92 Spirit inwardly and invisibly"
M. Lofton's summary of the theory"
1. THE RISE OP THE PARTICULAR BAPTISTS•
Although the General and Particular Baptists had
separate beginnings, the manner of their origin was similar.
The General Baptists grew out of a congregation of Separatists gathered by John Smyth; the Particular Baptists grew out of a congregation of Separatists gathered by Henry Jacob.
The Beginning Of The Henry Jacob Church In l6l6. In l6l6 Henry Jacob, a learned Puritan minister, pastor of an English congregation at Middelburg, Zealand, published a number of works against the English Establishment. A. H.
Newman, in an article in the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopaedia Of Religious Knowledge, states that Jacob had conference with the Separatist brethren in the Netherlands and "reach- ed the conviction that duty required him to return to
England and to 'venture himself for the kingdom of Christ's 2
sake1". Some of his members returned with him and they organized anew at Southwark, London. Jacob was chosen and ordained pastor. After about eight years he emigrated to America and John Lathrop became pastor. This church con- tinued to grow rapidly.
2 Schaff-Herzog, Encyclopaedia Of Religious Knowledge (New York and London: Punk And Wagnalls Co., 1909), Vol. I., p. l],6l.
i6i
The Division Of 1633• In 1633 a division arose as the result of discussions concerning whether the parish church-
3
es were true churches. Some of the members held that bap- tism by the Parish Clergyman was invalid, tfnot because it was infant baptism, but because it was received in the Church Of England". A new church of seventeen members was formed;
and Newman states that Samuel Eaton with some others received a further baptism.
The Spilsbury Church. John Spilsbury soon became the pastor of this church, but the exact date of the beginning
of his work with the church is not known. It is known that by 1638 he was pastor, for at that date another group of
six members came from the Jacob church. In the Schaff- Herzog Encyclopaedia Of Religious Knowledge, Newman quoted the members of the Jessey Church as saying:
These also being of the same judgment with Sam Eaton and desiring to depart and not be censured, our
interest in them was remitted with prayer made in their behalf, June 8, 1638, they having iust for- saken us, and joined with Mr. Spilsbury.o
3 H. C. Vedder, A Short History Of The Baptists (Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publication Society, 1907), p. 206.
Ij. Shakespeare, o£. ci t., p. 182.
5 Schaff-Herzog, Loc. Cit.
6 Loc . Cit.
131+
The Original Jacob-Lathrop Church Divided Again In 16I1O. Newman continues:
Shortly before or shortly after this secession William Kiffin, then a young man of twenty-two, afterward
till 1701 one of the most influential leaders of the Particular Baptists, united with Eaton. The learned and zealous Henry Jessey had become pastor of the Jacob-Lathrop church in 1637. In l6q_0 the convic- tion that 1 dipping the body into the water1 is the only valid baptism forced itself upon a number of the 1 members and the matter was much agitated in anti-
pedobaptist circles. As a result of the conferences on this matter Richard Blount, who understood Dutch, was sent to Holland inhere the Collegiants of Rhyns- burg were practicing immersion, and received bap-
tism at the hands of J. Batte, a teacher among them.
This party had arisen about I0I9, but its immersion may have been derived from the Polish (Socinian)
antipedobaptists. On his return Blount immersed
Blacklock, and they two baptised large numbers (I6I4-I) .7 It was the Jacob-Lathrop church, under the leadership of Henry Jessey, that became convinced of the necessity of suc- cession in relation to baptism, and sent to Holland for the proper administration of the ordinance. Spilsbury?s group believed that the administrator did not have to be an im- mersed person in order to begin true baptism. His group be- gan immersing about the same time as the Jessey group, but it was an independent beginning, without the baptized ad- ministrator. This is seen in the statement:
Spilsbury insisted that !baptizedness is not essen- tial to the administrator1 of baptism and, with a
7 Ibid ., p . 1+61.
131+
number of adherents, discountenanced Blounts method of restoring baptism. As the agitation had been going on for some months before Blount's journey to Holland, it is not unlikely that Spilsbury and his
adherents, including Kiffln, had some time before introduced immersion independently. Spilsburyfs argument against the necessity of succession in baptism prevailed.8
In this statement, Newman points to the fact that it was the church of Spilsbury that first reached the conviction that immersion was the scriptural form of true baptism. About l61|_l they began the practice, and it seems to have been this beginning of immersion independently that led to the discussion among the Particular Baptists as to the validity of that baptism. They were convinced of immersion, but did they have the power to begin it themselves, or should they go to some group outside England that did practice it? The church of Spilsbury decided that they had the power to re- store it; while the Jessey church believed that they must receive their baptism from one who had been truly baptized.
This accounts for Blount's mission to Holland. The last
statement given from Newman in the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopaedia Of Religious Knowledge asserts:
By October l61flj., the Calvinistic antipedobaptists of London who had adopted immersion as the ex- clusively valid form of baptism 'had become seven churches' #9
8 Loc. Cit.
9 Ibid., p. I)-6lf.
l61j- This has not been an attempt to give a complete his- tory of the Particular Baptists, but this brief statement of their development from a group of Separatists in l6l6, under the leadership of Henry Jacob, to a group of seven churches by will help in the understanding of a full- er discussion of their teachings on baptism. The growth of the Particular Baptists was very rapid after l6i[l|_> but until that time the development was slow.