TRUE BAPTISTS IN ALL AGES SINCE CHRIST HAVE OPPOSED ALIEN IMMERSION
BAPTISTS TRACED FROM APOSTLES TO AMERICA
THE FOUNDERS OF THE DENOMINATIONS
By, Elder R.Y. Blaylock
2742 Sinclair Avenue
Concord, CA
Reprinted 2008
First Landmark Missionary Baptist Church
Springfield, OR
TRUE BAPTISTS IN ALL AGES SINCE CHRIST HAVE OPPOSED ALIEN IMMERSION
For over 45 years the writer has been a student of Baptist History, and because of the recent statement of Dr. Ben M. Bogard in his paper that “ALL OF THE EUROPEAN CHURCHES practice alien immersion and have always done so”, I decided to take the histories I have and make a special study of Baptist history on this particular point; which I did. Now I will show you our friend is badly mistaken and true Baptists in all ages since Christ reimmersed those coming from other than Baptist churches.
- For 45 years, this writer, the churches of Middle Oregon Baptist Association, and pastors he has been associated with immersed those coming from other than Baptist churches.
- The churches of Roan Mountain Association of North Carolina, where I was baptized in 1881, refused to receive anyone on alien immersion. The old ministers of that Association and their churches opposed the reception of it. This is from personal knowledge and there are too many living witnesses for anyone to deny it.
- Elder J. H. Grimes, in his discussion with Dr. W. J. McGlothlin on alien immersion, shows that the churches of Sandy Creek Association in North Carolina, which was organized in 1758, opposed the reception of alien immersion. He also shows that the Kehukee Association of the same state, organized seven years later, opposed it. Brother Grimes also shows in his book that the Georgia State Convention in 1872 opposed alien immersion. If you will read Grimes and Dr. J. R. Graves on the question, you will see that the first Baptists settling America were opposed to receiving alien immersion and were what were called “Anabaptists” in Europe because they would not receive alien immersion but baptized those coming to them from other denominations, hence were called re-baptizers or Ana-baptists.
- Now, we will go into European history. I will quote largely from Dr. John T. Christian’s “History of the Baptists”, giving where you will find it in his book and where he gets his information. On page 82, he quotes from Mosheim, a learned Lutheran historian, as follows: “The origin of the sect, who from their REPETITION OF BAPTISM (emphasis mine) received in other communities, are called Anabaptists, but who are also denominated Mennonites, from the celebrated man to whom they owe a large share of their present prosperity, is involved in much obscurity (or is hid in the remote depths of antiquity, as another translator has it.)”
Note: These Mennonites were called Anabaptists because of the “repetition of baptism received in other communities.” So they would not receive alien immersion. Mosheim goes on, as quoted by Dr. Christian, and says, “I believe the Mennonites are not altogether in the wrong, when they boast of a descent from these Waldenses, Petrobrusians and others, who are usually styled witnesses for the truth before Luther.” This shows we were completely opposed to alien immersion before Luther’s time.
On page 85, Dr. Christian gives the following: “Robert Barclay, a Quaker, who wrote upon this subject, though not always free from bias, says of the Baptists: ‘We shall afterwards show the rise of the Anabaptists took place prior to the Reformation of the Church of England, and there are also reasons to believe that on the Continent of Europe, small hidden Christian societies, who have held many of the opinions of the Anabaptists, have existed from the time of the apostles.’” This clearly indicates that Baptists back to the apostles opposed alien immersion.
Then, on the same page 85, Dr. Christian quotes Cardinal Hosius, a member of the Council of Trent, A.D. 1560, as saying, “If the truth of religion were to be judged by the readiness and boldness of which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinion and persuasion of no sect can be truer and surer than that of the Anabaptists since there have been none for these past 1200 years, that have been more generally punished or that have more cheerfully and steadfastly undergone, and even offered themselves to the most cruel sorts of punishment than these people.”
This takes Anabaptists back to 360 A.D. He quotes Cardinal Hosius on page 86, as saying, “The Anabaptists are a pernicious sect of which kind the Waldensian brethren seem to have been; although some lately, as they testify in their apology, declare that they will no longer rebaptize, as was their former custom; nevertheless, it is certain that many of them retain their former custom, and have united with the Anabaptists.”
This shows the Waldenses were of the same faith as the Anabaptists, but some of those had promised not to “rebaptize,” perhaps to prevent being persecuted by the Catholics for it. There are Missionary Baptists today, who no doubt under persecution, would go over to the aliens.
Dr. Christian on page 86, quotes Zwingle, the Swiss reformer, as saying: “The institution of Anabaptists is no novelty, but for three hundred years has caused great disturbance in the church, and has acquired such strength that the attempt in this age to contend with it appears futile for a time.”
Dr. Christian says on page 87, “The Anabaptist movement was the continuation of the old evangelical faith maintained by the Waldenses and other Medieval Christians.”
Let me say here that you cannot trace Baptists back to Christ except through a Baptist people; hated and persecuted because they would not receive the immersion of the Catholics and others as valid baptism.
On page 92, Dr. Christian says, “The author of the ‘Successio Anabaptistica’, says of the Anabaptists: ‘I am dealing with the Mennonites or Anabaptists, who pride themselves as having the apostolic succession; that is, the mission and the extraction from the apostles, who claim that the true Church is found nowhere except among themselves alone and their congregations, since with them alone remains the true understanding of the Scriptures.’”
We, as true Baptists today, claim the same these ancient Mennonites, or Anabaptists did, and if I believed “ALL OF EUROPEAN CHURCHES practice alien immersion and have always done so,” I would quit the Baptists and join something else. We cannot be true Baptists and betray their history and teachings.
CHAPTER 2
Remember, most of our Baptist history is gleaned from Pcdo-Baptists, or enemies of Baptists, and what they have said about us. On page 93 of Dr. Christian’s “History”, lie gives the following: “A notable proof of the antiquity of the Baptists of Moravia is here recorded. Johanna Schlecta Costelacius wrote a letter from Bohemia, October 10, 1519, to Erasmus, affirming that for one hundred years the Picards had been dipping believers, and that they rebaptized and were therefore Anabaptists. His words are: ‘Such as come over to their sect must every one be dipped in mere water’,” This is evidence that the Baptists in Europe in (he 15til century would not receive alien immersion.
The American Cyclopedia, Vol. II, P. 293, which is before me, in speaking of the Baptists says, “These churches from the 5th century onward, were the subjects of systematic persecution from the state churches, both in the East and in the West. Cyril of Alexandria and Innocent I of Rome, according to the historian Socrates, began this persecution by depriving them of their houses of worship and driving them into secret places, under the laws of Honorius and Theodosius II, which forbid rebaptism (so-called) under penalty of death. Yet their principles reappear among the Culdees of the West and the Paulians of the East, the Vallesii and the Paterines, the Albigenses and Waldenses, and emerge on all sides at the first dawn of the reformation.” Then, going on, this Cyclopedia says, “Mr. Bancroft says of the German Baptists of that era: ‘With greater consistency than Luther they applied the doctrines of the reformation to the social positions of life, and threatened an end to priestcraft, kingcraft, spiritual domination, titles, and vassalage.”
Now notice the persecution of the Baptists in the 5th century “and onward under penalty of death” was because they rebaptized those coming from the Catholic party, and at that time the Catholics immersed nearly altogether. They immersed for a wrong purpose and had so apostatized from the Baptist faith, that they did not have a Scriptural right to baptize any one. True Missionary Baptists today do not believe those who are
immersed for a wrong purpose by human institutions and apostate churches can administer Scriptural baptism. Those claiming to be Baptist, who, as churches, have departed from the faith and accepted those immersed for a wrong purpose and by unscriptural institutions become guilty of the same offense, co-equal with those administering such immersions so their baptism is no better. They confess it by accepting the other.
In the law of our country, one endorsing, aiding, and abetting in a crime is held equally guilty with the one committing the crime. If our laws are just and right, and 1 believe they are, those receiving alien immersion are guilty with those performing the act.
I am defending the blood stream of true Baptist baptism from John the Baptist, who was sent from God to baptize (John 1:6,33), and who baptized our Savior; who in turn organized the first Baptist church on earth and said, “The gates of hell shall not prevail against it,” (Matt. 16:18). He commissioned her to “make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” (Matt. 28:19, 20).
Now, I contend this pure stream of Baptist baptism has been flowing through a stream of blood and suffering in His churches all the way down to this day. If not, His church failed and the “gates of hell” did prevail against it.
This is not a question about individual sins of church members. A member may get drunk, commit adultery, or even commit murder; that is not the church. The church, as a body of Christ, opposes such. Our friends who try to justify the reception of alien immersion will say, “There are worse sins than receiving alien immersion,” and refer to drunkenness and adultery, etc. But who ever heard of a church voting to endorse such sins? This receiving alien immersion is a church act; the church voting to do the wrong. If she voted to endorse drunkenness, she would be unworthy to be called a church of Christ. Or if she voted to endorse any evil practice, she would forfeit all right to be a Baptist church. When a Baptist church votes to endorse another baptism in place of her own, or as good as her own, is she not rejecting her own for another, and forfeiting the right to administer true Scriptural or Baptist baptism? When you destroy the ordinance of baptism what have you? You have destroyed one of the doctrines essential to a New Testament Church. As Dr. T. T. Martin has well said, “Only two doctrines are essential to a New Testament Church. They are the way of salvation and the way of baptism.” When you destroy the way of baptism what have you? You strike at the heart of the way of salvation when you pervert the way of baptism, for it pictures the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.
The Corinthian church was reproved for tolerating sins in the members, but the church had not voted to endorse them. All of the seven churches of Asia had sinned in tolerating some evil among them, but there is no indication that they had voted as churches to endorse any of those sins. But God threatened to “remove the candlestick,” if they did not repent. Here we have some churches who have tolerated alien immersion put over by a pastor and a few unsound members.
The Church has taken no action as a church in regular conference, but has tolerated this evil put over by a few. They have sinned and if they do not repent and repudiate it, they lose the right to administer Scriptural baptism. If they, by a church action in conference, vote to endorse alien immersion, I think they then forfeit the right to administer Scriptural baptism. They have repudiated Scriptural baptism and accepted another, hence, they have none to give but the alien they have endorsed.
Why do I speak of the “blood stream of baptism”? Because we trace the Baptists by the blood they have shed in opposing alien immersion, and contending for a pure Scriptural baptism. We have a compromising, pussy-footing class of Baptists now that will sell us and betray us into the hands of the aliens for 30 pieces of silver. God help us to be real Baptists as our fore¬fathers were, willing to die for the truth.
CHAPTER 3
We have in our previous chapters shown by history that our Baptist ancestors did not receive alien immersion. I will now give some reasons why they would not receive it; they had Scriptural example for it. In Acts 19:1-6, we have an example where Paul immersed some who had alien baptism. They were unsaved when first immersed; did not know “whether there be any Holy Spirit.” They were aliens to the gospel truth of salvation, and to the purpose of baptism. When they heard the truth and believed in Christ, they “were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.”
There are three things essential to Scriptural baptism.
- A proper subject; a saved person.
- A proper design; to show forth the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.
- A proper administrator; a Missionary Baptist church through and by an ordained Baptist minister.
If one fails in having any one of these in being dipped, he is an alien to Scriptural baptism. We are accused by the aliens of being re-bap tizer and they say “Jesus was buried but once.” He was baptized but once, was a proper subject, was baptized for a proper purpose, to point to His death, burial, and resurrection, and by a proper administrator, a Baptist preacher, sent from God to baptize (John 1:6,33). But these aliens who dip, do not dip for the right purpose, to point to His death, burial, and resurrection, but for the purpose of procuring, to some extent, salvation as they believe in good works to obtain salvation. So their baptism is alien to the true teachings of the Bible. Therefore it is not baptism at all; not being for the right purpose, nor by the proper authority His church. We hold to these truths which the Waldenses and Anabaptists held to. Ray’s Church History, page 356, says, “But the Waldenses adhered to the apostolic practice of ‘one baptism’.
They buried in baptism only once those who professed to be dead to sin. They were charged, it is true, with Anabaptism or rebaptism, which they denied on the ground that even the immersions performed by false churches were invalid and not baptism at all.”
This is like what the great Baptist preacher, Dr. S.
- Cone, of New York City in 1840 said speaking of a Freewill Baptist preacher’s immersions, “We no more considered their baptism by Plumer as Christian than we should if they had been dipped by a Mohammedan in the name of his prophet.” (In “Old Landmarkism What Is It?” p. 210). But now most of our Northern Convention so-called Baptist churches receive those Freewill Baptists and the Campbellites’ baptism as valid. So their churches have been corrupted with all sorts of alien immersion and open communion; becoming guilty of destroying the true purpose and design of baptism. Then, when we who hold to the faith of our fathers, and the baptism kept by them, and recommend true churches to withdraw from those who have departed from the faith once for all delivered to his saints, we are condemned by some who say “ALL OF THE EUROPEAN CHURCHES practice alien immersion and have always done so.” Acts 19:1-6 proves that statement is untrue, as well as the history of Baptists from that time to the present day.
Dr. John T. Christian, on page 115 of his “History of the Baptists”, gives this: “L’Abbe Fleury, the great Roman Catholic historian under date of 1523, gives an account of the Baptist practice. He says: ‘This was called the heresy of the Anabaptists because the name was attributed to this erroneous sect for they baptized in a sacred fountain all those baptized in infancy, and they condemned baptism given to little children. . . . Neither did they detest baptism the less, and all, as many as gave name to their own faction, dipped again in the sacred fountain; whence they were called Anabaptists.’ (Fleury Historiae Ecclesiastica, XXXIV, 282).”
Why were they called Anabaptists? This Catholic Historian tells us because they “dipped again in the sacred fountain.” Let me say again, you cannot trace the Baptists through the ages to the apostles except from enemies who condemned and put them to death because they refused to receive their dipping as Scriptural baptism.
I will here quote from Dr. Ben M. Bogard’s “Baptist Way-Book,” page 51. Tracing the Baptists in the Fifth Century he quotes from Orchard Vol. 1, page 61, as follows: “The Catholic party, now accumulating power, saw in other churches rebaptizing a virtual renunciation of the baptism they had conferred upon those who went over to the other party. . . . consequently, a spirit of persecution was raised against all those who rebaptized Catholics. In the fourth Lateran council, canons were made to banish them as heretics, and these canons were supported by an edict in 413, issued by the emperors Theodosius and Honorius, declaring that all persons rebaptized and the rebaptizers should be both punished with death. Accordingly Albanus, a zealous minister, with others was punished with death for rebaptizing.”
Dr. Bogard, in commenting on this says, “What if it were punishable with death now for Baptists to baptize those who had been baptized by others? One thing is certain, alien immersionists who are willing to take anybody’s baptism, would not suffer; and another thing is equally certain; these alien immersionists have DEPARTED FROM A PRACTICE WHICH ANCIENT BAPTISTS WERE WILLING TO DIE FOR.” (Emphasis his.) This is from the same Dr. Ben M. Bogard who said in his paper, “The Orthodox Baptist Searchlight” Sept. 25, 1940, “Our American churches from Wales and England-all of them came that route to get back to the apostles and ALL THE EUROPEAN CHURCHES practice alien immersion and have always done so.” (Emphasis his.)
Did he tell the truth in his book some twenty odd years ago, and in his old age, has he forgotten what he wrote of history then, and now fallen away from the truth? The Bible and history, or Baptists, brands him in error in his statement in his paper in 1940. I deny that all the European Baptists practiced alien immersion at the time they came over here and settled in America. They were persecuted at that time because they would not affiliate with Presbyterians and the Lutherans, and receive their baptism after the Reformation, even after they had come over here in the American colonies. If they received alien immersion in Europe, why did they refuse it as soon as they came over here? We have not space in this little work to produce the history. But read J. R. Graves’ book, “Old Landmarkism, What Is It?” pages 211 to 214.
I will give one more quotation of history. It is partly quoted by Dr. Bogard on page 63, of “The Baptist Way” book, but is given more fully by Dr. J. T. Christian on page 95 of “A History of Baptists”. He says, “The claim of the Dutch Baptists to apostolic origin was made the object of a special investigation in the year 1819, by Dr. Ypeij, professor of Theology in Gronigen, and the Rev. J. J. Dermont, chaplain to the King of Netherlands, both of whom were learned members of the Reformed Church. Many pages might be filled with the report that they made to the King. In the opinion of these writers: The Mennonites are descended from the tolerably pure evangelical Waldenses, who were driven by persecution into various countries; and who during the latter part of the twelfth century, fled into Flanders and into the provinces of Holland and Zealand; where they lived simple and exemplary lives, in the villages as farmers, in the towns by trades, free from the charge of any gross immoralities, and professing the most pure and simple principles, which they exemplified in a holy conversation. They were therefore in existence long before the Reformed Church of the Netherlands.’
“We have now seen that the Baptists who were formerly called Anabaptists, and in later times Mennonites, were the original Waldenses, and who have long in the history of the church received the honor of that origin. On this account the Baptists may be considered as the only Christian community which had stood since the days of the apostles, and as a Christian society which has preserved pure the doctrines of the Gospel through all ages. The perfectly correct external and internal economy of the Baptist denomination tends to confirm the truth, disputed by the Romish Church that the Reformation brought about in the 16th century was in the highest degree necessary, and at the same time goes to refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics, that their denomination is the most ancient, (Ypeij en Dermont, Geschiedenis der Nederlandsche Hervormde Kerk. Breda, 1819.)”
We have given you quotations from history, not only proving Baptists have had a continual line of existence from Christ to the present time, but that they generally opposed the reception of what we now call alien immersion, and many have suffered and died for these principles. We do not deny there have been at different times some who, for the lack of principle and stability and to escape persecution, have received alien immersion, yet were classed as Baptists because they were dipped. But no honest, intelligent historian can deny that there has been a true line of Baptist churches that refused to receive it, and were called Anabaptists or re-baptizer by others. We have today both the true and the untrue called Baptists.
The untrue have gone out from us: “But they were not of us: for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us,” as the apostle John has well said (1 John 2:19).
CHAPTER IV
In this chapter I will give a chain of history tracing Baptists from Christ and the Apostles to America. I am indebted to Roy Mason for a large part of this was taken from his book, “The Church Jesus Built”.
- John, the beloved disciple, baptized by John the Baptist, a charter member of the Jerusalem Church, which Jesus organized. (Luke 6:12-16; Matthew 16:18; Acts 1:21-22.)
- John, the beloved disciple, baptized Polycarp, A.D. 90. (Neander’s Church History, page 285.)
- Polycarp organized Partus church, A.D. 150. (Cyrus Commentary of Antiquity, p. 924.)
4.Turtullan came from Partus church and organized Turan church, A.D. 237. (Armitage Church History, p. 182.)
- Tellestman came from Turan church and organized Pontifossi church, A.D. 394. (Nowlan’s Church History. Vol. 2, p. 318.)
- Adromicus came from Pontifossi church and organized Darethea church, A.D. 671. (Lambert’s Church History, p. 47.)
- Archer Flavin came from Darethea church and organized Timto church, A.D. 738. (Mosheim Church History, p. 394.)
- Balcolao came from Timto church and organized Lima Piedmont church, A.D. 812. (Neander’s Church History, Vol. 2, p. 320.)
- Aaron Arlington came from Lima Piedmont church and organized Hillcliff church, A.D. 987. (Jones’ History, p. 324.) Many churches were organized in Wales and England from Hillcliff Baptist Church.
- Elder John Clark came from England and organized Newport Baptist Church in Rhode Island, the first: Baptist church in America, A.D. 1638. (J. R. Graves “First Baptist Church in America”, p. 13.)
- Elder H. Roller came direct from Hillcliff Baptist church to Philadelphia Baptist Association in A.D. 1809, and organized many churches in the United States. (See Minutes of Philadelphia Association.)
This gives our Baptists a continuous chain of churches from Jerusalem, A.D. 31 to America, A.D. 1941.
CHAPTER V
ORIGIN AND FOUNDERS OF OTHER DENOMINATIONS
- Catholics separated from the Baptists about A.D. 251, and gradually drifted into the Papacy. The first universal Bishop or Pope was Boniface III, who was made such by Emperor Phocas, A.D. 606.
- Lutherans split off from the Catholics and organized by Martin Luther in A.D. 1530.
- Presbyterians split off from the Catholics in France, organized by John Calvin in A.D. 1535.
- Episcopalians were organized by King Henry VIII, pulling off the English people from the Catholics inAD. 1540.
- Congregationalists were organized by Robert Brown in A.D. 1580.
- Quakers were organized by George Fox in A.D. 1648.
- Methodists split off from the Episcopalians and organized by John Wesley in A.D. 1729.
- Freewill Baptists were organized by Ben Randall in 1780.
- Campbellites, that call themselves “The Christian Church” and “The Church of Christ”, were organized by Alexander Campbell in A.D. 1827.
- Mormons, now many of them call themselves “Latter Day Saints” were organized by Joseph Smith in A.D. 1830.
- Hardshell Baptists pulled out of Missionary Baptists by Daniel Parker in A.D. 1832.
- Seventh Day Adventists were organized by William Miller in A.D. 1843.
- Jehovah’s Witnesses, or Russellites, organized by “Pastor Russell”, A.D. 1884.
- “Christian Science”, so-called, organized by Mary Baker Glover Paterson Eddy, in A.D. 1884.
- Nazarenes, organized in Los Angeles, by P. F. Bresee, “on the first Sabbath of October”, A.D. 1895.
- “Four Square Church” organized in Los Angeles by Mrs. Aimee Semple McPherson, in 1925.
These dates may not all be exactly correct, as some historians may date the beginning of a church
when they first met as a society, while another may give a later date when they were called a church, or organized into what they called a church.
Just a word more about Baptists. It is said, “History repeats itself.” We know in nature, like begets like. Is Baptist history of the second and third centuries repeating itself? In A.D. 1792, English Baptist ministers formed a separate missionary society from the churches to do missionary work, and laid an egg of autocracy among Baptists. Then again in A.D. 1814, in the City of Philadelphia the “Delegates from Missionary Societies, and other religious bodies of Baptists, organized a plan for eliciting, combining, and directing the energies of the whole denomination,” and they incorporated under State laws, thus uniting church and state to carry on their work as the Catholic party did in the early centuries of the church.
In A.D. 1845, The Southern Convention was organized and incorporated under the laws of Georgia, uniting church and state to carry out their plans to “elicit, combine, and direct the energies of the Baptist denomination.” Another seed of autocracy was planted in the Baptist denomination which has grown to quite an autocratic system.
In A.D. 1932, at the “Bible School in the First Baptist Church, Fort Worth, Texas,” the Fundamentalist Baptist Missionary Fellowship was started and “incorporated in the State of Texas, County of Tarrant”. On April 18, 1938, it was incorporated in the State of Michigan, according to Dr. J. Frank Norris as published in his paper, April 29, 1938. They have seven directors and constitute a corporation of individuals; an autocratic system.
I hope and pray this little booklet will help our true Baptists to see the drift of the times and that they may be more able to withstand the evils of our day. With a prayer for the Holy Spirit to lead us all into the perfect truth of God’s Word, I dedicate it to true independent Missionary Baptists everywhere.
ShareThis!!| Bookmark
Copyright (c)2003 First Landmark Missionary Baptist Church, Springfield, OR
