Stennett also wrote another major work in 1772. An Independent (Congregational) minister, Dr. Addington of Miles Lane, brought
about a controversy with Stennett on Baptism.
086
Stennett replied under the title,
Remarks on the Christian Minister's Reasons For Administering Baptism by Sprinkling or Pouring of Water in a Series of
Lectures to A Friend
.
087
In writing a defense of Baptism, Samuel recalls
his grandfather Joseph's book on the same subject. Addington, in contrast to Russen of 1703 is very cultured and quite fair.
088
Samuel defends immersion as the form of baptism used in the Bible which is the "religion of Protestants." He defends
immersion, but agrees with Addington that "Christ would not have Baptism administered to any at the
manifest hazard of their lives ... 'because God will have mercy and not sacrifice.'
089
The positive ordinance of Baptism "is not regeneration, 'but a memorial of it.'"
090
-
Now it is certain that they lay an undue stress upon this sacred rite, who maintain that it is necessary to s
alvation, or place it in the same point of view with a moral precept ... Nay, the making Baptism a saving upon which
they exclude infants from a right to it; I mean the necessity of a profession of faith in Christ, and of a person's
giving some credible proof that he is a New Creature.
091
The Baptists, of all people, are the least to be suspected of laying any such stress upon this ordinance as is
prejudicial to the interests of real personal religion.
092
Stennett extends his Christian love to all Christians no matter by what means they were baptized.
-
Nor do I love a fellow a fellow Christian, who conscientiously differs with me in this point, a whit less than
one who has been immersed in Jordan itself.!
093
Three years later, in 1775, Stennett wrote
An Answer to the Christian Minister's reasons for Baptizing Infants
.
094
This book was a reply to the second part of Addington's Treatise upon Baptism. He agrees with Mr. Addington that it is a
"great evil" to use time in disputing about baptism. That time
-
ought to be spent in acquiring an accurate and through acquaintance with the gospel, and in cultivating a spirit of
candor, humility, integrity, and benevolence. But is it a fact that the Baptists are guilty of this great evil?
Are they ever talking, preaching, and writing upon this subject? It is true, they judge it their duty, at the
administration of this ordinance, to give the reasons of their practice. But will any one say, because these
occasions may frequently return, that this is indecent? Is it the usual topick of their publick discourses' ...
Are the friends of Pseudobaptism [infant_baptism] only to be permitted to speak; and those on the other side be
required to hold their peace? This, Sir is very hard!
095
As in the previous book on baptism, while contending for adult baptism by immersion, he is faced with the question,
"Is Baptism a condition of salvation?"
096
To argue himself out of a Iiteralistic trap, He says that baptism by water (and the spirit) which is demanded in
John 3: 5 is to be understood in light of Titus 3:5 which speaks of "internal 'washing of regeneration.'"
097
"Our Lord . . . has plainly intimated that faith only, with is essential to it, is
necessary to salvation."
098
Thus his answer to the question,'" Is Baptism a condition of salvation?" is that "There is no foundation in Scripture or
Reason for making Baptism a condition of salvation.
099
Similarly he denies that baptism is a means of faith and repentance.
100
In other words, baptism does not impart grace, it is not a sacrament. The Stennetts always call baptism an ordinance,
an institution, or an "outward sign of inward Grace."
101
Samuel also warns that infant baptism
-
has a direct and natural tendency to beget in the minds both of parents and their children a
false hope
, and an
unwarranted dependence
.
102
Samuel also examines a number of scriptures which are alleged to contain proofs of the validity of infant baptism.
In general, he says of these texts,
-
But, difficult as it may be to fix the precise meaning of these phrases, we may surely with confidence pronounce
upon any such interpretation of them as contradicts reason, Scripture, and fact, that it cannot be genuine.
103
Note that to "Scripture and reason", Stennett has now added the criterion of "fact.")
Stennett is confronted. with the reasoning that
circumcision was a type and that Baptism is the antitype. Therefore, some people would say that as infants. Therefore,
some people would say that as infants are involved in the former, they, should be involved in the latter. But Stennett asks,
"What necessity is there for supposing, that Christian ordinances must have been prefigured by Jewish types?" He says that
"striking dissimilarity" destroys a type antitype relation in this case. He also raises the objection that circumcision was
only for male children.
104
He calls on Addington as a Protestant Dissenter to throw out anything that is not founded on Scripture.
105
He goes on to say,
-
What a pity then our Brethren will not yield to the force of this plain truth, that positive institutions must in
their own nature derive their authority, not from the uncertain deduction of analogy, but, from the clear and express
declarations of God's word!
106
Addington says that Christians observe Sunday as the 'Christian' Sabbath; infant baptism is founded on similar grounds.
Stennett says that: for himself, he has rejected the seventh day Sabbath in favor of Sunday. Here is the Exact passage:
-
A[ddington]. would reply that the Baptist keeps the 'Christian Sabbath,' though Christ has no where said in so
many words, 'Remember the first day of the week to keep it holy'. There is, I acknowledge, some weight in this objection:
and all I can say to it is, that not having yet met with any passage in the New testament that appears to me to have
repealed the fourth commandment, I cannot think myself sufficiently authorized
to renounce that, and to keep this.
107
He does not explain further his observance of the seventh day Sabbath.
Once when using the early church fathers, Samuel uses historical criticism. In regard to Origin, he says that a
Mr. Daille says that Rufinus' has changed the works of Origin in a great many places, there being scarcely a page that is
completely accurate. This difficulty casts some question on whether or not Origin believed in infant baptism. Today,
there is also criticism of Origin's works. which have come through Rufinus.
108
Stennett's criticism of the text of Origin's works holds good today: I myself have read portions of a modern
reprint of Rufinus' prologue to Origin's works in which he says he has changed them here and there to make them self consistent
and to cut out "previous" corruptions.
109
In closing, Samuel Stennett says that Baptist love all Christians; the spirit of Christ is above quarrels on baptism.
As to Baptists, Samuel asks,
-
Do they affirm that the Kingdom of Christ is confined to them? that they only have the true religion among them?
and that, unless men are of their party, they will
not be saved? Do they wish success to none that are employed in the vineyard, but themselves? or say of others,
engaged in the same common cause, Master, forbid them, because they follow not with us? On the contrary, do they not
profess a warm esteem and affection for all those, of whatever communion, who love the world? and do they not give
proof of this, by holding a friendly correspondence with them as opportunities offer; and by cordially, joining them
in occasional exercises of public worship?
110
At Salter's Hall in London he preached on April 12, 1776 the "the Correspondent Board in London of the SOCIETY IN SCOTLAND
(Incorporated by Royal Charter) for Propagating Christian Knowledge in the Highlands and Islands, and for Spreading the
Gospel among the Indians in America." His sermon title was not much shorter:
The Great Duty of propagating the Truth Considered and Recommended
.
111
This society had been in existence for nearly a century; my guess is that it was formed not long after the Protestants
William and Mary came to the throne in 1688. It is not to be confused with the well known publishers of today, the
S.P.C.K. - Society for promoting Christian Knowledge - which was founded in 1699.
112
This society which Stennett speaks to is doing its main work in the Highlands and islands of Scotland. It will be
remembered that in the time of Samuel's father Joseph II, it was from the Highlands that the Young pretender received
support when he landed in Scotland in 1745. Stennett, too, mentions that these people have supported "a popish pretender."
However, the society has schools in the highlands which teach religion of a Protestant character , so the Roman Catholic
power is being broken. The schools also teach their pupils English rather than their native Erse (the language of the
Celts). These schools teach both boys and girls and include in their curriculum "husbandry, manufactures" and
"other useful trades."
113
This is the outline of the sermon:
-
How ... are we to help the truth? I answer, -- by possessing men of the means of knowing it -- by removing, s
o far as lies in our power, every obstruction to a free and full examination of it -- by properly stating and defending it --
by offering suitable motives to engage men to a cordial reception and profession of it -- by adorning it with a
holy life and conversation -- and by earnestly imploring the blessing of God upon our endeavours.
114
Stennett says that sometimes Christianity is "betrayed by some who ... have meant to be its friends." In spreading
Christianity, Christian leaders should give everyone full liberty to propose their difficulties, remembering that if
we do not, they may be prejudiced against considering it at all; if they are rash enough to acknowledge it, their
difficulties not being obviated, they do not truly believe it,
but are only hypocritical professors of it."
115
On the other hand if someone refuses to become a Christian, the leader should not do anything to injure that man's
"worldly interests," but should give him "every office of kindness our circumstances will admit."
116
If any one may apply that principle, wouldn't it be valid to say one should not patronize the stores of church members
to the neglect of other stores? He also says that even nonbelievers should be allowed "their natural rights and privilege."
117
As he had said in defense of the Dissenters, use of military force to further Christianity or defend its truths is
"an affront and high injury to the truth."
118
As is consistent with the aim of this Society, Stennett says that Christians should send "missionaries into remote parts,
and into our neighborhood where ignorance and sin prevail."
119
As to literature, Christians should distribute "not only the Bible but other good books to
read."
120
Elsewhere it is said that Stennett him self paid pastoral visits to the poor as well as being able to live in a more elite
society:
-
In many a wretched apartment in the city of London, he has wept over the sick and dying, generously relieved their
wants, and with his knees on the bare floor, has lifted up his cries to God for them. And yet if called upon, be we so
perfectly at ease in the higher circles of life, that respectable personages in honorable stations and of noble rank,
have sought his friendship, and thought themselves honoured by it ... .
121
Also, as I have said before, it was while making calls in a prison that he had mistakenly thought John Wesley recommended the
use of a crucifix.
Index
More Religious Freedom Achieved
In 1779, Samuel had a work published under the following title:
Considerations on the Propriety of a Protestant Dissenting Minister Acceding to Declaration of the Belief, in the
Holy Scripture, Appended to a Bill flow Depending in Parliament, For the Farther Enlargement of Religious Liberty.
I have never seen a copy of this work, so I do not know its exact character. Anyway, Whitley says that this bill was passed;
thus for Dissenter ministers, a declaration of faith in the Holy Scripture replaced the subscription to
most of the thirty-nine articles of the Church of England.
122
A small book he wrote in 1793 gives his attitude toward the bill after it did become law. Stennett says that he does not
necessarily object to subscribing to articles of faith drawn up by someone else, but as some other Dissenters do object,
he is throwing his weight behind this bill which lessened theoretical governmental control. Of the successful bill of 1779,
he says,
-
no man of a liberal mind will say that persons ... if peaceable and loyal subjects, be they Calvinists, Armenians, Arians,
or Socinians, or their reasoning on the question of subscription itself mistaken or otherwise, are deserving of the vengeance
of the penal laws. .
How far is a man obliged to give an account of his faith to him who has no right to demand it, and who demands it at the
peril of depriving him ,if he refuse of his natural and civil rights? ... he is not obliged ... he is guilty of no sin i
n refusing to subscribe.
123
God forbid that it should ever be thought, that we had our doubts that truth is incompetent to its own support, or that what
we understand to be the gospel, wants the aid of the wealth of this world to add splendour to it, or of the powers of this
world to crush its opposers... . It is an insult to Christ, to plant by way of deference about impregnable, fortress of
his church, the puny batteries of penal laws.
124
In 1776, a young man, Robert Burnside, became a member of Curriers' Hall Seventh Day Particular Baptist Church.
125
Three years later, Burnside is at school in Aberdeen, a city well up the coast of Scotland. On Dec. 23, 1779 he wrote to
Samuel Stennett. From the letter we learn that Samuel had been guiding Burnside in his studies for the ministry. Thus far,
Samuel has recommended only these books: The Bible, Doddridge's
Paraphrase
and Pool's Annotations.(
126
Pool's book was written in 1685: it is mainly a simple commentary on the Bible verse by verse. It gives practically no
introductions to the books of the Bible;
127
that I suppose, was all that was expected of commentaries in that time I note, however, that Joseph Stennett's introduction to
the
Song of Songs
( accessable from the main Index ) gives the options of a number of persons, ancient and modern, about the Song of Solomon in
this respect, Joseph gave a better introduction to the book than did Poole only some twenty years earlier!
The reason why Samuel recommended only commentaries is discoverable to twentieth century readers in his 1790 series of published
sermons, entitled,
Discourses on the Divine Authority, Etc.
of the Holy Scriptures.
128
In these sermons, he recommends, among other things, that "In order to affixing right ideas to what you read," you should first
study
the Scriptures with no commentaries and later you should seek the aid of "preaching, exposition, and discourse with religious
friends."
129
Samuel himself, in those sermons, uses, for instance, a later very detailed history of the time of Tiglath-Pileser of Assyria
and Ahaz of Judah to the crucifixion of Christ.
130
(Samuel's grandfather, Joseph I had made the same suggestion that one should read the Bible before consulting other people's
opinions.)
Burnside is back in London in 1780 and the church had him take over the afternoon services from the several "first day"
ministers; Stennett continued to preach in the morning. In the same year, "on the advice of Dr. Stennett," the Curriers'
Hall Church agreed to let Mill Yard Seventh Day General Baptist minister preach to his congregation at Curriers' Hall while
their own meeting house was undergoing repairs.
131
Also in 1780, Stennett delivered the oration at the interment of Mr. John MacGowan, pastor of the church at Devonshire-Square,
London. The most notable portion of the
short oration is in his section on arguments in favor of immortality. First he notes a "vehement desire we all feel in our
breasts" for immortality. The second is a "consciousness that we are accountable creatures."
Also, a future life is needed to provide a time to vindicate the ways of Providence. Finally,
-
we do not address ourselves to those . . who have only the dim light of nature and reason to direct their enquiries.
You have the scriptures in your hands, and you admit their divine authority. And they expressly assure us; that as at death
the body returns to the dust whence it was taken, so the spirit returns to God who gave it . ...
132
|
