|
|
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE BAPTISTS
By Hugh L. Tully
FOREWORD
Baptists are not protestants in the sense other denominations are. The denominations which came out of the Catholic Church are protestants. The People known today as Baptists are older than Roman Catholics. Prof. William Cecil Duncan, professor of Latin and Greek, University of Louisiana, says: "Baptists do not as most Protestant denominations, date their origin from the Reformation of 1520 . . . they did not, however originate with the reformation, for long before Luther lived, yea, long before the Catholic Church herself was known, Baptists and Baptist Churches existed and flourished in Europe, in Asia and in Africa."
Alexander Campbell, founder of the Campbellite Denomination says: "Hence it is that the Baptist denomination in all ages, and in all countries, has been as a body, the asserters of rights of man.
Drs. Ypeif and Dermout, learned historians of the Dutch Reformed Church say: "Baptists . . . formerly called Anabaptists and in latter times, Mennonites, were the original Waldenses . . . Baptists may be considered the only Christian Community which has stood since the Apostles, and as a Christian Society, which had preserved pure the doctrines of the Gospel though the ages."
On the following pages the writer produces the testimony of many other historians and scholars of various denominations confirming the testimony given above. No other denomination can produce such testimony as to its Scriptural origin.
PART ONE
CHAPTER I
Introduction
When Jesus said, “…upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18), he was either sincere or insincere. Who would dare accuse Him of insincerity? He surely meant what He said. He meant that His Church as a local, independent body would never cease to exist on earth until His return at the end of the age.
This promise is further confirmed in the Great Commission when He said: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world” (Matt. 28:19-20).
This command was not given to the apostles as individuals, but as a church. He promised His abiding presence with his church "all the days.” If His church were not to abide "all the days'' how could He be with it "all the days?" This simply means that churches of Christ have continued through the ages, and will continue until His return. If they have not, then Jesus made a promise He could not fulfill, or would not fulfill. Failure to make good His promise would prove Him to be the world's greatest impostor.
They, who think that His church as a local independent body failed to continue through the ages, do not understand that the churches of Christ are purest in doctrine and practices amid prosecutions. The storms of persecution of the past centuries did not weaken but strengthened Christ's Churches. What the writer in Hebrews said of the Old Testament saints may be said of Christ's Churches: "Had trials of mockings, scouragings, bonds, imprisonments, slain with the sword; they went about in sheepskins, being destitute, afflicted, wandering in deserts and mountains and caves and holes of the earth.” The fires of persecution of pagan and papal Rome could not overcome Christ's Churches.
Since Jesus instituted His church during His earthly ministry, as we shall later prove, and, since His church has continued on earth until the present time, He then, did not need Luther, Calvin, Henry VIII, Wesley, Campbell and a host of other church founders, to organize or start new denominations. Every denomination that has come into existence since the days of Christ's earthly ministry is man-founded, and cannot be composed of the Churches of Christ.
These men-founded denominations think they have the right to exist because our government gives a man the right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience. This is not Scriptural ground. As man-to-man one has the right to believe and practice any doctrine or join any denomination he desires, but between man and God, he has the right to believe and practice only what the Scriptures teach. Men have founded organizations and called them churches, and many think these men founded churches are on equality with Christ's Churches. These men who have founded organizations, called churches, and persons who join them, must answer to God one day for rejecting Christ's Churches and joining men's church. Away with this Christ-dishonoring belief that a person has the right to believe and practice any doctrine or join any denomination he desires. Obedience to Christ and His Word is demanded. "Why call me Lord, Lord and do not the things I command you?" Do you belong to Christ's or man's church? If your denomination has an origin this side of Christ's earthly ministry, you belong to man's and not Christ's Church. Of the nearly 220 denominations in the U. S. claiming to be the scriptural one, which one can trace its origin back to Christ's ministry? This question will be answered in the following chapters.
CHAPTER II
The Name of Christ's Church
How is the Church of Christ to be known? It is not to be known by its name as some think. It is the part of divine wisdom that neither Christ nor His disciples enjoined any one proper name by which His church should be known during the present dispensation. If the terms "Church of Christ" "Christian Church," "Church of God," "Saints," "Elect," etc., had been given as the proper name, the most heretical sects set up by men without authority of God, could call themselves by one of these names, and make that an argument why they should be recognized as the true church. This is exactly what the Campbellites, and the Church of God (Holiness) are doing. They think they are the true churches because they have adopted one of the many names by which the followers of Christ are called in the New Testament.
In the New Testament the followers of Christ are called disciples, believers, saints, brethren, elect, sheep, branches, light, salt etc. They never called themselves Christians. They were first called "Christians" in Antioch, a heathen city. They received this name not from God, but from the heathen. It was a nickname, and, like all nicknames, it stuck. The name occurs in Acts 11:26; Acts 26:28; I Peter 4:16. The term "sheep" is more Scriptural than "Christian." The church is referred to as the "Churches of Christ," "Church of God," "House of God,'' etc. It is more Scriptural to say the “Sheep Church" than to say the "Christian Church."
Christ's Churches are not to be known by their names but by their doctrine and practices. Baptists do not claim to be the Churches of Christ because of their name---although they do have a Bible name. The first New Testament preacher was a Baptist. "In those days came John the Baptist…" (Matt. 3:1). Some claim that Baptist was his surname. Such ignorance! The original text states that he was "the immerser.'' He was a Missionary Baptist. Missionary means "One Sent." "There was a man SENT from God whose name was John" (John 1:6). Then John was a Missionary Baptist. He baptized Christ. Christ was a Missionary Baptist. Christ instituted His Church; Christ's Church at Jerusalem was a Missionary Baptist Church. Churches like it have continued from Christ until the present day. Christ's Churches have not always been called Baptist Churches, for various names have been given them in different countries through the past centuries, but churches holding the same doctrine and practices of present day Baptists have continued through the ages, and have thus fulfilled His promise that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against'' His Church. It is interesting to note that the old name "Baptist" by which the first New Testament preacher was called has been restored to the true Churches of Christ.
CHAPTER III
Origin of The Church
The Church of Christ was not founded with Adam or Abraham as some claim. The word "Church" in Acts 7:33 should be translated "congregation," referring to Israel. The Old Testament does not give a single direct reference to the Church. It discusses the Jew and Gentile, but not the Church. In Eph. 3:1-11 Paul states that the church is a "mystery, which in other ages (O. T. times) was not made known unto the sons of men as it is now revealed unto His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit." This passage states that the church was unknown before Christ.
Some claim that the church was instituted on the day of Pentecost. This view is unscriptural. In Matt. 16:18 Christ states "I will build my church." He left it not to man to build. The church was in existence when Christ gave a rule to discipline in Matt. 18:17 when He said "Tell it to the church." The two ordinances, baptism and the Lord's Supper, were given during His earthly ministry. Do you think He would give the church ordinances before He instituted the church? The Great Commission (Matt. 28:19,20) was given before Pentecost. Jesus sang amidst His church during the supper on the night before the Crucifixion. Hebrews 2:11,12 says "For which cause he (Christ) is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church I will sing praise unto thee." When did Christ sing among His brethren (disciples)? Mark 14:26 says "And when they had sung a hymn (after the Lord's Supper) they went out into the Mount of Olives." The church was in existence on the night of the Supper, which was many days before Pentecost.
The record of the institution of Christ's Church is found in Luke 6:12-16. After praying all night Jesus selected twelve apostles. Here His Church began. The apostles were first added to the church. In a sense they are the foundation of the church and Jesus is the chief cornerstone. I Corinthians 12:28; Ephesians 2:19,20; Revelation 21:14. The church in conference selected a successor to Judas (Acts 1:15-26) before Pentecost and was in prayer on the day of Pentecost. The church was "energized" and not "organized" on the day of Pentecost.
CHAPTER IV
Three Distinguishing Baptist Principles
There are at least three distinguishing Baptist principles. They distinguish Baptists from all other denominations.
First: Baptist believe that the New Testament is the sole and sufficient rule of faith and practice. This means, too, that Baptist accept no headship but Christ. Only what He commands should his followers do. Other denominations claim that they accept the New Testament as sole rule of faith and practice, and Jesus alone as head, but they do not. They have changed His teaching and follow men who changed them.
The Roman Catholic Church claims that it has the authority to change the teaching of the Scriptures. Haydock's Catholic Bible and Commentary in discussing the change from immersion to sprinkling states that the Catholic Church had the right to do so. He states that "not only the Catholic Church but also the pretended reformed churches, have altered this primitive custom (changed from immersion to sprinkling).'' Dean Stanley, Episcopalian, says: ''the practice of immersion, apostolic and primitive as it was, was peculiarly unsuitable to the tastes and feelings of the western world, and hence the change from immersion to sprinkling.''
Scholars of all denominations, which sprinkle or pour, acknowledge that Christ and His disciples were immersed and immersed others, but say that sprinkling and pouring will do. They are not accepting the New Testament as sole and sufficient rule of faith and practice. If it makes no difference whether immersed or sprinkled, why then did Jesus say, "And why call me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" Again He says: "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." Baptism is a command. To break a command is to lose a reward and be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.
Of those who substitute men's doctrines for Christ's our Lord says: "This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrine the commandments of men.” Believe and practice no doctrine except New Testament doctrine. The Old Testament is the Word of God, but is typical. Baptists do not go back to the Old Testament for laws of the church.
Second: Baptists believe in individual responsibility to God. They do not believe that one person can be saved because of the faith of another. Children are not saved on the merits or faith of their parents, nor are they to be baptized, because their parents are Christians. To sprinkle or pour an unconscious infant is a plain violation of the teaching of the Holy Scriptures. Each individual is responsible to God. No person should be compelled to confess his sins to a man called priest. Baptists believe in the priesthood of all believers.
Before and some time after the Reformation, “the Christian world” was organized upon the lines of persecution. The exception to the rule were the Baptists. They held that every man had the God-given right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience; and the larger right than other men had the same privilege. In this contention they stood absolutely alone; and standing alone, they paid the price in human blood that every man might worship, or not worship, God according to the dictates of his own conscience. It was a costly sacrifice but it was none too dear for the world’s redemption.
The entire Christian World was engaged in persecution. The Baptists in all lands, by both Protestants and Catholics, were cruelly persecuted by imprisonment, exile, torture, fire and sword. The Baptists by the thousands were martyred. They alone pleaded for liberty.''
Third: Baptists believe that the Church of Christ is a body of baptized believers, equal in rank and privilege, administering its own affairs under the headship of Christ. The true Churches of Christ are composed of believers only. There were no infants in the New Testament Churches. The apostles were believers. Those received on the day of Pentecost were believers. Acts 2:41. All others received into the New Testament Churches were received upon a profession faith. Acts 5:14; 8:12, 37; 10:44- 48; 16:32-34. Not believers only but baptized believers alone were members of New Testament Churches. Dollinger, a Catholic says: "There is no proof in the New Testament that the apostles baptized infant's."
The members of the New Testament Churches were equal in rank and privilege. This is true of Baptist Churches. There were no ruling elders, presiding elders and bishops as known today. Only two officers were known then, pastors, called bishops or elders, and deacons. A New Testament bishop was simply an overseer, pastor. He was also called elder. In Acts 20:17 Paul ''called for the elders of the church'' of Ephesus. In giving them a charge he calls them "overseers" in verse 28. This word "overseer" is translated "bishop" in I Tim 3:1. So bishop and elder refer to the same person and not to two grades in the ministry.
Waddington, an Episcopalian historian, says: "In the earliest government of the first Christian Church, not the elders only, but the whole church was associated with the apostles and, it is certain for a brief period that the terms bishop and elder were applied to the same person." Mosheim, an Episcopalian says: "A bishop during the first and second centuries was a person who had care of one Christian assembly."
Elder is a Hebrew term and bishop a Greek term referring to the same person. Elder originally referred to age, and bishop to the office. As we said above such positions as ruling elders, presiding elders and modern bishops were unknown in the New Testament. How did they originate? After the apostles, the pastors of the larger churches began to exercise authority over pastors of the smaller churches in the surrounding country. This spirit of superiority and power finally headed up into the office of the pope, and when the reformers withdrew from the Roman Catholic Church, they carried the idea of a graded ministry with them. The offices of ruling elders, presiding elders and modern bishop are derived from the Roman Catholics and not from the New Testament. Baptists do not have a graded ministry.
Jesus taught that His followers were equal. See (Matt. 23:8-12; I Peter 5: l-3. A careful study of the Jerusalem Church reveals it to be a democratic body, equal in rank and privilege. The whole church is to exclude a member for disorderly conduct. Matt. 8:5-17; I Cor. 5:1-5, 9-13. The whole church is commanded to receive an excluded member back into fellowship if he repents. II Cor. 2:4-11; 7:11,12.
CHAPTER V
Baptism And The Lord's Supper
Only a brief outline of baptism and the Lord's Supper will be given in this volume. A fuller treatment of these subjects will be given in a later volume. The Bible and Baptists requirements of baptism are as follows:
I. Much water. John 3:23: ''And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salem, because there was MUCH WATER there." Pouring and sprinkling do not require "much water." II. Going "down into the water." Acts 8:38: ''And they went down both INTO THE WATER, etc." III. A burial. Romans 6:3-5: "Therefore we are BURIED with him by baptism into death." Colossians 2:12: "Buried with him in baptism." The Scriptures state that baptism is a BURIAL and this should be final to all who love the Lord. IV. Coming up out of the water. Matt. 3:16: "And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway OUT OF THE WATER.'' Do we have the Scriptural authority to substitute man's doctrine for the Scriptural teaching? Matt. 5:19; 15:8, 9; Luke 6:46. V. Believers only are to be baptized. Not a single infant was baptized in New Testament times. John the Baptist baptized only those "…confessing their sins" (Matt. 3:6). Jesus and His disciples baptized only those first “made'' disciples. John 4:1,2. On the day of Pentecost only those who "…gladly received His word were baptized” (Acts 2:41). Philip baptized only those believing. Acts 8:12. Paul was saved on the road to Damascus. Acts 9:5, 6; Rom. 10:9, 10. Philippian jailer and his entire household believed and were baptized. Acts 16:30-34. Verse 34 states "…believing in God with ALL his house." All members of household believed. Crispus and his entire house believed. Acts 18:8. None but believers are eligible for baptism. VI. Symbolical or figurative. Baptism is only symbolical or figurative. It is simply a picture of Christ's death, burial and resurrection. Rom. 6:4: "…Buried with him by baptism into death: that LIKE (a likeness, picture of death, burial, resurrection) as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so should we walk in newness of life.” Now verse 5; "…planted together (baptism)…in the LIKENESS of His resurrection." Baptism is only a figure or picture of His death, burial and resurrection, and the believer's death, burial (to sin) and resurrection unto a new life. I Peter 3:21 states that baptism is only a "figure" and "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh." Baptism is not essential to salvation (only a symbol) for no work is essential to salvation and baptism is a work. John 3:13-16; 36; 5:24; Romans 3:21-28; 4:5; Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5.
The Lord’s Supper
The supper does not belong to the churches of Christ except as guardians of it. It is the Lord's supper and He alone has the right to say who shall eat and who shall not eat. It is not a Christian but a church ordinance.
To partake of the supper one must be: 1. A believer in the Lord Jesus Christ - saved. The apostles were believers. Judas did not partake of the supper. Only believers in Acts 2:41, 42. 2. Baptized believers. Apostles were baptized. Members of the Jerusalem Church were baptized. Acts 2:40-42. All denominations teach that those who partake of the supper should be baptized. Wall, Church of England, says: "No church ever gave communion to any person before he was baptized.'' Doddridge, Presbyterian, says: "No unbaptized person received the supper." Hibbard, Methodist, says: "In one principle the Baptists and Pedobaptists agree . . . rejecting from the table of the Lord . . . all who have not been baptized . . . the only question that divides us is, then, what is valid baptism?” 3. Must continue in New Testament teaching. Acts 2:42. There must be no doctrinal differences. Must be of sme faith pand practice. The church at Corinth was divided (I Cor 1:10-13; 11:17-20) and according to I Cor. 11:20: “Ye cannot eat the Lord’s supper.” (R.V.) Members of the various denominations cannot eat the supper when they come together. 4. In fellowship with the church. Acts 8:42 “Continued … in fellowship.” An excluded member cannot eat. I Cor. 5:11. A member then excluded for immoral conduct cannot eat. Nor can one eat who has been excluded for heresy. Rom. 16:17. Therefore the various denominations do not agree on the teachings of the Bible and cannot eat the supper when they come together.
PART TWO
A Brief History of The Baptists
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
As we have seen, Jesus promised that His churches would continue on earth from the day He instituted His Church during His earthly ministry, until His return at the end of the age. He did not mean that an invisible curch would continue, for such belief is unscriptural, but that local churches of same doctrine and practices as the Church He founded would continue. This promise is being fulfilled. Of the nearly 220 denominations in the United States, which one is composed of the genuine Churches of Christ, and can trace its origin to the days of Christ's earthly ministry? Every denomination whose origin dates this side of Christ's earthly ministry cannot Scripturally and historically claim Christ as its founder.
On account of lack of space dates of origin of very few denominations will be given. Suffice it to say that all but one have human founders and are not composed of Christ's Churches. Roman Catholics claim apostolic origin, but this big denomination did not begin as such until the beginning of the seventh century, when Boniface the Third became the first universal pope. There is not the least bit of likeness between the Roman Catholic and a New Testament Church. The Greek Catholic Church split off from the Roman Catholics in 1054. Henry VIII king of England wanted to divorce his wife, Catherine, and marry her maid, Anne Boleyn. The pope of Rome objected. Henry married Anne anyway. The Pope excommunicated him. Henry thereupon organized the Church of England (Episcopal) 1530. John Calvin, a reformer, founded the Presbyterian Denomination in 1541.
John Wesley is the founder of the Methodist Denomination. The Methodist Discipline (1904 pp. 30, 31) states that certain persons came to Mr. Wesley, a minister of the Church of England, for spiritual advice. They met weekly on Thursday. Soon many other such prayer meetings or societies sprang up. Finally these societies developed into the Methodist Denomination. Mr. Wesley did not want these societies to become a separate denomination from the Church of England, but they did. The Methodists began in 1739; 1700 years after Christ founded His Church. The Wesleyan Methodists represent the original body of Methodists.
In 1780, Benjamin Randall, an excluded Baptist minister, founded the Freewill Baptist Church. The Freewills are over 1700 years too late to be the true Churches of Christ.
The Disciples, or better known as Campbellites, came into existence not on the day of Pentecost as they earnestly contend, but in the beginning of the 19th century. Their founder is not Jesus Christ but Alexander Campbell and his father. They lack 1800 years being the Church of Christ historically, and more so Scripturally. Let us seek the testimony of history with reference to their origin. Newman's Church History, Vol. 2. p. 96, states that Thomas Campbell, a seceding Presbyterian minister, came from North Ireland and settled in Pennsylvania in 1807. In 1811, his young son, Alexander joined him in a reformation. They adopted immersion. In 1813, Alexander having become the leader, their independent church united with the Redstone Association, and in 1823, owing to a controversy, joined the Mahoning Association. Because of Campbell's views on baptism - believed baptism was essential to salvation - he and his church were excluded from the Baptists in 1827. Later a division occurred in the formation of another denomination or body known as "The Christian Church."
There are about thirty branches of the Holiness movement. Each branch or denomination declares itself to be composed of the true Churches of Christ, yet their origin is of recent date. In the latter part of the 19th century, many became dissatisfied with the spiritual conditions of the Methodist Denomination in the west, and withdrew, forming organizations, which have developed into the Holiness Denominations. Their origin is of recent date and yet they declare themselves to be the true Churches of Christ. If their claim were true, then Christ failed to found His Church as He claimed, and left it to men of the 19th and 20th centuries to institute.
The Hardshells left the Missionary Baptists in 1832. This is the statement of one of their own ministers, James Watson. He says: "After our painful separation from the Missionaries in 1836, a number of churches met together and formed the stone River Association. We had then as what was generally supposed, a strong and happy union, but alas, there was an element of heresy incorporated in that body as bad of the Gospel in the world." Hardshells oppose education and missions. American Baptists were Missionary Baptists before the Hardshells left them.
Baptists were missionaries before they came to America. The English and Welsh Baptists were missionaries in 1669, nearly 200 years before the Hardshell separation, the English Baptists raised money for ministerial education and missions. The General Assembly of English Baptists met in Londen in 1689. At this convention it was "resolved to raise a fund for missionary purposes, and to assist feeble churches; also, for the purpose of ministerial education." Benedict Bapt. Hist; p. 336. The Dutch Baptists established a college for ministers at Amsterdam, nearly 250 years before the Hardshell separation. The ancient Waldenses, who were Baptists, had ten schools in Valcomoncia alone in 1229. They were great missionaries. The church at Antioch was a missionary church. The Jerusalem Church was missionary. In fact, the true churches of Christ have always been missionary. The Hardshells are anti-missionary and cannot be the Churches of Christ. They are, therefore, not the "Primitive'' Baptists. "Primitive" means first, and the first Baptists were missionaries. Missionary Baptists are the true Primitive Baptists, and did not originate with Hardshell separation.
Other denominations know that they cannot trace their history back to Christ, and hence, have no succession back to Christ. They know that some man founded them. Many have attempted to prove that Baptists, too, have a human founder, and therefore do not have an unbroken succession back to Christ. Certain dates have been set for Baptist origin. We shall give brief attention to these dates and supposed human founders in the following chapter. All who have attempted to set the date and founder of the Baptists do not agree. This shows that they have no absolute proof as to when and who founded the Baptist Denomination. As to the origin and human founders of all other denominations there is no doubt.
CHAPTER TWO
American Baptists
In the study of Baptist History we shall go up stream, beginning with the American Baptists and tracing the Baptists back to Christ.
Whence came the American Baptists? Some ignorantly claim that Roger Williams was the founder of American Baptists, and, since Williams was baptized by an unbaptized person, Baptist succession back to Christ has been broken. As to Williams' baptism we find that he was immersed by Ezekiel Holliman, and in turn immersed Holliman. Williams organized "a thing like a Church," but after four months he renounced his baptism and his church "came to nothing." Mr. Backus, the historian says: "Mr. Williams . . . in March, 1639, was baptized by one of his brethren, and then he baptized about ten more. But in July following . . . he refrained from such administrations (baptizing) among them." Backus Ch. Hist., p. 50.
In discussing this affair Cotton Mather, Pedobaptist, says: "He (Williams) settled at a place called Providence. There they proceeded not only unto the gathering of a thing like a church, but also unto renouncing their infant baptism. After this he turned Seeker and Familist, and the church came to nothing." Hist. Bap. Crosby, Vol. 1, p. 117. Mr. Lechford, Episcopalian, who visited in New England at the time of the Williams affair, says of Williams; "At Providence, which is twenty miles from the said Rhode Island, lives Master Williams and his company of divers opinions . . . They hold that there is no true, visible church in the world, nor any true ministry."
After a careful study of Williams and his church Mr. Adlam remarks: "Among the evils that have resulted from the wrong date of the Providence Church, has been the prominence given Mr. Williams. It is to be regretted that it ever entered into the mind of anyone to make him, in America, the founder of our denomination. In no sense was he so . . . A man only four months a Baptist, and then renouncing his baptism forever, to be lauded and magnified as the founder of the Baptist denomination in the New World!"
Shortly after Williams' church was disbanded. Thomas Olney, a member of the "thing like a church," organized another church. Later this church disbanded, and Wickenden, Dexter and Brown organized the present First Baptist Church at Providence in 1652. These ministers were ordained in England. No preacher ever came out of the Williams and Olney churches: no persons or churches owe their baptism to these churches.
Christian, A Hist. of Bapt., Vol. 1. p. 374 says: "In any event, the Baptists of America did not derive their origin from Roger Williams. Benedict mentions the names of fifty-five Baptists Churches, including 1750, in America, not one of which came out of the Providence Church." On the same page he quotes J. P. Tustin, who says: "From the earliest period of our colonial settlements, multitudes of Baptist ministers and members came from Europe and settled in different parts of this continent. It is a fact generally known, that many of the Baptist Churches in this country derived their origin from Baptist Churches in Wales, a country that has always been a nursery for their peculiar principles. In earlier settlements of this country, multitudes of Welsh immigrants who left their fatherland brought with them the seeds of Baptist principles, and their ministers and members laid the foundation of many Baptist Churches in New England."
Ray's Bapt. Suc., pp. 121-5, gives the names of twenty Baptist ministers ordained in England and Wales who came to America. A whole Baptist Church from Wales came over in the same boat. Roger Williams was never a genuine Baptist. For four months only he posed as a Baptist, and then renounced his church and baptism. As a valiant advocate of religious liberty we pay him homage, but as founder of the American Baptists, never! Persons who go around bleating like a calf that Williams was the founder of American Baptists show themselves to be ignorant of the truth.
The first Baptist Church in America was founded by John Clarke at Newport, Rhode Island, in 1638, one year before the Williams' affair. Minutes of the Philadelphia Association read as follows: "When the first church in Newport, Rhode Island, was one hundred years old, in 1738, Mr. John Callender, their minister, delivered and published a sermon on the occasion." Quoted by Ray Bapt. Suc. p. 116. This date is confirmed by the inscription on John Clarke's tomb. It reads as follows; "To the Memory of Doctor John Clarke, one of the original purchasers and proprietors of this island, and one of the founders of the first Baptist Church in Newport, its first pastor . . . He came to this island in March, 1638 . . . shortly afterward gathered the church aforesaid, and became its pastor." Ray Bapt. Suc., p. 116.
We thus see that the church at Newport, Rhode Island, is the oldest Baptist Church in America. The First Baptist Church at Providence, R. I., was not organized by Wi1liams or Olney, but by preachers ordained in England. Roger Williams was never a Baptist; Baptists in America do not owe their existence to him; nor is Baptist succession broken by the Williams' affair.
CHAPTER THREE
English And Welsh Baptist
We saw in the foregoing chapter that the American Baptists did not originate with Roger Williams, but that English and Welsh Baptists came to America, thus founding the great Baptist Denomination in America. Whence came the English and Welsh Baptists? Did they originate with some human founder? Baptist enemies have attempted to prove that they did, and have set certain dates for their origin and certain men as their founders. We shall listen to the voice of history.
Some claim that Baptists did not begin to immerse until 1641. Christian History of Bapt., Vol. 1, Chap. 15, goes into this question very thoroughly and proves that Baptists were very numerous in England from 1509 to 1547, the period covered in this chapter. This was from 150 to 100 years before 1641, the date set for Baptist origin. On page 191 Christian states "…there was then an organized Baptist Church in London, in the practice of believers' immersion in the year 1525." On page 193 he states, “There were more Baptists here (in England) at the period under survey (1509-47) than there were in America at the beginning of the Revolutionary War.”
As to baptism during this period he states on p. 194 that, “Immersion was the universal rule for baptism in the reign of Henry VIII. The Church of England practiced immersion. The Catholics practiced immersion. The Baptists practiced immersion.” Turner, a Baptist enemy, said these Baptists practiced “over baptism which is the dipping into the water.” Christian Hist. Bapt., Vol. 1, p. 202. Floyer, a non-Baptist, says: “The above references prove that all immersed in England until the seventeenth century; that sprinkling did not become popular until 1644; and that Baptist have always immersed.
It is claimed by some that John Smyth founded the English Baptists, and, since he is reputed to have baptized himself in 1609, and formed a Baptist Church, Baptist succession back to Christ has been broken. What if he did baptize himself? We saw above that Baptists were numerous in England 100 years before Smyth. He was not the founder of Baptists in England. Crosby, historian, says: “If he (Smyth) were guilty of what they charge him, ‘tis no blemish on English Baptists . . . for they did not receive their baptism from him.” Christian in Hist. of Bapt., Vol. 1, p. 225, says: “After prolonged investigation, we are unable to find evidence that any Baptist Church grew out of this one."
English Baptists did not begin to immerse in 1641, nor did they originate with Smyth in 1609. Whence came they? Ivimey, historian, says of the origin of Baptists in England and Wales: "We have shown that persons professing similar sentiments with these of the present English Baptists have been found in every period of the English Church." Quoted by Christian, Vol. 1, p. 226. Crosby, historian, says: "It being agreed on all hands, that the plantation of the gospel here was very early, even in the days of the apostles." Barclay Quaker, says, "The rise of the Anabaptists took place long prior to the foundation of the Church of England (1530) . . . There are reasons for believing . . . many of the opinions of the Anabaptists (Baptists) have existed from the times of the Apostles." Christian Hist. Bapt., VOL. 1, p. 174.
Richard Davis, Bishop of Monmouth, said: “There was a vast difference between the Christianity of Ancient Britons (English) and the mock Christianity introduced by Austin in England in 596; for the ancient Britons received it from the disciples of Christ." President Edwards of Princeton University says: "God was pleased to maintain an uninterrupted succession of many witnesses through the whole time in Britain, as well as in Germany and France." Edwards Hist. Redeem., p. 205.
Historian Davis says: "The vale of Carleon (in South Wales) is our valley of the Piedmont (in which valley God preserved the Waldenses); the crevices of the rocks, the hiding places of the lamb of the sheep of Christ, where the ordinances of the Gospel to this day have been administered in their primitive mode." Robison, a non-Baptist, in referring to a Baptist congregation in England in 1457, says: "I have seen enough to convince me that the present dissenters (Baptists) contending for the sufficiency of the Scriptures and for Christian Liberty may be traced back to the Apostles."
These men of authority, most of whom are not Baptists, state that the gospel was preached in England and Wales during days of the Apostles; that the gospel as preached by the disciples of Christ has been kept pure through all the centuries, and that the persons who kept the gospel pure were Baptists. What a concession to Baptists by scholars who were not Baptists! They simply state that Baptists have been in England and Wales since the days of the Apostles. And yet, in light of this knowledge, some willfully or ignorantly claim that Baptists did not begin in England until 1609 or 1641. Genuine evidence is to the contrary. So says Dr. R. K. C. Howell. He says: "The prevalence of Baptists in Great Britain from the earliest times and in no small numbers will be questioned by no one who is at all familiar with the religious history of the land of our fathers." Christian Hist. Bapt, Vol. 1, p. 175.
It is admitted that the gospel was preached in Britian during apostolic times. The gospel spread rapidly. Lucius, the first king converted, was baptized in 180. Under the Roman Emperor, Diocletian, in 300, the British suffered fierce persecution. Their churches and books were burned and many were put to death. Says Crosby, the historian, concerning these martyrs: "Whom I must regard as Baptist martyrs till the Pedobaptists convince me to the contrary.'' He further says: "It is more than a probability that the first English Christians were Baptists." He further states that the doctrine and form of worship delivered by the Apostles were maintained in England during this early period. There is no mentioning of baptism of infants for at least 300 years.
Saint Patrick, a native born Briton, who preached among the Irish, Scotch and English, was doubtless a Baptist. The exact time of his ministry is unknown, but probably at the close of the fourth century. He practiced immersion upon profession of faith. His opinions on the Lord's Supper were scriptural. The Roman Catholics claim him, but that church was then unknown.
In 597, Augustine was sent into Britain to convert the people to the doctrines of the Church of Rome. He found a people (Baptists) who held to the simple teachings of the Word of God. They did not practice infant baptism. They would not acknowledge the supremacy of the Church of Rome. Because they would not, Augustine made war upon these simple Baptists and nearly 1,200 of them were slain while attending a prayer meeting.
The native English and Welsh Baptists were reinforced by Baptists from other lands. W. J. E. Bennett who hated Baptists, said that the Waldenses, called Paulicians by some, infested Northern Germany and spread all over England. In 1154, a body of German Waldenses (another name for Baptists as we shall later prove), were driven into England through persecution. These Paulician and Waldensean Baptists were followed by other Paulician Baptists in 1160. Henry II, King of England, ordered them to be branded on the forehead with hot irons, dresses cut short, to be whipped through the streets and then turned out into the open country to starve. No village would receive them, and they perished with cold and hunger, simply because they were Baptists following the teachings of the Bible.
A Baptist Church was located at Hill Cliffe. Its origin is unknown, but doubtless in existence in 1357. It was probably founded by the Lollards. Who were the Lollards? Walter Lollard, a preacher among the Waldenses, came into England in 1315. He was a great preacher. Knighton, the English chronicler, says, "more than one-half of the people of England became Lollards." Lollard was a Waldensean preacher. The Waldenses were Baptists.
Lollard was a Baptist preacher, but his followers in England were called Lollards. Soon one-half of England became Baptists. This was in the fourteenth century, and yet, there are those who claim that Baptists did not begin until the seventeenth century!
Bishop Burnett says: "At this time (1549) there were many Anabaptists (Baptists) in several parts of England. They are generally Germans." Ray 137. During the persecution of the Albigenses in France by the Roman Catholics, many fled to England. These Albigenses were the same people as the Waldenses. They were Baptists.
During the Reformation period in England, Baptists suffered intense persecution. Henry VIII broke with the Catholic Church (1530) and organized the Church of England (Episcopal.) He hated the Baptists and many were put to death. Henry joined in a general attempt to suppress the Baptists. On May 15, 1533, 14 were burned. Fraud, the English historian, says of them: "Fourteen who by no terror of stake or torture could be tempted to say what they did not believe." He says that they died not in vain, for in their deaths they were helping England to purchase religious liberty. Some of their enemies stated that so many Baptists were burned that the price of wood for fuel was increased. Yet like the Israelites, the more they were persecuted, the more rapidly they increased. There were more Baptists in England during this period (1509-47) than were in America at the beginning of the Revolutionary War.
As to baptism during this period, Christian Hist. Bapt, Vol. 1, p. 196, says: "The practice of immersion was universal. It was the form of baptism of all parties and there is no known testimony to the contrary. The Church of England practiced immersion. The Catholics practiced immersion. The Baptists practiced immersion." This was 100 years before some claim the Baptists began to immerse.
Under Edward VI (1547-53) persecution of the Baptists continued. A1l other denominations were protected. Criminals were pardoned but to be a Baptist was a great crime. Despite this bitter persecution, Baptists increased. At this time the influence of John Calvin, founder of Presbyterian Denomination, had begun to be felt in England. He was responsible in a great measure, for the demon of hate and fierce hostility, which the Baptists of England had to encounter. He advised that Baptists be put to death. Immersion continued to prevail among all denominations. However, at the close of this period, a slight concession was made to sprinkling among all denominations except Baptist because of Calvin's influence.
"Bloody'' Mary Tudor (1553-58) was a Catholic. Baptists suffered greatly under her. A "Protestant" Queen Elizabeth succeeded her. Although the Catholics were constantly plotting against her, she showed them more favor than she did to the Baptists. During her reign the word “Baptist'' was first used when referring to the Anabaptists. The word ''Anabaptist'' however, is still used in England to designate the Baptists of today.
Of the prevalence of Baptists in England during Queen Elizabeth's reign (born 1553, died 1605), Christian Hist. Bapt, Vol. 1. p. 206, says: "There were at this time a number of Baptist Churches in England and the Baptists had a great following." This was many years before the dates 1609 and 1641 at which time some have endeavored to prove that Baptists began. Says Christian on the same page: “England under a Protestant Queer (Elizabeth) appealed to the Baptists as a land of freedom, and many Baptists hoped to find at least partial liberty of conscience. Third, there were also in England numbers of native Baptists. At the prospects of liberty they came from their hiding places . . . The native Baptists were reinforced by shoals of Baptist abroad."
Whitgift, an enemy of the Baptists, said that the Baptists in England were to be feared by the Church of England, because Baptists follow the preaching of the gospel. Christian states that there are now in existence in nine counties outside of London, Baptist Churches founded during Queen Elizabeth's reign. This was before 1600.
The character of the Baptists during the Reformation period and during all periods has been grossly misrepresented. They were declared to be the most turbulent of all men. Every hostile movement was ascribed to the Baptist. They were charged with being the cause of earthquakes, famines, pestilences, sickness, etc. Their enemies thought God sent these calamities because of the stubborn Baptist who would not prove disloyal to Christ and His Word.
The Baptists were the most peaceful of all men. They loved peace and quietude. They wanted no one persecuted because of religious belief. They were the champions of religious liberty. Because of their peaceful lives, and contention for religious liberty, many were burned, drowned in rivers, and killed by many other devices. Their women were outraged; they were hunted down like wild beasts. Yet they never persecuted, although they had it in their power to do so.
Says Christian concerning them: "Earnest and evangelical as were the Baptists it would seem natural to suppose that they would at least be tolerated by the government but their views were too radical and principles too far reaching, to fail to challenge the hatred of the persecuting era. The whole Christian world was organized upon the lines of persecution. The exception to the rule were the Baptists. They held that every man had the God given right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience; and the larger right that other men had the same privilege. In this contention they stood absolutely alone; and standing alone, they paid the price in human blood that every man might worship, or not worship, God according to the dictates of his own conscience. It was a costly sacrifice, but it was none too dear for the world's redemption."
The Baptists appealed directly to the New Testament as sole authority in matters of religion. They rejected earthly councils as favored by the Catholics, etc. They almost exclusively read the Bible. Many among them could read. Those who could not would gather around those who could read and listen. The Waldensian Bible was used by them. They welcomed Luther's translation of the Bible.
CHAPTER FOUR
The Dutch and German Baptists
In the preceding chapter on the English Baptist we saw that Baptists had been in England and Wales since the days of the Apostles. These native Baptists were reinforced by Baptists from foreign countries, especially Germany and Holland. We give one other testimony. Fuller, the church historian, in giving the reason why so many Dutch Baptists flocked to England during the sixteenth century, says: "A match being now made up, by Cromwell's contrivance. betwixt King Henry and Lady Anne of Cleves, Dutchmen flocked faster than formerly into England-and soon after began to broach their strange opinions, being branded the general name Anabaptist."
We have seen that the Baptists were called Anabaptists before they received the name Baptists. Anabaptists was their general name in Germany and Holland just prior to and during the Reformation Period. They were first called Waldenses in these countries. Their enemies called the Baptists who followed Simon Menno, a great Baptist preacher, Mennonites.
The Baptists preferred to be called Catabaptists instead of Anabaptist for they did not consider their baptism of persons coming from other denominations to them as a rebaptism, but the first and only baptism. Ana means "again." When they baptized persons coming from other denominations they were said by their enemies to rebaptize - hence they were called Anabaptists (rebaptists). Baptists in Germany immersed. Baptists have always immersed. Some out of ignorance have attempted to prove that Baptist did not begin to immerse until 1641, but such a false claim has long been exploded. The reformers, one hundred years before 1641, had a controversy with Baptists on baptism. Christian says: "At first the reformers were disposed to take the Baptist side of the controversy and to deny infant baptism-even when the reformers practiced, or permitted, pouring, or sprinkling, they generally affirmed that the primitive rite was by dipping." Vol. 1, p. 105. Luther immersed at first and testified that the Baptists immersed. Calvin, founder of Presbyterian Denomination testified that the Baptists immersed and that the Greek word baptidzo means to immerse.
Now back to origin of the German Baptists. Whence came they? We shell let Mosheim, a Lutheran historian, who hated Baptists, answer this question. He says: "the origin of the sect . . . called Anabaptists . . . are not altogether wrong, when they boast of a descent from these Waldenses, Petrobrussians, and others who are usually styled witnesses for the truth before Luther. Prior to the age of Luther, there lay concealed in almost every country of Europe, but especially in Bohemia, Moravia, Switzerland and Germany, very many persons in whose minds were deeply rooted the principle which the Waldenses maintained." Quoted by Christian Hist. Bap., Vol. 1, p. 83. On this statement Christian, p. 83, remarks: "This origin of Mosheim, expressed in 1755, of the ancient origin of Baptists and their intimate connection with the Waldenses, and many other witnesses of the truth, meets with the approval of the most rigid scientific research of our own times."
This learned Lutheran historian says that the Baptists were known as Waldenses, Petrobrussians, and others, before the time of Luther, at which time they were called Anabaptists. Barclay, a Quaker, says: "We shall afterward show the rise of the Anabaptists took place prior to the Reformation (and some call Baptists protestants, as if they, too, came out of the Roman Catholic Church) and there are reasons for believing that on the continent of Europe, small hidden Christian societies, who have held many of the opinions of the Anabaptists, have existed from the times of the Apostles." Quoted by Christian Bapt. Hist, Vol 1, p. 85.
On the same page Christian remarks: "Roman Catholic historians and officials in some instances eye witnesses, testify that the Waldenses and other ancient communions were the same as Anabaptists. "Baronius, a learned Catholic historian, says: "The Waldenses were Anabaptists." Cardinal Hosius (Catholic) 1506 dated the Anabaptists back to 360 A.D. He says: "The Anabaptists are a pernicious sect. Of which kind the Waldenses brethren seem to have been . . . many have united with the Anabaptists." The Catholic writers state that the Anabaptists and Waldenses sprang from the Waldenses. They should know for they persecuted the Baptists for centuries.
Luther, who hated Baptists, said in 1522: ''The Anabaptists have been for a long time spreading in Germany." Christian says: "In those places where the Waldenses flourished there the Baptists set deep root. In all those places where the Waldenses in Medieval times: in all of them were the Baptists in Reformation times."
To further prove that the German Baptists sprang from, or rather were, the same people as the Ancient Waldenses, we introduce the statement made by a committee appointed by the King of Holland to write a history of the Dutch Reformed Church. In this history there is a chapter devoted to the Baptists. This history was published at Breda, 1819, by Dr. Ypeit Professor of Theeology at Gronigen, and Rev. I. J. Dermout, Chaplain to the King, learned Pedobaptists. These men had access to all of the libraries and archives of Germany and Holland. After a careful study of the Baptists they made this statement: "We have now seen that the Baptists who were formerly called Anabaptist, and, in latter times, Mennonites, were the original Waldenses; and have long, in the history of the church receive the honor of that origin. On this account Baptists may be considered the only Christian community which has stood since the days of the Apostles, and as a Christian society, which has preserved the pure doctrines of the gospel through all ages."
They further state that the Reformation was unnecessary, because the Baptists, then known as Anabaptists, Waldenses and other names, were preaching the Gospel in its simplicity, long before Luther; yea, even from the days of the Apostles. They further state that the existence of Baptists through all the ages since Christ "refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics that their communion is the most ancient." Rel. En., p. 786. This is not the language of narrow Baptists, but of learned Pedobaptists, and is worthy to be embalmed in the memory of every lover of the truth. Baptists have a succession back to Christ!
To the above statement by the learned Pedobaptist historians as to Baptist origin, Newton Brown, editor of the Religious Encyclopedia says: "This testimony from the highest official authority in the Dutch Reformed Church, is certainly a rare instance of liberality toward another denomination, conceding all the Mennonites or Baptists claim."
The German Anabaptists sprang from the Waldenses. Some claim that the Anabaptists or Baptist sprang from the Munster Riot, but the above testimony proves that such claim is false. Mr. Brown, editor Rel En, a nun- Baptist, in answering this claim says: "It is but just to observe also that the Baptists in Holland, England and the United States, are entirely distinct from these seditious and fanatical individuals."
The Waldenses entered Holland in 1182 and by 1233 Holland was full of them. These persecuted Waldensian Baptists fled into Germany and Holland from other countries to escape persecution at the hands of the Catholics. In Holland and Germany they found more liberty than in other countries. These Waldensian Baptists enjoyed liberty granted them by the Prince of Orange. Other sects endeavored to arouse the anger of the Prince against these Baptists, but he accorded them the same religious liberty granted to others. The Baptists spread rapidly.
A great Baptist preacher among these Waldensian Baptists of Germany was Simon Menno. He was at first a Catholic, but became converted and joined the Baptists or Anabaptist, in 1531. He became a great leader among them. His immediate followers were called Mennonites, not because he was their founder, but leader. To prove that the Baptists called Mennonites did not originate with Menno we give testimony of Mosheim, learned Lutheran historian, who says: "The true origin of that sect which acquired the name Anabaptist . . . administering anew the rite of baptism to those who came over to their communion, and derived that of Mennonites from the famous man to whom they owe their greatest felicity, is hid in the depth of antiquity." Church History, p. 490. Mosheim states that the Baptists or Mennonites of Germany did not begin with Menno but far before his time.
Christian, in his history of Baptists, Vol. 1, pp. 142-44 proves that the Baptists or Mennonites of Holland immersed and that Menno was a strong advocate of immersion. The modern Mennonites pour, but the ancient Mennonites were Baptists and immersed. Says Christian: "The Mennonites of our day reject infant baptism and practice believer's baptism by affusion (pouring). Menno and his immediate followers were in the practice of dipping, but later the Mennonites did not strenuously insist upon this form of baptism." He further states that at the close of the sixteenth century and beginning of the seventeenth, immersion was the practice.
We have seen that a people called Waldenses, who were bitterly persecuted by the Roman Catholics, fled into Germany and Holland for protection in the early part of the 12th century. By the 13th century Holland was full of them. These Waldenses baptized all who came to them from other sects; hence, they were called Anabaptists (rebaptizers). One of the great preachers was Simon Menno. He preached the gospel with power. Many were saved under his ministry. His immediate followers were called Mennonites, but they were simple Waldenses or Anabaptist. We saw above that Menno did not originate the Mennonites, but his followers who were Anabaptists, were called Mennonites after their illustrious leader.
A quotation from Ray's Bapt. Suc. will serve as a fitting conclusion for the chapter we are now closing. He says: "We have traced a regular succession of Baptists from the shores of America to Wales, England and Germany, and to the valleys of the Alps, long before the Munster rebellion. We have now entered upon a period of our history prior to the Lutheran Reformation. In this period, prior to the year 1520, we find no Lutheran, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, nor Methodists, and, of course, no Campbellites. But the Baptist denomination stands alone here as the 'pillar and ground of the truth' as the mighty pyramid of Gospel light, whose apex touches heaven, and whose rays light up the dreary pathway of the dismal ages upon which we are now entering.''
CHAPTER FIVE
The Waldenses
The American Baptists originated not with the Hardshell separation, nor with Roger Williams, but with the English and Welsh Baptists who came to America in large numbers. The English Baptists, originated not with John Smyth in 1609, nor in 1641, but evidence has been given showing that Baptists have been in England and Wales since the days of the Apostles; and, that these native Baptists were reinforced by Baptists abroad-especially from Germany and Holland. These German and Dutch Baptists did not originate at Munster Riot, but were the original Waldenses. To dispute these statements is to deny the testimony of men of authority. The Baptists sprang from the Waldenses. Whence came the Waldenses?
The valleys at the foot of the Alps are called Piedmont. This district is "an extensive tract of rich and fruitful valleys, embosomed in mountains which are circled again with mountains higher than they, intersected with deep and rapid rivers, and exhibiting in strong contrast, the beauty and plenty of paradise, in sight of fruitful precipices, with lakes of ice, and stupendous mountains of never-wasting snow. The whole country is an interchange of hill and dale . . . traversed with four principal rivers . . . which contribute to the fertility of the valleys."
Part of this territory is "strongly fortified by nature on account of the many difficult passes and bulwarks of rocks and mountains; as if the all-wise Creator had from the beginning, designed that place as a cabinet, wherein to put some inestimable jewel, or, in which to reserve many thousand souls, which should never bow the knee before Baal." The fields are fertile, in the mountains are mines of gold, silver, brass and iron; rivers abound in fish, and the forests and fields in game.
"For centuries God had a company of faithful witnesses in these valleys, thousands of whom suffered martyrdom for the sake of the Truth. While the nations of the earth were engrossed in darkness and superstition of Roman Catholicism, these faithful witnesses held aloft the torch of the Word of God.'' These faithful witnesses were known as Waldenses. We have seen that the Baptists of Germany and Holland sprang from them. Much has been written relative to their origin, beliefs and practices.
As to their origin Christian Hist. Bapt., Vol. 1, p. 70, says: "It is asserted on the one hand that they originated with Waldo, and had no connection with former movements. This view is held absolutely, probably by very few." He says that very few now hold the Waldenses . . . sprang from Waldo. Who was Waldo? He was . . . at first a Roman Catholic, but became converted and began to preach the gospel. He obtained a great following. He was driven from France, and finally joined the Wa1denses.
Instead of the Waldenses receiving their name from Waldo, he received his name from them or from the valleys from which the Waldenses received their name. "Waldo was so called because he was a valley man, and was only a noted leader of a people who had long existed. This view is ardently supported by most Waldenses historians." Christian Hist. Bapt., Vol. 1, p. 71, Jones, the Waldensian historian, says: "It is proved, from their books, that they existed as Waldenses before the times of Peter Waldo, who preached about the year 1160. Perrin, who wrote their history, had in his possession a New Testament in the Vallense (Waldensian) language written on parchment in a very ancient letter and a book . . . under date 1120 . . . twenty years before Waldo." Jones Church Hist., p. 257.
Dr. Allix says: "Wherefore that I may, once for all clear this matter, I say, first, that it is absolutely false that these churches (Waldemsean ) were ever founded by Peter Waldo." This is the statement of a Waldensian historian. Allix Ch. of Piedmont, p. 192. Waddington, Episcopalian historian says: ''There are some who believe Vaudois (Waldenses) to have enjoyed . . . the uninterrupted integrity of the faith even from the apostolic ages . . . At least it may be pronounced, with great certainty that they had been long in existence before the visit of the Lyonese reformer." Waddington Ch. Hist., p. 353.
From the above testimony we see that the Waldenses did not derive their origin or name from Waldo. They derived their name from the valleys in which they lived. Everhard de Bethume, A. D. 1160, says: "Some of them call themselves Valenses because they live in the vale of sorrows or tears." Bernard, Abbot of a Monastery, about 1209, says they were called "Wal denses, that is, from a dark valley." Quoted by Christian Bapt. Hist., Vol. 1, p. 71. Cok's Hist. of Bapt p. 42, says: "In times of persecutions they (early Christians) sought refuge among the mountains, and dwelt in large numbers in the valleys of the Alps and Pyrenees, and, hence, received the name Waldenses, or valley dwellers."
Now back to their origin. Jones' Hist., p. 257, says: "Sauho, an inquisitor, and one of their most implacable enemies who lived 80 years after Waldo, admits that the Wa1denses flourished 500 years before that preacher (Wa1do)." Christian Hist. Bapt., Vol. 1, p. 72, quotes Sacchoni. He says: "Among all sects, there is no one more pernicious to the church (Catholic) than the Leonists (Waldenses) . . . because it is the most ancient . . . others date it to the time of the Apostles . . . It is the most widespread. There is no country where it does not exist."
Theodora Beza, Reformer of the 16th century, says: "As for the Waldenses, I may be permitted to call them the very seed of the primitive and purer Christian church since they are those that have been upheld, as is abundantly manifest, by the wonderful providence of God, so that neither those endless storms and tempests by which the whole Christian world has been shaken for so many succeeding ages . . . nor those horrible persecutions which have been expressly raised against them, were able so far to prevail as to make them bend, or yield a voluntary subjection to the Roman tyranny and idolatry (that is Roman Catholicism).'' This Reformer traced the Waldenses back to the Apostles.
Jonathan Edwards, President of Princeton University, writes of the Waldenses: "Some of the popish writers themselves own that that people (Waldenses) never submitted to the Church of Rome . . . It is supposed that this people first betook themselves to the desert, secret place among the mountains to hide themselves from the severity of the heathen persecutions, which were before Constantine the Great." He further says that "God was pleased to maintain an uninterrupted succession of witnesses, through the whole time, in Germany, France, Britain, as historians demonstrate." Christian Hist. Bapt., Vol. 1, p. 74.
Dr. Edwards, President of Princeton University, simply says that during the persecutions of the early Christians by the Roman Emperors, the Christians fled from the scenes of persecution and hid themselves in the secret places of the mountains. Those hiding in the valleys of the Piedmont became known as Waldenses.
Edwards' statement is confirmed by the testimony of Orchard, the historian. He says: “The orthodoxy of the Novatian party, with the influence of some of their ministers, is supposed to have procured some mitigation of the law. Constantine's (Roman Emperor) oppressive measures prompted many to leave the scene of sufferings, and retire into more sequestered spots. Claudis Sessyl, the popish Archbishop, traces the rise of the Waldensean heresy to a pastor named Leo, leaving Rome at this period for the valleys.' He further states that "Eckbertus and Amerieus, two avowedly and bitter enemies of the Waldenses, do assert, that the New Puritans (Waldenses) do conform to the doctrines and manners of the O1d Puritans (Novatianists)."
Mr. Brown, editor of Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, remarks: "It seems to be a serious mistake, into which some popular writers have fallen, who represent the Waldenses as originating in France, about the year 1170, and deriving their name from the celebrated Peter Waldo. The evidence is now ample, that so far from being a new sect at that period, they had existed under various names, as a distinct class of dissenters from the established churches of Greece and Rome in the earliest ages. It is an egregious error to suppose that when Christianity was taken into alliance with the state, by the Emperor Constantine, in the beginning of the fourth century, all orthodox churches were so ignorant of the genius of religion as to consent to the corruption of a worldly establishment. The Cathari, or Puritan Churches of the Novatians, also had at that very period (abut 325 A.D.) been flourishing as a distinct communion for more than seventy years over the empire; maintaining the integrity of the true faith, together with the purity of discipline and power of godliness which had generally disappeared from the Catholic (general, not Roman Catholic, for it was unknown) churches. These Purtians being exposed to churches. These Purtians being exposed to severe persecutions from age to age, were compelled to shelter themselves from the desolating storm in |