Evangelical and Particular Baptists in Church History

Reformed Baptists today can trace their roots back to the English Particular Baptists of the 1630s onward. For the first 100 years of the fellowship, certain movements threatened to disrupt their harmony, particularly the disputes over congregational singing and, later, the question of whether hymns should be accepted alongside the singing of metrical psalmody. While these were no small squabbles, they did not effectively divide the movement into two lasting streams.

This changed in the 18th century, following the influence of John Gill. What developed throughout the 18th and into the 19th century was a division between the Strict Baptists and the Evangelical and Particular Baptists. History has since vindicated the latter stream, which was spearheaded by the leading men of the 1792 Baptist Missionary Society (originally named The Particular Baptist Society for the Propagation of the Gospel Amongst the Heathen). These men included Andrew Fuller (1754–1815), William Carey (1761–1834), John Sutcliff (1752–1814), Samuel Pearce (1766–1799), John Ryland Jr. (1753–1825), Robert Hall Sr. (1728–1791), and John Rippon (1751–1836). The Evangelical and Particular Baptists were not hyper-calvininsts, and were known for their evangelistic zeal alongside their rich confessional commitments and heritage.

The Strict Baptists were characterized by four principal features: 1) their adherence to closed communion and, very often, confessional membership. Baptists alone were admitted to the table, and becoming a member meant subscribing to a rather lengthy confession of faith; 2) their skepticism toward the Evangelical Awakening and the revivals of their day; 3) their sectarianism, tending to associate in much narrower circles and holding fast to more nuanced doctrinal positions; and 4) a strong orientation toward hyper-Calvinism, accompanied by hesitation toward fervent evangelistic appeals to the unconverted.

By the mid-1800s, the Particular Baptist tradition had effectively divided between the Strict Baptists, who were committed to closed communion, and the Evangelical Calvinistic Baptists, who had become more characterized by commitment to open communion. American Regular Baptists, both North and South, likewise followed in the Evangelical and Particular vein.

On the question of strict versus open communion, the Evangelical and Particular Baptists were initially divided with Andrew Fuller being a strong advocate of strict communion. As time went on, however, and especially under the influence of Robert Hall Jr., the Evangelical Calvinistic Baptists became increasingly characterized by an open view of communion, allowing convinced paedobaptists to partake of the Lord’s Supper.

Eventually, over the course of the 20th century, both of these streams of the Particular Baptist tradition were almost entirely forgotten, with only remnants of their beliefs having resurfaced in various contexts today.

The goal of this blog is to reawaken the Evangelical and Particular Baptist tradition amongst Reformed Baptists in our own day, best exemplified in the Reformed Evangelicalism of Charles Spurgeon. We want to be both Evangelical and Particular in

By Evangelical we mean we are committed to the evangelical quadrilateral–the four distinctives which have commonly characterized the evangelical movement since it began during the Great Awakening. They are:

1. Conversionism

This is different from the superficial revivalism that came to characterize the evangelical movement at the end of 19th century and into the 20th century. Conversionism, means as Evangelicals, we are revivalistic, missions-oriented, committed to the efficacy of fervent prayer for the salvation of souls, and the need to be born-again to be right with God.

2. Activism

This is different from the woke agenda advanced by advocates of social justice. Rather, this means as Evangelicals, we believe the church is to care for the practical needs of the congregation first, and then those of the community second, but never in isolation from the power of the preached word and priority of the local church. This emphasized social concern often manifests itself by the appointment of a deacon dedicated to community involvement and some portion of church funds going to support such endeavors.

3. Biblicism

This is different from they hyper-biblicism which revolts against any mention of the usefulness of creeds, confessions, and systematic theological discussion and is generally opposed to the method of Reformed scholasticism and it’s emphasis philosophy, and implicit deductions. Rather, this means as Evangelicals, we have a Berean-mindset, are quick to fact-check any purported doctrine by the straightforward understanding of applicable proof-texts, and refuse to submit or regard any tradition or confession as an authority upon our conscience. While synods and creeds are at times most necessary, and confessions most useful, biblicism upholds the Bible alone as not only the supreme, but the only norm and authority for the believer, besides those explicit spheres of hierarchy found in this life and affirmed in Scripture.

4. Crucicentrism

This means, as Evangelicals, we believe all Scripture is centered around the life and work of Jesus Christ our Saviour. And thus, all ministry must reflect the same. This means, we are committed to banding together in associational unity and power alongside other conservatives committed to the true gospel, however imperfect their doctrine and impious their practice may be. As Evangelicals, we are not sectarian, and are against sect-making, believing most attempts at establishing new denominations to be the work of the Devil. Rather, our crucicentrism commits us to work within our own denominational structures for reform, seeking the greatest degree of denominational unity, without sacrificing issues of core importance relating to the gospel and the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

We Are Particular

By Particular we mean we are Particular Baptists. In America, Particular Baptists were regarded as Regular Baptists–Regular meaning according to the Standard or Rule. Today, many distinguish between calvinistic Baptists, and 1689 Reformed (uppercase R) Baptists. The latter is descended from the same theological tradition as the Regular (in America) and Particular (in England) Baptists and have commonly been identified by the following core commitments:

1. Confessionalism

While supporting the work of genuine Revival, we believe such efforts ought to be centered around the local church and bolstered by the drafting of confessions useful to prevent the propagation of heresy and dangerous error. Shorter confessions upon primary matters including the distinctives of Calvinism and Credobaptism being most useful in the realm of associational fraternity, and longer confessions and catechisms being useful as teaching tools and anchors within the life and ministry of the local church.

2. Sabbatarianism

Sabbatarianism is characterized by adherence to a weekly rhythm beginning with a holiday of worshipping a full day in both the am and pm. It is a day to be characterized by both rest and worship, and followed by a full six days of work. This means we believe the concept of the 5-day work week and the 2-day Weekend is a direct affront against God’s good design for man. As much as we must set aside Sunday as a day of Rest, we must set aside Saturday as a day of work. Thus, Sabbatarians are generally anti-retirement, anti-“summer-break,” anti-weekend, and anti-“Lazy Sundays.” Nevertheless, the strictness of this precept has been relaxed with the resurrection of Christ abolishing the abiding authority of the Old Testament positive laws. And just as the OT principle was frequently disrupted by national holidays, and allowances made for uncleanness, sickness, etc. all the more is their now new freedom found within the Sabbath principle for the New Testament saint.

3. Formal Membership Process

Particular Baptists are characterized by an orderly ecclesiology. A common model for the church membership process was often taken from Bunyan’s book the Pilgrim’s Progress. This is the model Charles Spurgeon used for his own church. First, an applicant would first meet with a couple elders (the chained lions) where notes would be taken of their discussion. The Lead Pastor (the porter) would then observe the notes, and visit one-by-one with each prospective member himself. Then they would be visited by a member (lady discretion) at the their dwelling or even possibly at their workplace, and would report back to the elders any misgivings or encouragements. If all was good, the applicant would then be invited up on stage for a live Q&A with the elders before the congregation (the Q&A with prudence, piety, and charity) at the next church meeting, and after stepping outside, a vote from the church would be taken affirming the genuineness of the applicants conversion. Then plans would be made to have the applicant baptized and would formally be joined to the congregation at the next Lord’s Day Service upon partaking of the Lord’s Supper.

4. Calvinistic

We should not be shy of term Calvinism, for what it very commonly represents is most wholesome and foundational doctrine. Calvinism is also known as the Doctrines of Grace, and is ably summarized in the acronym TULIP: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. Calvinism is neither core doctrine required to be saved, nor is it tertiary, or should be regarded as optional or theological minutiae. Calvinism is the gospel, and is the polish that beautifies the bedrock of our faith. We therefore reject both the Arminian denial of sovereign election and the hyper-Calvinistic denial of the free and sincere offer of the gospel to all who hear it. God’s sovereign election and man’s genuine responsibility are both affirmed without apology.

5. Credobaptist

Baptism is an ordinance appointed by Christ for those who personally profess repentance and faith in Him. Consequently, we reject the baptism of infants as lacking the New Testament prerequisite of credible profession of faith. Baptism as a sanctifying act of obedience unto Christ does communicate grace and union with God and His people, but it does not regenerate, justify, or otherwise save the one baptized apart from repentance and faith. It is the sign and seal of our faith, and demonstrates the death of our old life, and the birth of our new life as adopted into the family of God. We deny that any family relation can provide the necessary pre-requisite to be baptized. A Father’s headship and influencing power within his own household ought to be incredibly strong, and yet, while his or his wife’s faith does make their children holy, it does not automatically grant their children or unbelieving spouse access into the New Covenant.

6. Covenant Theology

Baptists have taken the wonderful liberty of redefining their presbyterian friend’s concept of covenant theology. We do not shun the concepts of the covenant of works and of grace, but we define them as the Bible clearly explains. Many disagreements exists on how the principle of works-based and grace-based covenants relate to thecovenants of works and grace themselves, and differ between a proto or typological covenant vs. the covenant itself. But the thrust of Baptist Covenant Theology states that only believers are in the covenant of grace, which is the New Covenant.

7. Congregationalism

Particular Baptists believe the congregation has more responsibility than merely attending church on Sundays and enjoying Christian company over that of the world. Congregationalism means the church as a whole (the elders included), are given by Christ certain duties which only they as a collective are permitted to perform. This includes the formal admittance of new members, the recognition and appointment of elders, as well as the exercise of church discipline, the restoration of repentant members, and the removal of those who persist in unrepentant sin. This does not mean that pastors are merely paid employees of the membership. The Bible grants to elders real authority and rule within their local congregation, and they are to be respected in accordance with their office (there being no higher calling on earth) and obeyed in all spiritual matters for the edification and unity of the church.

Evangelical and Particular Baptists in Church History

Reformed Baptists today can trace their roots back to the English Particular Baptists of the 1630’s onward. For the first 100 years of the fellowship, certain movements threatened to break their harmony, this mainly being the schisms regarding singing during church, and later the acceptance of singing hymns during church, and not psalms only. While these were no small squabbles, they did not effectively divide the movement into two lasting streams. But this changed in the 18th century after the influence of John Gill. What developed in the 18th and into the 19th century was the division that between the Strict Baptists and the Evangelical and Particular Baptists. History has since vindicated the latter stream which was spearheaded by the leading men of 1792 Baptist Missionary Society (Originally named The Particular Baptist Society for the Propagation of the Gospel Amongst the Heathen). These men include: Andrew Fuller (1754–1815), William Carey (1761–1834), John Sutcliff (1752–1814), Samuel Pearce (1766–1799), John Ryland Jr. (1753–1825), Robert Hall Sr. (1728–1791), as well as John Rippon (1751–1836).

The Strict Baptists were characterized by: 1) Their adherence to closed communion and very often confessional membership (Baptists only were admitted to the table, and becoming a member meant signing your name in subscription to a rather lengthy confession of faith; 2) They were also more skeptical of the Evangelical Awakening and revivals of their day; 3) They were more sectarian and tended to associate in much narrower circles holding fast to much more nuanced doctrine; and 4) They were much more oriented towards hyper-calvinism and hesitant towards the fervent evangelistic pleading for souls. By the mid 1800’s the particular baptist tradition had effectively split into the strict baptists, and that of the Evangelical Baptists, with American regular baptists from both the North and South following in the footsteps of the Evangelical and Particular vein. Concerning the issue of strict vs. open communion, the Evangelical and Particular baptist were at first divided, but as time went on and especially with the influence of Robert Hall Jr., the Evangelical Calvinistic Baptist became characterized by holding to an open view (allowing convinced paedobaptists to the Lord’s Supper). Eventually, over the course of the 20th century, the distinctives of the Particular Baptist tradition would almost entirely be forgotten including the traditions established by the strict baptists, with only remnants of their beliefs resurfacing in various contexts today. The goal of this blog is to re-awaken the Evangelical and Particular tradition today, best exemplified in the ministry and practice of Charles Spurgeon.