it is sometimes asked: “when and where did the baptists originate? who were their founders? what is their history?” these are questions of interest; but a more important one would be: “are they right? is their faith according to the teachings of the new testament?” many things which are old are not true. creeds and sects may boast a venerable antiquity, while the word of god utterly condemns them. any organization that cannot reasonably claim christ for its founder has small right to the name of a christian church, no matter how old it may be.
baptists claim to be built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, jesus christ himself being the chief corner-stone. if this claim be well founded, whether they have a written history of one century or of twenty, matters little. yet whatever of the past belongs to any, it may be well to know. [p. 155] any baptist history constitutes one of the most interesting chapters in the records of christianity.
during the apostolic age even, the doctrines of the gospel became corrupted, and its ordinances soon after. both jewish and gentile converts brought into the churches many of their old religious notions, and incorporated them with the faith of christ. these, together with the many philosophical ideas of the times and the perversions to which the truth is always exposed from the ignorance and selfishness of men, very early turned the churches aside from the faith once delivered to the saints. still there were many who in simplicity and humility maintained the doctrines and customs in their original purity. those churches which were strongest and most prosperous were most exposed to corruption by alliances with the world.
when at length the period of martyrdom and persecution terminated; when a nominal christianity took possession of a throne, and church and state became united, then religion, in its prevailing forms, lost its simplicity, its spirituality, and its power, and a temporal hierarchy took the place of the church of christ. this was the great apostasy [p. 156] of the early times. but all the churches and all disciples did not follow in the wake of this sad departure from the truth. many congregations and communities of true worshipers kept the doctrines of the gospel, and practiced its ordinances, nearly, or quite in their primitive purity. and this they continued to do through all the ages of darkness and corruption which followed. they were never identified with the roman or greek churches; they never were in alliance with states; never formed hierarchies. as independent congregations, or small communities, with no other bond of union than a common faith, fellowship, and sympathy, often obscure and unobtrusive, taking the word of god as their guide, they sought to realize the idea, not of a temporal, but a spiritual kingdom in the gospel dispensation.
these religious communities were by the dominant hierarchies called sects, and stigmatized as heretics. as such they were traduced and persecuted continually. and though they may have had their errors, they were the best and purest defenders of the christian faith, and the truest representatives of the first disciples of christ then existing. the state churches were the [p. 157] heretics; while those so-called sects were the true successors of the first christians.
they were defamed and oppressed, calumniated and martyred because they bore witness to the truth of god and testified against the errors and vices of the so-called churches. history has never done them justice, and perhaps never will; because history has been too much written in the interest of their enemies, or from their standpoint. tortured and tormented by those who should have been their defenders, crowns and miters alike pledged to their destruction, they could do nothing but suffer. and this they nobly did as christ’s faithful witnesses. they were known by various names in different ages and in different lands, but retained the same general characteristics.
in the first and second centuries, messalians, montanists, euchites, were terms which distinguished some of these sects.
in the third, fourth, and fifth centuries arose the novatians. increasing with exceeding rapidity, they quite overspread the roman empire, in spite of the cruel and destructive persecutions which they suffered.
in the fourth century the donatists appeared, as a new form of existing sects, or [p. 158] a new phase of the old faith. they multiplied rapidly, spread extensively, and long survived.
in the seventh century appeared the paulicians, attracting much attention, and calling down upon themselves the wrath of the romish church. still they increased greatly, notwithstanding their many persecutions.
that these christian communities should have been faultless could not be supposed. but they were the best of the ages in which they lived, and maintained the purest forms of gospel truth and practice. without the advantage of organization and association, they differed somewhat among themselves.
but in general they all professed to take the new testament as the rule of their faith and practice. they held to a spiritual church-membership, and received only professedly regenerated persons to the ordinances. denying the orthodoxy of the romish church, they rebaptized persons received from that body, and hence were called anabaptists. infant baptism they rejected, according to allix, mosheim, robinson, and other historians. baptism they administered by immersion, as indeed did [p. 159] all christians during those ages. robinson calls them “trinitarian baptists.” it is said that the empress theodora, after having confiscated their property, caused to be cruelly put to death no less than one hundred thousand paulicians, for no other fault or offense than their religious faith.
about the close of the tenth century appeared the paterines; substantially the same people, no doubt as had previously existed under other names. they too rejected infant baptism, and protested against the corruptions of the romish church; in consequence of which they suffered long and severe persecution.
in the eleventh century, and the ages following, were the waldenses, albigenses, vaudois, cathari, and poor men of lyons. these were new names, and names usually given by their enemies. they increased, even under their persecutions, to a wonderful extent, and attracted the notice, if not the sympathy, of all europe.
it is not pretended that these ancient sects were known by the name as baptists; but in general they held the more prominent and distinctive principles which have always characterized the baptists; thus: 1. they [p. 160] declared and defended the rights of faith and conscience and the freedom of worship. 2. they denied the authority of popes and the right of kings and states to interfere with the people in matters of religion. 3. they rejected infant baptism. 4. they baptized by dipping. 5. they held the bible to be the only rule and authority in concerns of religious faith and practice. 6. they admitted to the churches none except such as professed to be regenerated and godly persons.
now it is conceded by all historians of note that such churches and communities did exist, separate from and persecuted by, the prevailing state churches and civil authorities during all the ages from the apostles to the reformation.
when the reformation under luther and his coadjutors broke out, these sects to a great extent fraternized with, and were lost in, the multitude of the reformers. such as continued their separate existence, as the waldenses of piedmont, yielding to the influence of the reformers, did from sympathy what the persecutions of the papists had never been able to compel them to do—abandon dipping for sprinkling in baptism, adopted infant baptism, and took the [p. 161] general forms of religious life, into which pedobaptist protestantism grew.
the welsh baptists
few denominations have a better claim to antiquity than the welsh baptists. they trace their descent directly from the apostles and urge in favor of their claim arguments which have never been confuted.
when austin, the romish monk and missionary, visited wales, at the close of the sixth century, he found a community of more than two thousand christians, quietly living in their mountain homes. they were independent of the romish see, and wholly rejected its authority. austin labored hard to convert them—that is, to bring them under the papal yoke; but entirely failed in the effort. yielding things in general, he reduced his demand upon them to three particulars: 1. that they should observe easter in due form, as ordered by the church. 2. that they should give christendom, or baptism, to their children. 3. that they should preach to the english the word of god, as directed.[1]
[p. 162] these demands of austin prove that they neither observed the popish ordinance of easter, nor baptized their children. they, however, rejected all his overtures, whereupon he left them with threats of war and wretchedness. not long after, wales was invaded by the saxons, and many of these inoffensive christians cruelly murdered, as was believed, at the instigation of this bigoted zealot, the exacting austin.
the dutch baptists
the baptists of holland have a history that reaches back to a very remote period, if not to the apostolic age, as some confidently assert. and this antiquity is conceded by historians who have no sympathy with their denominational sentiments.
mosheim, in his church history, says, “the true origin of that sect which acquired the name anabaptist is hid in the remote depths of antiquity, and is consequently extremely difficult to be ascertained.” eccl. hist., vol. iv., p. 427, mac. ed., 1811. see introd. orchard’s hist. bap., p. 17.
zwingli, the swiss reformer, contemporary [p. 163] with luther, declares: “the institution of anabaptism is no novelty but for thirteen hundred years has caused great disturbance in the church.” introd. orchard’s hist. bap., p. 17. thirteen hundred years before his time would have carried it back to within two centuries of the death of christ.
doctor dermont, chaplain to the king of holland, and doctor ypeij, professor of theology at groningen, a few years since received a royal commission to prepare a history of the reformed dutch church. that history, prepared under royal sanction, and officially published, contains the following manly and generous testimony to the antiquity and orthodoxy of the dutch baptists. “we have now seen that the baptists, who were formerly called anabaptists, and in later times mennonites, were the original waldenses, and have long in the history of the church received the honor of that origin. on this account, the baptists may be considered the only christian community which has stood since the apostles, and as a christian society, which has preserved pure the doctrines of the gospel through all ages.” hist. ref. dutch ch., ed. breda, 1819. see ency. relig. knowledge, art. mennonites.
[p. 164]mosheim says of the persecutions of this people in the sixteenth century, “vast numbers of these people, in nearly all the countries of europe, would rather perish miserably by drowning, hanging, burning, or decapitation, than renounce the opinions they had embraced.” and their innocency he vindicates thus: “it is indeed true that many anabaptists were put to death, not as being bad citizens, or injurious members of civil society, but as being incurable heretics, who were condemned by the old canon laws. for the error of adult baptism was in that age looked upon as a horrible offense.” that was their only crime. eccl. hist., cent. 16, sec. 3. part 2, ch. iii. fuller’s ch. hist., b. 4.
this testimony is all the more welcome, because it comes from those who have no ecclesiastical sympathies with baptists, but who, in fidelity to history, bear honest testimony to the truth which history teaches. the circumstances under which their evidence was produced give it additional force.
cardinal hossius, chairman of the council at trent, says: “if the truth of [p. 165] religion were to be judged of by the readiness and cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinions and persuasions of no sect can be truer or surer, than those of the anabaptists; since there have been none, for these twelve hundred years past, that have been more grievously punished.” orchard’s hist. bap., sec. 12, part 30, p. 364.
many thousands of the dutch baptists, called anabaptists, and mennonites, miserably perished by the hands of their cruel persecutors, for no crime but their refusal to conform to established churches.[2]
the english baptists
at what time the baptists appeared in england in definite denominational form, it is impossible to say. but from the twelfth to the seventeenth century, many of them suffered cruel persecutions, and death by burning, drowning, and beheading, besides many other, and sometimes most inhuman tortures. and this they suffered both from papists and protestants, condemned by both civil and ecclesiastical tribunals, only because [p. 166] they persisted in worshiping god, according to the dictates of their consciences, and because they would not submit their religious faith and worship to the dictates of popes and princes.[3] in 1538, royal edicts were issued against them, and several were burnt at the stake in smithfield.
brande writes that: “in the year 1538, thirty-one baptists, that fled from england, were put to death at delft, in holland; the men were beheaded, the women were drowned.” hist. reformers. see benedict’s hist. bap., p. 303. neal’s hist. puritans, vol. i., p. 138. note, vol. ii, p. 355, sup. what crime had they committed to merit such treatment as this?
bishop latimer declares that, “the baptists that were burnt in different parts of the kingdom went to death intrepidly, and without any fear, during the time of henry viii.” lent sermons. neal’s hist. purit., vol. ii, p. 356.
under the rule of the popish mary, they suffered perhaps no more than under that of the protestant elizabeth. during the reign of the latter a congregation of baptists was [p. 167] discovered in london, whereupon several were banished, twenty-seven imprisoned, and two burnt at smithfield.[4]
doctor featley, one of their bitter enemies, wrote of them, in 1633: “this sect, among others, hath so far presumed upon the patience of the state, that it hath held weekly conventicles, rebaptizing hundreds of men and women together in the twilight, in rivulets and in some arms of the thames, and elsewhere, dipping them all over head and ears. it hath printed divers pamphlets in defense of their heresy; yea, and challenged some of our preachers to disputation.” eng. bapt. jubilee memor., benedict’s hist. bapt., p. 304.
bailey wrote, in 1639, that: “under the shadow of independency they have lifted up their heads, and increased their numbers above all sects in the land. they have forty-six churches in and about london. they are a people very fond of religious liberty, and very unwilling to be brought under bondage of the judgment of others.” benedict’s history, p. 304.
the first book published in the english [p. 168] language on the subject of baptism was translated from the dutch, and bears date 1618. from this time they multiplied rapidly through all parts of the kingdom. the first regularly organized church among them, known as such in england, dates from 1607, and was formed in london by a mr. smyth, previously a clergyman of the established church.
in 1689, the particular baptists, so called, held a convention in london, in which more than one hundred congregations were represented, and which issued a confession of faith, still in use and highly esteemed.
the last baptist martyr in england was edward wightman, of burton upon trent, condemned by the bishop of coventry, and burnt at litchfield, april 11, 1612.[5]
american baptists
the history of american baptists runs back a little more than two and a quarter centuries. in this country, as elsewhere, they were cradled amidst persecution, and nurtured by the hatred of their foes. this has been their fortune in every age, and in every land.
[p. 169]roger williams, a distinguished and an honored name, was identified with the rise of the denomination in america. he has been called their founder, because he organized the first church, and was intimately connected with their early history. williams was born in wales, 1598, educated at oxford, england, came to america in 1630, and settled as minister of the puritan church in salem, massachusetts. not long after, he adopted baptist views of doctrine and church order, on account of which he was banished by his fellow puritans, and driven out of massachusetts, in the depths of a rigorous winter, in a new and inhospitable country. having wandered far and suffered much, finding the savage indians more generous and hospitable than his fellow christians, he finally reached and fixed his future home at what is now providence, r. i. here, with a few associates of like faith, he founded a new colony, calling both the city and the colony providence, in recognition of the divine guidance and protection, which he had in so remarkable a manner experienced.
in 1639, mr. williams received baptism from one of his associates, there being no minister to perform that service. he in turn baptized his associates, and a church [p. 170] was organized, of which he was chosen pastor. he was also appointed first governor of rhode island. full liberty was granted in matters of religion. thus roger williams became the first ruler, and rhode island the first state which ever gave entire freedom to all persons to worship god, according to their own choice, without dictation or interference from civil or ecclesiastical authorities.
on account of this unrestricted liberty many baptists, as well as other persecuted religionists from other colonies, and from europe, collected in considerable numbers at providence, and spread through the colony.
it is a mistake to suppose that all the baptist churches in america grew out of the one which roger williams founded. it is even doubtful whether any single church arose as an outgrowth of that. as immigration increased, other churches grew up, having no connection with that; and with considerable rapidity the sentiments of baptists spread into adjoining colonies, particularly west and south. for a long time, however, they were sorely persecuted, especially in massachusetts and connecticut; persecuted even by those who had themselves [p. 171] fled from persecution in their native land, to find freedom and refuge in these distant wilds.
in 1644, the present first church in newport, r. i., was organized. but whether the present first church in providence was constituted before this date is still a disputed point. both claim priority. in 1656, the second church, newport, was formed. then followed in order of time the church in swansea, massachusetts, 1663; first, boston, 1665; north kingstone, r. i., 1665; seventh day church, newport, 1671; south kingstone, r. i., 1680; kittery, me., 1682; middletown, n. j., 1688; lower dublin, pa., 1689; charleston, s. c., 1690; philadelphia, pa., 1698; welsh tract, del., 1701; groton, ct., 1705. others, not mentioned, arose within this period in these and other colonies. with the increase of population, baptists rapidly increased and widely spread over the country.
edward’s tables gives the number of american baptist churches in 1768, as only 137.
asplund’s register for 1790, reported 872 churches, 722 ordained ministers, with 64,975 members.
[p. 172]benedict’s history states that in 1812, there were 2,633 churches, 2,143 ordained ministers, and 204,185 members.
allen’s register for 1836, puts them at 7,299 churches, 4.075 ordained ministers, and 517,523 members.
the baptist year-book gives the following figures:
date churches ministers members
1840 7,771 5,208 571,291
1860 12,279 7,773 1,016,134
1880 26,080 16,569 2,296,327
1890 33,588 21,175 3,070,047
1900 43,427 29,473 4,181,086
1910 49,045 33,909 5,266,369
1920 53,866 42,121 7,504,447
1930 53,888 49,907 8,915,785
the year-book gives the sunday school statistics for 1930, as follows: for the united states, schools, 46,132; total enrollment 5,143,056.
the figures given in all these cases are probably less than the actual facts warrant, since full reports from associations, churches, and schools can never be obtained.
other baptists
besides the regular baptist brotherhood, there are in the united states very many [p. 173] other and smaller denominations, which practice immersion, but are not in fellowship with, or reckoned as a part of, the great baptist family.
the seventh day baptists, so called on account of their observing saturday, or the seventh day of the week, as their sabbath, on the ground that the jewish sabbath was never abrogated. they are estimated at about 7,000.
the free will baptists, who take their name from their views as to the freedom of the human will and practice open communion, number about 66,000. in the north the free will baptist churches have generally united with the northern convention, and their membership is reckoned with that of the regular baptist body.
the six principle baptists, so called because their doctrinal confession is based on the six points mentioned in hebrews 6:1, 2, are estimated at about 300.
the anti-mission baptists, or rather primitive baptists, found chiefly in the southwest, do not believe in missions, sunday schools, or other reform movements lest they should seem to interfere with the divine decrees. they are said to number 43,000.
[p. 174] the disciples of christ, sometimes called campbellites, or christians, number about 1,200,000.
the winebrennerians, or the general eldership of the churches of god in north america, are estimated at about 30,000.
the tunkers, or dunkards, of all groups number about 126,000, and the united brethren, about 330,000.
baptists elsewhere
in north america, aside from the united states, but including the provinces of british america, central america, mexico, and the west indies, baptists numbered in 1930 about 249,809.
in europe there were in 1930 about 1,639,656.
in asia, about 361,800.
in australasia, about 35,113.
in africa, about 83,041.
