A neighboring Baptist minister reports an old deacon, close at hand, saying that “the Baptists are going to the Independents, the Independents to the Church, the Church to the Romanists, and the Romanists to the ——.” But we need not repeat all that the old man said. Still, where are the Baptists going, and what are they doing? is a fair question. They seem to be “doing nothing,” or what is worse, “doing things they ought not to do, and leaving undone the things they ought to do,” and unless they repent they may have to add, “and there is no health in us.” There are individuals and churches honourable exceptions, but present results, as reported by themselves, indicate a state most lamentable. Some act as though a better class of chapels is to be “the power of God unto salvation.” Costly buildings with towering spires looking down on the more humble steeple-house of the State Church, are possessed by some, and longed for by others. Fashion-worshiping congregations sustain the cause and support ministers who are charming preachers, with only one defect—their hearers remain unconverted. This is the state of the case in some places, and will be in others so soon as the aspirants can climb the mount. Baptism, too, is sadly in the way. Baptist churches cannot, while they surround the communion table with water, compete with Independents in the race for popularity, and therefore “don’t say anything about baptized believers in your trust deed,” says one preacher. “Do not form a Baptist Association, but let us merge into the general body of Christians,” exclaims a second. Another says, “I rejoice to say that the church which to-day we dedicate to God, is to be open to all Christians—that here the Lord’s people of whatever denomination may come to his table.” Oh, most charming liberality! most excellent charity! Surely these Baptists convert their tens of thousands. Let us see. The Annual Meeting of the Baptist Union, recently held in London, supplies both facts and comments. From the Secretary’s report we learn that an increased number of churches have given in their adhesion to the Union, but that membership in the denomination has only increased, on the average, little more than one member to each church. With this agrees the Baptist Hand-book, where we found the statistics of 1863, and from which it appears that there were 37 associations, containing 1270 churches, which together counted 136,825 members, and gave [443] an average membership of 122 to each church. The clear increase in members during 1863 is set down at 1825, or about 1 5/8 to each church. The present report shews no alteration in this rate of increase. The returns are from 1701 churches, with a total membership of 176,323 persons, which reduces the average membership to 104, and 1 5/8 the increase of each church. There are many churches not belonging to the associations. The number of Baptists in Great Britain may be 300,000.
The Rev. C. Williams read a paper on Associations, shewing that the Baptists at present are an unorganized body. Of 48 churches in Bedfordshire, 33 are unassociated, and so in other counties. There are 170 churches within twelve miles of St. Paul’s, 166 of which do not carry out the connectional principle. In Lancashire there are twelve towns, with populations ranging from 5,000 upwards, in which Baptists are entirely unrepresented. In Yorkshire there are thirteen similar towns in which there are not Baptist chapels. In England there are seventy such towns, with an aggregate population of 754,000. London is almost as bad—Shoreditch, with a population of 77,800 has but one Baptist chapel, and Bethnal-green, with over 100,000, has but four, the united membership of which is 450 only. Mr. Williams urged the great need of associations, in order that combined effort might cover the vacant ground. The Rev. W. Robinson did not concur. “There is no association where he lives. There had been a small one but it had died out, and it was now in contemplation to form a new one. The point is, shall it be a Baptist or a Christian association—should they extend its limits sufficiently wide to embrace all who believe in the Lord Jesus, or should they make it strictly a denominational interest? What might be the result he did not know.” By all means we should have the Baptist associations become Christian. But can Mr. Robinson, New Testament in hand, shew that an association of unbaptized persons, or one in this particular mixed, is Christian? Can he shew that unbaptized persons were ever in the Christian church? If he can, let him take the work in hand, and ever after we will help him break up close communion churches. But what would the proposed amalgamation do for the Baptists? Push them to the wall, and make them fewer than they are. There are many Robinsons in America as well as here. In Tract Societies and Sunday School Unions, and the like, they have united with the unbaptized sects, and with what result? Loss! decided loss! The effects have recently roused some sleeping Baptists on the other side of the Atlantic, and a new series of tracts are now issuing. The first of the series (a letter to Baptists) indicates its main object by a suitable motto—“God does not allow us to part with one inch of his ground, though we [444] might thereby gain the peaceful possession of all the rest.” It points out that the circulation of Baptist tracts by Baptists is the exception, and it opposes co- operation of Baptists and Pedobaptists in what are called “Christian Unions,” because such co-operations subverts institutions which Christ has ordained as part and parcel of the Christian system. Facts are added in illustration—“At one of the noon prayer meetings in Philadelphia, Rev. Mr. Catden, an Episcopal clergyman, proposed ‘a union communion service.’ Coming from a ‘Churchman,’ it was considered a happy move in the right direction. Dr. Brantly, however, a Baptist preacher present, arose to object, and was proceeding to give his reasons, when he was called to order on the ground that no controversy was allowed in the meeting. Thus the Baptists in the meeting were tied up in an arrangement by which they could offer no objections to miscellaneous communion. They had no business there professing a union which was not real.” Another incident of a similar character is stated as follows: “In a small town in New Jersey, it was decided to hold union meetings. The Baptist meeting-house was selected for the purpose. The meetings were held, and converts to the various isms represented in the motly group were added daily. The meetings came to a close, and not one was found who desired to be buried by baptism into the Saviour’s death. That Baptist church learned a good lesson—that when they yield a part of the truth, the remainder will be stolen from them.”
“In ‘Sunday School operations’ the Baptists have sacrificed truth by uniting with Pedobaptists. The Union books ignore everything that is peculiar to Baptists, and when Baptists act as agents or colporteurs for the S. S. Union, they have to seal their lips on the whole subject of baptism. At a Sunday School Convention of the New York Baptist Association a committee was appointed to prepare an ‘Address to Baptists on Sunday School Instruction,’ having in view the organization of a Baptist Sunday School Union. Only one Baptist paper published the address. All but one of the Baptist Sunday Schools in New York city then ‘in the hands and under the control of other religious bodies.’
“A lady connected with a Baptist church in this city had been instrumental in bringing seventy-five persons to a knowledge of the truth; but on inquiry it was found that she was engaged in distributing for the American Tract Society, and that the seventy-five had all united with Pedobaptist churches. A tract has been put in circulation recently headed, ‘How to become a Christian.’ But let the Baptists who have been distributing it in this city and elsewhere say if it teaches the trembling penitent to ‘believe and be baptized,’ as Jesus taught—or ‘repent and be baptized in the [445] name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,’ as Peter taught—or ‘Why tarriest thou? arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord,’ as Saul was taught.”
But it is not all dark. Sterling things were said at the meeting of the Baptist Union. Caution and rebuke were administered. Rev. J. P. Mursell, of Leicester, read a lesson on Æstheticism—“Are we in danger of falling into the gross notion—of drinking in the too common, but very subtle feeling, that human artifice commends itself to the Divine complacency? that material grandeur comports with the spiritual essence? that garnished temples are pleasing to God? May we not go on till the forms of our worship overlay its spirit, till screens and vestments, intonations, and chants, become substitutes, instead of auxiliaries, to the intelligent devotion of the sanctuary? Is there no danger of the sword of the Spirit losing its edge while brandished amid so much that is incidental and artistic?”
In the right direction, Friend Mursell! But only halfway. There can be no reasonable objection to a good meeting-house, with every really useful addition, but what need have Christians for screens and peculiar vestments? Let us be content with such clerical robes as sufficed for the apostles, and when we speak of screens, remember the blanket meetings of the persecuted Baptists of former generations. Perhaps, however, the best things were said by the Rev. B. W. Noel: “It is a very secondary consequence that our chapels rise and fall, that we are esteemed and beloved, if souls are not added to the Redeemer. If souls are not saved, woe to us * *. Now let me ask you—In those churches where not more than one is added in the course of a year, are we believers fulfilling our glory? Can you say that of a church where no souls were saved? Where are the children of our godly parents? More than one in each church would be added if only the children were converted. * * Were Christ’s friends the aristocracy? Did he dine with the Pharisees, except when they wanted to cavil with him? By the poor Christ shook the world. Let us thank God that we have to labor amongst the poor. They are accessible and grateful; and the faith and love of poor men, who are Christians, is often much stronger than that of merchants and gentlemen. Have you ever seen religion working downwards? I never did. Get a number of poor men to love Christ, and serve him, and those above will be sure to notice the phenomenon; whereas, if you set squires and rich men to worship God, in their fashion, the poor do not notice.”
Mr. Noel also gave an earnest call to the churches, not to leave the work to ministers, citing an instance in which a poor man preached the gospel, and in a short time brought fifty souls to [446] Christ, who, learning that they should be baptized sought not the use of a Baptist chapel, but, with their own hands, dug a baptistery in their little hired room. He also urged to plain faithful preaching—“We must preach the gospel, not controversy. When Jesus went about the country, what did he preach? ‘Repent and believe the gospel!’ What did John preach? What did the Apostle Peter preach? ‘Repent and be baptized every one of you, for the remission of sins!’”
Mr. Noel is perfectly right. The gospel will work upward, from the poor. The rich will have but little of it—they will have a form of religion without the power and the chapels prepared for them, at a cost far beyond all needed expenditure, but will bar the millions from hearing the word. Let the Baptists in this particular run a race with the independents and they are lost to real gospel usefulness and open to contempt. Let time-serving preachers, who fail to distinguish between saving sinners and pleasing well-paying seatholders take heed. The Lord will hold them to account, and a fearful one it will be. On the other hand let faithful brethren, who contend for the good old ways and may sometimes feel discouraged as they witness costly temples arise in their locality, remember that those erections are but conducive to weakness. Let these brethren compare the last year’s results of their own labors with those of the Baptists generally, and they will find room to praise God for a more excellent way and for far superior, if not for fully satisfactory results. They will at least see enough to shew that they are in the right way and have ground for much hopefulness. [447]
[Volume I: June, 1864.]
Return to Lard’s Quarterly index.