Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

Williams’ society had dissolved; (3.) of the most ancient inhabitants of
Providence never having heard there was any Baptist church in Providence
originated by Williams — see p. 384 of this book; (4.) of Brown University
being built on the present site “because it was the home of Chad Brown,
the first minister of the Baptist church;” (5.) of the tablet of its bell not
even mentioning Williams as the founder of the Baptist church; (6.) of the
most ancient Inhabitants of Providence understanding that Brown,
Wickenden, Olney. Tillinghurst, originated the first Baptist church of
Providence; (7.) of the Congregationalists passing Providence to go the
greater distance to Newport, in 1660, to join a passing Church which they
would not have done had there been a Baptist church in Providence; (8.) of,
as Backus said of the early New England historians, — “many New
England historians represent that the (Williams) church soon broke up;”
(9.) of Cotton Mather’s statement — he was Williams contemporary —
that “his church soon dissolved;” (10.) of the improbability of its surviving
the great influence of its unscriptural formation and the example of
Williams leaving it; (11.) of Prof. Whitsitt’s concession, that late
investigators hold that Williams’ society dissolved soon after he left it;
(12.) of Dr. Dexters, statement — he is one of Prof. Whitsitt’s highest
authorities — that Williams never was such a Baptist as Baptists of
America are — in view of these twelve points against Williams’ society
not having dissolved soon after he left it, Prof. Whltsitt’s attempt to revive
the fabulous concern of Williams and to palm it off as a Baptist church,
and one continuing for eighty years, is to say the very least, exceedingly
weak and as bold in making history as it is weak. Prof. Whitsitt starts out to
prove the Williams claim by the utterly ground-less assertion, that:
“Evidences of the existence of the church founded by Roger Williams for
about eighty years are numerous!” Indeed! How strange that Backus
Adlam, Callender Cotton Mather, Prof. J.C. C. Clarke Prof. David Weston,
Dexter, Armitage, Ford, Graves, etc., etc., and the oldest inhabitants of
Rhode Island, never found out the “numerous” evidences! Yea, how
strange that Prof. Whitsitt himself, after this assertion, falls back, mainly,
on the bitter, hasty and inconsiderate letter of Mr. Scott, which says
nothing more on the disputed point than that Williams left the society. It
says nothing as to how long it continued after he left it. With all
Armitage’s antipathy to Church Perpetuity and sympathy for the Williams
claim, this Scott letter has so little bearing on the subject that he concedes
it utterly uncertain as to “what became of his society after he left it” —
Armitage’s Bap. Hist. p. 603. Prof. Whitsitt’s statement, that “there were
two distinct Baptist churches in Providence for many years after 1652,” has
no hearing on the subject.” No one denies this. It Is about as good proof (?)
for Prof. Whitsitt s position as the existence of more than two now in