Apostles. They were satisfied with stating men's danger, and assuring them \par that they were on the high road to perdition. But they did not call upon them to \par "repent and believe the Gospel." They did not entreat them to be "reconciled \par unto God." They did not "warn every man and teach every man in all wisdom." And \par the churches did not, could not, under their instruction, engage in efforts for \par the conversion of souls. They were so afraid of intruding on God's work that \par they neglected to do what He had commanded them. They seem to have supposed \par that preservation was all they should aim at; they had not heart enough to seek \par for extension. No wonder that the cause declined! \par \par The backsliding and coldness had affected all religious communities in England. \par Had it not been for the merciful revival which accompanied the labours of \par Whitfield and the Wesleys, Mevangelical truth would have well nigh died out. \par These extraordinary men were raised up for a glorious purpose. The effects of \par their ministry were felt by all denominations. The churches began to arise and \par shake themselves from the dust. A new order of things may be dated from the \par commencement of their itinerancy, indicating a gradual return to Apostolical \par simplicity and fervor. Christian ministers preached differently; if they uttered \par the same truths, there was more affection and power in the utterance. Some of \par them found that an addition to their creeds was necessary, to bring them into \par accordance with the heavenly standard, and Christian churches saw that there \par were duties incumbent on them, which they could not neglect without incurring \par guilt. \par \par The restorative process did not take effect among the Baptists so soon as in \par some other denominations; but at length they also felt its influence, and then \par it was noNt long before improvement was discernible, as the statistical returns \par show. Another circumstance tended to bring it about. Some excellent ministers in \par the midland counties had long seen and lamented the prevalence of unscriptural \par opinions, and striven against the stream; they now saw a turn in their favour, \par and wisely resolved to avail themselves of it. Robert Hall, of Arnsby, father of \par the great Robert Hall, delivered a sermon before the Northamptonshire \par Association, at its Annual Meeting in 1779, founded on Isaiah 57:14:-"Cast ye \par up, prepare the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of My people." \par In compliance with the urgent request of his brethren, this discourse was \par shortly afterwards presented to the public, in an enlarged form, under the title \par of, Help to Zion's Travelers; or, an Attempt to Remove various Stumbling\- blocks \par out of the Way, relating to Doctrinal, Experimental, and Practical Religion. \par This Oinstructive and useful book had a wide circulation. It corrected the \par religious senti\-ments of many, molding after the Divine model, and was \par peculiarly serviceable to the cause of truth. \par \par From that time we may discern religious progress. Thoughtful concern for the \par souls of others began to manifest itself. A monthly prayer-meeting far the \par revival of religion and the spread of the Gospel, was instituted in 1784. \par William Carey meditated on the state of the world, and longed to evangelize it. \par His Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to use means for the Conversion \par of the Heathen, was published in 1791. This paved the way for the missionary \par enterprise; but our fathers did not rush into it unadvisedly or in haste. They \par thought, and prayed, and marked the leadings of the Divine will, prepared to \par follow the light. God educated them for the work, and so, when they engaged in \par it, it was not so much to undertake a projectP as to develop a principle, \par trusting in the promises of Him who has said in His Word, "It shall not return \par unto Me void." \par \par Andrew Fuller and John Sutcliffe were "men that had understanding of the times, \par to know what Israel ought to do." When they saw that the time was come, they \par prepared to arouse the people. To this their discourses (delivered at a meeting \par of ministers at Clipston, Northamptonshire, in 1791) mainly contributed. Fuller \par preached from Haggai 1:2, on "The Pernicious Influence of Delay;" Sutcliffe from \par 1 Kings 19:10, on "Jealousy for the Lord of Hosts." Decisive action followed \par shortly afterwards. \par \par On the 2nd of October, 1792, twelve ministers, deputed by the Northamptonshire \par Association, met in the house of Mr. Beeby Wallis, at Kettering, and, after \par lengthened and prayerful discussion, adopted a plan of a mission, and formed a \par society, designated, "The Particular Baptist Society for PropagatiQng the Gospel \par amongst the Heathen." The names of the twelve were, John Ryland, Reynold Hogg, \par John Sutcliffe, Andrew Fuller, Abraham Greenwood, Edward Sharman, Joshua Burton, Samuel Pearce, Thomas Blundel, William Heighton, John Eayres, Joseph Timms. \par \par Their joint contributions amounted to \'a313 2s. 6d. \par \par William Carey immediately offered himself as a missionary. Mr. John Thomas, who \par had already performed some Christian labour in Calcutta, while practicing there \par as a surgeon, and was then in England, joined him. They sailed from England June \par 13th, 1793; John Fountain followed them in 1796; and in 1799 Messrs. Ward, \par Brunsdon, Grant, and Marshman were added to the little band. Difficulties and \par trials of no ordinary character oppressed the work for several years. At length \par the mission found a home at Serampore, under the protection of Denmark, to which \par country Serampore then belonged. There, on the 16th of May, 1800, the first \par sheet of the Bengali New Testament, translated by Carey, was put to press. Thus \par was a solid foundation laid, on which a fair and noble superstructure was \par afterwards erected.6 \par \par It is observable that, five years after the institution of the Missionary \par Society, the claims of home began to be deeply felt. Christians saw that, if one \par thing was to be "done," the other was not to be "left undone." The Baptist Home \par Mission Society was founded in 1797. \par \par The denomination had been gathering strength for several years. In 1763 the \par number of churches was 200. In 1790 there were 326 churches in England and 56 in \par Wales, besides the churches of the General Baptists, the number of which is not \par given. \par \par 1 History, iii. p. 279. \par 2 Ivimey, i. p. 496. \par 3 History, iii. p. 179. \par 4 Ivimey, iv. p. 28. \par 5 Works, ii. p. 183. \par 6 See Dr. Cox's History of the Baptist Missionary Society. \par \fs20 \par } “*.e‚¥0701b-General Character of the Period part 2{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE QUIET PERIOD \par Chapter I continued \par \cf0\b0 \par Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists, and Methodists, were considered \par unworthy to share in responsibilities and honours with members of the Church of \par England. Nay, more-the Corporati@T during this period. \par DR. JOHN GALE was educated at the University of Leyden, where he obtained the \par degree of Doctor in Philosophy at the early age of nineteen. Proceeding thence \par to Amsterdam, he studied theology under Limborch, author of the History of the \par Inquisition, and other works. On his return to England, in 1705, he became \par assistant to Mr. Allen, then pastor of the Church in Barbican, London, and \par afterwards to his successor, Mr. Joseph Burroughs. He died in 1721, in the 41st \par year of his age. \par \par Dr. Gale is best known by his answer to Dr. Wall, in a volume entitled, \par Reflections on Dr. Wall's History of Infant-Baptism. This is a standard work in \par the Baptist controversy. The author's various learning is advantageously \par employed, and in a very effective manner. Even those who differed from him \par acknowledged the great merit of his work. It is reprinted in the Oxford edition \par of Wall's History. This evinces remarkabUle fairness and impartiality. \par We are sorry to be compelled to say that Dr. Gale's religious sentiments were \par lamentably defective on some points. He inculcated the morals of Christianity \par rather than its evangelical truths. \par \par JOHN GILL was born at Kettering, Northamptonshire, November 23rd, 1697. He was educated in the Grammar-school of that town, but was taken from it at the age of \par eleven, in consequence of the unreasonable conduct of the master, who insisted \par on the attendance of the scholars at prayers in the parish church on week-day. \par To this, those of the parents who were Dissenters would not submit, and \par therefore removed their children from the school. Young Gill had made such \par extraordinary progress in Latin and Greek that his friends endeavored to procure \par assistance with a view to the prosecution of his studies at one of the \par Universities: but they were unsuccessful. This did not damp his ardor. Part of \par his time was Vnecessarily spent in attendance on his father's business (he was \par engaged in the woolen trade); every minute of the remainder was employed in \par gathering knowledge. He improved himself in Latin and Greek; he studied logic, \par rhetoric, and natural and moral philosophy; he acquired a knowledge of the \par Hebrew, in which language "he took great delight;" he read a large number of \par Latin treatises on various subjects, but especially on theology. All this was \par accomplished by his own unaided exertions. \par \par In 1716 he was baptized on the profession of faith, and immediately afterwards \par commenced preaching. His labors were very acceptable, and the church at \par Kettering would have gladly detained him among them; but that was not his \par destined sphere. In compliance with the request of the church at Horselydown, \par Southwark-over which the celebrated Benjamin Keach had formerly presided, who \par was succeeded by his son-in-law, Mr. Benjamin Stinton, tWhen lately deceased,-he \par visited them, and, after preaching several months, was chosen pastor. His \par ordination took place March 22nd, 1720. \par \par More than fifty years of unremitting toil succeeded that transaction. Mr. Gill's \par life was emphatically a laborious one. His duties as pastor were punctually and \par faithfully discharged. Besides attending to these, he constantly enlarged his \par acquaintance with all learning. He watched the movements of the enemies of \par truth, and held himself in readiness to repel assaults. His pen was never idle. \par The great work of his life was the Commentary on the Scriptures. It was \par originally given to his people from the pulpit, in the form of expository \par discourses. He began with Solomon's Song, on which he preached one hundred and \par twenty-two sermons. The Exposition was published in 1728, in a folio volume. \par Three folios more were occupied with the New Testament, the third of which \par appeared in 174X8. In that year the author received from Marischal College, \par Aberdeen, the degree of Doctor in Divinity. Special mention was made in the \par Diploma of Dr. Gill's proficiency in sacred literature, in the oriental \par languages, and in Jewish Antiquities. The Exposition on the Prophets, in two \par folios, was issued in 1757, 1758. The remaining volumes appeared in 1763, 1764, \par 1765, and 1766. Truly it was a gigantic undertaking! \par \par The particular excellence of this work lies in its plain, strong sense, its \par perspicuous style, the care with which every sentence and almost every word is \par explained, and, especially, the light thrown upon many passages by extracts from \par Jewish authors. Dr. Gill was a profound Rabbinical scholar. He was familiar with \par the whole circle of Jewish literature. None could compete with him on this his \par own ground. \par \par A judicious reader may derive much benefit from the use of Dr. Gill's \par Exposition. He will kYnow how to supply the expositor's deficiencies, and will \par abstain from following him in his interpretation of allegorical passages. For \par the results of modern criticism he must repair, of course, to other sources. But \par this Exposition will ever be a mine which will repay the labors of the discreet \par explorer. \par \par In addition to the Exposition, Dr. Gill published a Body of Divinity, in three \par quarto volumes, which, like the Exposition, was first preached to his \par congregation:-The Cause of God and Truth, being an examination of all the \par passages of Scripture usually adduced in the Arminian controversy; and Sermons \par and Tracts (including a learned Dissertation on the Antiquity of the Hebrew \par Language), in three volumes, 4to. \par \par Dr. Gill's preaching was rather solid than attractive. He abstained from \par personal addresses to sinners, by inviting them to the Saviour, and satisfied \par himself with declaring their guilt and doom, andZ the necessity of a change of \par heart. It is not surprising that the congregation declined under such a \par ministry. His steady refusal to have an assistant or co-pastor operated also \par injuriously on the welfare of the Church. \par \par He preached but once on the Lord's-day during the last two years of his life. \par Yet he laboured on in his study till within a fortnight of his death. A short \par time before that event he said to his nephew, the Rev. John Gill, of St. \par Alban's, "I depend wholly and alone upon the free, sovereign, eternal, \par unchangeable love of God, the firm and everlasting covenant of grace, and my \par interest in the Persons of the Trinity, for my whole salvation; and not upon any \par righteousness of my own, nor on anything in me, nor done by me under the \par influences of the Holy Spirit; not upon any services of mine, which I have been \par assisted to perform for the good of the Church; but upon my interest in the \par Persons of the [Trinity, the free grace of God, and the blessings of grace \par streaming to me through the blood and righteousness of Christ, as the ground of \par my hope. These are no new things to me, but what I have been long acquainted \par with-what I can live and die by."1 \par \par Dr. Gill died October 14th, 1771, in the 74th year of his age, having been \par fifty-one years pastor of the church. \par \par JOHN MACGOWAN, who was fifteen years pastor of the church in Devonshire-square, London, has acquired considerable celebrity among authors, by his Dialogues of Devils, in which he satirizes the follies, vices, and inconsistencies of men, \par especially of professing Christians, in a masterly manner. Some affect to be \par greatly shocked at the dramatic style of the work, and the language ascribed to \par the interlocutors in the Dialogues; but for our part, we cannot help thinking \par that there is a marvellous vein of naturalness in the supposed reports of the \par conferences of th\e diabolical preachers; and we are disposed to believe that the \par devil has more to do with much that occurs in human history than is commonly \par supposed. If the existence and operation of good and evil spirits were more \par thoroughly realized by Christians generally, it might be useful to them. \par In another publication by Mr. Macgowan, entitled, The Shaver, or Priestcraft \par Defended; a Sermon occasioned by the Expulsion of Six Young Gentlemen from the \par University of Oxford, for Praying, Reading, and Expounding the Scriptures, he \par inflicted a well-merited rebuke on the University authorities, and held them up \par to ridicule for their anti-religious propensities, and the folly of their \par endeavour to stop the progress of the revival, to which, by God's blessing, even \par the Church of England has been largely indebted. \par \par Mr. Macgowan died November 25th, 1780, in the fifty-fifth year of his age. \par We wish that it were possible to give a pleasing ]and favorable portraiture of \par the celebrated ROBERT ROBINSON. Gifted with remarkable talents-of sprightly \par genius-vigorous in imagination-capable of writing in an easy, clear, and flowing \par style-and well-informed on all subjects-he might have rendered eminent service \par to the cause of truth, if truth had really obtained a lodgment in his heart. \par \par Mr. Robinson professed to be converted under the ministry of Mr. Whitfield. He \par began to preach almost immediately after his baptism. He took charge of a small \par church at Cambridge, with which he continued all his life. As a preacher he was \par deservedly popular with all classes. The educated admired his discourses; the \par illiterate could understand them. As a writer, he attracted great attention. His \par Village Discourses are models of exquisite tact in the adaptation of style and \par manner to special circumstances. To his translation of Claude's Essay on the \par Composition of a Sermon, he append^ed voluminous notes, curious and instructive, \par containing plans of sermons, illustrative of the advice given by the author, \par together with pertinent and pithy observations. His Tracts on Nonconformity were \par like "sharp arrows of the mighty with coals of juniper." His History of Baptism \par exhausts the subject; all writers on the controversy, on our side of the \par question, make use of the work. When he compiled his Ecclesiastical Researches \par he had renounced the doctrine of the Trinity and other truths connected with it. \par The effects of his change of sentiments appear in every part of the volume. \par There is a constant endeavour to write down the Orthodox, or Trinitarian party, \par while all excellence is ascribed to Arianism and other isms of a lower kind. But \par being a posthumous work, it is less open to criticism, as it did not receive a \par final revision from the author; we will only add, therefore, that the statements \par in the text should be _always carefully compared with the authorities cited in \par the notes, and that the originals should be consulted, whenever practicable. \par Mr. Robinson died at Birmingham, June 9th, 1790, in the fifty-fifth year of his \par age. He had preached in Dr. Priestley's meeting-house on the preceding \par Lord's-Day. "His discourse," said Dr. Priestley, "was unconnected and desultory, \par and his manner of treating the Trinity savored rather of burlesque than serious \par reasoning. He attacked orthodoxy more pointedly and sarcastically than I ever \par did in my life."2 On the following Tuesday morning he was found dead in his bed. \par What a difference between his beautiful hymn, "Mighty God, while angels bless \par Thee," &c., and that last sermon! \par \par ROBERT HALL, of Arnsby (the father of the celebrated Robert Hall), has been \par mentioned as the author of the valuable and useful book, Help to Zion's \par Travelers. He also wrote several of the Circular Letters of the Nor`thamptonshire \par Association, which were, in fact, brief, treatises on doctrinal and practical \par subjects. Mr. Hall died March 13th, 1791. \par \par JOHN COLLETT RYLAND, A.M., was, in some respects, an extraordinary man, though now reckoned among the forgotten ones. His Contemplations on Religious Subjects (in three volumes, 8vo.) were received by the public with considerable favour. \par \par His Address at the grave of Dr. Andrew Gifford, entitled, The First and Second \par Coming of Christ Contrasted, was a rare specimen of sublime eloquence. He was an \par enthusiast in education, and his influence over the young was peculiarly \par powerful. After a successful ministry at Northampton, where he laboured \par twenty-six years, he resigned his charge into the hands of his son (afterwards \par Dr: Ryland, of Bristol), and spent the remainder of his life at Enfield, in \par Middlesex. There he presided over a large and flourishing school, in which many \par were trained for, afuture usefulness. The late Dr. Newman, of Stepney Col\-lege, \par was for some time his assistant. Mr. Ryland died July 24th, 1792. \par \par The Baptist denomination is under deep obligations to the STENNETT family. \par \par EDWARD STENNETT Was some time pastor of the church at Pinner's Hall, London, where he was succeeded by his son Joseph, in the year 1690, who presided over the Church till his death, in 1713. Both were Sabbatarians. Distinguished among \par his brethren for the extent and variety of his literary acquirements, his \par earnest\- ness of soul, his profound and practical wisdom, and his unswerving \par integrity, Mr. JOSEPH STENNETT was held in high esteem by all religious parties. \par If he would have con\-formed to the Church of England, he might have attained an \par exalted position; but he was proof against temptation, though liberal offers \par were made him. His influence was known to be powerful, and strenuous efforts \par were employed by the Court, in bthe latter end of Queen Anne's reign, to gain him \par over to the Tory policy, in the hope that other Dissenters might be induced to \par follow him. Mr. Stennett understood the principles of freedom too well to be \par caught in such a trap. His firmness had a happy effect on others. Numerous \par treatises on religious subjects, and a considerable number of poetical \par compositions, were published by Mr. Stennett. A collected edition of his works \par was issued after his death. He is most advantageously known among Baptists by \par his Answer to Russen, a learned and elaborate work on baptism, to which \par succeeding writers have been much indebted. \par \par His son and grandson were also "shining lights." Dr. JOSEPH STENNETT, who died \par February 7th, 1758, was upwards of twenty years pastor of the Church in Little \par Wild Street, London. He distinguished himself for loyalty and patriotism during \par the rebellion in 1745. He enjoyed the esteem of the King George II.c, and was on \par terms of friendship with some of the great ones of the day. Adverting to an \par interview with the then Bishop of London, Dr. Gibson, he said, in a letter to a \par friend, "I told his Lordship that I more than ever saw the usefulness of the \par Book of Common Prayer; for, considering how little the Scriptures are read by \par the common people, and how little the Gospel preached by the clergy, if it were \par not for what is said of Christ in the Prayer Book, multitudes would forget there \par was any such Person. He heartily joined in my observation, and told me he had \par lately heard a sermon by an eminent preacher, who seemed to labour to keep the \par name of Christ out of it. 'For my part,' added he, 'my time is now short, and \par therefore my charge to all my clergy is short too.' I say to all of them that \par come to me: 'See to it that you preach Jesus Christ; don't preach Seneca, nor \par Plato, but preach Jesus Christ.'"3 \par \par DR. SAMUEL SdTENNETT, son of the above, succeeded his Father at Little Wild \par Street, and held the pastorate till his death. He had been assistant-pastor for \par ten years previously. Few men have risen so high in general estimation. His \par learning-his discretion-his benevolence-his earnest zeal-his holy and uniformly \par consistent conduct, secured for him an amount and power of influence rarely \par enjoyed. His pulpit labours were highly appreciated; his writings were \par acceptable and much valued. Besides two treatises on the baptismal controversy, \par he published three volumes of discourses On Personal Religion, On Domestic \par Duties, and On the Parable of the Sower. \par \par The celebrated John Howard honored Dr. Stennett with his friendship, and was \par accustomed to attend his ministry when he visited London. In a letter addressed \par to him from Smyrna, dated August 11, 1786, he says:-"With unabated pleasure I \par have attended your ministry; no man ever entered moree into my religious \par sentiments, or more happily expressed them. It was some little disappointment \par when any one occupied your pulpit. Oh, sir, how many Sabbaths have I ardently \par longed to spend in Wild Street on those days I generally rest, or, if at sea, \par keep retired in my little cabin. It is you that preach, and I bless God I attend \par with renewed pleasure. God in Christ is my rock, the portion of my soul. I have \par little more to add-but accept my renewed thanks. I bless God for your ministry; \par I pray God reward you a thousand fold."4 Dr. Stennett died August 24th, 1795. \par BENJAMIN BEDDOME, A.M., who ministered to the Church at Bourton-on-the-Water more than fifty-four years, was one of those whose "memory is blessed." We are indebted to him for many excellent hymns, in the use of which the churches \par praise God, and will probably continue to praise Him for ages yet to come. He \par was accustomed for a long time to compose a hymn to be sung after his fsermon on \par the Lord's-day morning. These were afterwards collected into a volume. It is \par somewhat remarkable, that having preached on Lord's-day, January 4th, 1778, from \par Psalm 31:15-"My times are in Thy hand,"-and read at the close of the discourse \par that most appropriate hymn, "My times of sorrow and of joy," &c., he received \par intelligence next morning of the sudden death of his son, a young physician of \par great promise. God had graciously prepared him for the stroke by the spiritual \par exercises connected with the sermon and hymn. \par \par Mr. Beddome died September 3rd, 1797, in the seventy-fifth year of his age. \par Three volumes of his sermons were published after his death, and extensively \par circulated. \par \par SAMUEL PEARCE, pastor of the church in Cannon Street, Birmingham, died October 10th, 1799: He was greatly beloved by his brethren, and justly so; for his \par character was an embodiment of Christian loveliness. Born at Ply\-mouth, Julgy \par 20th, 1766-converted at the age of sixteen-\-called to the ministry by the Church \par in 1786-he studied at Bristol College, under Dr. Caleb Evans, and was ordained \par at Birmingham in 1790. His ministry in that town was eminently successful, \par because it was evangelical to the core, and because it was recommended and \par supplemented by his seraphic and consistent piety. Three hundred and thirty-five \par persons were added to the church during his pastorate. \par \par Mr. Pearce was extremely desirous of joining Dr. Carey in missionary labours, \par but yielded to the advice of his friends and brethren, who judged that he could \par not be spared from England. They were compelled to give him up, however, for the \par Lord summoned him to the palace above. \par \par During a protracted and painful illness, he exemplified Christian character in \par some of its sublimest aspects. "Of all the ways of dying," he observed, a short \par time before his departure, "thaht which I most dreaded was by a consump\-tion (in \par which it is now highly probable my disorder will issue). But, O, my dear Lord, \par if by this death I can most glorify Thee, I prefer it to all others, and thank \par Thee that, by this means, Thou art hastening my fuller enjoyment of Thee in a \par purer world." Surely, that was heroism! \par \par "We have seen men," said Mr. Fuller, "rise high in contemplation, who have \par abounded but little in action. We have seen zeal mingled with bitterness, and \par candor degenerate into indifference; experimental religion mixed with a large \par portion of enthusiasm, and what is called rational religion void of everything \par that interests the heart of man. We have seen splendid talents tarnished with \par insufferable pride; seriousness with melancholy; cheer\-fulness with levity; and \par great attainments in religion with uncharitable censoriousness towards men of \par low degree; but we have not seen these things in our brotiher Pearce."5 \par DR. ANDREW GIFFORD, whose father and grandfather had been pastors of the Pithay Church, Bristol, presided over the church in Eagle Street, London, nearly fifty \par years. His ministry was remarkably successful. He was a thoroughly learned man, \par and possessed excellent taste and judgment in regard to coins, manuscripts, and \par other relics of antiquity. In 1757 he was appointed Assistant Librarian to the \par British Museum, which situation he held till his death. The following anecdote \par is worthy of preservation. "Some gentlemen were inspecting the Museum under the \par Doctor's guidance, amongst whom was a profane youth, who hardly uttered a \par sentence without taking the name of the Lord in vain. The Doctor, who had kept \par his eye upon him, was at length asked by him, 'Whether they had not a very \par ancient manuscript of the Bible there?' On coming to it, the Doctor asked the \par youth if he could read it? Being answered in the affirmative, the Doctor wished \par him to read a paragraph which he pointed out. It was, 'Thou shalt not take the \par name of the Lord thy God in vain.' The irreverent youth read and blushed; the \par countenances of his companions seemed to acknowledge the justness of the \par reproof, and the polite and Christian manner in which it was administered."6 \par Dr. Gifford died July 19th, 1784, in the eighty-fourth year of his age, and was \par buried in Bunhill Fields, at an early hour in the morning, in compliance with \par his own wish, "to testify his faith in the resurrection of Christ, who arose \par early on the first day of the week, and likewise his hope of the resurrection \par morning at the last day." \par \par \par 1 Rippon's Memoir of Dr. Gill, p. 134. \par 2 Dyer's Memoir of Robinson, p. 397. \par 3 Ivimey, iii, p. 581. \par 4 Baptist Magazine, 1843, p. 142. \par 5 Memoirs of the Rev. Samuel Pearce, M.A. \par 6 Funeral Sermon, by Dr. Rippon, p. 41. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } N3ÄNˆ*1]‚0703b-Progress of Denomination continued{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{}M0k‚ž?0703a-Progress of Denomination in North America{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfek¼i/?‚ù#0702-Biographical Notices{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 The Quiet Period \par \cf0\b0 \par \par CHAPTER II. \par Biographical Notices-Dr. John Gale-Dr. Gill-John Macgowan-Robert Robinson-Robert Hall, Sen.-John Ryland-The Stennetts-Benjamin Beddome-Samuel Pearce-Dr. Andrew Gifford. \par \par Before we proceed to furnish information respecting the state of our body in \par other parts of the world, we will give a brief account of some of the principal \par ministers who flourished in EnglandSl1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\caps\f0\fs28 The Quiet Period \par \cf0\b0\caps0 \par \par CHAPTER III. \par Progress of the Denomination in North America-Sufferings in New England-Mrs. \par Elizabeth Backus-Mrs. Kimball-Virginia-Whitfield's Preaching-The "New \par Lights"-Philadelphia Association-Other Associations-Correspondence with London \par Ministers-Great Revivals-Brown University-Nova Scotia-New Brunswick-Canada. \par \par At the commencement of this period there were but thirteen Baptist churches in \par North America. In the year 1740, the number of churches was thirty-seven, with \par less than 3,000 members. But in 1790, there were 872 churches, containing 64,975 \par members. Twenty-five new churches were formed in the first half of the period; \par in the second half no fewer than 835 churches. This is surely a wonderful \par incremase. \par \par It will be interesting to note the dates of the establishment of the first \par churches in the several States:- \par \par 1703. Welsh Tract, Delaware. \par 1705. Groton, Connecticut. \par 1714. Burleigh, Virginia. \par 1724. Golden Hill, New York. \par 1727. Perquimans, N. Carolina. \par 1742. Chestnut Ridge, Maryland. \par 1755. Newtown, New Hampshire. \par 1764. Berwick, Maine. \par 1768. Shaftesbury, Vermont. \par 1772. Kiokee, Georgia. \par 1780. Buffalo Ridge, Tennessee. \par 1781. Nolinn, Kentucky. \par 1790. Miami, Ohio. \par 1796. New Design, Illinois. \par \par Our Baptist forefathers had a hard struggle in the New England States. The \par Congregationalists were the "Standing Order," and the support of their ministers \par was provided for by law, in the shape of a tax, levied on all the inhabitants. \par They had fled from one establishment, and had set up another! A backward \par movement had taken place, in the introdnuction of the "half-way covenant," which \par filled the churches with men who were strangers to godliness.1 The assessment \par for ministers' salaries was rigorously enforced. It was in vain that the \par Baptists pleaded their conscientious dissent from the "Standing Order," and the \par obligation under which they lay to support their own ministers. Their oppressors \par would not listen, nor abate one jot of their demands. The scourge was in their \par hands, and they applied it without mercy. \par \par "From the year 1692 to the year 1728, the Baptists were everywhere, except in \par Boston and some few other towns, taxed for the support of Congregational \par ministers. The fact of their maintaining worship by themselves was not allowed \par to be a sufficient reason for exempting them from rates to sustain a ministry \par which in point of conscience they could not hear. For their refusal to pay such \par rates, we are told that they 'oftentimes had their bodies seized upoon, and \par thrown into the common jail, as malefactors, and their cattle, swine, horses, \par household furniture, and implements of husbandry, forcibly distrained from them, \par and shamefully sold, many times at not one-quarter part of the first value.' And \par it is added 'that the heavy pressures and afflictions occasioned by these \par distraints, imprisonments, and the losses consequent thereupon, made many of the \par Baptists bend, almost ruined some of our people, and disheartened others to such \par a degree, that they removed, with the remaining effects they had left, out of \par the Province.'"2 \par \par In the year 1728, an Act was passed by the General Court of Massachusetts, \par exempting Baptists from the tax; but as it relieved the persons only, but left \par the property still liable, it was of little service. Other Acts were afterwards \par passed, to be in force for short periods, professedly to give relief; but they \par were clogged with so many difficpulties and obnoxious conditions, that the \par Baptists continued to suffer, in many places, and for many years. The following \par letters from Christian women furnish painful illustrations of these statements. \par Elizabeth Backus, mother of the Rev. Isaac Backus, writes thus to her son:- \par \par " Norwich, Nov. 4th, 1752." \par "MY DEAR SON,-I have heard something of the trials amongst you of late, and I \par was grieved, till I had strength to give up the case to God, and leave my burden \par there. And now I would tell you something of our trials. Your brother Samuel lay \par in prison twenty days. October 15th, the collectors came to our house, and took \par me away to prison, about nine o'clock, in a dark, rainy night. Brothers Hill and \par Sabins were brought there the next night. We lay in prison thirteen days, and \par were then set at liberty, by what means I know not. Whilst I was there, a great \par many people came to see me, and some said one thing and some said aqnother. Oh, \par the innumerable snares and temptations that beset me! more than I ever thought \par of before. But oh, the condescension of Heaven! though I was bound when I was \par cast into this furnace, yet I was loosed and found Jesus in the midst of a \par furnace with me. Oh, then I could give up my name, estate, family, life and \par breath, freely to God. Now the prison looked like a palace to me. I could bless \par God for all the laughs and scoffs made at me. Oh, the love that flowed out to \par all mankind! then I could forgive as I would desire to be forgiven, and love my \par neighbour as myself. Deacon Griswold was put in prison the 8th of October; and \par yesterday old brother Grover; and they are in pursuit of others, all which calls \par for humiliation. The Church has appointed the 13th of November to be spent in \par prayer and fasting on that account. I do remember my love to you and your wife, \par and the dear children of God with you, begging your prayers rfor us in such a day \par of trial. We are all in tolerable health, expecting to see you. These from your \par loving mother," \par "ELIZABETH BACKUS." \par \par "MR. BACKUS,-I understand that you are collecting materials for a Baptist \par History, in which you propose to let the public know how the Baptists have been \par oppressed in Massachusetts Bay. This is to let you know that in the year 1768, \par in a very cold night in winter, about nine or ten o'clock in the evening, I was \par taken prisoner, and carried by the collector in the town where I live, from my \par family, consisting of three small children, in order to be put into jail. It \par being a severe cold night, I concluded, by advice, while I was detained at a \par tavern in the way to jail some hours, to pay the sum of 4-8 L. M. [i.e. Legal \par Money], for which I was made a prisoner, it being for the ministerial rate. The \par reason why I refused paying it before, was because I was a Baptist, and belonged s\par to the Baptist Society, in Haverhill, and had carried in a certificate to the \par assessors, as I suppose, according to law. Thus they dealt with a poor widow \par woman in Bradford, the relict of Solomon Kimball, late of the said town;-at \par whose house the Rev. Hezekiah Smith was shamefully treated by many of the people \par in Bradford, who came headed by the sheriff, Amos Mulliken, at a time when Mr. \par Smith was to preach a sermon in our house, at the request of my husband, and \par warmly contended with him, and threatened him if he did preach. Mr. Smith went \par to begin service by singing, notwithstanding the noise, clamor, and threats of \par the people. But one of their number snatched the chair, behind which Mr. Smith \par stood, from before him. Upon which my husband desired Mr. Smith to tarry a \par little, till he quelled the tumult; but all his endeavors to silence them were \par in vain. Upon which my husband desired Mr. Smith to begin public service; whicht \par accordingly he did, and went through then without further molestation. \par "MARTHA KIMBALL." \par \par "Bradford, Sept. 2nd, 1774." \par "N.B. The above I can attest to. It may be observed, that the tavern whither \par they took me is about two miles from my house. After I had paid what they \par demanded, then I had to return to my poor fatherless children, through the snow \par on foot, in the dead of the night, exposed to the severity of the cold."3 \par \par In the other New England States, Rhode Island excepted, the Baptists met with \par similar treatment. The Rev. Mr. Marshall, for instance, who laboured in \par Connecticut, was put in the stocks for preaching in another minister's parish, \par and afterwards sent to jail, for "preaching the Gospel contrary to law." The \par tongue of slander was busy against them, and they were "everywhere spoken \par against." Unrighteously taxed, unlawfully imprisoned, the butts of all men's \par ridicule, they quailed not, noru did they slacken in zeal or effort; and God \par wonderfully blessed them. \par \par Their success was great also in Virginia. After the revival under Whitfield and \par his associates, many Baptist ministers itinerated in that State, and so preached \par that multitudes believed and were converted. Persecution soon broke out. Several \par of the ministers were arrested. "May it please your worship," said the lawyer, " \par these men are great disturbers of the peace; they cannot meet a man on the road, \par but they ram a text of Scripture down his throat." As they would not promise to \par desist from preaching, they were committed to prison, to which they went \par cheerfully, singing as they walked through the street, Dr. Watts's hymn, "Broad \par is the road that leads to death." This was in the county of Spottsylvania, in \par the year 1768. The same course was pursued by the magistrates in other parts of \par the State. About thirty ministers, besides many exhorters and otvhers who \par manifested Christian earnestness for the salvation of souls, were imprisoned, \par some of them repeatedly.4 \par \par "The magistrates, in all parts of the Commonwealth, impelled and directed by the \par State clergy and their more zealous friends, commenced a relentless annoyance of \par the people, and a heartless persecution of the ministers of our churches. \par \par Attempts were made to set aside the Toleration Act, and old and obsolete laws \par were hunted up, and essays were made to enforce their provisions. Assessments \par were prosecuted with new vigilance; fines were imposed and collected; meetings \par were disturbed and violently dispersed; and pastors, and other ministers, were \par arrested, dragged before the courts, browbeaten, and ignominiously punished. All \par this, and more, is acknowledged by the ministers and historians of the 'State \par Church' themselves. Dr. Hawks, for example, says:-'No dissenters in Virginia \par experienced, for wa time, harsher treatment than did the Baptists. They were \par beaten and imprisoned, and cruelty taxed its ingenuity to devise new modes of \par punishment and annoyance. The usual consequences followed. Persecution made \par friends for its victims; and the men who were not permitted to speak in private, \par found willing auditors in the sympathizing crowd, who gathered round the \par prisons, to hear them preach from the grated windows. It is not improbable that \par this very opposition imparted strength in another mode, inasmuch as it at least \par furnished the Baptists with a common ground on which to make resistance.'"5 \par "In all the prisons where our brethren were incarcerated, they preached daily \par from the windows to the crowds who there assembled to hear them."6 \par \par Irritated beyond measure at this boldness, their enemies resorted to various \par expedients to check it. "In some cases," says Benedict, "drums were beaten in \par the time of service; high enxclosures were erected before the prison windows; \par matches, and other suffocating materials, were burnt outside the prison doors." \par But all was in vain. The servants of God would preach, and the people were \par equally determined to hear. Converts were multiplied; new churches sprang up all \par over the State: "so mightily grew the Word of God, and prevailed." \par \par The great increase of our denomination took place after the year 1740. In the \par fall of that year Whitfield landed at Newport, Rhode Island, and commenced that \par course of Evangelical labour in the United States which was productive, under \par the Divine blessing, of such remarkable results. The revival at Northampton, \par Massachusetts, in 1734, had already prepared the minds of the people, in some \par measure, for a general outpouring of the Spirit. It was graciously vouchsafed, \par and so glorious was the manifestation, that "in the term of two or three years \par thirty or forty thousand soulys were born into the family of heaven in New \par England."7 Some of the converts joined the existing churches, but a large \par number formed separate churches, requiring satisfactory evidence that the \par candidates for communion were the subjects of regeneration. This New Testament \par rule had been departed from by the "Standing Order;" and the New Lights, as they \par were called, determined to reinstate primitive principles in their proper place. \par The natural effect was that many of them became Baptists. \par \par The new converts were "fervent in spirit." They thirsted for the salvation of \par souls. Unexampled efforts were immediately employed for the spread of the \par Gospel. Some went from house to house in their respective neighborhoods, \par "warning every man and teaching every man," and exhorting all to turn to the \par Lord. Pious ministers were stirred up to unusual exertion, and old Christians \par renewed their youth. "The Lord gave the word; great was tzhe company of them that \par published it." They were not all suitably qualified for the work, as we should \par now judge; mistakes were committed, and measures of doubtful propriety adopted, \par in some places; but such things might be expected in times of great spiritual \par excitement. It cannot be denied that the laborers were generally men of God, \par "full of the Holy Ghost and of faith." They had deep convictions of the evil of \par sin, and of the peril of a rebellious state. The love of God in Christ \par overpowered their souls. Their views of the solemn realities of another world \par were vivid and heart-affecting. They "set the Lord always before" them, and \par walked as in the sight of the judgment-seat. Their earnest appeals made the \par stouthearted tremble, awed many a reprobate into silence, and wrung tears from \par daring and hardened offenders. Tens of thousands bowed before the majesty of \par truth. \par \par Some of the most powerful preachers emigr{ated to other States; and wherever they \par went, the floods of blessing poured over the land. Virginia was remarkably \par indebted to their labours. In 1768 there were but ten Baptist churches in that \par State; in 1790 there were two hundred and ten. The Carolinas and other States in \par the South were also visited by the New Lights, and marvellous effects followed. \par As soon as the Baptist churches became sufficiently numerous, they proceeded to \par combine in Associations, which arrangement has proved eminently conducive to the \par prosperity of the body. Carefully guarding against the assumption of \par ecclesiastical power, and avoiding all interference with the affairs of \par individual churches, the ministers and delegates who assembled from time to time \par exercised a brotherly supervision over the Baptist cause, and often "devised \par liberal things" on its behalf. Personal edification was promoted by the \par religious services; Christian friendship was renew|ed and extended; important \par questions of doctrine and practice were discussed, and advice given in difficult \par cases; weak and destitute churches were assisted; and plans for the wider \par diffusion of Gospel truth were originated. Almost all our denominational \par enterprises may be referred to the influence of these Associational gatherings. \par \par The Philadelphia Association was the first of the kind. It was formed in the \par year 1707. "This Association," says Dr. Samuel Jones, in his Century Sermon, \par "originated in what they call General and sometimes Yearly meetings. These \par meetings were instituted as early as 1688, and met alternately in May and \par September, at Lower Dublin, Philadelphia, Salem, Cohansey, Chester, and \par Burlington, at which places there were members, though no church or churches \par were constituted, except Lower Dublin and Cohansey. At these meetings their \par labours were chiefly confined to the ministry of the Word and the administration \par of Gospel ordinances. But in the year 1707, they seem to have taken more \par properly the form of an Association; for then they had delegates from several \par churches, and attended to their general concerns. We, therefore, date our \par beginning as an Association from that time, though we might, with but little \par impropriety, extend it back some years. They were at this time but a feeble \par band, though a band of faithful brothers, consisting of but five churches, viz. \par those of Lower Dublin, Piscataway, Middletown, Cohansey, and Welsh Tract. There \par were at that time but these five in North America, except Massachusetts and \par Rhode Island."8 \par \par This Association is still a large and flourishing body, notwithstanding the \par numerous offshoots which it has given out. There are seventeen other \par Associations in the State. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } ~\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 THE QUIET YEARS \par Chapter III continued \par \cf0\b0 \par \par A few years after the establishment of the Philadelphia Association, a \par correspondence was opened with the Baptist ministers of London. In a letter \par dated August 12th, 1714, Abel Morgan says:-"We are now nine churches . . . In \par these churches there are about five hundred members, but who are greatly \par scattered on this main land. Our ministers are necessitated to labour with their \par hands. We hope, if it please God to supply us with more help, we shall be more \par churches in a little time. Most churches administer the sacrament once a month. \par These ministers are all sound in the faith, and we practice most things like the \par British churches." Another letter, written the following year, contained a \par request for assistance, in books, &c., "for the preservation and further  \par promoting of the truth in those parts." Two gentlemen responded to the request. \par "Mr. Thomas Hollis and Mr. John Taylor gave a supply of books; Mr. Hollis sent \par twelve copies of Mr. Burkitt's Annotations on the New Testament, directing that \par each minister in those parts might have a copy; and Mr. John Taylor gave twenty \par pounds' worth of old books, and several copies of the Baptist Catechism." \par \par Acknowledging the gift, the church at Philadelphia wrote as follows:-"Your \par letter was read in our meetings in town and country. We concluded that the books \par might be disposed of as intended: the family-books for the benefit of \par well-disposed folks; the Annotations to be for particular qualified persons. The \par other books for the public use, for our leading brethren to resort to, are \par lodged here in the city, to be lent and returned again; whereby the rising \par generation may have the benefit of them as well as the present. The contents of € \par the letters and a catalogue of the books are recorded in our church-books, to \par prevent all mistakes." An acknowledgment was also forwarded by the Association, \par at its annual meeting, held September, 1717. An extract from their letter will \par show the nature of the struggle which the Baptists in Pennsylvania had at that \par time to maintain:-"We think that the very minds of the people in common here are \par tainted with Arminianism, Socinianism, and what not. The common notion of \par religion among them is like a leprous house: it is not to be mended by patching, \par but must be pulled down, and re-built upon the right foundation-the covenant of \par grace. This we labour to do, and, therefore, go against the current of the \par times, that others who succeed us may see no cause to lament our having gone \par before them; and this we still do, God permitting."9 They did it, and that right \par well. None of their successors have lamented "their having gone before them." \par \par We have adverted to the remarkable increase of our denomination in the latter \par half of the period now under notice. It was the fruit of a series of revivals. \par The ministers of those times were not satisfied with discharging the duties of \par their pastorates. They undertook long journeys, preaching as they went, often \par with no preconceived or definite plan, but traveling and laborings as they \par believed themselves to be directed from above. Mighty effects followed, "the \par Lord working with them, and confirming the Word," not indeed by "signs \par following," such as Apostolic churches saw, but by still greater displays of \par power and mercy-by the conversion of souls. These manifestations were not \par confined to any particular part of the country; they were everywhere enjoyed. \par Rhode Island experienced a rich blessing in 1774. The churches in the northern \par parts of New England were more than doubled in number in the ten years precedi‚ng \par 1792. Many thousands were added in Virginia and other Southern States. In 1791 \par there was an extensive revival in Massachusetts, which reached far into the \par State of New York. Two hundred and ninety-three members were added to the \par churches of Saratoga and Stillwater in that year.10 \par \par We need not be surprised at some oddities. All society was in a ferment; strange \par things bubbled up to the surface, now and then, and were gazed upon, or smiled \par at, or it may be wept over, till they sank into oblivion. If the churches \par composing the Sandy Creek Association in North Carolina were tenacious of the \par kiss of charity, the laying on of hands upon members, the appointment of \par elderesses, and such things; if a large Baptist body in Virginia were so \par mistaken as to choose, in the year 1774, three of their number, and designate \par them "apostles," investing them with a power of general superintendence; and if, \par in some respects, the ƒfervency of New Light feelings got the better of \par discretion and decorum, we must bear in mind the peculiarities of the times. \par After a long season of cold and drought, the Lord "poured water upon him that \par was thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground;" the spiritual vegetation sprang up \par thick and strong, requiring skilful cultivators; and some detriment was \par experienced for want of care in pruning and training. In the course of a few \par years these wants were supplied, and suitable arrangements constituted. Surely \par we ought to prefer a revival of religion, though dashed with some \par irregularities, to the death-like coldness of mere orthodoxy and form. \par \par The year 1764 was memorable for the founding of Rhode Island College, now called \par "Brown University." This Institution originated with the Philadelphia \par Association. The desirableness of the measure had been long felt. The Rev. \par Morgan Edwards was the principal mover in the undertak„ing, and his views were \par zealously forwarded by the Pennsylvania Baptists. They chose Rhode Island as the \par seat of the proposed College, because it was supposed that the preponderance of \par the Baptists in that State would secure the bestowment of a suitable charter of \par incorporation. The Rev. James Manning, then of Philadelphia, being at Newport, \par Rhode Island, in 1763, on his way to Halifax Nova Scotia, called a meeting of \par the chief Baptists, and laid the subject before them. The result was that a plan \par was formed, preliminary measures were taken, and application was immediately \par made to the legislature for a charter. Some difficulties arose, from the \par dishonest dealing of a Presbyterian minister whose assistance had been asked in \par the preparation of the charter, and who actually drew it up in such a manner \par that the Presbyterians would have had the control. The design was defeated, and \par the original promoters of the object obtained …their wishes. The College was \par founded on the following plan:- \par \par "That into this liberal and catholic institution shall never be admitted any \par religious tests; but, on the contrary, all the members thereof shall for ever \par enjoy full, free, absolute, uninterrupted liberty of conscience; and that the \par places of professors, tutors, and all other officers, the president alone \par excepted, shall be free and open for all denominations of Protestants; and that \par youth of all religious denominations shall and may be freely admitted to the \par equal advantages, emoluments and honours of the college or university, and shall \par receive a like fair, generous, and equal treatment during their residence \par therein, they conducting themselves peaceably, and conforming to the laws and \par statutes thereof; and that the public teaching shall in general respect the \par sciences; and that the sectarian differences of opinions shall not make any part \par of the †public and classical instruction." \par \par "The government of the college is vested in a Board of Fellows, consisting of \par twelve members, of whom eight, including the president, must be Baptists; and a \par Board of Trustees, consisting of thirty-six members, of whom twenty-two must be \par Baptists, five Friends or Quakers, four Congregationalists, and five \par Episcopalians. These represent the different denominations existing in the State \par when the charter was obtained. The instruction and immediate government of the \par college rests in the president and Board of Fellows."11 \par \par Mr. Manning, afterwards Dr. Manning, was chosen president. He commenced his \par labours at Warren, in 1766, and was soon encouraged by the resort of students to \par him for instruction. The erection of a college building became necessary, and \par Providence was chosen as the site, that city having offered the largest \par contribution towards the object. The work was accomplished ‡in 1770. On the \par breaking out of the American war, the Institution was suspended for six years, \par and the building was used for barrack and hospital purposes by the army. Dr. \par Manning died in 1791, and was succeeded by Dr. Maxcy, who resigned his office in \par 1802, when Dr. Messer became president. He was followed by Dr. Wayland, who \par resigned, "full of honours," in 1856. The University was next under the \par presidency of Dr. Barnas Sears, who resigned in 1867, in order to superintend \par educational arrangements in the South, founded by the munificent liberality of \par George Peabody, Esq., and is succeeded by Dr. Alexis Caswell. \par \par This venerable institution is now a hundred years old. About two thousand \par students have graduated there, upwards of five hundred of whom have become \par ministers of the Gospel.12 \par \par Rhode Island College was named "Brown University," in 1804, in honour of \par Nicholas Brown, Esq., to whose liberality it hasˆ been largely indebted. In the \par year abovementioned he founded a Professorship in Rhetoric and Belles Letters. \par He afterwards erected "Hope Hall," a spacious structure, designed to afford the \par increased accommodation required for the students, which cost 30,000 dollars. \par "Manning Hall," more recently built by the same generous benefactor, has the \par library on the ground floor, and the upper part is used for a chapel. The \par library contains between thirty and forty thousand volumes. \par \par The importance of providing means of instruction for those who intended to enter \par the ministry was early felt by our brethren on the American Continent. A \par considerable sum was raised for the assistance of such persons by the \par Philadelphia Association. Private seminaries of education were established in \par different parts of the country, which were attended by many who afterwards \par became ministers of the Gospel. The first academy of the kind was opened b‰y Mr. \par Eaton, at Hopewell, New Jersey, in 1756. Dr. Samuel Jones established another, \par at Lower Dublin, Pennsylvania, in 1766; and a third was founded at Wrentham, \par Massachusetts, in 1776, by Mr. W. Williams, one of the first graduates of Rhode \par Island College. These were useful efforts. They were the germs of the noble \par undertakings which have characterized the present age. \par \par The introduction of Baptist principles and practices into that part of the \par American Continent which is now called "British North America" remains to be \par recorded. \par \par In 1760, Shubael Dimock and family, with other persons, emigrated from \par Connecticut and settled in Newport, Nova Scotia. The vexations they had endured \par in their own country in being taxed for the support of the ministers of the \par "Standing Order" (Congregational) led to their removal. The Rev. John Sutton, a \par Baptist minister, accompanied them. He remained about a year in the provincŠe, \par baptized Mr. Dimock's son Daniel, and many more, and then returned. The Dimocks, \par father and son, preached the Gospel in the district where they had settled, and \par many were converted and baptized, but no church was formed. \par The Rev. Ebenezer Moulton, of Massachusetts, visited the same province in 1761, \par and preached chiefly at Yarmouth. The same results followed as at Newport. He \par also returned. \par \par In 1763, the Rev. Nathan Mason removed from Swansea, Massachusetts, to \par Sackville, which was then in Nova Scotia, but is now in New Brunswick (the \par separation into two provinces having taken place in 1784). A church had been \par formed, of which Mr. Mason was chosen pastor before he left. The whole church \par emigrated. They remained at Sackville about eight years, during which time they \par had increased to sixty members. The original emigrants then returned, and the \par church died out. Another church was formed in the same place in 1799‹. \par The first Baptist church formed in the province was at Horton. Ten persons were \par constituted a church, October 19th, 1778, and the Rev. Nicholas Pearson, who had \par been preaching there some time, was chosen their pastor. His labours were so \par successful that fifty-two persons were added to the church in 1779 and 1780. In \par the latter year the church adopted open communion, by admitting \par Congregationalists to their fellowship. The other churches which were \par established during the century adopted the same policy. \par \par The ministers to whose labours the denomination was chiefly indebted for its \par maintenance and extension in Nova Scotia were Thomas Handly Chipman, Joseph \par Dimock, John Burton, James Manning, Theodore Seth Harding, Harris Harding, \par Edward Manning, Enoch Towner, and Joseph Crandal. All these were eminent men in their time. Uneducated, in the common meaning of the word, they were well versed in Bible theology, and they were powerfŒul preachers. They did not confine \par themselves to the neighborhoods in which they lived, but itinerated through the \par province, proclaiming the glad tidings wherever they could gain access to the \par people, and turning many "from the power of Satan unto God." Their names are \par held in high honour in Nova Scotia. \par \par Mixed fellowship prevailed in all the churches, that at Halifax excepted, which \par was the only Baptist church (properly so called) in Nova Scotia, at the close of \par the eighteenth century. But all the pastors were Baptists, and the converts were \par invariably baptized. Strict communion became the practice of the churches in \par 1809. \par \par The first Association in British North America was formed in Lower Granville, \par Nova Scotia, June 23, 1800. It consisted of nine churches, viz.: Annapolis and \par Upper Granville, Digby, Lower Granville, Horton, Newport, Cornwallis, Chester, \par Yarmouth, and Sackville, N.B. \par \par A Baptist church was formed in the Township of Hallowell, Prince Edward County, \par Canada West, about the year 1795. The Rev. Joseph Winn was pastor, and probably \par exercised a general oversight over other Baptist communities, which were \par subsequently founded in that part of Canada. The Rev. Reuben Crandell was also \par an active and successful minister in the same province. \par \par There were many excellent ministers whose names and lives deserve to be recorded \par here, but space forbids. \par \par \par 1 The " halfway covenant" is thus explained by Dr. Lyman Beecher:-"According to \par the provisions of this anomaly in religion, persons of a regular deportment, \par though destitute of piety, might be considered as Church members, and offer \par their children in baptism, without coming to the Sacramental Supper, for which \par piety was still deemed indispensable. The effect was, that owning the covenant, \par as it was called, became a common, thoughtless ceremony, and baptism was \par extended to all who had sufficient regard to fashion, or to self-righteous \par doings, to ask it for themselves or their children. As to the promise of \par educating their children in the fear of the Lord, and submitting to the \par discipline of the Church, on the one hand, or of watchful care on the other, \par they were alike disregarded, both by those who exacted and by those who made \par them."-Autobiography, i. p. 270. \par 2 Dr. Hovey's Life and Times of Isaac Backus, p. 167. \par 3 Hovey, pp. 28, 184. \par 4 Benedict's History of the Baptists, p. 654. \par 5 History of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Virginia, p. 121. \par 6 Howell's Early Baptists of Virginia, p. 39. \par 7 Trumbull's History of Connecticut, quoted by Dr. Hovey, p. 35. \par 8 Benedict's History, p. 605. \par 9 Ivimey, iii. pp. 127,131, 133. \par 10 Hovey, p. 258. \par 11 Hovey, p. 151. \par 12 See Guild's History of Brown University. \par \par \fs20 \par } ÐЄ-2Kˆ!0800-STATISTICS AND REFLECTIONS{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 STATISTICS AND REFLECTIONS\b0 . \par \cf0 \par I.Effects of the Mission Enterprise-Revivals-Extension of the \par Denomination-Statistical Table-Societies-Diversity and Adaptation of \par Talent-Baptist Agency now employed-Peculiarities of the Present \par Period-Duties of Baptists. \par \par \par } on-Baptist \par Union-Peculiarities of the Present Period-Duties of Baptists. \par \par The history of the century through which we are now passing must be told much \par more briefly than that of any period that has preceded it. The names of living \par men do not properly belong to history; and even of those who are recently gone, \par it is not possible to speak with that degree of impartiality which historical \par composition demands. A few brief pages must, therefore, complete our narrative. \par The formation of the Baptist Missionary Society was an era in the history of our \par denomination. Enlarged views took the place of the selfish and narrow-minded \par notions which had so long prevailed. When the nature and extent of Christian \par obligation in reference to the diffusion of the Gospel were understood, and \par corresponding action resulted, a healthy religious condition was soon \par expe\-rienced. The new vigor demanded scope. Other enterprises besides foreign ‘\par missions were undertaken, and they were carried on with persevering ardor, \par characteristic of the altered state of feeling. \par \par Domestic missions engaged the attention of the British churches in England as \par early as 1797, and have been ever since prosecuted with judicious activity. On \par the North American Continent extensive itinerancies were the ordinary modes of \par home effort. The rapidly increasing population could be evangelized in no other \par way. These exertions are now directed by the Home Missionary Society, or by the \par respective State conventions. \par \par In 1813 the Baptist churches of the United States were awakened to a sense of \par their indebtedness to the world by the gracious interposition which brought \par Judson and Rice among them. Then their missionary career commenced. It has been \par prosperous in an unexampled degree. \par \par The astonishing revival of religion which occurred throughout the Union at the \par beginnin’g of this century was an educational process, tending to prepare the \par servants of God for the adoption of a widely aggressive policy. Sanctified \par talent was developed eager for employment in the Lord's cause. The spirit of \par consecration rested powerfully on the churches. Dr. Carey's terse admonitions, \par "Expect great things, attempt great things," became the watchwords of the \par large-hearted. Holy activity was the fruit; increased power was evolved, to be \par expended on new exertions; and the old promise was fulfilled, "I will bless \par thee, and make thy name great, and thou shalt be a blessing" (Gen. 12:2). \par And now, let us look around and abroad, and exclaim, "What hath God wrought!" \par At the close of the "Quiet Period," the number of Baptist churches in Great \par Britain and Ireland somewhat exceeded 400, containing probably about 20,000 \par members. There are now upwards of 2,400 churches, and the number of members is \par estimated at 280,000. Besi“des this, our principles have taken root in the \par Colonies and dependencies of the Empire, and are spreading rapidly. Baptist \par churches have been planted in the West Indian Islands, in Australia, in Van \par Diemen's Land, in Africa, in various parts of India, and plenteously in British \par North America, where, seventy years ago, there were but two churches of our \par denomination in existence. \par \par On the Continent of Europe, the labours of our beloved brother Oncken and his \par energetic coadjutors have been remarkably blessed. Churches of the primitive \par faith and order exist in Hanover, in Prussia, in several of the German States, \par in France, in Switzerland, in Denmark, and in Sweden. \par \par But it is in the United States that the most marvelous progress has been \par witnessed. Several causes have contributed to this. One is the immense tide of \par emigration annually conveying to that country many tens of thousands from all \par parts of Europe,” Great Britain, and Ireland, and among them numerous Baptists. \par Another is the congeniality of the mode of government and the state of society \par with the freedom of Baptist principles. The adaptation of the Baptist ministry, \par generally, to the condition and habits of the people, is not to be overlooked. \par These, however, are but secondary considerations, although due weight must be \par allowed them. Doubtless Baptist churches have shared largely in those \par outpourings of the Spirit which have peculiarly distinguished Christian effort \par in that part of the world, and which, it may be believed, are ever specially \par connected with plain faithful preaching and scrupulous adherence to the laws of \par the "King of Kings." In the year 1790 there were, in the United States, 872 \par churches, containing 64,975 members. There are now of Regular Baptists, leaving \par out the Freewill, the Anti-mission, Six Principle, and Seventh-day Baptists, the \par "Church of God•," the Disciples (or Campbellites), the Tunkers, and the \par Mennonites, 13,355 churches, with 1,109,926 members. \par \par Gathering up the statistics into one sum, the following table exhibits an \par approximation to the present strength of the denomination:- \par \par Churches Members \par United States 13,355 1,109,926 \par Great Britain and Ireland 2,400 280,000 \par British North America 567 41,000 \par West Indies 205 36,000 \par Burma, Assam, and Siam 375 17,000 \par Continent of Europe 292 23,494 \par India 70 3,000 \par ------------ ------------ \par Total 17,264 1,510 \par \par \par It is an approximation only China, Africa and Australasia are left out of the \par account, the returns not being sufficiently clear and full to warrant a definite \par statement. With the exception of the United States, Europe, and British North \par America, all the items in the foregoing list are est–imates founded on official \par reports. We believe that they are below the actual amounts; but it was better to \par err on that side, if entire accuracy could not be attained. \par \par There is another view of the subject. This is the age of societies. Designs \par which would be otherwise impracticable can be carried into effect by combination \par of effort and division of labour. We have joined other professing Christians in \par founding and sustaining institutions of general utility, and have borne our full \par share of the burdens of philanthropy. But there are some departments of \par Christian enterprise in which we must be content to labour alone. Among our own \par benevolent organizations are the following:\-- \par \par A.D. \par 1797. English Baptist Home Missionary Society. \par 1814. Baptist Irish Society. \par 1816. Baptist Highland Mission. Society for Aged or Infirm Baptist Ministers. \par 1824. Baptist Building Fund. American Baptist Publication So—ciety. \par 1832. American Baptist Home Missionary Society. \par 1838. American and Foreign Bible Society. \par 1840. Bible Translation Society. \par 1841. Baptist Tract Society. \par 1845. Southern Baptist Convention (Home Missions and Bible). \par 1850. American Bible Union. \par 1853. American Baptist Historical Society. \par In the Foreign Mission Department we have:- \par 1792. Baptist Missionary Society. \par 1814. American Baptist Missionary Union (formerly the " Baptist General \par Convention "). \par 1816. General Baptist Missionary Society. \par 1843. American Baptist Free Mission Society. \par 1845. Southern Baptist Convention (Foreign Missions). \par \par In supporting these institutions, we are enabled, by the blessing of God, to \par expend about \'a3150,000 annually. The income of the Baptist Missionary Society \par alone has been reported during the past year at no less a sum than that of \par \'a339,339; while the income of the Irish and ˜Home Mission (included since 1854 in \par one Society) is reported, for the year ending March, 1870, at \'a37,233 16s. 3d. \par It is needless to say that all this expenditure is additional to that required \par for sustaining extensive educational operations, and defraying all the expenses \par connected with public worship and the maintenance of the Christian Ministry. \par Of the character of the agencies by which the great work entrusted to us has \par been hitherto accomplished, it is not possible to speak, except briefly. \par \par It has been often remarked that when God is about to execute some great purpose, \par He prepares beforehand the appropriate agency; and providential interferences of \par a surprising kind, in order to bring about the appointed issue, have been not \par unfrequently noticed. Let us think, for a moment, of the men God has given us \par for the work of the last threescore years. Think of the immortal three at \par Serampore-Carey, Marshman, and Ward.™ Think of other missionaries, admirably \par qualified for the positions they were called to occupy-Adoniram Judson, with his \par incomparable wives, and George Boardman, in Burma; Comstock, in Arracan; \par Chamberlain and Yates, in India; Coultart, Knibb, and Burchell, in Jamaica; with \par many more whose names are familiar to the friends of Missions. Think of the \par writers by whose powerful pens our principles have been explained and defended. \par Think of the men of eloquence and the men of counsel, who have swayed and guided \par public opinion, preserved from discouragement, or prevented mistakes. Think of \par the men of wealth, whose hearts were moved by the grace of God to "devise \par liberal things," and whose examples have so stimulated others that the treasury \par of Christian benevolence has seemed to be, like the widow's "barrel of meal" and \par "cruse of oil," inexhaustible. "All this cometh forth from the Lord of Hosts, \par which is wonderful in counsel anšd excellent in working" (Isa. 28:29). \par \par There is yet another fact which must not be lost sight of. We refer to the \par intellectual machinery now in operation for the benefit of mankind under Baptist \par superintendence, or as the result of Baptist labor. Our brethren have taken the \par palm among translators. Their versions of the Scriptures will be read by the \par nations of the East from generation to generation. The swarming multitudes of \par India are mainly indebted to Carey and Yates for the Word of God, and even \par Brahmins receive that Word in their own venerated Sanskrit from Baptist hands. \par The natives of Burma, Assam, and Siam, owe to Judson and his associates their \par acquaintance with the Divine oracles. In those Eastern countries, too, and \par wherever else our Missionaries have planted the heavenly standard, the education \par of the young has been regarded as a matter of primary importance. By the \par institutions they have established, or a›ssisted in establishing, a foundation \par has been laid on which the temple of knowledge will be reared in coming times. \par In England, with the exception of theological institutions-which each \par denomination must necessarily found for itself-Baptists avail themselves of \par those facilities for the acquisition of learning and sciences which are \par abundantly provided for all classes of the community. But in the United States \par they have manifested, at the same time, enlightened patriotism and \par denominational zeal. Colleges and seminaries of the first order, amply endowed \par and well furnished with instructors, supply the wants of their own families, and \par offer inducements to others to participate in the advantages. By this means a \par salutary influence is exerted on the community at large. The following are the \par educational statistics of the denomination in Great Britain:- \par \par Colleges Presidents Founded \par Bristol College Rev. F.œ W. Gotch, LL.D. 1770 \par Rawdon College Rev. S. G. Green, B.A. 1804 \par Pontypool College, Wales Rev. Thos. Thomas, D.D. 1807 \par Regent's Park College Rev. Joseph Angus, D.D. 1810 \par Haverfordwest College Rev. Thos. Davies, D.D. 1839 \par Chilwell College Rev. W. Underwood, M.A. 1797 \par Glasgow Rev, Jas. Paterson, D.D. 1856 \par North Wales Rev. Hugh Jones, M.A. 1862 \par Pastors' College Rev. C. H. Spurgeon. 1861 \par Chamber Hall, Bury Rev. H. Dowson 1866 \par \par \par While giving the above statement; it is impossible to avoid referring to the \par influence that has been exerted on the denomination by the Rev. C. H. Spurgeon. \par Though still among living men (long may his life be spared!) he has rendered \par such invaluable service to the Baptist cause, that no Baptist history could \par possibly be complete which did not include his name. With unprecedented \par popularity and power as a preacher, endowed with inexhaustible enthusiasm and \par untiring activity, possessed especially by an earnest anxiety for souls and a \par passionate devotion to the Saviour, his great powers have been ever at the \par service of the churches, with results that every year seems to enlarge. Perhaps \par his most abiding influence will be exerted in connection with the Pastors' \par College which is named on previous page. There nearly one hundred students are \par being trained for the ministry of the Word; and from amongst them there are \par going out, in considerable numbers every year, pastors of churches, some of whom \par occupy, not unworthily, some of the most prominent positions in the land. Of \par course all these are marked, more or less, with the special characteristics of \par him whom they learn so much to admire and reverence; so that in them Mr. \par Spurgeon may be said to be continually reproducing himself. The Baptist body is \par certainly a different thing now, from what žit was when, some sixteen years \par since, the youth from Cambridgeshire made his first appearance in the pulpit of \par New Park-street Chapel. \par \par It would be improper not to mention, in reciting the influences which have \par tended recently to enlarge and strengthen the denomination, the increased vigor \par that has been put of late years into the operations of the Baptist Union. The \par churches will ever be indebted to the venerable John Howard Hinton (clarum et \par memorabile nomen) for his labours for many years; but it is to the zeal and \par perseverance of the junior Secretary, the Rev. J. H. Millard, that the Union is \par indebted for much of its new and more vigorous life. Its Autumnal Meetings have, \par especially, been "seasons of refreshing from the presence of the Lord." Again \par and again have the brethren gone from them and said, "Behold, how good and how \par pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!" If the denomination is \par moŸre consolidated and united than it ever was before, the Baptist Union and its \par officers deserve much of the praise which will never be ungenerously or \par inconsiderately withheld. \par \par Of late years the denomination has been much more attentive to its literature \par than it ever was before. The Baptist periodicals published in Great Britain \par are-The Freeman, weekly, edited by the Rev. Dr. Angus, and other gentlemen; The \par Baptist Magazine, monthly, established in 1809, and now edited by the Rev. W. G. \par Lewis; The General Baptist Magazine, edited by the Rev. J. Clifford, M.A.; The \par Sword and the Trowel, monthly, edited by the Rev. C. H. Spurgeon; The Gospel \par Herald and Voice of Truth, The Church, The Baptist Messenger, The Missionary \par Herald, The Juvenile Missionary Herald, and The German Baptist Reporter,-all \par monthly. There are also eight Welsh periodicals, for the use of the Baptists of \par the Principality. The Baptist periodicals issued  in the United States are too \par numerous to be even named. Some of them circulate by hundreds of thousands. \par God has assigned us an honorable position. It remains that we prove ourselves \par worthy of it. \par \par "The principles of the Reformation of the sixteenth cen\-tury, are undergoing \par expansion. Men are busily engaged in examining the foundations, and tracing all \par things to their origin. The claims of prescription and custom are disallowed. In \par religion, the stand taken by the old Reformers is fully recognized: nothing is \par to be admitted which cannot be sustained "by Scripture and necessary reason." \par With such views, inquirers conduct their investigations fearlessly, and push \par them on in every direction. Abandoning the traditionary, they ask for a system \par of, truth and practice which will abide the test of searching criticism. They \par desire to clear away all rubbish, and to find "the old paths." \par \par We profess to be walking in ¡them, and to carry out the Reformation to its \par legitimate issues. It is not unreasonable to suppose that, as independent \par inquiry proceeds, scrutinizing all forms of religious profession, our sentiments \par and practices will be extensively embraced, as presenting the nearest \par resemblance to primitive Christianity. The observance of infant-baptism is dying \par away among our P\'e6dobaptist brethren. We may fairly infer that large accessions \par to our ranks will follow. \par \par What, then, are the duties especially incumbent on us under such circumstances ? \par To this question, it may be briefly replied-that, if we would maintain our \par position, we must, in the first place, cultivate with growing earnestness \par intelligent and warm-hearted piety; we must adopt measures for the exposition \par and diffusion of our sentiments on those points in which we differ from other \par religious persuasions; we must extend our Christian influence by home-missionary \¢par efforts, conducted on a liberal scale; we must foster rising talent, and give to \par all the Lord's servants opportunities of being employed in His cause, according \par to their respective gifts; we must cherish an enthusiastic zeal for education; \par we must effectually engage the sympathies of the young; we must be ever ready to \par promote social improvements and to forward philanthropic designs; and we must \par exemplify, in the whole, unbroken union, devotedness to the Saviour, and \par believing reliance on Divine aid. \par \par It would be easy to enlarge on each of these topics. We will confine ourselves, \par however, to the most important-personal piety. \par \par Baptists should be a preeminently religious people. Our profession and practice \par are peculiar. We deem it our special mission to plead for personal obedience to \par the will of the Lord. For this we have always contended. We reject hereditary \par membership, holding that men are not born Christi£an, but that they become \par Christians when they are born again, and that, until then, they have no right to \par Christian ordinances, because they cannot enjoy Christian blessings. We deny \par sacramental power, maintaining that the soul is renewed and sanctified, not by \par any outward act performed upon us or by us, but by the truth of the Gospel and \par the grace of the Holy Spirit. We gather from the teachings of the Apostles that \par a man should be a Christian before he avows himself to be one; and, in full \par accordance, as we believe, with the instructions of the New Testament, we admit \par none to our fellowship without a profession of repentance towards God and faith \par in our Lord Jesus Christ. Their baptism is at the same time a declaration of \par their sole reliance on the Saviour, and a symbol of their union with Him in His \par death and His resurrection-a spiritual, vital union. Our churches, so \par constituted, profess to be societies of believers, c¤ongregations of saints. \par Membership in Baptist churches, therefore, implies piety. The object of our \par union is to nurture godliness in each other, and to diffuse it abroad to the \par greatest extent pos\-sible. Abjuring all attempts at mere outward attraction, our \par efforts tend exclusively to the advancement of personal religion. We invite men \par to the faith and holiness of the primitive churches. Our desire is first to call \par them to God, and then to train them for heaven by a course of spiritual \par education. All this cannot be accomplished but by a truly spiritual community, \par nor can such efforts be long sustained unless there be a continued spiritual \par progress. Orthodoxy is necessary, and order is necessary; but neither orthodoxy \par nor order will insure prosperity without a living likeness to Christ. How \par earnestly should we aspire after that blessing! How diligently should we labour \par to obtain it, and in increasing measure! With what ardo¥r should we adopt all \par scriptural means to promote communion with the Redeemer, and to enkindle \par sympathy and love among His servants! The extent and saving efficacy of our \par influence must depend on the amount of our spiritual attainments. There are \par sects which can prosper without those attainments, because of the worldliness \par that is inherent in their constitutions, and the connection of church privileges \par with natural descent; but the Baptist denomination depends altogether for \par suc\-cess and enlargement on the prevalence of true godliness among its members. \par \par Our churches will be fit asylums for those who shall escape from the perils of \par cold and torpid formality, only as they shall exemplify the "work of faith, and \par labour of love, and patience of hope," by which the early followers of the Lord \par were distinguished. If these be wanting, or notably deficient, inquirers will go \par where there is more power, though the form and o¦rder may be less agreeable to \par the apostolic pattern, and our "future" will be darkened by clouds of disgrace \par and failure. \par \par With what eagerness, then, should we engage in all endeavors by which earnest \par religion maybe promoted among us! How closely should we cling to evangelical \par truth, watching against all tendency to lower the standard, or to substitute the \par elegant essay for Biblical teaching and fervent appeal! How carefully should the \par spirit of the Gospel be cherished! How diligently should all opportunities for \par fur\-thering mutual progress in piety be improved! How nume\-rous and well \par sustained should be the efforts of benevolence and zeal, thus establishing the \par connection between Chris\-tian activity and spiritual-mindedness, and "proving \par what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God!" And with what \par vigilant observance should the laws of discipline be honored, so that, the \par purity of the churches§ being maintained, their members may be "epistles of \par Christ, known and read of all men!" If by these methods a vigorous and fruitful \par godliness become characteristic of our denomination, the force of the attraction \par will be felt by all around us; union with our churches will be regarded as not \par merely a duty, but a privilege; and thousands will say, "We will go with you, \par for we have heard that God is with you." Men will perceive that our profession \par of adherence to primitive simplicity and purity is warranted by fact-that our \par devotedness to the Saviour's cause is not impulsive, but habitual-and that in \par joining our ranks they will not only obey the dictates of scriptural \par conscientious\-ness, but also secure a large measure of Christian enjoy\-ment, and \par a fuller unfolding of the Christian life. \par \par "There is a future for the Baptists," and it is our duty to prepare for it. \par Thousands of souls, just looking out of obscurity, and "feeling after God," ask \par our guidance in the search for truth and life. Freedom, outraged and \par down-trodden by earthly tyrants, calls upon us to assert the rights of \par conscience, and its entire immunity from human control; and, while it beckons us \par to the holy war, reminds us that it is our glory (a glory in which most \par Protestant communities have no share) to wield the sword of the Spirit with \par hands that have never been reddened by a brother's blood. Our martyrs-burnt, \par beheaded, strangled, or drowned, in every European country, at the era of the \par Reformation, and as yet unknown to fame, although their Christian heroism was \par right noble-expect that, in the diffusion and defense of the truths for which \par they suffered, we will display a zeal befitting our privileged lot. A great work \par is before us, both at home and abroad, demanding ardent love, enterprising \par boldness, and indomitable per\-severance. \par \par \f1\fs20 \par } ààË43Qƒ–'0801-Effects of Mission Enterprise{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}{\f1\fmodern\fprq1\fcharset0 Courier New;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} \viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\b\f0\fs28 STATISTICS AND REFLECTIONS\cf0\b0 \par \par \par CHAPTER I. \par Effects of the Mission Enterprise-Revivals-Extension of the \par Denomination-Statistical Table-Societies-Diversity and Adaptation of \par Talent-\-Baptist Agency now Employed-Rev. C. H. Spurgeªnot admit the scripturalness of our principles should be \par thus ignorant; nor can we be surprised that those who have \par superciliously looked upon our comparative feebleness should have put us \par down as of latter-day growth; but it remains a matter of great surprise \par that our own congregations should be, for the most part, uninstructed in \par the past doings of our body. We certainly can boast of godly defenders \par of the faith, of noble men persecuted and contemned, who have sacrificed \par position, wealth, and life, for the truth; we can tell of able preachers \par and learned divines, and we can rejoice in the spirit of enterprise and \par heroism which has existed among Baptists of all ages. Why therefore \par should there be so much ignorance abroad as to the ecclesiastical \par history of the denomination? Why should so few know anything, and so \par many care nothing for the «early Baptists, when their history is beyond \par measure instructive and interesting? We think there are several reasons \par to be found for this apathy to our own history. We are not sure, in the \par first place, that Baptists have ever been passionate lovers of \par ecclesiastical history. Indeed, we have a notion-how far it is true we \par leave our readers to judge-that religious communities which indulge too \par much in these investigations, are apt to trust to the past, which in \par view of present necessities is about the worst thing a religious body \par could do. Baptists, too, in past days, being peculiarly obnoxious to all \par state-churchmen, have had enough to do to fight for very existence, and \par have been too much intent upon taking their part in the controversies of \par the times, and, upon seeking present edification, to spend much thought \par upon presenting in the foreg¬round the past history of their body. Then, \par too, that history has been, for the most part, obscure and scanty, and \par even now, as Dr. Angus confesses, the history of baptism in the early \par church and in the middle ages is still to be written. The few books that \par have been compiled have been too expensive for ordinary readers, and a \par condensed and graphic abstract of Baptist records has been much wanted. \par We are glad therefore to find that Dr. Cramp, the able president of a \par Baptist College in Nova Scotia, has endeavoured to meet this want. Dr. \par Cramp has long been a laborious, painstaking student of ecclesiastical \par history, and his works have been distinguished by some of the higher \par qualities of an historian. His book on Baptist history* is not intended \par for students; at least, it is thrown into a popular mould, and will be \par more acceptable to general ­readers, to whom we most heartily recommend \par it. All Baptists should possess a copy, and even those of our readers \par who do not sympathise with our view of the ordinance of baptism, will \par probably be glad to know what the immersionists have to say about \par themselves. The time is past, we hope, when religious rancour forbids \par one body of believers to take an interest in another. The work is so \par pleasantly written, and so tastefully produced, that it would form an \par acceptable gift to our young men and maidens. It traces the history of \par Baptists from the foundation of the Christian church, when he whose \par right it was to give the mandate commanded his disciples to baptise in \par the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, to the close of the \par last century; adding a chapter - which to our minds is the least \par satisfactory part of the work - on the extens®ion of the denomination and \par the peculiarities of the present period.\par \par The primitive period is remarkable only - so far as the point is hand is \par concerned - for two things: viz., the absence during the first two \par hundred years of any reference in "The Fathers" to infant baptism; and \par the introduction, with other heresies, of baptismal regeneration and \par children's baptism. Tertullian, at the in-coming of the third century \par openly declared that remission from sins, deliverance from death, \par regeneration and participation in the Holy Spirit, were spiritual \par blessings consequent upon baptism. The two things - the sacramental \par theory and the baptism of children (not infants) - probably came in at \par the same time; for we find Tertullian indignantly reproving those who \par had begun the practice of administering the ordinance to children, on \par the¯ ground that they were not old enough to repent and believe. \par Chevalier Bunsen distinctly points out that "Tertullian's opposition is \par to the baptism of young growing children: he does not say a word about \par newborn infants."\par \par The same must be said of Origen. But the seeds of the evil had been \par sown. Children's baptism was clearly originated by the sacramentarians, \par who considered that it was necessary to salvation. But infant baptism \par was instituted by a bishop of Northern Africa, in the middle of the \par third century, who confounded Christian baptism with circumcision - a \par blunder frequent enough nowadays. It must be remembered that the body of \par the infant was immersed, not sprinkled. Sprinkling sick persons confined \par to their beds was, however, a contemporaneous innovation.\par \par We next enter upon the transition period, when the new system was \p°ar quietly working its way. As Neander puts it, "among the Christians of \par the East, infant-baptism, though acknowledged in theory to be necessary, \par yet entered rarely and with much difficulty into the church-life during \par the first half of this period." Novelty needed extraneous power to \par bolster it up, and infant-baptism was promulgated by men who accepted \par state aid, and who were backed by a royal command that all infants \par should be baptised. The church allied to the state, the tide of \par persecution inevitably set in. The state-church people were the \par "orthodox," and as such were recognised; all others were heretics. A \par controversy sprang up with regard to those who apostatised during the \par Decian persecution, but who on the return of tranquillity, sought \par re-admission into the churches. Novatian held that apostacy was a sin \par which disqualified± them from again entering into church fellowship, and \par to secure a pure community, he formed a separate church, which elected \par him for its pastor. These purer churches multiplied, and continued in \par existence for more than three centuries, the members being everywhere \par looked upon as Puritans and Dissenters. They were Anabaptists, baptising \par again all who had been immersed by the orthodox and corrupt church. The \par Novatians, then, were Baptists.\par \par Then follows the obscure period - a period of mistiness, doubtfulness, \par and difficulty. What Dr. Cramp terms "The Revival Period," which \par extended from A.D. 1073 to A.D. 1517, includes the Crusades, the \par martyrdom of Huss, and the invention of printing. Peter of Bruys, who \par suffered martyrdom in 1124, was a Baptist minister, who maintained that \par the church should be composed alone of believers, that all bel²ievers \par should be baptised, and that baptism was of no use unless connected with \par personal faith. Others followed him in the advocacy of the same \par principles, giving a great deal of trouble to the Baptists by their \par denunciations of ecclesiastical corruptions. "The terrible storm which \par fell upon Southern France in the crusade against the Albigenses, \par doubtless swept away many of the Baptist churches, and scattered their \par surviving members. Notwithstanding the vigilance of the persecutors, \par great numbers escaped. Italy, Germany, and the Eastern countries of \par Europe received them." It is clear that "the Morning Star of the \par Reformation," John Wycliffe, believed that faith was required by those \par who were baptised, and those who held that infants dying without baptism \par could not be saved, were regarded by him as "presumptuous and foolish." \par \par ³ It is also certain that many of the Lollards, perhaps the majority of \par them, strongly opposed infant baptism. They were persecuted for this by \par the Paedobaptists, for it was held to be a grievous departure from the \par truth to believe that infants could be saved if unbaptised. There has \par been considerable diversity of opinion among historians as to the \par Waldenses, and both by those who assert that they were Baptists and by \par those who maintain that they were not, it has been forgotten that they \par were not distinguished by any uniformity of belief. "If," says Dr. \par Cramp, "the question relate to the Waldenses in the strict and modern \par sense of the term, that is, to the inhabitants of the valleys of \par Piedmont, there is reason to believe that, originally, the majority of \par them were Baptists, although there were varieties of opinion among them, \par as well as´ among other seceders from the Romish church." One of their \par earlier confessions, has this distinguishing belief, that it is proper \par and even necessary that believers should use the sacraments of baptism \par and the Lord's Supper, but that believers may be saved without either. \par Immersion in any case was still the mode, and incontrovertible facts, \par which no one has ventured to dispute, go to prove that it was the \par universal practice.\par \par Baptists were always equally prepared for conflict and, for persecution. \par At the rise of the Reformation they openly declared themselves, coming \par out of their obscure positions, where they had long worshipped their \par Master in quiet. seclusion. They were prepared to enlist themselves \par under the banners of the Reformers. They looked upon the defiant daring \par men of God whom no ecclesiastical tyranny could tame, no Papal \pµar fulminations could awe, no threatenings could silence, as their brothers \par - bone of their bone, and flesh of their flesh. It is much to be \par regretted that they should have been so bitterly disappointed.\par \par The Reformers were not as yet sufficiently wide in their sympathies, nor \par sufficiently clear in their Protestantism, to extend the right hand of \par friendship, and loving communion to the despised Baptists. As now, so \par then, Baptists were a go-a-head race, always prepared to travel beyond \par others. They were persecuted, destroyed, forsaken, had their possessions \par confiscated, and were reduced to the lowest depths of poverty. In spite \par of the Reformers who were bemisted by Popery, they maintained that the \par church of Christ should be kept as pure as possible; that there must be \par no indiscriminate mixing of wheat and tares, as though both were so much \p¶ar akin that there was no difference between them; that believers only were \par the proper subjects of baptism; that Scripture and Scripture alone was \par the sole arbiter in all theological disputes; and that civil magistrates \par and earthly potentates had no control over God's free gift to \par man-conscience. We, as Baptists of the present day, have precisely the \par same principles to defend, and in demanding the disestablishment and \par \par disendowment of the Irish church, that embodiment of injustice and \par bulwark against the progress of Protestantism in the sister country, we \par do but propagate opinions and principles which were tenaciously held by \par the Anabaptists of Reformation days - principles which find their source \par and authority in Holy Writ.\par \par No one disputes that the conduct of the Baptists of this era, was marked \par at times by folly. Yet it· has been the habit too much to magnify their \par wrong-doings, and to stigmatise all for the acts of some. The Reformers \par themselves chose out of their vocabulary all the offensive epithets they \par could, and flung them at their brethren - the Baptists. Latimer \par denounced them as "pernicious," and their opinions as "devilish." Hooper \par regarded them as "damnable;" while other and equally mild aspersions \par were made upon their zeal, their honesty, and even common decency. The \par Baptists declared their sympathy with Luther in throwing off the Pope's \par authority, and carried out their principles to their legitimate \par conclusion, by proclaiming themselves free from Luther's, or any other \par man's authority. Then came the Peasant's War, in which Munzer joined, \par and for which he paid by the forfeiture of his life. Occasion was taken \par by his connection with the insurgen¸ts, to load all Baptists with obloquy \par and reproach. They were persecuted and hunted down, obliged to worship \par in woods, far removed from the hot fierce hand of their enemies. An \par historian of these times, Sebastian Franck, affirms that within a few \par years no fewer than "two thousand Baptists had testified their faith by \par imprisonment or martyrdom." Yet despite the odium cast upon them, and \par the laws of repression enforced against them, they continued to spread \par in Germany, in Italy, in Switzerland, Austria, and Bavaria. They were \par hunted like sheep and compelled to emigrate in large numbers to Moravia, \par and to the Netherlands, where they were not free from the oppressor's \par yoke. The records of Baptist martyrology are very voluminous. Our \par readers should be acquainted with the doings and the sufferings of these \par brethren, who were singled out for unspa¹ring manifestations of cruelty \par and vengeance. We recommend them carefully to read Dr. Cramp's admirable \par condensation of their trials during this long and suffering period. One \par man, by name Jeronimus Segerson, who boldly declared that he would \par rather be tortured ten times every day, and then finally be roasted on a \par gridiron, than renounce the faith, was burned at Antwerp. His wife, \par Lysken, was drowned in a sack - a fitting death it was thought for a \par Baptist. The account given in the work entitled "Baptist Martyrology," \par written in Dutch, is very affecting. "She very boldly," we are told, \par "and uudisguisedly confessed her faith at the tribunal, before the \par magistrates and the multitude. They first asked her concerning baptism. \par She said, 'I acknowledge but one baptism, even that which was used by \par Christ and his disciples, and left to us.' 'What dºo you hold concerning \par infant baptism?' asked the sheriff. To which Lysken answered, 'Nothing \par but a mere infant's baptism, and a human institution.' On this the bench \par stood up, and consulted together, while Lysken, in the mean time, \par confessed, and explained clearly to the people the ground of her belief. \par \par They then pronounced sentence upon her. Lysken spoke in the following \par manner to the bench: 'Ye are now judges; but the time will come when ye \par will wish that ye had been keepers of sheep, for there is a Judge and \par Lord who is above all; he shall in his own time judge you. But we have \par not to wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, \par powers, and rulers of the darkness of this world.' " Two monks visited \par her in prison, but could not move her from her confidence. "On Saturday \par morning we rose early, some before day, som»e with the daylight, to see \par the nuptials which we thought would then be celebrated; but the crafty \par murderers outran us. We had slept too long; for they had finished their \par murderous work between three and four o'clock. They had taken that sheep \par to the Scheldt, and had put her into a sack, and drowned her before the \par people arrived, so that few persons saw it. Some, however, saw it. She \par went courageously to death, and spoke bravely, 'Father, into thy hands I \par commend my spirit.'\par \par Thus she was delivered up, and it came to pass, to the honour of the \par Lord, that by the grace of God many were moved thereby."\par The history of English Baptists is full of interest. From the first they \par were peculiarly offensive to "the powers that be." Henry the Eighth - \par who did so much for the Anglican Establishmentarians that he ought to be \par regarded by ¼them as a pet saint, even as he was befooled and belarded by \par the intriguing Cranmer - when he assumed the headship of the Anglican \par church which never acknowledged Christ to be its only Head, proclaimed \par against two kinds of heretics, viz., those who disputed about baptism \par and the Lord's Supper; and such as were re-baptised. These Anabaptists \par were commanded to withdraw from the country at once. Cranmer ordered \par some to be burnt, and burnt they were. Mr. Kenworthy, the present pastor \par of the Baptist church at Hill Cliffe, in Cheshire, has stated that if \par the traditions of the place are to be trusted, the church is five \par hundred years old. A tombstone has been lately dug up in the burial \par ground belonging to that church, bearing date 1357. The origin of the \par church is assigned to the year 1523. It is evident that there were \par Baptist communities in thi½s country in the reign of Edward VI., since \par Ridley, who was martyred in the following reign, had the following among \par his "Articles of Visitation:" "Whether any of the Anabaptists' sect or \par other, use notoriously any unlawful or private conventicles, wherein \par they do use doctrines or administration of sacraments, separating \par themselves from the rest of the parish?" A fearful crime which many \par Anglicans of the present day would be as ready to punish were it not \par that other notions of religious liberty exist and powerfully influence \par public opinion. We can trace the same spirit, though in embryo perhaps, \par in the ritualistic prints of the present age, and indeed in the two \par delightfully amiable Evangelical newspapers whose unbounded hatred of \par all outside the pale of their theology and clique is as relentless and \par unscrupulous as the bitterest feelings o¾f Papal days. All history \par teaches that state-churchism means persecution, in one form or another, \par according to the sentiments of the age; and the only cure for the evil \par is to put all religions on an equality.\par \par Elizabeth, like her father, found it needful for the peace and quiet of \par the Anglicans, to banish Baptists from her realm. This she did so \par effectually that Bishop Jewel congratulated his brethren, in 1560, in \par the following terms: - "We found at the beginning of the reign of \par Elizabeth a large and inauspicious corps of Arians, Anabaptists, and \par other pests, which I know not how, but as mushrooms spring up in the \par night and in darkness, so these sprang up in that darkness and unhappy \par night of the Marian times. These I am informed, and I hope it is the \par fact, have retreated before the light of purer doctrine, like owls at \par the sight of the sun, and are now nowhere to be found; or at least, if \par anywhere, they are no longer troublesome to our churches." With all this \par system of repression and persecution, and notwithstanding the emigration \par of large numbers, many remained in the country, and soon made their \par appearance, as history attests, in what Dr. Cramp has denominated "the \par troublous period," which extended from A.D. 1567 to A.D. 1688 - from the \par days especially of James I. to the period when Benjamin Keach suffered \par in the pillory. For an interesting abstract of the history of our \par denomination during those times and during the quieter period which \par followed, with its peculiarities of controversy, and conscientious \par differences, we must refer our reader to the book which we have already \par warmly commended to their favour.\par \par C. H. Spurgeon\par \par \par \par } LL´T4I‚èo000a-A Review by C.H. Spurgeon{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Times New Roman;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue255;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs28 \par \cf1 REVIEW\par This review of J.M. Cramp's Baptist History, by C. H. Spurgeon, \par \tab appeared in the August 1868 The Sword and the Trowel.\par \cf0\par \ul A History of the Baptists\par \ulnone\par All who know much of the Baptist denomination must have regretted that \par so few are acquainted with its early history. We are not surprised that \par those who do ©