Their Historical Relation to the
Protestant Reformation And the Roman Catholic Church*
by Fred G. Zaspel
PURPOSE OF PAPER
The purpose of this paper is to determine the historical roots of the
Baptists, to answer the question concerning any historical association
or connection with the Protestant Reformation or the Roman Catholic
Church, and to only briefly identify and examine the supposed
succession from the Anabaptists and other ancient religious groups. A
thorough discussion of all the questions involved with this subject
will not be given. A brief outline of the people and events involved is
all that is intended.
INTRODUCTION
The study of the history of Baptists is plagued by many difficult
questions on the one hand and very bold assertions on the other. This
paper, although written from the standpoint of an independent Baptist,
is an attempt to challenge the assertion that Baptists have absolutely
no historical ties to either the Roman Catholic Church or the
Protestant Reformation. The great differences which divide Baptists
from Romanism and from Protestantism is no doubt the cause for this
type of claim, but, as will be shown, the claim is not founded on a
knowledge of the facts of history. This in no way is a weakness in
Baptist beliefs, for history, tradition, and ancestry are not the
standard of truth nor the basis of faith; Scripture alone is the norm.
The question of historical origins, however, is one of value, for it
does give explanation to many of the beliefs and practices of the group
in question. This brief study, then, will seek to trace the background
of Baptists, beginning with those in America and working backwards from
there.
THE DESCENT OF MODERN BAPTISTS
Baptists In America
Skipping over the great names of Baptists such as Luther Rice, Adoniram
Judson, John Leland, Isaac Backus, etc., and looking back to their
fathers in Colonial America, the familiar names of men such as Roger
Williams, John Clarke, and Henry Dunster shine brightly. Their struggle
for freedom to practice according to the dictates of conscience and the
Word of God was long and difficult. They bore the persecutions of
whipping, imprisonment, excommunication, banishment, ridicule, and
starvation--all for believing and practicing principles which Baptists
hold dear. The story of Roger Williams (1600-1685), founder of the
first Baptist Church organized on American soil, and his banishment
from Massachusetts into the wilderness because of his opposition to the
Church of England and championing of the principles of individual soul
liberty and religious freedom, is well known. From his church in
Providence, Rhode Island, came one John Clarke, close associate of
Williams and probably the most prestigious Baptist leader of his time.
The church he established in Newport, 1641 (Quaker?), became the second
Baptist church in America, Clarke being its teaching elder from the
beginning. Henry Dunster (1612-1659), first president of Harvard, began
to preach against infant baptism and in 1653 refused the rite to his
fourth child. For this he was forced to resign and that after twelve
years of impressive service to the college. Even after earnest pleading
he was refused the use of his home any longer, was cast out into the
winter, and died within five weeks.
These are just a couple examples of the struggles for the rise of
Baptist convictions in America. The purpose here, however, is to
investigate the historical background of these early Baptists.
Roger Williams, a Welshman, began an Anglican, educated at Cambridge
and was ordained into the ministry of the Church of England. He became,
in turn, a Puritan (Congregationalist, still within the Church of
England), a Separatist, a Baptist, and finally a Seeker. There is some
evidence that he had also been a follower of George Fox's Quakerism. By
the time he reached America, he was convinced of Separatist views and
refused the offer to assume the pastorate of the Boston church because
it was unwilling to officially sever all ties with the Church of
England. Having been banished from Massechusetts, he founded the
settlement of Providence in June of 1636. In 1638 a church was
organized, and by 1639 it was practicing believer's baptism, Williams
having been baptized by a church member.
John Clarke fled England's persecution of Puritans under Archbishop
Laud. After arriving in Boston, he saw problems with Congregationalism,
and moving south to Newport established a church (1641?) which became
Particular Baptist, Clarke being the teaching elder.
John Miles (1621-1683), another Welshman, came to America in 1662,
having been ejected from the Established Church. He settled at Swansea,
near Providence, and in the following years was responsible for the
establishing of two churches.
Through the study of such men and events of Colonial America, it is
clear that Baptists did not migrate to America: English Puritans
migrated to America, who, in turn, became Baptists. To be sure, from
these men came hosts of American-born Baptists, but the evidence seems
very clear that American Baptists trace back to Colonial Puritanism.
Continental (Dutch and Swiss) Anabaptism did have some migration to the
New World (such as Hanserd Knollys who arrived in Boston in 1638), but
these "Anabaptists" would not fit the description or theology of what
is recognized to be "Baptist." They did have Baptist-type beliefs but
were Anabaptists of another type (Mennonite, etc.). America's earliest
Baptists were originally Puritans within the Church of England:
Williams, Clarke, Dunster, Thomas Gould, etc. Much of the same could be
said about later American-born Baptists who also were previously
Congregationalists (Isaac Backus, Shubael Stearns, etc.). Baptists were
by far the greatest beneficiaries of the Great Awakening of staunchly
Protestant Edwards and Whitefield. Entire Congretationalist bodies,
having been "awakened" under Whitefield's ministry saw complete
separation from the Church of England the necessary next step; hence,
the rise of more Baptist churches.
In summary, Baptists in America, although having certain theological
similarities to Continental Anabaptism, have no historical connection
with them. Their descent from Colonial Puritanism is obvious and also
explains the dominance of Calvinistic theology, not only in those first
Baptists in New England but in their children. John Myles, who had
previously taken orders from the Anglican Church, may have been the
first Baptist to immigrate to the colonies, having embraced Baptist
beliefs while in Wales. With Myles, then, Baptists have come out of
Puritanism without ties to Anabaptism on the Continent.
Baptists In Britain
Although the honor for the establishing of the first Baptist Church in
Wales belongs to John Myles, the real championing of the Baptist cause
belongs to one Vavasor Powell (1617-1670), because Myles and most of
his congregation moved to New England. Powell was definitely of Puritan
persuasion within the Established Church, but by 1655 his church in
Wales was baptistic at least, for records reveal that he had been
recently rebaptized. Many Baptists came from his efforts, and the
succeeding Welsh Baptists (Christmas Evans, 1766-1838, etc.) continued
his ardent Calvinistic beliefs, although for a time Arminianism was
threatening.
Baptists had no beginning in Scotland until the eighteenth century and
that, again, under the leadership of men from Independent and Puritan
(within the Church of Scotland) backgrounds. These earliest churches
were begun under the leadership of Sir William Sinclair (1750) and
Robert Carmichael (1765). The most familiar names of early Baptists in
Scotland are the Haldane brothers, Robert (1764-1842) and James
(1768-1851), both of whom had been Independents. In 1808 they both
became convinced that their practice of infant baptism was
unscriptural, and in the fifty years of ministry which followed, nearly
forty Baptist churches were founded in Scotland.
Baptists in Ireland have never been many, Irish resistance being too
great. The first Baptist church established was under the direction of
Thomas Patience in Dublin, probably in the year 1653. The Baptist who
perhaps most helped the cause of Baptists in Ireland was the esteemed
Alexander Carson (1776-1844). A very learned Scottish Presbyterian, he
vigorously opposed some of his church members who began to embrace
Baptist convictions. Later, having been persuaded of their
truthfulness, he was removed from his church by the synod. His Baptism:
Its Mode & Subjects, testifies to his ability to defend believer's
baptism.
The first Baptist Church in England (General Baptist) finds its origin
with John Smyth. Although Smyth had definite Puritan beliefs,
persecution drove him from England to Holland because of his Separatist
convictions. With his church moved to Amsterdam, he came into
fellowship with the strong Mennonite (Anabaptist) groups there. Smyth
there established a Baptist Church, having baptized himself and his
entire congregation (with one pail of water!). He soon applied for
membership in the Mennonite church, only to the great disruption of the
congregation. Thomas Helwys (c. 1550 - c. 1616), a member of the
church, led the congregation to excommunicate Smyth for his Anabaptist
heresy. In 1611 they published a declaration of their faith rejecting
the teachings of the Anabaptists. Shortly thereafter they moved back to
England, thus becoming the first Baptist Church on English soil.
General Baptists who followed (and who eventually gave way almost
entirely to Unitarianism) made great efforts to disavow any connection
with Anabaptism. Similarities there were, but identity or association
with them was consistently denied. Their Declarations of Faith made
this abundantly clear; not only did they reject Anabaptism, they often
referred to themselves as "Protestants." In 1678 they published "An
Orthodox Creed or Protestant Confession of Faith, Being an Essay to
Unite and Confirm all True Protestants."
The other strain of Baptists in England (Particular Baptists) began in
1638 under the leadership of John Spilsbury, their first pastor. The
church began as a break from the Independent Church which was begun by
Henry Jacob (the so-called "Jacob-Lathrop-Jessey Church," named after
its successive pastors) over the matter of infant Baptism. These
Particular Baptists were by far the strongest voice of English Baptists
for generations (Gill, Fuller, Spurgeon, Bunyan, etc.). Like the
General Baptists these Particulars repeatedly disavowed any association
with Anabaptism and continually affirmed their loyalty to the
Protestant Reformation, even calling themselves Protestants. Their
Second London Confession of faith is an obvious and admitted adaptation
of the Presbyterian Westminster Confession of 1646 (as is also the
Philadelphia Confession, which became the standard statement of faith
for Baptists in America). The Second London Confession (1677) states
the Particular Baptist agreement "with Protestants in diverse nations
and cities . . . in that wholesome Protestant doctrine, which with so
clear evidence of Scriptures that they have asserted," and claims
kinship with the great reformers of England who gave their lives in
opposition to Rome.
It is abundantly clear that the Baptists of Britain, while consistently
rejecting the teachings of the Anabaptists, sought to remain loyal to
the Protestant Reformation, their few (but major) differences
notwithstanding.
One other point is worthy of note here, and that regards the mode of
baptism practiced by these early Baptists. Originally it was almost
uniformly by affusion. This is true of the Anabaptists (even down to
today's Anabaptists and their children the Mennonites) as well as the
Baptists of Britain. Vedder ( A Short History of the Baptists) a
Baptist Historian, says this was the same of the first Baptists of
America as well (e.g., Roger Williams). Well into the third quarter of
the seventeenth century Baptists were not entirely an immersionist
group. The issue with them, which they so diligently fought, was that
of the subjects of baptism. In their struggle for complete conformity
to the New Testament, immersion did follow.
Anabaptism
Although this paper is rejecting any historical identification or
association of modern Baptists with Anabaptism, the assertion of some
Baptists today claiming succession from them, their similarities to
present-day Baptists, and their differences, make them worthy of note
here.
The similarities are several and well known: separation of church and
state, believer's baptism, sole authority of Scripture, the Lord's
Table as a memorial only, and individual soul liberty. These seem to
have been held by most of the Anabaptists although by no means all. A
very distressing problem in discussing the theology of the Anabaptists
is that there is no one theological system held by all of them: the
movement was extremely diverse, so when someone asserts that his church
finds roots in the Anabaptists, the only thing one can wonder is,
"which one?"
This claim of modern Baptists is made in effort to remain apart from
any historical connection with the Roman Catholic Church, even if that
connection is via the Protestant Reformers. But even that effort is
futile, for virtually all of the early Anabaptist leaders themselves
came either from Protestantism or from Romanism itself. A brief list of
names will suffice to establish this point: Balthasar Hubmaier, a
converted Roman Catholic Priest; Hans Denck, Lutheran headmaster of the
renowned St. Sebald School in Nuremberg; Menno Simons, a Roman Catholic
Priest in Friesland; Thomas Munster, a Roman Catholic? Lutheran?
Communist? --scholars debate; Melchior Hoffman, a Lutheran missionary;
Wilhelm Reublin, a Roman Catholic Priest; Johannes Brottli, Roman
Catholic Priest; George Blaurock, a Roman Catholic Monk; Simon Stumf,
Roman Catholic Priest; Conrad Grebel, Zwingli's protege in Zurich;
Felix Manz, Roman Catholic (illegitimate son of a Roman Catholic
Priest) and later associate of Zwingli; etc. The list could go on, but
the point is clear: Anabaptists do not represent a pure line of
believers outside the Roman Church.
Conclusion
It has been shown that Baptists in America find their origins in
Colonial and some English Puritanism. English Baptists continually
avowed allegiance to the Protestant Reformation, their early leaders
all being Puritans. The Anabaptism of the Continent, although holding
some clear Baptistic principles, were not the fathers of modern
Baptists (neither in America directly nor via Britain); nor were they
without roots in Roman Catholicism themselves.
ANCIENT "BAPTISTS"?
Since many religious groups found within the pages of church history
are being purported to be Baptists or Baptist types (cf. J. M. Carroll,
The Trail of Blood), this section will seek to briefly identify these
groups and their beliefs.
Montanists
The Montanists were a fanatical religious sect of Phrygia (western Asia
Minor), the followers of Montanus and his two prophetesses (Prisca and
Maximilla). A former Priest of Cybele worship, after converting to
Christianity, he attempted a reform of the formalism which had set into
the Church, the rise in authority of the one bishop in the local
church, and the lack of dependence upon the supernatural workings of
the Holy Spirit in this age. His prophetesses spoke for him; he spoke
for God and this often in the first person. He established Spirit-led
communities at Pepuza and Tymion in Phrygia (naming them "Jerusalem")
and predicted that Christ would return to establish His earthly kingdom
at Pepuza; then inspiration and prophecy would cease. The Montanists'
most illustrious adherent was the great church father, Tertullian. They
practiced a rigid church discipline, banned remarriage even after the
mate had died, approved of desertion of one's mate for the sake of
chastity--all in an effort to holiness. Serious sins after baptism
could not be forgiven. Montanism (begun in the mid second century)
survived only into the fifth century in northern Africa and into the
sixth century in Phrygia.
Novatianists
Novatian (mid third century) was a priest of the church of Rome who
broke away from the church because of its laxity in discipline
especially in regard to those who had given way under persecution.
Basically orthodox in theology his followers set up a rival church with
a bishop at Carthage. During the 250's they grew rapidly, requiring a
rebaptism (pouring) of all who joined, not for a belief in believer's
baptism but only because, in their view, they were the only true
church. No major sins after baptism could be forgiven. Novatianism was
reabsorbed into the Roman Catholic Church by the seventh century.
Donatists
Donatus was the Roman Catholic Bishop of Carthage from 313 to about
355. Like Novatian, he was concerned over the lack of strictness in
discipline of these who had given way under the persecution of
Diocletian. In 312 the bishop to be elected (Caecilian) was rejected by
Donatus and his followers because he (Caecilian) had been ordained by
Felix of Apthungi who had betrayed a copy of the Scriptures to his
persecutors. This, Donatus argued, rendered his performing of the
sacrament of ordination invalid, because he had committed the
unpardonable sin. Donatism survived, becoming continually closer to the
mother church of Rome, until the fifth century.
Paulicians
The Paulicians emerged in the mid seventh century in the eastern parts
of the Byzantine Empire, rejecting the formalism of the church. Their
founder, Constantine (who changed his name to Silvanus, or Silas) based
his teachings on the written Word of God alone, but that written Word
of God was to be found only in the gospels and the epistles of Paul.
(They were great lovers of the apostle Paul, the successive leaders of
the sect taking to themselves the names of the people closely
associated with Paul--Titus, Timothy, Tychicus, etc.; hence, the
designation Paulicians.) The other portions of Scripture (New and Old
Testaments) were written by an evil deity, the same evil deity who
created the world. Obviously, they were dualistic, matter being evil
and spirit alone being good. In order to save human spirits from this
evil physical world, God (the good deity) sent an angel who appeared as
the man Jesus. Some groups of Paulicians existed in Armenia into the
nineteenth century.
Waldensians
Having read the Scriptures for himself, Peter Waldo, or Valdes, was so
impressed by the claims of Christ that he sold all he owned in order to
live a life of poverty. He translated the New Testament from the Latin
and began to preach the gospel in the common tongue. He and his
followers were very orthodox in theology and began as a reform movement
within the Roman Catholic Church. Gathering men of like thinking around
him, the movement spread rapidly during the twelfth century. In 1184
they were excommunicated by Pope Lucius III, and as a result, they
began to spread even more rapidly. They rejected the authority of
high-ranking ecclesiastics, re-interpreted or rejected the sacraments
of the church except confession, absolution, the eucharist, and
baptism. The Waldensians made a noble attempt at reform and remain
today in northern Italy, about thirty-five thousand strong.
Albigenses
The Albigenses (so-called because they were most numerous near Albi, in
Southern France), or Cathari (from the Greek word, katharoi, meaning
pure ones), although claiming New Testament authority for their
beliefs, were a heretical sect formed in the Roman Catholic Church
during the twelfth century and resembling the Gnostics and Paulicians.
Dualism was at the heart of their teachings--two gods, one evil and one
good, matter being the essence of evil, etc. The evil god was the
Jehovah of the Old Testament. With matter being evil, they, of course,
rejected the incarnation of Christ; Christ, they taught, had no real
body; it only appeared so. Since matter is evil, they rejected all the
sacraments of the church; the one sacrament which they held to was the
consolamentum--the giving of the Spirit by the laying of hands and the
Gospel of John on the head. They were extremely ascetic, avoiding
marriage with its fleshly and therefore evil pleasures, oaths, war,
milk, meat, cheese, and eggs.(!) The use of anything material in
worship was forbidden.
Anabaptists
The Anabaptists arose in the sixteenth century in Holland and in
Zurich, Switzerland. As stated earlier they (generally) held to many
beliefs in common with today's Baptists, but the differences are at
least as obvious. Their beliefs and practices ranged from extreme
pacifism to extreme revolutionism; they sometimes rejected the taking
of oaths, association with the world in any way, and some would require
communal living with no allowance for ownership of private property;
while they practiced believer's baptism, very few, if any, immersed;
some practiced the strictest church discipline, while others were more
tolerant; some believed in the strict separation of church from state,
while others sought to rule the state; some were even Unitarian, such
as Servetus who was burned in Calvin's Geneva. One great difference of
Anabaptism from modern-day Baptists is that regarding their beliefs in
soteriology, and on this point they were all agreed. Far from the
Calvinism of the early Baptists, the Anabaptists were semi-pelagian,
declaring that not only was man's will free, but it remained unfallen,
his spirit remaining "utterly upright and intact before, during, and
after the fall" (Hubmaier). He went on to say that "God created you
without your aid, but he will not save you without your aid" (his
treatise entitled Von der Freiheit des Willens, "Concerning the Freedom
of the Will"). Sadly, many Baptists today have gone this direction in
their soteriology, but none who would even resemble anything
evangelical would agree with these extremes!
For all their differences, the Anabaptists were, as a whole, very
morally upstanding people; even their persecutors admitted this. But to
claim identification with them as modern Baptists is neither in keeping
with the facts of history nor the great differences of belief and
practice.
SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
It has been shown that Baptists in America and Britain find their
origins in Protestant Puritanism, and their connection with the
Anabaptists is only imaginary. Similarities there are, but the vast
differences must be honestly admitted as well. Historical ties to the
Anabaptists were continually disavowed by early Baptists, while at the
same time they all claimed the closest of ties with the Protestant
Reformation. Anabaptist, on the other hand, for the most part, came
from Roman Catholic stock. It has also been shown that while few
similarities exist between today's Baptists and some ancient religious
sects, none of them were actually what today's Baptists are. They too
came from out the established church of Rome, and were generally
sacramentalists and sometimes even pagan.