Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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