Wrote Purefoy:
"From a letter written by Elder Stadler, in reply to "A Friend of Truth," now in the possession of Brother C. L. Teague, of Abbot's Creek, we learn the following facts
1. "The missionary board was first organized in the Country Line Association in 1792, on the second day of October; then and there the contributions amounted to thirteen pounds, two shillings, one penny."
2. "It was not long [says Elder Stadler] after [his baptism] before the agent, Elder E. T. Daniell, came round and took up a collection, saying it was to support traveling preachers, &c, and I (Elder Stadler] gave him fifty cents, and my wife gave him twenty-five."
3. Elder Stadler says: "While I was under conviction, Elder Campbell came to Bush Arbor church, and asked for money to print the Bible in other tongues; and I thought my day of grace was gone, and that there was no mercy for me, and if one dollar would pay for printing one Bible, some one might read it, and it might stop them before it was too late."
4. Elder Stadler "went to every church" in the bounds of the Country Line Association, in order to get them to go against missions, &c. —See Brother Teague's letter, in the Biblical Recorder of February 3, 1859. While Elder Stadler was under conviction and thought his own day of grace was gone, he paid one dollar to the Bible Society! Soon after his conversion and baptism he paid fifty cents, for Home Missions, to Elder R. T. Daniell, agent!! Some years after this, he changes his position, and opposes these institutions, and goes from church to church, to induce them to change also! And yet, he now claims that he is "A Primitive Baptist!!" "When was Elder Stadler a Primitive Baptist, when he gave his money to Home Missions, or afterward, when he changed and opposed missions? Elder Stadler and his anti-mission brethren, are evidently the seceding, or New Baptists." (pgs. 55-57)
The same is true with several of the founding fathers of Hardshellism. They once were supporters of mission societies and such things, and then later turned vehemently against them. Osbourn was appointed a missionary. Other Hardshells wanted to be supported as missionaries, and when not chosen, got mad and became an enemy of those missionary organizations, men like Daniel Parker. Elder Wilson Thompson of Ohio was an early supporter of missions, and even had agreed to go and assist fellow minister Isaac McCoy to preach to the Indians in Indiana, but later changed his mind when he had a vision!
Wrote Purefoy:
"While Elder. Stadler and others, were changing and getting up divisions about missions, the Regular or Missionary Baptists went regularly on in support of missions, consequently they are the true "Primitive Baptists." It is a falsification of history, and injustice to the Regular or Missionary Baptists, whenever the Anti-mission Baptists are called the "Old Side" or the "Primitive Baptists." (pg. 57)
Through many years of studying the history of the Hardshell and anti mission schism I have see how true the above statement is. The Hardshells have given a revisionist false history to their people. One of the proofs of this is the fact that none of them are willing to come forward today and show us how missionaries and other such things were entirely new among Baptists of the early 19th century.
Wrote Purefoy:
"The Baltimore Baptist Association, so famous for its anti-missionary character since 1836, was, previous to that date, a missionary association. This will fully appear from a few extracts taken from the minutes of that body. In their minutes for 1811 may be found the following resolution: "Resolved, That this association recommend the following plan to the churches in our connection, viz.: that each church establish a 'mite society,' each member to pay one cent a week," &c. In 1814, the following record is on their minutes "Received a corresponding letter from Bro. Rice, one of our missionary brethren, on the subject of encouraging missionary societies," &c. In their minutes for 1816, in their circular letter, they say: "The many revivals of religion which are witnessed in various parts of the country—the multiplication of Bible societies, missionary societies, and Sunday-schools, both in our own and foreign countries, are viewed by us as strong indications of the near approach of that day when the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the earth," &c. Bro. Spencer H. Cone was appointed to preach a missionary sermon at our next association. At this meeting (1816) the association Constituted itself into a "Board of Directors," on "Domestic Missions," and "earnestly recommended the churches to use every exertion to collect sums to advance the Redeemer's kingdom, and to transmit to the Board." Again: "The standing clerk was instructed to supply the corresponding secretary of the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions with a copy of our minutes annually." In 1817, "a committee was appointed for Domestic Missionary affairs," and Brethren 0. B. Brown, James Osboum, and Spencer H. Cone, were appointed as Home Missionaries. "Bro.. Luther Rice presented himself as the messenger of the Baptist Board for Foreign Missions, and was cordially received" (in 1817). Elder James Osbourn, who afterward became a disturber of the churches, and a leader in the anti-mission ranks, was present, and "cordially, received" Bro. Rice and was afterward appointed a Home Missionary! In 1818, the minutes say: "The Fourth Annual Report, accompanied by a letter from the secretary of the Baptist Board for Foreign Missions, was read; the joyful contents of which could not fail to give delight," &c. In their minutes for 1818, they call themselves, as the Missionary Baptists now do, "the Regular Baptists." The name "Old School," or '"Primitive Baptists," had not then been invented. In 1827, the association passed the following preamble and resolution : " Whereas, Intelligence has been received of the death of our much esteemed sister, Ann II. Judson, for some time past a missionary in Burmah; therefore, Resolved, That while we deeply regret this afflicting providence, We consider it as loudly calling upon our brethren to be more interested in the prosperity of that mission, in which our deceased sister was engaged." It was not until 1836 that this association took an anti-missionary position. At its session for this year, convened at the Black Rock M. H., it declared non-fellowship with missionary operations as follows, by a vote of sixteen to nine - "Whereas, A number of churches of this association have departed from the practice of the same, by following cunningly devised fables, uniting with, and encouraging others to unite in worldly societies, to the great grief of other churches of this body, &c.; therefore, "Resolved, That this association cannot hold fellowship with such churches." &c." (pgs. 57-60)
So, clearly the Hardshells were the new party! They were the ones who departed from Baptist faith and practice. Even Hardshell leader of the time, Elder (Dr.) John M. Watson, author of that famous book "The Old Baptist Test," called his anti means brothers "modern innovators" and "ultraists." (See my postings here and here)
Wrote Purefoy:
"We have shown that this body, for a number of years, was in favor of, and encouraged what it in 1836 calls "cunningly devised fables," and "worldly societies," consequently before this non-fellowship preamble and resolution, they were Regular Baptists, engaged in benevolent efforts, but after this, they, by changing their principles, became the New Baptists. They had once practised the things they now condemned. The great body of the Baptists of the United States went on as they had done before. The anti-mission party, calling themselves "the Primitive Baptists," are but a small portion of the denomination, and yet it has been said that the Regular or Missionary Baptists have seceded from the Primitive Baptists! Who ever heard before of a body of at least four fifths seceding from one fifth!" (pg. 59)
Again, the Hardshells have no legitimate claim to being the "primitive" or "original" Baptists.
Wrote Purefoy:
"There never was an organized body of Baptists in existence that opposed missions, until since the beginning of the present century; perhaps not further back than 1820 or '25, and very few until about 1830. The English Baptists, the Philadelphia Association, the Sandy Creek Baptist Association, the Charleston, and many others, have never been connected, either in principle or practice, with the Anti-mission movement. As long ago as 1689 the English Baptists organized a benevolent society, to raise a public fund for the following purposes" 1. To communicate thereof to the churches that are not able to maintain their own ministry, and that their ministers may be encouraged wholly to devote themselves to the great work of preaching the gospel." 2. To send ministers that are ordained, or at least solemnly called to preach, both in the city (London) and country, where the gospel hath or hath not been preached, and to visit the churches, &c." 3. To assist those members that are found in any of the aforesaid churches, that are disposed for study, having inviting gifts, and are sound in fundamentals, in attaining to the knowledge and understanding of the languages Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, &c." (pg. 60)
In my series on "History of Baptist Mission Work" (See Archives for 2014) I show these proofs that the Baptist had been supporting mission organizations and theological education, and special teaching for the young (Sunday school), etc., since their beginnings in England and America.
Wrote Purefoy:
"This was about as soon as the Baptists could organize for benevolent effort, for soon after the days of the apostles, until about this time, they had to hide in dens and caves, and were persecuted to such an extent that it was with difficulty they could preserve their existence as a distinct denomination." (pg. 60)
Sometimes Hardshells will rebut such information by saying that in the centuries leading up to the protests made by those in the anti mission movement that support for such things was rare and not generally practiced by the Baptist family. But, they don't consider the fact stated above by Purefoy. A church that is small and being persecuted has little it can do in the support of such things. But, this does not mean that they were against those things.
Wrote Purefoy:
"The Baptist churches, associations, and individuals that are identified with benevolent effort, have never declared non-fellowship with those who were opposed to them. They have always been willing to allow their brethren, who differed from them about religious societies, to exercise liberty of conscience, give or not to these institutions, as they thought right. They have always been willing to live in peace and fellowship with their Anti-mission brethren. The time is no doubt coming when we shall all again be one body, having one fold and one shepherd, working together in the glorious cause of Christ. We have now fully shown that the Regular or Missionary Baptists have not seceded from the Anti-mission Baptists. That they have not seceded from any other sect, has been shown under the first division of this history, to which the reader is referred." (60-61)
No comments:
Post a Comment