"BAPTIST CHURCH PERPETUITY" by W. A. Jarrel, D.D
CHAPTER 27. — THE REGULAR BAPTISTS, OFTEN CALLED MISSIONARY BAPTISTS, ARE THE “OLD” OR PRIMITIVE BAPTISTS. (emphasis mine)
"Unable to meet the overwhelming testimony for Baptist Church Perpetuity, Baptist opponents attempt to “darken counsel” by asking: “But who are the ‘old Baptists?’ “Some of them, when meeting the Regular Baptists, affirm “the Anti-missionary Baptists (Hardshells - SG) are the oldest;” when meeting the Anti-missionaryBaptists, they affirm the “Regular Baptists are the oldest!!”"
"Since the Anti-mission Baptists have neither missions, pastors’ support, nor educational enterprises, the question, dividing the two, IS REALLY NOT PLANS OF MISSIONS, OF EDUCATION, BUT IT IS MISSIONS OR NO MISSIONS, AND EDUCATION OR NO EDUCATION, AND MINISTERIAL OR NO MINISTERIAL SUPPORT. It is whether the churches shall do any missionary and educational work and support their ministers."
"Regular Baptists do all this. Anti-missionary Baptists not only do not this, but they bitterly oppose it — so bitterly that they would exclude from their fellowship any who should do these obligations."
The General Association of “Particular” or “Calvinistic” Baptists of England and Wales — the one which adopted the Confession, just quoted, which was first published in 1677 — which met “to consult of proper means to advance the glory of God and the well being of their churches,” raised a fund of money:
(1.) “To communicate thereof to those churches that are not able to maintain their own ministry; and that their ministers 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 the gospel in both country and city where the gospel hath or hath not yet been preached, and to visit churches.
(3.) To assist those members that shall be found in any of the aforesaid churches, that are disposed to study, have an inviting gift, and are found in fundamentals, in attaining to the knowledge and understanding of the languages, Latin, Greek and Hebrew.”
"An act of a General Assembly of these same Baptists, hold in London, from May the 3d to May the 24th, 1692, reads:
“That all churches make quarterly collections, in what method they think best for the encouragement of the ministry, by helping those ministers that are poor, and to educate brethren that may be approved, to learn the knowledge of those tongues, wherein the Scriptures are written.”
Says Ivimey of the English Baptist church of this period:
“Their example, too, is worthy of imitation, as they strove to promote General Association of the churches who were agreed in doctrine and discipline; in providing the advantages of literature for young ministers; and in catechising the children of the congregation. The weekly money subscription … was adopted and recommended by a general assembly of the ministers and messengers of more than one hundred churches in London in 1689.”
In 1764, the Philadelphia association “agreed to inform the churches to which we respectfully belong, that inasmuch as a charter is obtained in Rhode Island government, toward erecting a Baptist college, the churches should be liberal in contributing towards carrying the same into execution.”
At its meeting in 1766, it “agreed to recommend warmly to our churches the interests of the college, for which subscription is opened all over the continent. This college hath been set on foot upwards of a year, and has now in it three promising youths under president Manning.” At its meeting in 1767 it “agreed that the churches should be requested to forward the subscription for Rhode Island college.” In the minutes of 1769, we read:
“We receive pleasing accounts from Rhode Island college. … The colony has raised 1,200 pounds towards the building, which will begin early in the spring. About 1,000 pounds lawful currency of New England, have been sent us from home towards making up a salary for the president; and all the ministers of the association have explicitly engaged to exert themselves in endeavoring to raise money for the same purpose. … Voted that fourteen pounds Jersey currency be given Mr. Thomas Eustick, towards defraying his expenses at college.”
In its minutes of 1774, we read:
“The minutes and letters from Charleston association, South Carolina, were read. The plan adopted by them respecting Rhode Island college recommended to us. Agreed to recommend the same to the churches we stand respectively related unto; and whoever shall see good to contribute to the money so gathered, agreeable to the plan to be remitted … or brought unto next association.”
At its meeting of 1774, it says: “The money raised for increasing the fund of Rhode Island college is as follows,” etc.
Thus BROWN UNIVERSITY STANDS AS MOST CONCLUSIVE PROOF THAT THE REGULAR BAPTISTS — often called Missionary Baptists — ARE THE “OLD BAPTISTS.”
"In the minutes of 1795 we read: “Agreed that the church be advised to make collections for the missionaries to the East Indies.” At its meeting in 1800 it
“Resolved, that it be particularly urged on our churches, that, as stewards of God, and influenced by a strong desire to spread the cause of our blessed Redeemer, they endeavor to raise, as early as possible, and to maintain a fund for the assistance of such ministers as may be called to supply destitute churches, or otherwise publish the gospel in their connection...The church of Philadelphia having presented a query on the propriety of forming a plan for establishing a missionary society: This association, taking the matter into consideration, think it would be most advisable to invite the general committee of Virginia and different associations on the continent to unite with us in laying a plan for forming a missions society, and establishing a fund for its support, and for employing missionaries among the natives of our continent.”
In its minutes of 1803 we read:
“The plan of a missionary society was read, and with some alteration approved and recommended. It also recommended that sermons be preached for the education and mission funds.”
Of its meeting in 1814 its minutes say:
“According to a suggestion in the letter from the Whateley’s Mill church, Brother Mercer presented and read the circular letter and constitution of the ‘Savannah Baptist Society for Foreign Missions and then moved for the approbation of the association, which was given most willingly and unanimously — whereupon it was thought proper to recommend the subject for its evident importance, to the consideration of the churches. … The glorious effort to evangelize the poor heathen in idolatrous lands.”
In its minutes of 1815 we read:
“Received from the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions for the United States, through its agent, Rev. Luther Rice, the report of the Board, accompanied by letters desiring the aid of this body in their laudable exertions, to spread the gospel of Christ among the heathen in idolatrous lands. The association unanimously agreeing to co-operate in the grand design … resolved itself into a body for missionary purposes.”
Jesse Mercer says, at that time, “No complaint was ever heard of” these missionary resolutions and acts."
"Turning now to the associations which the Anti-mission Baptists claim we find that they were originally Missionary Associations. The Kehukee association, of North Carolina, was organized in 1765. The churches composing it “adopted the Baptist confession of faith, published in London, in 1689 … upon which the Philadelphia and Charleston associations were founded.” In this chapter we have seen that the English Baptists who first adopted this Confession were strictly Missionary Baptists and that “in educational and missionary work” the Philadelphia and Charleston associations were in closest fellowship. The churches of this association, before they were organized into it, by missionary work of Mr. Gano, as missionary of the Philadelphia association, were reclaimed from Arminianism, and from a languishing condition. The churches of the Kehukee association covenanted “to be ready to communicate to the defraying of the churches expenses, and for the support of
T.H. Pritchard, D.D., one of our most scholarly and critical writers, says:
“I shall now prove from unquestionable historical facts that the associations which are now anti-missionary were in favor of foreign missions up to the year 1826, ‘27 and ‘30, and hence have no claim to the title of the Old School Baptists.
“I will begin with the Baltimore association, perhaps the most famous body of this modern sect in the United States. Their minutes for 1814 contain the following record: ‘Received a corresponding letter from Bro. Rice, one of our missionary brethren, on the subject of encouraging missionary societies.’ This Bro. Rice was Luther Rice, who was then just from Burmah, where he had gone as a missionary with Adoniram Judson.
“In 1816 these minutes in their circular letter 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 showing indications of the near approach of that day when the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the earth.’ The minutes of the same year state that ‘the standing clerk was instructed to supply the corresponding secretary of the Foreign Mission Board with a copy of our minutes annually.’ In 1817 ‘Bro. Luther Rice presented him-self as the messenger of the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions and was cordially received.’"
“Elder James Osborne was a member of this body, which cordially received a foreign missionary and at this very session was appointed a home missionary. This man Osborne, who was a leader in the anti-mission secession, both in Maryland and North Carolina, I remember to have seen in Charlotte when I was a small boy. He was a handsome, dressy man, full of conceit, and very fond of talking of himself and of selling his own books.
“From the same authentic source, the minutes of the Baltimore association, we learn that in 1828 they called themselves ‘Regular Baptists,’ just as we do now; the same year they express their joy at the intelligence of the conversion of the heathen, and as late as 1827 the association expressed, by formal resolutions, their sorrow at the death of Mrs. Ann H. Judson and their great interest in the mission with which she was connected, and it was not till 1836, when the association met with the Black Rock church, and then by a vote of sixteen to nine, that fellowship was withdrawn from churches favoring foreign missions, Sunday schools, etc.”
"To come back now to North Carolina, I can prove that the Kehukee and Country Line Associations, two of the most influential of the anti-mission party, were once missionary bodies. In Burkitt and Read’s History of the Kehukee Association it is stated on page 139, that in 1794, a special day was appointed to pray God for a revival of religion, and on page 145 that it was the custom of ministers of that date to invite penitents to come forward and kneel down to be prayed for, just as we do in our revival meetings now."
"In Bigg’s History of the Kehukee Association, page 162, it appears that this association appointed delegates to meet at Cashie Church, Bertie County, in June, 1805, with delegates from the Virginia, Portsmouth and Neuse associations, and at this meeting arrangements were made to collect money for missionary purposes. That it appears that the Kehukee was not only in fellowship with the Portsmouth and other missionary Baptist associations, but that the very first missionary society ever organized in the State, was in the bounds of this body."
"Now, from this brief statement of unvarnished facts we see that the Missionary Baptists are just where the Apostles were and where all of the name were till 1827-8 when a new set arose, calling themselves, according to Elder Bennett’s Review, page 8, at first, The Reformed Baptists in North Carolina, and then the Old Baptists, the Old Sort of Baptists, Baptists of the Old Stamp, and finally adopted the name of the Primitive Baptists."
"There are many things about these brethren which I like, and I would not needlessly call them by an offensive name, but I cannot style them either Old School or Primitive Baptists, for in so doing I should falsify the facts of history, and acknowledge that I and my brethren have departed from the faith of the Apostles and Baptist fathers. In no invidious sense, therefore, but from necessity, I am obliged to call them New School or Anti-missionary Baptists.
After years of pretty thorough and careful reading I have been unable to read the name of even one church, association or writer that ever opposed missions or education before about 1810."
"I conclude this part of the chapter in the language of David Benedict, “a leading Baptist historian:”
“Old School and Primitive Baptists are appellations so entirely out of place that I cannot, as a matter of courtesy, use them without adding, so-called, or some such expression. I have seen so much of the missionary spirit among the old Anabaptists, Waldenses and other ancient sects — so vigorous and perpetual were the efforts of those Christians, whom we claim as Baptists, in the early, middle and late ages, to spread the gospel in all parts of the world, among all nations and languages where they could gain access, that it is plain that those who merely preach up predestination, and do nothing, have no claim to be called by their name.”