Chapter IV

Samuel Stennett

A. Life - Baptism Affably Defended

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 salvation, 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, so 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.

A. Life - 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 in 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 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

Chapter IV - Samuel Stennett
           A.      Life                                              ....................................................................................
                     Personal Religion                       .....................................................................................
                     Baptism Affably Defended        ......................................................................................
                     More Religious Freedom Achieved        ..........................................................................
                     The American Revolution          .....................................................................................
                     The Social Aspect of Christianity           .........................................................................
                     Seventh Day Baptists                 .....................................................................................
                     On a Parable                              .....................................................................................
                     Hymns                              ..............................................................................................
                     John Howard                              ....................................................................................
                     Use of Bible                               ......................................................................................
                     Defense of Dissenters              .........................................................................................
           B.      Family                             .................................................................................................
           C.      Thought                           ................................................................................................
Contents                                                         ......................................................................................

Contact Us :                                                        ................................................................................

Interactive Index                                                .................................................................................