EX LIBRIS 
 
 BRUCE GOTTEN 
 
 COLLECTION 
 
 OF 
 
 NORTH CAROLINIANA 
 
 :i\r\:rj'y^^ T 
 
DISTINCTIVE 
 
 BAPTIST PRINCIPLES: 
 
 A SERMON 
 
 DELIVERED BEFORE THE WESTERN BAPTIST CONVENTION 
 OF NORTH CAROLINA, AT ENON CHURCH, TRANSYL- 
 VANIA COUNTY, OCTOBER 20TH, 1883. 
 
 PUBLISHED BY REQUEST OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 By JOSEPH E. CARTER. 
 
 " We afe His witnesses of these things." — Acts 5:32. 
 
 RALEIGH: 
 
 EDWARDS, BROUGHTON & CO., PRINTERS AND BINDERS. 
 
 1883. 
 
NOTE. 
 
 It is thought best not to encumber these pages with 
 marginal references to chapter and page of such quota- 
 tions as are made. The author holds himself in readiness 
 and will furnish, if desired, to any candid inquirer, the book 
 and page from which he quotes. Mention of the names of cer- 
 tain religious denominations is made, not to bring them con- 
 spicuously or unpleasantly before the reader, but simply to 
 make known the ecclesiastical complexion of those to whom 
 such reference is made. 
 
 Hendersonville, N. C, Oct. 30th, 18S3. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 Introduction . . 5 
 
 I. The Bible alone the Authority for all Faith and 
 
 Practice 8 
 
 II. Private Interpretation of the Scriptures 13 
 
 III. Religious Liberty 14 
 
 IV. Church Independency 18 
 
 V. Church membership to none but the Converted 23 
 
 VI. The Baptism of Believers only 26 
 
 VII. Immersion only is Baptism 29 
 
 VIII. Restricted Communion - 37 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 What do we mean by Distinctive Baptist 
 Principles ? We mean those principles of re- 
 ligious belief which have distinguished Bap- 
 tists from those of alt other ecclesiastical per- 
 suasions in the ages past, and which do now 
 distinguish them. But we hear one say that 
 he — and his church he thinks — believes that 
 the "Bible alone is the rule of faith and 
 practice;" another declares that his people 
 believe in "church independency ;" another, 
 that he does not believe in infant baptism 
 and that many of his church are fast giving 
 up the practice; and a third asserts that, in 
 this country in particular, all religious de- 
 nominations are as much in favor of religious 
 liberty as the Baptists themselves. To the 
 first respondent the answer is that he may 
 believe in the "Bible alone "as a rule of faith 
 and practice, but, perhaps, if he will investi- 
 gate he will find that his church does not, 
 and that when the test comes, what is known 
 as " Church Authority " is resorted to, as well 
 
b INTRODUCTION. 
 
 as the Bible, in the matters of the faith and 
 practice of his people. To the other re 
 spondents let it be said, the very fact that re- 
 ligious denominations have sprung up in 
 these latter days, who have espoused some of 
 the distinctive principles of Baptists, makes 
 a good showing for the Baptists' side. 
 Still better is it to know that some of them 
 have dropped, now and then, one and another 
 of the old errors against which Baptists have 
 always contended ; and better still to believe 
 that the influence of Baptist principles is 
 gradually bringing the world to the truth, 
 and that these principles are, in God's own 
 way and time, destined to conquer the whole 
 earth. Be it known that there were times, 
 in the past, when the principles set forth in 
 these pages were held by no people on earth 
 but the Baptists. Because some of them are 
 now held by others, it is no less true that 
 they are Distinctive Baptist Principles. 
 
Distinctive Baptist Principles. 
 
 We are His ivitnesses of these things. — Acts 5:32. 
 
 No one should undertake to set forth the 
 faith and practice of Baptists who will not do 
 it in a kind and Christian spirit. Asperity in 
 controversy on religious subjects, rather than 
 closing, generally widens the breach between 
 those who differ on such questions. When- 
 ever a religious teacher undertakes to con- 
 vince those who are not of his faith, of the 
 truthfulness of his own doctrines, he errs to 
 no little degree when he fails to observe this. 
 
 I trust that I am before you, on this oc- 
 casion, with this spirit. Should I fail in the 
 good intention, it will not be because that 
 good intent is now wanting. 
 
 Should I be pardoned for expressing my 
 feelings personally in this connection, I will 
 substitute as my own, the words of the great 
 and good Alexander Carson, with which he 
 prefaced his great work on Baptism : "I 
 hold myself as much under the law of God 
 in embracing all the children of Grod, as in 
 
8 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 forming the articles of my creed. My recog- 
 nition of all Christians, I found upon the 
 authority of Jesus. To set at naught the 
 weakest of Christ's little ones, I call not illib- 
 eral, but unchristian." 
 
 While this is true, we must claim our right 
 and privilege of setting forth those views of 
 Scripture truth which have distinguished 
 Baptists from all other denominations of 
 professing Christians in the past ages, and 
 which, to-day, are more or less the lines of 
 separation between our people and those of 
 all the world beside. 
 
 I. The Bible Alone the Authority for all Faith and 
 Practice. 
 
 Baptists have been distinguished in all 
 their history as having no creeds, catechisms 
 or decretals which bind them by authority. 
 
 Our churches usually have " Articles of 
 Faith," which are simple statements of what 
 they believe the Bible teaches. These, how- 
 ever, have not been put forth by an ecclesi- 
 astical authority which is over the churches, 
 or which binds the consciences of its mem- 
 bers. Some of our churches have no such 
 " articles," because they find no need for 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 9 
 
 them, referring, whenever called on, to the 
 New Testament as their rule of faith and 
 practice. 
 
 What danger threatens the least depar- 
 ture from this principle? History testifies be- 
 yond all doubt and cavil, that, by the use of 
 tradition and adherence to the syllabi of 
 Popes, the decrees of councils and synods, 
 the acts of civil government — when the 
 King is called " defender of the faith," and 
 such like — the world has been deluged with 
 false doctrines. 
 
 In this connection there is something re- 
 markable, that those " Fathers " of the early 
 centuries from whom false teachers so often 
 quote in latter days, were themselves op- 
 posed to tradition, and consequently held 
 our views on this particular subject. 
 
 Cyprian, a Latin Father of the third cen- 
 tury, said : " God has testified that we are to 
 do those things that are written; whence 
 have you that tradition? If it be in the 
 Gospels or the Epistles, then let us observe it." 
 
 Cyril, of the fourth century, said : " It be- 
 hooveth us not to believe the very least 
 thing of the sacred mysteries of faith with- 
 out the Holy Scriptures." 
 
10 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Jerome, of the fifth century, declared : 
 " Those things which without the authority 
 and testimony of the Scriptures, men invent 
 of their own heads, as from Apostolic tradi- 
 tions, are smitten of God." 
 
 You could not better put the views of the 
 Baptists on this question than, in the lan- 
 guage of one of the olden time martyrs, who 
 said : " I had rather follow the shadow of 
 Christ than the body of all the general coun- 
 cils or doctors since the death of Christ." 
 
 This is not the time to refer, more than in- 
 cidentally, to the great evils which have 
 grown out of a practice, contrary to Baptist 
 principles, upon this subject. It will be 
 enough to refer to the facts that the Jews 
 encumbered the written law of God with 
 their traditions, and filled their land with 
 false doctrines ; that since Christ came and 
 fulfilled the written law, the earth has been 
 flooded with the false teachings of tradition, 
 and of the decrees of great ecclesiastical 
 bodies who have assumed authority to de- 
 clare what are the doctrines of God's Word. 
 
 The words of the distinguished William 
 Jay, who was not a Baptist, are very forci- 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 11 
 
 ble in this connection. He says: "A Jew 
 admits the Scriptures of the Old Testament 
 to be of God, and could you lead him to 
 these only, you might easily convert him to 
 Christianity. But in his case they are sur- 
 rounded with Talmudical and Rabbinical 
 appendages, the errors, falsehoods, follies 
 and absurdities of which can scarcely be 
 conceived. These render Moses and the 
 Prophets almost inaccessible, or pervert their 
 meaning; and little can be done unless 
 you separate the vile from the precious, 
 and lead them at once to the law and 
 the testimony. A Papist admits the Scrip- 
 tures of both the Old and New Testament to 
 be divine; and could you contend with him 
 upon this ground only, a victory would be 
 easily obtained. But he admits, along with 
 these, the Apocrypha, tradition, the decrees 
 of councils, and the word of truth is ap- 
 proached, if not through these, yet in full 
 company w 7 ith them, and can only " speak 
 as they approve. And there are Protestants 
 who invite you into the temple of Revela- 
 tion, but you must enter leaning on Calvin, 
 or Arminius, or some other interpreter, who 
 is to tell you how the responses of the sacred 
 
12 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 oracles are to be taken, for you cannot be 
 trusted alone." 
 
 Note this sentence : " Hence articles and 
 creeds and s}^stems are drawn up by fallible 
 men, who have no other sources of informa- 
 tion than ourselves, and these are to be taken 
 as including all the faith once delivered to 
 the saints." 
 
 It has been a wonder to those who are not 
 Baptists, to know what a united people 
 they have been upon Scripture doctrines in 
 all ages of the world. And also the greatest 
 wonder, that while they have had so many 
 of the plain and unlearned people with 
 them, they have preserved the doctrines of 
 God's Word, and have held it in such purity 
 up to the present day. The question has 
 been asked us : " How can you ascribe this 
 more perfect knowledge of the Word of God 
 to yourselves?" And the answer has been, 
 " Our fathers were, for the most part, plain, 
 unlearned men. Having nowhere else to 
 look, they looked up in humility to the Holy 
 Spirit to teach them the meaning of the 
 Word of God. They had no learned au- 
 thorities to lead them astray. They min- 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 13 
 
 gled in no aristocratic circles whose over- 
 whelming public sentiment might crush the 
 first buddings of earnest and honest inquiry. 
 As little children, they took up the Bible, 
 supposing it to mean just what it said, and 
 willing to practice whatever it taught. Thus 
 they arrived at truth which escaped the 
 notice of the learned and the intellectually 
 mighty." 
 
 II. Private Interpretation of the Scriptures. 
 
 This is a part of our faith which neces- 
 sarily grows out of the principle which we 
 have just discussed. And as it involves 
 much which the other question compre- 
 hends, we need not dwell at length upon it. 
 Let us be careful to understand what we 
 mean by " private interpretation of the Scrip- 
 tures." We do not mean that men are at 
 liberty to think of the Bible what they 
 please, and obey or disobey its precepts as 
 they choose. But that each man is bound to 
 use his judgment, and to govern it accord- 
 ing to the teaching of the Bible as he un- 
 derstands it. The right to investigate the 
 truth for himself does not carry with it the 
 right to disobey it or to doubt it. God gives 
 
14 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 every man the right to interpret his Word 
 for himself, and then to act upon it from an 
 honest conviction. No general church coun- 
 cil can come in and interpret it, and dictate 
 it to him. 
 
 A cardinal principal with Baptists is, that a 
 man is responsible to God, and to God only, 
 for his faith and practice, and not responsi- 
 ble to Popes or councils, or decrees, or eccle- 
 siastical " standards," or to civil govern- 
 ments. If he errs and mistakes in his un- 
 derstanding of God's Word, there is no 
 power to force or compel him to renounce 
 his errors, or to punish him for not con 
 forming to an established creed, although 
 heretics may and should be excluded from 
 the Churches of Jesus Christ for holding 
 false doctrine. 
 
 III. Religious Liberty. 
 From the second principle, just an- 
 nounced, grows a third, which has been, 
 and is to-day, in a great measure a distin- 
 guishing principle of Baptists — Religious 
 Liberty. Because this foundation principle 
 of Baptist faith was not held by those who 
 were in control of ecclesiastic and civil gov- 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 15 
 
 ernment, the world has witnessed in the 
 centuries past, and history has written indel- 
 ibly upon its pages, the disastrous effects of 
 the false idea that the cause of religion de- 
 mands what is known as a union of Church 
 and State. 
 
 The Greek, Lutheran, Reformed, Presby- 
 terian, Congregational, Episcopalian, as 
 well as the Roman Catholic, and every 
 other Church organized previous to the 
 eighteenth century, were governed upon 
 the principle that the State governments 
 should by taxation or otherwise, support 
 the church, and should enact laws to pun- 
 ish those who would not adopt the State re- 
 ligion, and should otherwise exercise au- 
 thority and control with the church. As a 
 striking and illustrious example, witness the 
 celebrated Concordat which was concluded 
 between the great Napoleon and the Pope, 
 in 1801. Some of its provisions were: 
 
 " That Bishops shall be named by the 
 First Consul and instituted canonically by 
 the Pope ; and that before entering on their 
 functions they shall take an oath of fidelity 
 to the Republic of France ; and that Bish- 
 ops are to nominate the under clergy ; but 
 
16 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 these nominations shall not take effect until 
 approved by the government." 
 
 Baptists have fought this monstrous error 
 and evil wherever their feet have trodden 
 this earth. Those who are not of them tes- 
 tify that Baptists have been the champions 
 of Liberty of Conscience, the boon and boast 
 of the Nineteenth Century. 
 
 In all countries and among all people, 
 wherever the civil arm has been raised to 
 cramp the conscience in matters of religion, 
 Baptists have said : " We are free-born" as 
 Paul declared when he asserted his Roman 
 citizenship. They have looked into the faces 
 of kings and parliaments, and responded to 
 the edicts of rulers and councils, with the 
 flames of persecution looking them in the 
 face, Whether it be right in the sight of God to 
 hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye, 
 for we cannot but speak the things which we have 
 seen and heard. 
 
 When the great reformation broke upon 
 the world in the sixteenth century, it did not 
 throw off this terrible scourge. Luther him- 
 self scouted the doctrines of religious liberty, 
 at that time announced by the despised 
 Baptists. " Had Baptists then been listened 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 17 
 
 to," says one of our able thinkers, " the Ref- 
 ormation would have swept all Europe." 
 Freedom of conscience was not accepted by 
 any of the leaders of the Reformed churches. 
 Its only defenders were those persecuted and 
 maligned Baptists. 
 
 The first published confession of faith in 
 all ages asserting the right of all men to re- 
 ligious liberty was by the Baptists of England 
 in A. D. 1611. 
 
 What Baptists have done and suffered for 
 these principles in America, is told by the 
 history of the Colonial days; by the old jails 
 of Virginia ; by the whipping posts of Mas- 
 sachusetts; by the fines and imprisonments 
 of the courts of law; when, like the "royal 
 people" from whom they have descended, 
 they wandered about in sheepskins and goat- 
 skins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented; of 
 whom the world was not worthy. 
 
 Gen. Washington, John Locke, Judge 
 Story, Chevalier Bunsen, George Bancroft 
 and a host of others, patriots, statesmen, 
 philosophers and historians have left their 
 record on the pages of history as to this great 
 distinguishing principle of Baptists, and as 
 to their grand achievements for the soul lib- 
 
18 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 erty of the world. The glory of all this is 
 that while this boon is now so prized over 
 great portions of the earth, and while many 
 other religious denominations are the advo- 
 cates of it as much as we are, we are free to 
 confess, it is nevertheless the outgrowth of 
 Baptist principles, and to those principles the 
 world is indebted for its existence to-day. 
 IT. Church Independency. 
 
 No principle has more distinctly marked 
 a difference between Baptists and other per- 
 suasions of Christians than that of the inde- 
 pendency of the churches. 
 
 There can be no such thing as "the Bap- 
 tist Church of England" or the Baptist 
 Church of America, or of any other nation 
 or country. Baptist churches may be any 
 and everywhere, but such a thing as a gen- 
 eral church, as is the nature of other Chris- 
 tian denominations, is simply an impossi- 
 bility with Baptists. 
 
 With us each church or congregation is 
 entirely independent of each other, in all 
 that concerns its government. Each church 
 calls its own minister and other officers, re- 
 ceives and dismisses or excludes its own 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES 19 
 
 members, makes its own rules for its govern- 
 ment and is a sovereign under Christ as its 
 head throughout. 
 
 Our churches, of their own accord, organ- 
 ize into associations, conventions and such 
 like, but these are only for fraternal and 
 missionary purposes. 
 
 Such a thing as a Convocation, Council, 
 Synod or Conference clothed with legislative, 
 judicial or executive powers, would be an un- 
 heard of thing as well as an utter impossi- 
 bility among Baptists. 
 
 Our position on this is based on many 
 teachings of Scripture. We find Jesus in 
 the 18th chapter of Matthew, and Paul in 
 the 5th chapter of 1st Corinthians, laying 
 down the principles upon which the indi- 
 vidual church is to act in matters of cor- 
 rective discipline. In both these instances 
 the whole church is the body which is to act, 
 and the body to whom final appeal is to be 
 made. 
 
 When the question of the bearing of cir- 
 cumcision upon the converts to Christianity 
 was to be settled, and wise heads were to be 
 consulted, after the apostles and elders came 
 together at Jerusalem with the church to 
 
20 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 consider the matter, we are told that the de 
 cision was by the " apostles and elders and 
 the whole church." Even here the indepen- 
 dent church sent its letter of advice to the 
 church in Antioch in connection with the 
 advice and counsel of the apostles and elders. 
 
 Paul tells the Romans of the character of 
 a church of Christ when he shows it to be a 
 body made up of many members, putting 
 the prophet, the exhorter and others all on 
 the same level. 
 
 There were no bishops or councils or as- 
 semblies to govern the church at Corinth, 
 for some of them wanted to follow Paul, 
 some Peter and some Apollos. 
 
 The independent church government of 
 the Galatians is seen when the apostle ex- 
 horts them to "restore" any who might be 
 "overtaken in a fault" among their mem- 
 bership. 
 
 No one then, need be surprised that Mos- 
 heim—a. Lutheran — the celebrated Church 
 historian, speaking of the first century of 
 the Christian Era, should put upon the 
 pages of his standard work the following : 
 " The churches in those early times were 
 entirely independent, none of them being 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 21 
 
 subject to any foreign jurisdiction, but each 
 governed by its own rulers and its own laws ; 
 for, though the churches founded by the 
 apostles had this particular deference shown 
 to them, that they were consulted in diffi- 
 cult and doubtful cases, yet they had no 
 judicial authority— no sort of supremacy — 
 over others, nor the least right to enact laws 
 for them." Observe how, in another chap- 
 ter, he shows the origin of the centralizing 
 power, and how it went to seed in the out- 
 come of the first Pope of Rome: "These 
 councils, of which we find not the smallest 
 trace before the middle of this (the second) 
 century, changed the whole face of the 
 Church, and gave it a new form ; for by them 
 the ancient privileges of the people were 
 considerably diminished, and the power 
 and authority of the bishops greatly aug- 
 mented. The humility, indeed, and pru- 
 dence of these pious prelates prevented their 
 assuming, all at once, the power with which 
 they were afterward invested. At their first 
 appearance in these general councils they 
 acknowledged that they were no more than 
 the delegates of their respective churches, 
 and they acted in the name and by the ap- 
 
22 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 pointuient of their people. But they soon 
 changed this humble tone, imperceptibly 
 extended the limits of their authority, turned 
 their influence into dominion and their 
 counsels into laws, and openly asserted, at 
 length, that Christ had empowered them to 
 prescribe to his people authoritative rules of 
 faith and manners. 
 
 " Another effect of these councils was the 
 gradual abolition of that perfect equality 
 which reigned among all bishops in the 
 primitive times. * * * In the mean- 
 time the bounds of the Church were en- 
 larged, * * * and the universal 
 Church had now the appearance of one 
 vast republic, formed by a combination of a 
 great number of little states. This occa- 
 sioned the creation of a new order of eccle- 
 siastics, who were appointed, in different 
 parts of the world, as heads of the Church. 
 * * * At length, ambition, having 
 reached its most insolent period, formed a 
 a new dignity, investing the bishop of Rome 
 and his successors with the title and author- 
 ity of Prince of the Patriarchs." 
 
 Had Baptist principles been maintained 
 and the New Testament church govern- 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 23 
 
 merit thus preserved, the world would never 
 have witnessed theencroachmentson church 
 independency and the "lording it over 
 God's heritage " by bishops and popes and 
 ecclesiastical councils, such as the history of 
 the past and exhibits of the present display. 
 
 V. Church Membership to none but the Converted. 
 
 No less do Baptists show their distinct 
 line of difference from others than in their 
 great distinguishing doctrine of the spirit- 
 ual nature of the churches. No person is 
 qualified to be a member of a Baptist Church 
 who is not regenerated by the Holy Spirit. 
 At least that person must profess to have 
 found the pardon of sins by faith in the 
 Lord Jesus Christ. We baptize one, not 
 in order that his sins may be remitted, but 
 because he professes that those sins are al- 
 ready remitted. We can find no precept or 
 example anywhere in God's word where any 
 but those who were convicted of sin and born 
 again were considered eligible to church 
 membership. The commission we have, 
 is : " Go ye into all the world and preach the 
 gospel to every creature ; he that believeth and 
 is baptized shall be saved, but he that be- 
 
24 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 lievetb not shall be damned." Those after 
 whom Baptists feel they should look for 
 church members are those who, after they 
 are made disciples, can be taught " to ob- 
 serve all things whatsoever" Christ has "coru- 
 manded." Unless this great principle of 
 ours is adhered to, membership in the 
 churches must be made by baptismal regen- 
 eration or by hereditary membership. In 
 such cases, a jumble and confusion of in- 
 consistent and contradictory doctrines oc- 
 curs, which bewilder the mind. It has al- 
 ready set the whole Pedobaptist world in a 
 muddle. In the times of President Ed- 
 wards, in our country, quite a hitch was 
 brought about in New England. The chil- 
 dren of those who were church members and 
 the children of those who were not church 
 members were admitted to membership by 
 infant baptism. Then persons who had 
 been baptized and were of moral life and de- 
 sired to be converted were admitted to the 
 church ; so that it was expected that every 
 respectable man in the town would join the 
 church. It was said that at that time, 
 among the Reformed Dutch Churches of 
 this country, " every young man at the age 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 25 
 
 of twenty-one was married and joined the 
 church as a matter of course." 
 
 It is well known that the Quakers of the 
 United States, who claimed so much for the 
 spirituality of their Church, have just about 
 been rent in twain by getting their churches 
 filled with hereditary members, who never 
 knew what it was to experiencj the grace of 
 God in the heart. 
 
 If you could draw infant baptism aside 
 for awhile, this great truth of the Baptists 
 w T ould shine more clearly, even in the 
 churches of those who so widely differ with 
 us. 
 
 Dr. Lyman Beecher, one of the great men 
 among the Congregationalists, in a public 
 meeting said : " The requisite qualifications 
 for membership in a church of Christ are, 
 personal holiness in the sight of God and a 
 credible profession of holiness before men." 
 At this another minister arose, and was 
 heard to say : " If you deny the church mem- 
 bership of baptized infants your Baptist breth- 
 ren have you on the hip" 
 
 In the articles of faith of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church, it is said that " the visi- 
 ble Church of Christ is a congregation of 
 
26 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 faithful (meaning converted) men," and vet 
 the creed of that Church requires that " the 
 baptism of young children be retained in the 
 Church." 
 
 VI. The Baptism of Belierers only. 
 
 Baptists believe honestly, and with all due 
 deference to the opinions of others, that an 
 infant cannot discern the object and mean- 
 ing of the Lord's Baptiain any more than it 
 can the Lord's Supper, and that consequently 
 the infant is not a subject for either ordi- 
 nance. They believe that there is no pre- 
 cept or example for infant baptism in the 
 word of God from the book of Genesis to the 
 book of Revelation. They believe that in- 
 fant baptism is an outgrowth of the views 
 of baptismal regeneration which obtained in 
 the early centuries of the Christian era. 
 They hold that the traditions of men in con- 
 nection with those false views of the design of 
 baptism are the foundation stones on which 
 infant baptism is built. They believe that 
 infant baptism necessarily demands infant 
 membership, and that infant membership 
 destroys the spirituality of the church. They 
 further believe that a church formed in part 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 27 
 
 of those baptized in infancy has produced 
 an unconverted and ungodly membership 
 which has allied itself with the State, has 
 torn from the people their religious liberty 
 and lighted the fires of persecution in dif- 
 ferent parts of the world. 
 
 These and other things honestly believed 
 by them on this subject, they feel can be sus- 
 tained by the word of God and the pages of 
 history. 
 
 To their support on this question men of 
 ripe scholarship and piety are fast flocking 
 in different parts of the world, those, too, 
 who are not Baptists and never expect to be. 
 
 A Pedobaptist writer of great distinction 
 has said in a published essay, "Scripture 
 knows nothing of the baptism of infants. There 
 is absolutely not a single trace of it to be found 
 in the New Testament." 
 
 One of the great scholars of this century, 
 a native and resident of Europe, who is also 
 not a Baptist, has said : " Would the Protestant 
 church fulfill and attain to its final destiny the 
 baptism of infants must of necessity be abolished." 
 
 Dr. Jacobi, a pupil of Neander, said, "In- 
 fant baptism was introduced neither by 
 Christ nor his apostles. * * * Now, how- 
 
28 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 ever, that infant baptism has been intro- 
 duced it is best that it should be retained." 
 
 Rev. A. T. Bledsoe, one of the distin- 
 guished men of the Southern Methodist pul- 
 pit, said in the Methodist Quarterly Review a 
 few years ago: "It is an article of our 
 faith that the baptism of young children 
 (infants) is to be retained in the church as 
 most agreeable to the institutions of Christ. 
 But yet, with all our searching, we have 
 been unable to find in the New Testament a 
 single express declaration or word in favor 
 of infant baptism. We justify the right, 
 therefore, solely on the ground of logical in- 
 ference, and not on any express word of 
 Christ and his apostles." 
 
 One of the latest candid confessions of 
 this sort has been made by an English 
 Churchman, the Bishop of Salisbury. He 
 says: "I must candidly and broadly state 
 my conviction that there is not one passage 
 nor one word in Scripture which directly 
 proves it, not one word the undeniable and 
 logical power of which can be adduced to 
 prove, either in any way of fact, that in the 
 scriptural age, infants were baptized, or of 
 doctrine that they oughtto be baptized. 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 29 
 
 Nor I believe is there any such direct state- 
 ment to be found in any writings of the 
 fathers of the church before the latter end 
 of the second century after Christ." 
 
 Baptists are so strenuous in their oppo 
 sition to infant baptism because they know 
 there are precepts, examples and commands 
 in the Bible in favor of believer's baptism 
 and none in favor of infant baptism, and 
 that the tendency of infant baptism is to 
 supplant believer's baptism, and banish it from 
 the world, since the universal baptism of in- 
 fants would leave none to be baptized upon 
 becoming believers. 
 
 They appeal to church history without 
 fear of failure, to prove that nothing but 
 believer's baptism was known for more than 
 two hundred years after Christ, as the Bishop 
 of Salisbury has testified. And they are 
 equally as sure that infant baptism did not 
 begin until baptism began to be regarded as 
 essential to salvation. 
 
 VII. Immersion only is Baptism. 
 
 Baptists believe that the immersion of a 
 believer in water, into the name of the 
 Father, Son and Holy Ghost is absolutely 
 
30 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 essential to the performance of a valid act of 
 baptism, and that the use of water in any 
 other way, as a sacred rite, is without the 
 sanction of the Scriptures. Among our 
 many reasons for this will be found : 1. The 
 meaning of the original Greek word ; 2. The 
 example of Christ; 3. The practice of the 
 apostles and early churches ; 4. The truths 
 taught by baptism as a symbol ; 5. The al- 
 most uuiversal consent of the scholarship of 
 the world ; 6. The concessions of those who 
 practice otherwise ; and 7. That immersion 
 was the practice of all the churches until the 
 thirteenth century. These, all, compel to 
 our position and leave on our minds not a 
 trace of doubt that we are right, and that 
 our position is simply impregnable. As we 
 read the history of the past we understand 
 that the original ordinance was first changed 
 in the third century, by pouring water over 
 a sick man, lest he die without baptism ; 
 that then they poured the water over him 
 so copiously that it icas looked upon as a substi- 
 tute for immersion. The same history tells 
 us, in the light in which we read it, that 
 after the sick man was thus baptized an 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 31 
 
 effort set in to substitute " pouring and 
 sprinkling" for the good old way, but that 
 it was long withstood by both Popes and 
 councils; that it gained in popularity through 
 the dark ages, and that in the thirteenth 
 century the Pope finally yielded to the pop- 
 ular clamor and authorized sprinkling in all 
 cases. We also know that since thos^ days, 
 even down to this day regret after regret has 
 been expressed by good and great men that 
 the " old mode " was ever changed. We 
 also know that the representatives of the 
 Roman Catholic Church will tell any one 
 who inquires of them now that immersion is 
 the real meaning of the word, and that im- 
 mersion was the original way of performing 
 the rite, but that "the Church, in Her wisdom, 
 saw fit to change the mode, and that this 
 she had a right to cfo." We also learn from 
 the pages of history that the great Luther 
 insisted on a return to the old mode, offer- 
 ing as an argument that " baptism is a Greek 
 word and may be translated immersion, as 
 when we immerse something in water, that 
 it -may be wholly covered. And, although 
 it is almost wholly abolished (for they do not 
 
32 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 dip the whole child, but only pour a little 
 water on it), they ought, nevertheless, to be 
 wholly immersed, * * for 
 
 that the etymology of the word seems to de- 
 mand." Baptists know that the scholarship 
 of the Church of England, at this time, is 
 almost altogether united in the belief that 
 New Testament baptism was immersion 
 only, notwithstanding their practices to the 
 contrary. 
 
 Upon the fundamental doctrines of Bap- 
 tists' belief, they cannot find place for any- 
 thing else than immersion Their doctrine 
 of a converted church membership, and the 
 profession which the converted member 
 makes when he is. baptized, binds them 
 against anything else. We believe that in 
 the act of baptism the believer symbolizes 
 his spiritual death and his spiritual resur- 
 rection ; that he also symbolizes his total 
 defilement and his total purification ; 
 and, in addition to this, we believe that the 
 same act of baptism symbolizes the power 
 and the agent by which he receives his 
 cleansing and his new life. And this we be- 
 lieve because we have in our New Testament 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 33 
 
 a book called "Romans," and in that book 
 a chapter, and in that chapter verses, which 
 are as follows : " Know ye not that so many 
 of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were 
 baptized into his death? Therefore we are 
 buried with him by baptism into death, 
 that like as Christ was raised up from the 
 dead by the glory of the Father, even so we 
 also should walk in newness of life." 
 
 This beautiful and striking symbolism of 
 baptism has impressed itself on the minds 
 of reading and thinking men, in all ages of 
 the world. As late a writer as the distin- 
 guished Dr. Philip Schaff, who is not a Bap- 
 tist, tells us how any other view of this 
 Scripture than immersion obscures the 
 meaning and destroys the whole beauty of 
 its speaking symbolism. And this is but a 
 re echo of the old writers in the first centu- 
 ries. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, in the 
 fourth century, said : " For as Jesus assum- 
 ing the sins of the world died that, having 
 slain sin, he might raise thee up in right- 
 eousness ; so also thou, going down into the 
 water, and in a manner buried in the waters, 
 
34 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 as he in the rock, art raised again, walking 
 in newness of life." - 
 
 Baptists believe that Christ intended, in 
 the institution of this ordinance, to show 
 forth in symbol these great fundamental 
 truths of Grace, just as he symbolized 
 other truths in the Lord's Supper. They be- 
 lieve that this ordinance of the Lord's 
 House is so simple that the " wayfaring " 
 may not err in the way; and they hon- 
 estly feel that the errors which have sprung 
 up, and are conscientiously believed by 
 many now, are on account of the uprising 
 of false doctrines ; that, with the New Tes- 
 tament only in one's hand, no one would 
 ever make a mistake about the " mode " of 
 baptism. 
 
 Baptists believe that baptism is one of 
 those simple teachings of Jesus, which is 
 easily understood, both in the precept and 
 the example. They join Mr. Albert Barnes, 
 one of the most superior of Pedobaptist com- 
 mentators, when he says, speaking of bap- 
 tism : 
 
 "If it were an element or first principle of 
 religion — if it were presumed that any one 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 35 
 
 who entered the church could understand 
 it — can it be believed that it was then so 
 perplexing and embarrassing as it is often 
 made now? Can it be believed that a vast ar- 
 ray of learning, and a knowledge of languages, 
 and a careful inquiry into the customs of ancient 
 times were needful in order that a candidate for 
 baptism should understand it f " 
 
 Baptists could not more strongly speak on 
 this line than this able commentator has. 
 They asked a similar question a few years 
 ago with double emphasis, when Dr. Dale, 
 the distinguished Presbyterian brother of 
 Mr. Barnes, wrote his "four ponderous vol- 
 umes," entitled "Judaic Baptism," " Johannic 
 Baptism" "Classic Baptism," and "Christian 
 Baptism," all to convince the world at large 
 that immersion is not the baptism of the New 
 Testament. 
 
 What an impression is made in witness- 
 ing the baptism of a believer, especially on 
 one who understands its symbolic import! 
 A new convert, fresh in his first love, may 
 tell us of his putting off the " old man " and 
 putting on the " new man ;" of what Christ 
 has done for him, and of what he expects to 
 
36 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 do for Christ; of his buried sins and of his 
 resurrection hopes ; but when we see him, 
 silently going down into the water, his hands 
 folded across his breast, in the image of 
 death, while his body passes under the wa- 
 ter of his liquid tomb ; and when we see him 
 rise from the flood, the water dripping from 
 his garments, as the cerements of the grave 
 are to fall away in the " morning of the res- 
 urrection," then He speaks to us in eloquent 
 language, which can be understood in all 
 the tongues of the peoples of the whole earth, 
 which cannot change with the flight of 
 years, and which " no oratory can rival." 
 For this, as for other reasons, Baptists will 
 " go down into the water," and they will 
 " come up out of the water " until Jesus shall 
 greet them in the glories of his Second 
 Coming. 
 
 Who ever heard of a person who left a 
 Baptist church to join any other because of 
 dissatisfaction with his baptism? Whoever 
 heard of a person living in the fellowship 
 of a Baptist church and in mortal misery for 
 fear he had not been properly baptized ? 
 Who ever found a church, of any religious 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 37 
 
 persuasion, which would not accept immer- 
 sion for valid baptism ? Where was a Bap- 
 tist church ever found which would not 
 willingly say to an inquirer for the way of 
 baptism, " Take the New Testament and see for 
 yourself.'' 1 
 
 Till. Restricted Communion. 
 
 What is commonly known as "close com- 
 munion " is a subject on which Baptists are 
 more grieviously misrepresented, more un- 
 charitably thought of, and more severely 
 spoken against, than all things else. Some- 
 times the most scathing words of denuncia- 
 tion are spoken against us, and the most 
 unkind references to bigotry and Phariseeism 
 are hurled at us with unsparing tongues. 
 This is done, too, we honestly believe, by 
 some who, were they to listen long enough 
 to understand our views, would respect us for 
 our integrity and self-consistency rather 
 than denounce us so bitterly. 
 
 Baptists hold, as a fundamental article of 
 belief on the question of the Lord's Supper, 
 the same as is held by the great body of those 
 we call "evangelical churches." That is, that 
 
38 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 the Supper is to be administered only to those 
 who have professed conversion and have 
 been baptized.- We have n© idea that the 
 Supper or the act of baptism has anything 
 to do with the bestowment of " sacramental " 
 grace from God. These two ordinances, ac- 
 cording to our faith, have equal authority, 
 are of equal benefit, and are both symboli- 
 cal in their nature. Baptism, to us, preaches 
 Christ's burial and resurrection, and the 
 Supper " shows forth " the Lord's death " till 
 he come." 
 
 We do not believe that a place together at 
 the Lord's table is the test of Christian char- 
 acter, but that regeneration is that test. A 
 true Baptist believes that there are thousands 
 and tens of thousands of converted men and 
 women in all the various religious denomi- 
 nations, many of them, it may be, better 
 men than he is. On this account it is a 
 great injustice to a Baptist to say that he 
 " unchristianizes " those whom he does not 
 welcome to the Lord's table. According to 
 our faith we neither christianize a Baptist 
 when we sit down with him to the table — for 
 there are many Baptists who partake of the 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 39 
 
 supper unworthy of their name — neither do 
 we unchristianize those with whom we will 
 not sit down. Christian unity is what God's 
 Word calls "unity of the faith," and not 
 unity of the table. 
 
 >i But, we are told, the world's great preacher, 
 Mr." Charles Spurgeon, is an open com- 
 munionist, and that there are many followers 
 of Robert Hall and other open communion 
 Baptists in England now. This is true, but 
 it is not against us, as far as argument is con- 
 cerned, nor is it in favor of the side of our 
 Pedobaptist friends. Because the open com- 
 munion Baptists defend their practice on 
 grounds that both ourselves and our Pedo- 
 baptist friends reject, namely, that baptism is 
 not prerequisite to the Lord's Supper. While 
 we deplore the existence, among a few Bap- 
 tists, of open communionism— a very few, 
 however— who need be surprised that in our 
 denomination, numbered by millions over 
 the world, there should not be, at sometime, 
 a difference of opinion ? We feel sure that 
 those few Baptists are wrong in the principle 
 on which they defend themselves, because 
 we have our great denomination almost a 
 
40 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 unit upon the question of the principle, and 
 almost the whole Pedobaptist world agreeing, 
 also, with us. That I ma} 7 not be rash, but 
 speak to the record, I quote from the Inte- 
 rior, an able Presbyterian organ, published 
 in Chicago: "Close communion, in our 
 judgment, is a more defensible position than 
 open communion which is justified on the 
 ground that baptism is not prerequisite to the 
 partaking of the Lord's Supper." He is 
 right. It is clear that the grounds of defence 
 of the few open commuuion Baptists proves 
 too much for our Pedobaptist friends. 
 
 The testimony of our open communion 
 friends, that the unbaptized have no Scriptu- 
 ral right to sit down at the Lord's table is 
 voluminous. We select some. Dr. Wall, of 
 the Church of England, in his " Histoiy of 
 Infant Baptism," says : "No church ever gave 
 the communion to any persons before they 
 were baptized. Among all the absurdities 
 that ever were held, none ever maintained 
 that any persons should partake of the com- 
 munion before they were baptized." 
 
 Dr. Doddridge, Independent, says : " As far 
 as our knowledge of primitive antiquity 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 41 
 
 extends, no unbaptized persons receive the 
 Lord's Supper," 
 
 Dr. D. E. Griffin, claimed by both Presby- 
 terians and Congregationalists as one of 
 their great men, says : " I agree with the ad- 
 vocates of close communion in two points: 
 ]. That baptism is the initiatory ordinance 
 which introduces us into the visible church ; 
 of course, where there is no baptism there 
 are no visible churches. 2. That we ought 
 not to commune with those that are not 
 baptized, and, of course, are not church 
 members, even if we regard them as Chris- 
 tians. Should a pious Quaker so far depart 
 from his principles as to wish to commune 
 with me at the Lord's table, while he yet re- 
 fuses to be baptized, I could not receive him ; 
 because there is such a relationship estab- 
 lished between the ordinances, that I have 
 no right to separate them. In other words, 
 I have no right to send the sacred elements 
 out of the church. The only question, then, 
 is, whether those associations of Evangelical 
 Christians that call themselves Churches, 
 and practice sprinkling, are real Churches of 
 Christ* in other words, whether baptism by 
 sprinkling is valid baptism." 
 
42 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Dr. Hibbard, good Methodist authority, 
 in his work on "Christian Baptism," says: 
 "Valid baptism, they (Baptists) consider as 
 essential to constitute visible church mem- 
 bership. This also we hold. The only 
 question that here divides us is, what is es- 
 sential to valid baptism?" 
 
 Now, while all the above is admitted by 
 those who are not of us, we poor Baptists are 
 still berated, and have to receive and bear, for 
 truth's sake, hard blow after hard blow, be- 
 cause we do not recognize the baptism of 
 our brethren Who differ with us, and then 
 admit them to the table. We do not pro- 
 pose to argue this phase of the subject here, 
 but to let those who are not Baptists argue 
 it for us. One of the leading minds in the 
 Pedobaptist pulpit of the United States 
 has published these words to the world : 
 
 "A Pedobaptist who believes that bap- 
 tism is a prerequisite to communion has no 
 right to censure the Baptist churches for 
 close communion. On this question there 
 is a great deal of pulling out of motes by 
 people whose own vision is not clear. Their 
 course, on this question, however mistaken, 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 43 
 
 is certainly consistent, and we must yield 
 thetn the respect due to all who adhere 
 firmly to their conscientious convictions." 
 
 The great Presbyterian preacher of New 
 York city, Dr. John Hall, speaking of those 
 who would heap censure on Baptists for being 
 close communionists, says: " It is a course 
 of doubtful catholicity to raise a popular 
 cry against a most valuable body of people, 
 who honestly defend and consistently go 
 through with what they deem an important 
 principle." 
 
 The Chicago Interior, already referred to, 
 says : 
 
 " The difference between our Baptist 
 brethren and ourselves is an important dif- 
 ference. * * * Their views com- 
 pel them to believe that we are not baptized 
 and shut them up to close communion. 
 * * * To chide Baptists with bigotry 
 because they abide by the logical consequences of 
 their system is absurd. We think they are 
 wrong in reference to the mode and subjects 
 of baptism, and should not hesitate to take 
 ground against their interpretation ; but we 
 would not be silent about the interpretation 
 
44 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 and then charge them with bigotry for a 
 consistent adherence to their interpretation.'' 
 
 Conclusion, 
 
 We solemnly believe that God has given 
 Baptists a special mission to uphold and 
 preach their distinctive doctrines, so that, in 
 addition to the other great truths which 
 they propagate, they shall, by maintaining 
 the gospel order of, first, faith, then baptism, 
 and then communion, continually and per- 
 petually bear a solemn protest against infant 
 baptism and against every mode of baptism 
 which does not symbolize burial and resur- 
 rection ; and that they shall, through the sym- 
 bolism of baptism and the Lord's Supper, 
 preach, till the world shall end, that whole 
 gospel which Jesus intends those ordinances 
 of His House shall symbolize. 
 
 As another has said : " We yield to no 
 other denomination in our love for all 
 Christians, and in our desire to unite with 
 them in all Christian labors ; but the honest 
 truth is, we do differ from them in our views 
 of the ordinances of the visible church — not 
 from ignorance, not from bigotry, not from 
 
DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 45 
 
 a spirit of exclusiveness — but because we 
 cannot help understanding our Master Jesus 
 to teach that none but a believer ought 
 to be baptized; that baptism must symbol- 
 ize his death and resurrection, and that bap- 
 tism must precede communion." 
 
 God save us from a spirit of boasting. It 
 is a fact that despite all the contempt and 
 tne charges of " Phariseeism " and " bigotry " 
 which have been put upon Baptists, God 
 has wonderfully honored and blessed them. 
 Notwithstanding in the early history of our 
 country they were few in numbers and were 
 fined, whipped, imprisoned and banished 
 by the persecuting colonies, they now num- 
 ber, in these United States alone, over two 
 million members of as good and true peo- 
 ple, as a class, as ever walked the earth. 
 
 As I began, so I close, with expressions of 
 kindness and good will to the brethren of 
 other religious persuasions. They are, most 
 of them, conscientious and honest in their 
 convictions. Though we believe them to be 
 in error, we respect and esteem them for 
 their love to Christ and for their Christian 
 character. I believe I can speak for every 
 
46 DISTINCTIVE BAPTIST PRINCIPLES. 
 
 true Baptist when I say we love the image 
 of Christ when seen in any feature in a 
 child of God, by whatever name he may 
 be called. We wish them well in their 
 efforts to love and serve our Lord. And we 
 hope to meet them in " That Day," when, 
 as face answereth to face in water, heart 
 shall answer to heart, and we shall cast our 
 crowns before the throne, saying, ii Thou art 
 worthy, Lord, to receive glory, and honor, 
 and power." — Amen. 
 
THE LIBRARY OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF 
 
 NORTH CAROLINA 
 
 THE COLLECTION OF 
 NORTH CAROLINIANA