Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

palm him off as a Baptist, and the father of them. Dr. Rule, in his ‘Spirit of the
Re-formation,’ says: ‘He performed a ceremony on baptized persons which
they mistook for baptism, and with his followers received the designation
Anabaptist.’ But Ulhorn says that he did not practice rebaptism, and did not
form a congregation.” f517 :
“Few writers have treated this subject with greater care and clearness than
Ypeij and Dermout in their ‘History of the Netherland Churches.’ They say of
the Munster men that while they are known in history as ‘Anabaptists,’ they
ought by no means to be known as Baptists. ‘Let the reader,’ they request,
‘keep this distinction in mind in the statement which we now make respecting
them. Since the peculiar history of the Anabaptists and Baptists has exerted so
powerful an influence on the reformation of the church in this country, the
nature of our historical work requires that we present in its true light the
whole matter from its origin. After speaking at length of the Munster men and
their excesses, especially of their leaders, they say of Mathiesen: ‘He laid as
the foundation of his new system of doctrine, that teaching respecting the holy
ordinance of baptism which, in part, had. long before been maintained by the
Baptists. He considered infant baptism not to be of the least advantage to the
religious interests of the Christian. In his opinion baptism should be delayed
to years of discretion, and after a profession of faith on the part of the
baptized. Therefore every one who passed over to the community of which he
was the head must first be baptized, even if he had been baptized into another
society at an adult age. When he renounced his confession of faith he
renounced also his baptism. … It can now be easily understood how the
followers of the Munster leaders received the name of Anabaptists, or rebaptizers.
So far as their views of baptism are concerned, these could be easily
tolerated and they need not have been hated by reasonable persons on account
of these. But besides these, they taught doctrines fraught with important
errors, partly founded on Pelagianism, f518 partly Unitarianism, partly
Mysticism, and partly impure principles. Yet, with all these opinions they
could have been suffered to exist had they behaved themselves properly as
members of society. … Since the enlisting of the rebel Anabaptists happened
in this manner, it is sufficiently evident that the great majority cannot be
supposed to have been Baptists in belief. They were people of every variety of
religious beliefs, and many of them of no religion at all in heart, although they
aided the Protestant cause. From the nature of the case the majority of
Romanists knew no difference between the various Protestant parties and
sects, and would make no distinction. Hence, the abhorrence only deserved by
some of the Anabaptists was bestowed upon all Protestants. The honest
Baptist suffered most severely from their prejudice, because they were
considered by the people to be the same, and were called by the same name.
… On this account the Baptists in Flanders and in Friesland suffered the most
terrible persecutions. … We have nowhere seen clearer evidence of the
injurious influence of prejudice; nowhere have we met with more obstinate
unwillingness to be correctly informed, and a more evident disposition to
silence those who better understood the truth of the matter. Prejudice, when