09.02.2013 Views

Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

CHAPTER 24. — JOHN SMYTH’S BAPTISM AND<br />

THE ORIGIN OF ENGLISH BAPTISTS.<br />

Inasmuch as the alleged self-baptism of John Smyth has been used to the<br />

discredit of <strong>Baptist</strong>s, it is thought best to devote this chapter to its treatment<br />

and to the explanation of its alleged relation to them.<br />

(1.) Instead of that baptism being the origin of English and American <strong>Baptist</strong>s<br />

it was not even done in England. This alleged baptism was done in<br />

Amsterdam, in Holland, in 1608. f808<br />

(2.) Smyth never had any connection with the Regular or Particular <strong>Baptist</strong>s, of<br />

which denomination are American <strong>Baptist</strong>s.<br />

Though but poorly informed on the differences between the Particular and the<br />

General <strong>Baptist</strong>s of England, Mosheim was sufficiently informed to know they<br />

were different religious bodies. He says:<br />

“The sect in En and which rejects the custom of baptizing infants, are not<br />

distinguished by the title of Anabaptists, but by that of <strong>Baptist</strong>. It is probable<br />

that they derive their origin from the German and Dutch Mennonites. The<br />

English <strong>Baptist</strong>s differ in many things. … They are divided into two sects.<br />

One of which is distinguished by the denomination of General or Arminian<br />

<strong>Baptist</strong>s, on account of their opposition to the doctrines of absolute and<br />

unconditional decrees; and the other by that of Particular or Calvinistic<br />

<strong>Baptist</strong>s, from the striking resemblance of their system to that of the<br />

Presbyterians, who have Calvin for their chief.” f809<br />

Armitage and other historians recognize the difference between these two<br />

bodies. f810<br />

(3.) Admitting Smyth as the founder of English <strong>Baptist</strong>s, the report that he<br />

baptized himself is so far from being proved true that the contrary is more<br />

probably true. Cramp says:<br />

“There has been much dispute respecting the manner in which they<br />

proceeded, some maintaining that Smyth baptized himself and then baptized<br />

others. It is a thing of small consequence. … The probability is that one of the<br />

brethren baptized Mr. Smyth, and that he then baptized the others.” f811<br />

Armitage notices the rumor:<br />

“Smyth and his congregation met in a large bakery for a time, but he soon saw<br />

his mistake in his hasty see baptism, and offered to join the Dutch<br />

congregation of <strong>Baptist</strong>s. … Part of his congregation under the leadership of

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!