Discusión de resultados

The Baptist practice of forming separate congregations apart from the National Church in the mid-1640s was a policy required to be defended against the charge of schism from those who believed that the Church could be

reformed and purified from within.139 _{In his principal work in defence of Baptist} ecclesiology, Thomas Collier argued that it was not the task of saints to reform the Church of England, but rather to begin again, laying a new foundation for the church. This posture was typical of the perspective of moderate Puritans regarding the corruptions lately visited upon the National Church under the Laudian regime.140 _{Collier’s conviction was that the fundamental ideology of a}

136_{ARPB, 146. I have omitted the many biblical texts inserted between each of the practices.} 137 _{Collier, Certaine Queries, 10-11.}

138 _{Johannes G. Vos, ‘The Visible Church: Its Nature Unity and Witness’, Westminster}

Theological Journal 9.2 (1947), 147.

139 _{See Edwards, Gangraena I.i., 61-2; Robert Baillie, Anabaptism (London: 1647), Dedicatory}

Epistle & Preface; Robert Poole, whose accusations we know via William Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance of the Reasons and Grounds of those People commonly calle Anabaptists, for

their Separation (London: 1645), see below. The charge of schism was rebutted in the First

London Confession, ‘To All that Desire . . .’, and article XLVI, Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions, 154

& 168. Baptist sensitivity about schism is reflected in the Midland Association debate about the lawful conditions under which a member may leave a parochial church. ARPB, 36.

140 _{See for example, Nicholas Tyacke, ‘Archbishop Laud’, in Kenneth Fincham (Ed.), The Early}

Stuart Church, 1603—1642 (Basingstoke and London: The Macmillan Press, 1993), 51-70;

National Church was erroneous and therefore the saints were under no obligation to seek its reformation.

For I deny the whole Nation of England, that is, the people of the Nation, ever to be the true Church of Christ.141

Collier’s sectarian ecclesiology was based on the proposition that compulsion in religion is evidence of false religion.142 _{He blamed the advent of ‘Popery’ into} England for the creation of a state church into which all citizens are compelled to come, a mixture of the faithful and the faithless.143 _{Such a church was not} built on Gospel preaching, but upon the power of the magistrate, before which all must submit, and by which all citizens were made Christians.144 _{Far from} being the Church, such an institution was ‘the beast’ and usurped the authority of God to create the church, because Christ ordained that it should be by means of preaching the Gospel that ‘stones were hewn’, and the church built. Collier further argued that the prestige of succession in ecclesiology, greatly prized among Episcopalians, was worthless if the church was founded by Antichrist.145 _{Thus the Church of England was not a church that could be} reformed, nor should it be, because its foundation was false.

William Kiffin’s defence of separate congregations was presented in a public correspondence with Robert Poole.146 Poole believed Baptists were schismatics and asked of Kiffin,

Kevin Sharpe, ‘Archbishop Laud’, in Margo Todd (Ed.), Reformation to Revolution: Politics and

Religion in Early Modern England (Routledge: London and New York, 1995), 71-77.

141 _{Thomas Colyer [Collier], Certaine Queries: or Points now in Controvercy Examined (London:}

1645), 5. I will employ the usual spelling of Collier for the sake of consistency.

142 _{Louise Fargo Brown argues, ‘The salient feature of [Baptist] faith was the principle that a}

church, according to Scripture, is a voluntary association of believers, with whose organization and support the state has nothing to do, and over whose belief and worship no civil power has jurisdiction.’ L.F. Brown, The Political Activities of the Baptists and Fifth Monarchy Men in

England During the Interregnum (Washington: American Historical Society; London: Henry

Frowde; Oxford: University Press, 1912), 2.

143 _{Collier, The Right Constitution, 7.} 144 _{Collier, Certaine Queries, 5.} 145 _{Collier, Certaine Queries, 6.}

146 _{Robert Poole left no indelible mark on the seventeenth century but was almost certainly the}

father of Elizabeth Poole who has her own entry in ODNB. Elizabeth came under the influence of William Kiffin at about sixteen years old and joined his church. Some time prior to 1648 she was expelled from the congregation for heresy and immorality. She later gained notoriety as a prophetess in politics. “Poole, Elizabeth (bap. 1622?, d. in or after 1668),” Manfred Brod in

Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, eee online ed., ed. Lawrence Goldman, Oxford: OUP,

How can you vindicate by the Word of God your Anabaptisticall way, from the sinfull guile of notorious Schisme, and defection from the Reformed Churches.

By what warrant of the Word of God, doe you separate from our Congregations, where the Word and Sacraments are purely dispensed?147

In reply, Kiffen took issue precisely with the manner in which the Word and Sacraments were dispensed in the National Church. First, the Word was compromised by permitting the ungodly to participate in worship, their sins being unchallenged.148 _{The National Church had become like apostate Israel as} described in Jeremiah 7.8, 9, 10

Behold, ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn Incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye know not; and come and stand before mee, &c.’149

Kiffen deplored the policy of mixed church membership. He opined that some congregants were found in church who ‘leaven the whole lumpe, 1 Cor. 5.6.’150 The remedy to this situation was provided by God’s Word, which, if purely dispensed, might heal the sinner, but the Word was preached without efficacy. Second, turning to baptism, Kiffen challenged Poole,

shew me what Gospel Institution have you for the Baptizing of Children . . . what can you finde for your practise therein, more then the durty puddle of mens Inventions.151

Baptism was no longer administered ‘according to the pure institutions of the Lord Jesus,’152 the fundamental criteria of a true church for Particular Baptists. Baptists, therefore, could hardly be judged schismatic, Kiffen argued, by a church that corrupted the sacraments, failed to discipline sinners, and preached not the word. If the National Church reformed its practices and conformed to the Rule of Christ there would be no justification for separation, Kiffen conceded. If the Church were

147 _{William Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance of the Reasons and Grounds of those People}

commonly Called Anabaptists, for their Seperation, &c. (London: 1645), 3 and 4. Italics as

original.

148 _{Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance, 5.} 149 _{Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance, 5.} 150 _{Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance, 5.} 151 _{Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance, 5.} 152 _{Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance, 5.}

a pure lumpe of Beleevers, gathered and united according to the Institution of Christ, wee (I hope,) shall joyne with you, in the same Congregation and Fellowship, and nothing shall seperate us by death.153

But since this was not the case, Kiffen asserted, separation was not merely justified, it was necessary. The two fundamental notae ecclesia, which had been central to the Reformation project to establish a true church, namely Word and Sacrament, were corrupted and powerless.154

Unlike Thomas Collier, who regarded a National Church as inherently flawed on account of the essential link between Church and State, Kiffen, like Henry Jessey, could imagine worshipping in the National Church, if it could be purified and disciplined.155 _{Until such time as this be brought about, however,} the gathering of Calvinistic Baptist believers in congregations wholly separate from the National Church would continue.156 Poole stated to Kiffen that the great work of reformation in the Church was taking place, and asked why Baptists, by pursuing a policy of separatism, were placing this in jeopardy. Kiffen responded saying he placed no confidence in the Westminster Assembly to bring reform to the Church, and in any case the proposals for change were bringing the National Church closer to the religion practiced and enjoyed already by Baptists. How could Poole, therefore, regard Baptists as a disturbance, were they in fact not contributing to the furtherance of reformation, by pursuing the same ends?157

That the policy of separatism was of the essence of Baptist ecclesiology is evidenced by the decision of the Abingdon Association in 1656 to buy a burying place for their own church members, so that there might be no ‘unnecessary

153 _{Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance, 6.}

154 _{On the importance of Word and Sacrament in Luther and Calvin, see for example, Paul Avis,}

The Church in the Theology of the Reformers, 13-50. At the General meeting of the Midland

Baptist Association in 1656, the ministry of national church ministers was declared ‘Babilonish’.

ARPB, 25.

155 _{Collier’s uncompromising stance on the question of separation is evidenced in ARPB, 61}

where he forbids baptized believers even to listen to the preaching of parochial ministers.

156 _{Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance, 6 & 13.} 157 _{Kiffen, A Briefe Remonstrance, 7.}

mingling’ with false worshippers, or those with corrupt customs, even in death.158