Newspaper Page Text
2
DR. WHFISITT VS. BAPTIST HIS
TORY.
BY W A. JARRF.L, DD , AUTHOR OF
BAPTIST CHURCH PERPETUITY.
No. 5.
The prescribed limits of thin review
prevent my noticing Dr. Whitaitt'a
book in all ita particulars. But I no
tice other illustrations of his use of
authors, under his pedobaptlst teach
er, Dexter.
EDWARD BARBER'S TESTIMONY.
Dr. Whltsitt seems so confident that
Barber is on his side of this question
that he says (p. 18): “The ordinance
was extinct in England in 1641, if
Barber's authority is worth anything
at all and if the plainest statements
of fact are capable of being understood
by the human mind." leaving out
the truth that Barber's Treatise was
not written to prove what is the ac
tion of baptism —that it was written
only to show "that the Lord Christ or
dained dipping for those only that
professed faith and repentance,” that
it implies that immersion was not new
among the Baptista at the time he
wrote is clear. As showing that the
name Baptist was not given Baptists
because of any change from affusion
to immersion, as Dr. Whltsitt has
argued. Barber says: "In like man
ner those that profess and practice
the dipping of Jesus Christ, instituted
in the Gospel, are called and reproach
ed with the name of Anabaptists."
Again, Barber's words show that
instead of Dr. Whitsitt's witnesses
having had the opportunity of know
ing whether Baptists were Immersion
iats from Baptists having been “hid”
from their persecutors, the contrary
is the case. He says: "In Queen
Mary's days Papists, in Queen Eliza
beth's Protestants, when the Bishops
were in power and authority, submit,
flee their countries, or hide their
heads, now that in the providence of
God they are in disgrace and in part
down, oppose them with all their
might, whereas the true ministers of
Christ were ever the same.” This is
fatal to Dr. Whitsitt's position, In that
it proves (1) that the Baptists, at the
time under consideration, were so hid
den that any negative testimony aa to
their practice Is worthless. If they
were so cruelly "hid” that the officers
of the law could not find them, he
who builds an argument on the nega
tive testimony is, indeed, a very reck
less investigator and assailant of Bap
tist history, especially when that tes
timony Is that of pedobaptists. (2)
In that it says the true witnesses were
never all extinct in the most trying
times that they were "ever the
same,” that they were only "in part
down.” it shows there were yet some
faithful ones —some who had continued
the practice of Immersion.
Again, says Barber: "Others affirm
ing. there was no plain text of the
dipping of any woman.” This is now
repeated in pedobaptists saying:
“There is no plain text of the baptism
of any woman.” It plainly shows that
dipping was so universally recognized
and so often done that it was not the
subject in dispute. But Dr. Whltsitt
says that Barber says the "ordinance
was lost; it was destroyed and raced
out both for matter and form.”
So to the greatest extent it was;
but surely not from among Baptists.
Barber says he means by “the matter,”
“l>eing a believer.” Now, inasmuch as
Dr. Whltsitt acknowledges the Bap
tists had not ceased to baptize believ
ers only the very words on which he
relies are fatal to his position; for
they, if strained as by him. equally
prove that there was no baptism of
believers—that believers' baptism was
“destroyed and raced out.” Possibly,
with a few more lessons from his
great pedobaptlst teacher, Dexter.
Dr. Whltsitt may write a book and
also (?) prove that Baptists once uni
versally practiced Infant sprinkling!
But, like a drowning man catching at
a straw, ha emphasizes Barber’s state
ment that the Lord had raised him up
to "divulge” immersion. Had the doc
tor only consulted his Webster as
faithfully as he did the Baptist slan
derer, Dexter, he could have learned
that “divulge” is also used as a syno
nym of publish. Had he carefully
read Barber to see something else
than that Baptists were once apos
tates he would have seen that Barber
undoubtedly uses the word "divulge”
as meaning to publish—"therefore in
obedience to God and love to our na
tive country, wo desire to publish."
Leaving the testimony of Barber, af
ter the most careful reading of his
treatise. I do not hesitate to join Drs.
King, of London, Lorimer, Ford,
Eaton, Christian and other English
and American scholars in saying Bar
ber affords no foundation for Dr. Whit
sitt's boasted discovery. On the con
trary, Barber's treatise implies dip
ping the only act as baptism among
Baptists of and before his time. This
is so clearly true that Dr. Whitsitt’s
opponents have widely republished the
whole of Barber's treatise in this
country as Dr. Whitsitt's confutation.
As the next illustration of the use
Dr. Whltsitt makes of authors, I no
tice
THE TESTIMONY OF A. RITOR.
The very key to all Ritor says. Dr.
Whitsitt does not give his readers. Its
title is: “A treatise of the vanity of
childish baptism, wherein the defi
ciency of the baptism of the Church
of England is considered in five par
ticulars thereof, and wherein is proved
that baptizing is dipping, and dipping
is baptizing. Printed in the year 1642
by A. R.” "True, Dr. Whitsitt quotes
the title to where it tells the purpose
of the treatise is to show" wherein
“the deficiency of the Church of Eng
land is considered,” but there he cuts
the title in two. As Dr. Whitsitt is
copying from Dexter we are glad to
exhonerate him from the sin of this
shameful garbling of an author, ex
cept as to his committing himself to
so unscrupulous a traducer of Bap
tists and their history. Had I the
space to show that this perversion of
authors in Dr. Whitsitt’s book is very
frequent, to do so would be an easy
thing. In truth, the phrase "except
here and there one, or some few. or no
considerable number,” in the citation
of this author by Whitsitt, Dexter &
Co., is fatal to their side. The lan
guage as comparing the number of
Baptists with others, is equivalent to
the declaration that there had con
tinued a good number of Baptist
churches immersing and otherwise ad
hering to Gospel practices.
THOMAS KILLCOP’S TESTIMONY.
Speaking of the quotation which Dr.
Whitsitt reproduces from Dexter. W.
H. King, D.D., of London, who is so
far from us as not to be accused with
being affected by any local prejudice,
after a thorough examination of the
original, says: “When I verified the
quotation I could hardly believe my
own eyes, for a greater misrepre
sentation of Mr. Killcop's meaning
could scarcely be imagined. Dr. Dex
ter uses the quotation as proving that
Mr. Killcop is defending the position
that immersion be made a necessity
for chureh membership, as if that were
a new practice, whereas in the whole
context Mr. Killcop Is not saying a
word about the mode of baptism. For
eight pages before the paragraph
from which the quotation is taken to
the end of the treatise there is not a
sentence about either sprinkling, pour
ing or immersion. The suggestion
that Mr. Killcop is speaking about the
rightfulness of making the new prac
tice of dipping the foundation on
which to erect a church state is alto
gether false; his contention is that
'Baptists have the right to make be
lievers' baptism to the exclusion of
infant baptism the foundation of a
church state. It will be seen that Dr.
Dexter's contention about the newness
of dipping Is disapproved by the very
quotation by which he tries to support
It. This is a typical instance of Dr.
Dexter’s method of quotation. While
the words he cites may be verbally
correct, they are sometimes presented
as having a meaning quite foreign to
that they bear in the books from
which the citation is made. His quo
tations are not to be trusted until they
are verified and read in connection
with the context from which they are
taken. In this whole treatise there is
not a word or hint that there was
anything new in the practice of im
mersion.”
HENRY DENNE'S TESTIMONY.
On the sentence, "the church is now
travailing to bring forth the baptism
of water, raked heretofore in immita
tion of pedobaptism. The truth of the
ordinance and institution of the Izird
Jesus, lying covered with custom and
practice and a pretended fact of an
tiquity,” Dr. Whitsitt attempts to
build. That it did not occur to Dr.
Whitsitt that much of this language is
highly figurative and that it may as
well be understood to apply only to
pedobaptlst churches is equaled in
strangeness only by a president of a
great Baptist Theological Seminary
building a historical argument
against Baptist Church Perpetuity on
garbled and perverted quotations of an
unscrupulous Baptist enemy. The
"doctrine of baptism of water,” as is
to be plainly seen by the title of the
treatise, refers to the subject of bap
tism and not to the action, save as im
plied.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN MABBAT.
From the words, “this opinion (of
rebaptizing by dipping) being but new
and upstart, there is good reason they
should disclaim it and be humbled
for it," Dr. Whitsitt builds one of
his usual arguments, saying: “No
finer opportunity was ever presented
to deny a charge with indignation if it
had not been true. But,” says Dr.
Whitsitt, "he not only fails to deny,
Inn actually concedes the correctness
of the allegation, and defends himself
by saying: ‘The apostles were, in
their time, charged for new and up
start doctrine by 'some; should they
by good reason therefore disclaim it,
and be humbled for it, and so have de
nied Christ’s doctrine and truth.” But
as Dr. Whitsitt never saw the treatise
of Mabbat and relies wholly on an
unreliable Baptist detainer, Dexter, for
what Mabbat said, he does not know
what is the testimony of Mabbat—or
of that of any of the other witnesses
for whose testimony he is wholly de
pendent upon Dexter. Inasmuch as
the apostles' “new doctrine" was
Christ crucified and raised from the
dead—the doctrine in Moses and the
prophets, in likening the newness of
baptism to the newness of the old doc
trine of the apostles, Mabbat denied
the charge in the most emphatic and
effective way. Considering the weak
ness of Dr. Whitsitt's argument upon
these testimonies, there can be no
that he so often tries to prop
them up with the "Jessey Church
Records.” But though the other quo
tations that Dr. Whitsitt makes afford
a rich field for showing the weakness
of his position, my prescribed limits
admonish me that I have already
yielded too much to the temptation to
do so.
Says Dr. King, of London: “In con
nection .with this controversy I have
carefully examined the titles of the
pamphlets in the first three volumes
of this catalogue, more than 7,000 in
number, and have read every pam
phlet which has seemed by its title to
refer to the subject of baptism, or the
opinions and practices of Baptists,
with this result: That I can affirm,
with the most unhesitating confidence,
that in these volumes there is not a
sentence or a hint from which it can
be inferred that the Baptists generally,
or any section of them, or even an
individual Baptist held any other
opinion than that immersion is the
only true and Scriptural method of
baptism, either before the year 1639
or after it. It must be remembered
that these are the earliest pamphlets
and cover the period from the year
1640 to 1646. All the evidence that
can be gathered from them —and the
testimony is both full and clear —is
most full and conclusive that from
the first the doctrine of believers’ bap
tism by immersion was firmly and
intelligently held.” As the result of
an examination of the documents in
the British Museum, with this con
troversy before him, Dr. Lorimer, one
of the first scholars, a historian him
self. says: “I have just returned
from the British Museum, where I
went over the documents which are
supposed to substantiate such a view,
and I solemnly declare that no such
exists. It cannot be made out from
the pamphlets of Edward Barber,
Praisegod Barebone, Dr. Featly, or of
those signed A. R., or by Thomas
Killcops. In the title page of the first
we have the design of the treatise thus
announced: ‘Of baptism or dipping,
wherein is clearly showed that the
Lord Jesus Christ ordained dipping
for those only that profess repentance
and faith.’ Here is the key to the
whole controversy, and to the misap
prehension that exists. These writers
were either assailing or defending in
fant baptism, and the newness of the
ordinance to Englishmen was not the
mode, but the subject: though Dexter
observes this by introducing into one
of the citations the word dipping,
which is not in the original, * » *
* * I accuse no man of misrepre
sentation, but I am sure many rush
to a conclusion and pain multitudes
of good people by their garbled quota
tions. I, at least, may be allowed to
express my dissent: The Baptists of
England did immerse before 1641, even
as they did on the continent. This I
claim on the authority of George 111
pamphlets in the British Museum,
and from the fact that even the Church
of England in young King Edward’s
time, directed that babes should be
dipped.” To Dr. Whitsitt I especially
commend these words of Dr. Lorimer:
“I insist that it is due our Baptist
churches that their action on the
world’s progress should not be ig
nored. As a rule they do not receive
the recognition they deserve. Dr.
Dexter, in his ‘True Story of John
Smythe,” has put them in an entirely
false light; and in his representation
that Edward Barber originated the
practice of immersion in England,
and that before the publication of his
book, in 1641, the Baptists poured and
sprinkled, is, to put it mildly, incor-
THE CHRISTIAN INDEX: THURSDAY NOVEMBER 5. 1896.
rect. • • • • • These humble
people deserve to be faithfully dealt
with, for they have been history
makers of no mean importance. They
dared the face of kings, and taught
the world to worship God according
to the dictates of conscience; they
turned their faces against oppression
of every kind and were the harbin
gers of the age.” So testify the ven
erables H. Ford. D.D., LL.D.; T. T.
Eaton, D.D.; the eminent English
scholars, Gotch, Clifford and others,
who have most carefully examined
the original documents. But, of
course, with Dr. Whitsitt and his
pedobaptists all this accounts for
nothing at the side of the wonderful
Dexter. Yes, Dr. Whitsitt swallows
the pedobaptlst slanderer, Dexter,
and denounces the eminent English
scholar's decision and researches as
"clumsy fraud,” as "blushes to the
cheeks of intelligent Baptist people
in all parts of the world;” and Implies
that all the English Baptist scholars
are dishonest—“ English scholars have
kept holiday in this department ever
since his volumes left the press. * •
* * * The quiet composure with
which they have rested in traditional
views that have been exploded and
discredited by Evans would be amus
ing if it were not lamentable.” Then,
of a well accredited church record,
accepted by scholars that cannot be
gulled by such Baptist opponents as
Dexter, Scheffer, etc.. Dr. Whitsitt
thus writes and reflects on the repre
sentative English Baptist scholars: “A
generation has passed away since 1862,
and yet the only English production
in Baptist history that has come to the
attention of the general public has
been the fraud at Epworth, Crowle
and West Butterwick, that brings
blushes to the cheeks of intelligent
Baptists in all parts of the world.”
(See pp. 19, 15, 7,8, 12.)
Having seen that Dr. Whitsitt has
utterly failed to prove that Baptists
were once affusionists, I will now
give some of the proof that Baptists
of the time under consideration were
immersionists.
The reader will please remember that
my prescribed limits admit of me giv
ing only a part of the proof that Bap
tists of the time under consideration
Immersed, and that the burden of
proof is on the other side of this con
troversy,
TESTIMONY OF TRADITION.
Defending the Gospels, an eminent
English scholar (Dr. R. B. Girdle
stone), says: “It is no literary sin
to fall back on tradition. We have it
to do for most authorship, secular as
well as sacred. Juvenal, for example,
was never named as an author till
268 years after his death, and the case
of Thucydides was nearly the same;
yet we accept the books which go by
their name without hesitation. His
tory is, to a large extent, well attest
ed tradition.”— Living Papers, vol. 10,
LX., pp. 15, 16.
Thus, independently of written his
tory, as handed down from father to
son, the main facts of the war for
American independence are certainly
well established. A well established
chain of tradition, not contradicted by
any reliable testimony, is the best of
history, as to its main statements. Ap
plying this to the subject before us:
tradition so certainly points to immer
sion as the only act ever practiced
by the English as baptism that to
make English Baptists believe that
they are the descendents of affusion
-Ist churches is impossible. Notwith
standing they are not subject to the
charge of being influenced by "land
markism” they
guessiHH'f Dr. kJAlthiM
for Dr.
rejolcers: It dipping has not always
been the practice of English Baptists
how is it that they are so firm in
the belief that it has always been so?
When did they come to believe this,
if it is not so? How and by whom
were they so misled that it is neces
sary for Dr. Whitsitt and his pedobap
tist helpers to lead them into the light
of the boasted "discovery?” Why is
he so silent on so important a diffi
culty as this? The answer to this
difficulty would have been worth more
to the great doctor’s position than tons
of Dexter, Scheffer, fabled “Jessey
Church Records,” strained, discon
nected interpretations and guesses.
CONFESSIONS OF FAITH.
Dr. Whitsitt having said in The In
dependent: "It was not until the
year 1644, three years after the inven
tion of immersion, that any Baptist
confession prescribes dipping or
plunging the body in water as the way
and manner of dispensing this ordi
nance, I begin with the Schleitheim
Confession, of 1527, at Rothenburg, on
the Neckar—said by Armitage. “The
Earliest Baptist Confession Known.”
It reads: “This baptism to all those
who * * * desire to walk in the
resurrection of Jesus Christ, and to
be buried with him in death, that they
with him may rise.”—Armitage, p. 949.
With Baptists and in New Testa
ment language (with the candid schol
arship of others, too), this language so
clearly means immersion that com
ment on it is unnecessary.
In a "Baptist” confession, adopted
in Smythe's time, we read: "The
whole dealing in the outward visible
baptism of water, setteth before the
eyes, witnesseth and signifieth, the
Lord Jesus doth inwardly baptize the
repentant faithful man in the laver of
regeneration." —Evans' Early English
Baptists, vol. 1, p. 250. In article XL.
of Smythe's Confession we read:
“That those who have been planted
with Christ together in the likeness
of his death and burial, shall be also
in the likeness of his resurrection.
(Romans 6:4, 5.)
Again, Smythe says: “Baptism is
the external sign of the remission of
sins, of dying and being made alive.” —
Evans' Early English Baptists, pp.
262, 254. Even Dr. Whitsitt, notwith
standing he was leaving unturned no
stone to justify his idle guesses, con
cedes that some of the citations I
have made from Smythe may “be in
terpreted in favor of immersion.” The
expressions being evident allusions to
Romans 6:3-5 (in truth, they refer to
this Scripture) and being peculiar to
immersionist confessions and to the
interpretation pedobaptlst Biblical
scholars give to the language in Ro
mans 6:4-5. these confessions certainly
mean only immersion.
The second confession of Thomas
Helys and his church reads: "That
baptism, or washing with water, is
the outward manifestation of dying to
sin and walking in newness of life.”
In the Encyclopedia Britannica Dr.
Gotch produces this language as tes
timony to immersion.
The London Confession of 1646, by
"seven congregations," reads: “The
way and manner of dispensing this
ordinance is dipping.”—Art. XL. This
is in line with the confessions just
quoted. They easily account for it
But with the position of Dexter, Whit
sitt & Co. that Baptists in less than
six years wholly changed from affu
sion to dipping, it is irreconcilable.
I next introduce the testimony of
the Westminster Confession. This
was formed and adopted by the West-
minster Assembly in 1643-1652. This
Assembly, after a heated debate on the
matter, decided that "dipping of the
person in water is not necessary; but
baptism Is rightly administered by
pouring or sprinkling water upon the
person." Says Dr. Schaff: “This
change in England and other Protest
ant countries from immersion to pour
ing and from pouring to sprinkling
was encouraged by the authority of
Calvin • • • a nd by the West
minster Assembly of Divines.” —
Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, p.
52. Thus, instead of immersion being
"a lost art” and "Invented” in 1641,
as Dr. Whitsitt says it was, this great
assembly found it yet "a lively corpse”
which it was able to down only after
a very hard fight and by only one ma
jority—“twenty-five voted for sprink
ling and twenty-four for immersion,
and even this small majority was ob
tained at the earnest request of Dr.
Lightfoot, who acquired great influ
ence In the assembly.”—Brewster. This
was done in August, 1644, in less than
three years after, Dr. Whitsitt says,
immersion was "Invented.” Remem
bering that this great assembly of
fifty-one scholars represented the Eng
lish-speaking world, and therefore the
immersion controversy in their own
localities, that immersion was at that
time practiced throughout the English
world is certain—unless that assembly
was legislating on dead issues or
against a few known Baptists, who by
their weakness were able to so shake
the world that this great assembly had
to come to its relief. A little of the
space Dr. Whltsitt gives in his book
to lauding the slippery Baptist enemy,
Dexter, had better been devoted to
reconciling the act of this great as
sembly with immersion as "invented”
in 1641. But even this great assem
bly did not succeed in making immer
sion “a lost art” even among pedo
baptists. From the citation, in the
foregoing from Dr. Schaff, he goes on
to say: "But the pouring ritual re
tains the direction of immersion, al
though it admits sprinkling or pour
ing as equally valid. In the revision
of the prayer book under Charles II
(1662) the mode is left to the parents
or godfathers.” Thus the testimony
of both Baptist and pedobaptlst Con
fessions of faith are plainly contra
dictory to Whitsitt, Dexter & Co. They
constitute an' unbroken line of testi
mony in favor of the position that in
stead of immersion having been a
“new thing” among Baptists in 1641
it was a continuance of the Baptist
past and so prevalent as to have then
moved the English-speaking world.
The act of the Ix>ng Parliament, in
1640, of which Dr. Whitsitt speaks
on page 6, broke the silence and as
Dr. Whitsitt answers his own argu
ment from “silence,” by consequence
the public press was immediately em
ployed by all sorts of people to a
much larger extent than had been
possible hitherto. Publications of every
kind came teeming from it. —p. 6.
I now notice the testimony of indi
viduals. As to the practice of the
German, Swiss and other Baptists,
this was given in my article second
or third. In "A Brief Remonstrance
of the Reasons and Grounds of those
People Commonly Called Anabaptists,
Printed and Published for Public In
formation in the Year 1645,” William
Kiffin (here is some testimony that
is undoubtedly from Kiffin), as quoted
directly from the British Museum by
Dr. King, we read: “It is well known
to many, especially to ourselves, that
our congregates were erected and
are> accor(lln E
■tar- A-'
height
its vanishinf^pory. ’’ Here Dr. Kiffin,
who knew as near whereof he spoke
as did any of his time, says there had
been no change in the constitution
and ordinances of Baptist churches as
they existed "before we heard of any
reformation"—before Luther’s time.
He knew nothing of immersion hav
ing been "invented” in 1641 or of Bap
tists as the creatures of the reforma
tion —“our congregations were erected
and framed as they now are.”
Thomas Fuller, whose authority Dr.
Whitsitt has conceded, says, in 1655:
“The Anabaptists for the main are
but the Donatists, new dipped.”—Ful
ler’s Church History, Cent. 16. Sec. 5,
11. This is so unequivocal that when
Dr. Whitsitt tries to evade its force
by saying “Mr. Fuller was fond of
alliteration and employed the expres
sion for no other purpose than to indi
cate that the Anabaptists were but Do
natists with a new name," he does
not rise to the dignity of a flrst-class
pedobaptist quibbler. Besides, the
Donatists, as Dr. Benedict, the stand
ard writer in the English language on
the Donatists, says: “It may be
proper to notify the readers that not
only the Donatists, but all others
then, whether Catholics or dissenters,
practiced immersion; and the practice
was also prevalent with all parties of
requiring faith before baptism.”—Ben
edict's Historical Donatists, p. 130;
Robinson’s Ecclesiastical Researches,
p. 125. Knowing the Donatists and
the Baptists, as to the action and the
subjects of baptism, were the same.
Fuller said the Baptists of his time
were “for the main but the Donatists
new dipped.” If Fuller’s word can be
trusted the Baptists of his time were
immersionists —immersion was not
“invented” in 1641. Well did Mr. Ved
der, of whom Dr. 'Whitsitt so much
boasts as his helper in this fight, say
that “it takes so much proof to con
vince the good doctor of some things,
and so little to convince him of
others.”
I now come to the testimony of Mr.
Fox. As Dr. Whitsitt quotes him as
reliable, he will not object to this wit
ness.—p. 35. Os the time of which
this controversy is concerned he says:
“Tnere were some Anabaptists at this
time in England who came from Ger
many. Os these there were two sorts;
the first only objected to the baptism
of children, and to the manner of it,
by sprinkling instead of dipping. The
other held many opinions, anciently
condemned as heresies.” —Fox’s Book
of Martyrs, Alden Ed., p. 338. With
only the first class are we concerned,
as only they are our Baptist fathers.
Fox says they were immersionists.
As the Mennonites were Baptists
and through Scheffer and Smythe
figure extensively in this controversy,
I now introduce the testimony of Rob
ert Baillie —one of Dr. Whitsitt’s wit
nesses. He says: “The Mennonite
dippers do oppose the truth of Christ s
human nature.” —Anabaptism the True
Fountain, A. D. 1646, in the first chap
ter, on the Original Progress of the
Anabaptists—cited by Dr. King, from
the British Museum. As the testi
mony of an enemy against himself is
of incomparably more help to the
truth than his testimony for himself,
this sets aside what Baillie says, as
quoted by Dr. Whitsitt, on p. 129 of
his book, and leaves his testimony in
favor of immersion. In the language
with which Dr. Whitsitt closes the
testimony of Baillie I close it: “Os
course it is to be expected that efforts
will be made to discredit the testi
mony of Baillie, but they cannot avail.
He will always stand as a clear and
consistent witness on this point.”
We come to the testimony of Dr.
Featly. Unable to deny the quotation
from Featly, that the Anabaptists
flock in great multitudes to their Jor
dans and both sexes enter Into the
rivers and are dipped after their man
ner, “they were preaching and practic
ing their belief near the place of my
residence for more than twenty years,”
thus witnessing to the existence of
Baptists in 1624, Dr. Whitsitt says,
but the latter statement appearing
“nearly three pages” farther on,
breaks the testimony. But any one
knows that while an author is in the
same connection his statement on the
same point is not weakened by its ap
pearing any distance farther on.
Hence Armitage and others and Dr.
Whitsitt's own witnesses, Evans and
Vedder, use these two quotations to
prove immersion among Baptists be
fore 1641. (See Evans' Early English
Baptists, vol. 2, p. 114.) Thus Vedder
says: "Some of the opponents of
Baptists, in the year immediately fol
lowing 1641, accused them of introduc
ing a new way of baptizing; others
bear a different testimony, as Dr.
Featly. who speaks of them as having
defiled the rivers with their impure
washings ‘near his own residence for
more than twenty years.’ These
words of Dr. Featly are specially sig
nificant. He professes to speak for
Baptists from personal knowledge,
and though he was bitterly prejudiced,
there is no reason why he should
exaggerate in such a particular. Since
he wrote in 1644, his twenty years,
however carelessly he used tne phrase,
evidently carry the date of immersion
far back of 1641.” On p. 73 Dr. Whit
sitt quotes from Featly and leaves out
words that are essential to the un
derstanding of his meaning. The
following is the quotation with the
word which Dr. Whitsitt omits, given
in quotation: “This article is whollv
soured with the new leaven of Ana
baptism (he alludes to the 40th arti
cle of the London Confession, which
defines baptism dipping). I say the
new leaven of Anabaptism, for it can
not be proved that any of the ancient
Anabaptists maintained any such po
sition, there being three ways of bap
tizing, either by dipping or washing,
or sprinkling, to which the Scripture
alludeth in sundry places: the sacra
ment is rightly administered by any
of the three, and whatsoever is here
alleged for dipping we approve of so
far as it excluded not the other two.
Dipping may be and hath been used
in some places trlna immersio, a
three-fold immersion; but there is no
necessity for it; it is not essential
to baptism, neither do the texts in
the margin conclude any such thing."
The words Dr. Whitsitt suppresses
show that instead of Featly saying
that immersion is a new thing, he
says. "There are three ways of bap
tizing;” that "dipping may be and
hath been used;" that the only thing
he pleads for is that affusion may
be allowed. In the light of the Epis
copal ritual, which tolerated affusion
in cases of sickness, he should be un
derstood as pleading for affusion for
only cases of sickness. By reference
to p. 28 of Featly’s book it may be seen
that he means by “the ancient Ana
baptists” those of the time of the
Donatists and Novatians. In his
preface Dr. Featly tells us that these
dipping Anabaptists originated long
before 1641 —at least back in the six
teenth century: “This fire in the
reign of Queen Elizabeth and King
James and our gracious sovereign till
was covered in England under
* * • * this sect, among
others, hath so far presumed upon
the patience of the State; that it hath
held weekly conventions, rebaptized
hundreds of men and women together
in the twilight in the rivulets, and
some in the arms of the Thames and
elsewhere, dipping them over head
and ears.” The “new leaven of Ana
baptism,” therefore, in Featly’s eyes,
was not dipping, but it was the re
fusal since the sixteenth century to
even tolerate affusion in cases of
emergency. (Os course we will not
accept Featly’s putting the origin of
Baptists against both pedobaptist and
Baptist history in the sixteenth cen
tury.) To get Featly out of the way
as a witness for immersion among the
Baptists before 1641 is utterly impos
sible. As Armitage says, he clearly
states their then current practice when
he says: “The sick cannot after the
manner of the Anabaptists be carried
to rivers or wells and be dippeu and
plunged in them.” He never accuses
the English Baptists of substituting
dipping for some other practice which
they had previously followed. He
gives not one hint that in England
they had ever been anything else
but ‘dippers,’ an unaccountable si
lence, if they had practiced something
else within the previous fifty years."—
Armitage, p. 458. So far from Featly
saying immersion was “invented” in
1641, he says that long before that
time these Anabaptists practiced it in
far-away Vienna. “At Vienna the
Anabaptists are tied together with
ropes, and one draweth the other
into the river to be drowned, as it
should seem. The wise magistrates
of that place had an eye to the old
maxim of justice: let the ‘punishment
bear upon it the point of the sin. for
as the sectaries drew one another
into their error, so also into the gulf;
and as they drowned men,
spiritually by rebaptizing them;
and so profaning the holy
sacrament, so they were drowned
corporally.” Says Armitage, he clear
ly alludes to the drowning of Hub
meyer’s wife and others in martyrdom
at Vienna —Armitage, p. 352.
This is not only testimony of Featly
that immersion was not "invented” in
1641, but it agrees with the proof, in
my second article, that the German
and Swiss Baptists were dippers—
drowned because they immersed.
the
Any publication mentioned in this de
partment may be obtained of the
American Baptist Publication So
ciety. 93 Whitehall St.. Atlanta. Ga
When prices are named they include
postage.
The Editors of the Christian Index
desire to make this column of service
to their readers. They will gladly
ans wer, or have answered, any quee
tions regarding books. If you desire
books for certain lines of reading, or
desire to find out the worth or pub
lisher of any book, write to them.
Gem of Short Sermons. Elder A. S.
Tatum. Polk County Pub. Co., Bar
tow, Fla. Price 50c.
This little book of short sermons
is neatly gotten up; is brief, compre
hensive, and entertaining, reflecting
credit upon the author, who, after
devoting his life to a successful minis
try, desires to leave something after
death that will still hold up Christ
to a lost world, and preach salvation
by grace. Until recently he has been
a country pastor in North Georgia,
much beloved and remarkably suc-
cessful in his labors. His book is a
perfect little gem and „ Bt ®r e , h . ou ®®
Bible truths, and is Baptistic to the
core The last sentence in it is sigmu
cant of the whole: “Grace shall
crown the work." Eph. 2:8.
In his style of preaching an u writing
he imitates the humility, tenderness
and love of the beloved disciple of
Christ, making the Gospel an invita
tion to the lost, winning and wooing
them to a Savior’s love. His many
friends treasure the book for the sake
of the author, as well as for Christ s
sake. The book recommends itself; it
needs only to be read to be appreciat
ed as a good and safe book worthy of
a place in any library.
MRS. LAURA RICHARDS.
Bible Illustrations. Henry Froude, 91
Fifth Avenue, New York. 31.00.
This book contains a series of
plates illustrating Biblical versions
and antiquities. These plates are the
ones that are to be used in the Ox
ford Teachers' Bible, but accompany
ing them are more or less full descrip
tions, which make them much more
valuable. The plates are in three sec
tions, as follows: 1. “Illustrations of
the Languages, Writings and Versions
of the Old and New Testament; 2.
■■lllustrations of Old Testament His
tory and Religion,” and 3, “Illustra
tions of New Testament History." To
many the terms “cuneiform,” "hiero
glyphic,” etc., are very vague and
convey little idea. Here these, with
photographs of the tablets, cylinders,
etc., on which they are found can be
seen. The book is an interesting one,
especially to students.
Select Notes. A Commentary on the
Sunday-School Lessons for 1896, by
F. N. & M. A. Peloubet W. A.
Wilde & Co., Boston. American
Baptist Publication Society, At
lanta. Price |1.25.
This has become a standard lesson
help. Its convenience is acknowl
edged by teachers. It does not take
the place of our regular denomina
tional helps, but rather supplements
them. The book form serves to pre
serve it and the fact of having the
year’s lessons together is worth a
great deal. The peculiar method of
preparation makes the book unusually
suggestive. We learn from it that the
lessons for 1897 are to be in the Acts
of the Apostles with incidental lessons
in the epistles. The whole year is
given to this one set of lessons. This
will be a most helpful year’s study.
The book is finely and profitably illus
trated, and well supplied with maps.
The Judges. Arranged by R. G. Moul
ton. Macmill«A & Co., New York.
Price 50c.
This is one of a series of neat and
handy volumes giving the Scriptures
in sections and in their literary form.
The volumes are about the size of
Rolfe’s Shakespeare. The text of the
Revised Version is used and all verse
and chapter marks done away with.
The narrative runs along continu
ously, being broken into appropriate
divisions. For the purposes of study
this becomes a great advantage. This
volume contains Joshua, Judges, and
a part of 1 Samuel. Few comments
other than verbal are given. It is sur
prising how intensely interesting the
narrative becomes when we are able to
read it thus continuously. We are all
of us neglecting a world of good read
ing in the narrative portion of our
Bibles.
Famous Givers and Their Gifts. Sa
rah K. Bolton. T. Y. Crowell &
*» Co., New York. Price 31.50.
We wish we could help to circulate
this book very widely among the
young. It is a healthy book. The
lives of the great givers is told and
the objects of their benevolence de
scribed. Nearly all of these men have
started as poor boys and out of their
own necessities been taught to min
ister to others. Many of the lives
have been full of interest apart from
the great gifts that have characterized
them. We need more consecrated
money-makers. This book in the
hands of our boys and girls, for some
of those included are women, would do
great good. It might inspire to
money-making for noble purposes and
arouse ambitions that will be as good
seed. We hope a great many Baptist
boys in Georgia will receive this vol
ume as a Christmas present.
St. Nicholas. November. The Cen
tury Co., New York 33.00 a year;
25c a copy.
The November number of this excel
lent magazine begins a new year and
shows not only no decrease, but rather
increase, of excellence. "Master Sky
lark” opens a story of Shakespeare's
time and town. It promises well.
"How Plants Spread" is a pleasant
study of nature's ways. “A Race for
a Girdle” and "How the Bad News
Came to Siberia” tell of a race be
tween two companies for the first
inter-continental telegraph line, and
the success of the Trans-Atlantic
over the Russian-American. “The
Last Three Soldiers” is begun—a tale
of Sherman's march. The bicycle en
ters into fiction in the “The Dicycle
Race.” “An Old-Time Thanksgiving”
shows that the Indian still has his
place, by the bicycle, in story. “Marco
Polo” is continued, and there are
many bright bits of prose and verse
for the little folks.
The Missionary Review of the World.
November. Funk & Wagnalls Co.,
New York. 32.50 a year; 25c a
copy.
The present issue of the Review pre
sents a varied and valuable table of
contents. "William E. Dodge as a
Systematic Giver” is continued and
concluded. Such lives of great givers
are instructive and inspiring. “Six
Years in Utah” is an interesting story
of difficult mission work. From Utah
to China the reader goes. “Foreign
Community Life in China” next at
tracts attention. The second part of
Professor Godet’s “The Russian Stun
dists” deals with the persecutions en
dured by this remarkable people. “The
Place of the School in the Work of
Evangelization,” by Dr. John M. Kyle,
of Brazil, presents a strong plea for
the school, not as a means of spread
ing the Gospel, but merely for the
children of converts. It is a strong
paper.
The regular departments are full, as
usual.
The Biblical World. October. Uni
versity of Chicago Press, Chicago,
111. 32.00 a year.
This magazine is of constant value.
The best feature in this number is
Professor George B. Stevens’ “A Par
aphrase of the Epistle to the Romans.”
This restates verse by verse the epis
tle. This makes a commentary of
great value. Os great interest is the
article on a certificate of apostacy
during the persecution of Dacian. This
is a recent discovery. Dr. A. B.
Bruce gives a bright sketch of Dr.
A. B. Davidson, the famous Hebrew
scholar. The regular departments are
filled with good things.
A Little Child
With a Little Cold.
That’s all!
What of it?
Little colds when neglected
grow to large diseases and
Ayer’s Cherry Pectoral
CURES COLDS.
1 ]Not AS I lie World Gireth.”
Peace springs from within the soul,
asking little odds as to outward cir
cumstances. Paul and Silas singing
in the jail at Philippi and making tneir
chains accompany a psalm of David
in expressing “peace that the world
cannot give," have many successors
to-day. Two students of one of our
largest universities, while fighting
their way for an education, strolled
off one Saturday afternoon for a walk
on the tow path. They saw an old
man with a rope over his shoulder,
drawing a large boat, partly filled
with stones. One of the students re
marked to the other that being poor
was hard enough, but being compelled
to take the place of a mule was down
right cruelty. As they drew near tne
old man they heard him singing and
secured a rich endowment for life,
the old gentleman cheerfully remark
ing as to his lot, "It is all right, boys;
only a mile more and I shall have fin
ished my week’s work; to-morrow is
Sunday—a whole day with my family
and time to worship God.” They left
him pulling at the rope and humming,
"Nearer, My God, to Thee.” Once ac
costing a man on his way home, bear
ing a sack of flour on his back, and
asking him if he did not think it
rather hard to work all the week and
then tramp home with such a load,
he replied, “God has made me inside
so that this fifty pounds of flour is
more to me than the finest team of
horses to a millionaire. So you see,
stranger, things are not so bad as they
seem; the trouble is inside of folks.”
Thus the tow-path and the mountain
road echo the spirit of the prisoners
of Philippi, and Christ gives peace "not
as the world giveth.” —F. G. E., in the
Interior.
CHURCH ORGAN,
Hook & Hastings Co.
Boeton, Maas.
va DEAFNESS
A-W 11 and Hud Noises relieved by usiag
VfTB 11 Wilson’s Common Sense Ear Drums.
JT*. (Crlll New scientific Invention; different
* 1 from all otherdevlcea The only «afe,
1 simple, comfortable and Invisible
lEar Drum in the world Helps wberv
Iniedl-al falls S wlie orstrlng
/attachment. Write for pamphlet.
■ / WILSON EAR DRUM CO.,
i n« ‘k I.
ATheCreatl I CUT
churchLlW
FRINK’S tor efectrie, caTSr
PATENTxJf
REFLECTORS
light known for churches, halls and
public buildings. Send sice of room.
Book of light and estimate free.
Don't be deceived by cheap tmito
Ml Petri sir^eU IN Wew Y®rk.
*
f : J f
FINE SANITARY PLUMBING
ANDRAS FITTING.
ALL KINDS OF PIPE WORK.
Heat your house with Hot Water or Steam.
Call on. or write for prices.
Wingate Plumbing'Co.,
21 Auburn Ave., Y M. C A. Building,
Teleophone 1028. Atlanta, Ga
OPTKfIL.
We now own and conduct the Optical Depart
ment in Douglas, Thomas A Davision’s, and
have inaugurated a sy-tem of large sales and
small profits such as before never existed iu At
lanta. In Spectacles and Eyeglasses we defy all
competition, offering you superiorquality Glasses
for less money than any firm in the South.
Attention is also called to our Opera Glasses
Lorgnettes and Chatelaine Cases. A full line of
Optical goods Special discount to ministers.
qOObELL fr P1ER5214.
We also manufacture many other de
signs in Wire, Wrought Iron and Steel
Picket, for Lawns. Parks, Farms, Cem
eteries and Grave Lots. The cheapest
and best. Slate your wants and let ue
quote yon prices. Catalogue free. We
pay the fteight. Mention this paper.
CATE CITY FENCE WORKS
Atlanta, Georgia
17aepl2t
General a:d Special Agents feed
Throughout Georgia, North and South Caro
lina, to work the best and cheapest system
of Life and Accident Insurance nowon the
market. Men of ability and character can
make liberal arrangements by applying with
references, to Julius A. Buknby, Manager,
No. 800 The Grand. Atlanta. Ga auglStf
BELLS of
the ‘‘old” mingled with the “kkw.” Ten
Thousand sold first year. More than 10U0
ordered before its publication. Bongs for the
millions. Price 60c. single copy, M.2Oa doz
en; fßoa hundred. Send so sample copy to
JOHN C. F. KYGEB, Publisher,
locUt Waco, Texas.
MORPH I
cured at home. Remedy $5. Cure Guaran
teed. Endorsed by physicians, ministers
and others. Book of particulars, testimoni
als, etc. Free. Tobaccoline, the tobacco
'Cure, |l. Est. G. WILSON CHEMICAL
CO., Dublin, Texas. Iftoctly