Baptists who were U.S. Presidents

Four men affiliated with Baptist churches have become President of the United States. Three were Democrats and one was a Republican. Two were northerners* and two were southerners.

1.     Warren G. Harding (Republican from Ohio, 1921–23), 29th president. He was a member and trustee of the Trinity Baptist Church, Marion, Ohio. He joined the church on May 6, 1883, when he was 17 years old and it was still called the Free Baptist Church. Historians have generally ranked Harding as one of the worst Presidents. This is based on the idea that he accomplished little while in office, and for corruption during his administration – several of his appointees went to prison for various scandals. I don’t think Harding himself was accused of improprieties beyond allowing it to go on.

2.     Harry S. Truman (Democrat from Missouri, 1945-1953), 33rd president. Truman is probably best known for following Roosevelt, being plain-spoken, and authorizing dropping the bombs on Japan. I know little about his presidency otherwise, or of his Baptist beliefs. At the age of 18, Truman was baptized at the Benton Boulevard Baptist Church in Kansas City, Missouri, where he was living at the time. He later became a member of the First Baptist Church of Grandview, Missouri, (then called the Grandview Baptist Church) in 1916. In 1945 Truman wrote, “I am a Baptist because I think that sect gives the common man the shortest and most direct approach to God.” (Source: Michael Devine, director of Harry S. Truman Library and Museum)

3.     James Earl “Jimmy” Carter (Democrat from Georgia, 1977-1981). Carter is often remembered for speaking of being born-again (and by some for giving away the Panama Canal). His presidency by many is thought of as ineffective, and after one term the American people replaced him with Ronald Reagan. At the time of his presidency he was a Southern Baptist, but later his church are affiliated with the more liberal Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. He was a popular Sunday School teacher at Maranatha Baptist Church, Plains, Georgia. As a Baptist he would be considered on the liberal end of the spectrum. No questionable moral dealings or improprieties are associated with his presidency.

4.     William Jefferson “Bill” Clinton (Democrat from Arkansas, 1993-2001). He was baptized by Park Place Baptist Church in Hot Springs, Arkansas. One of the most remembered acts of this Southern Baptist president is the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. Though a Baptist, the president and his family attended the Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, D.C. while he was president.

Related:

Abraham Lincoln was raised by Baptist parents, but he was never a member of any church. George Washington was purportedly baptized by John Gano during the Revolutionary War. Regardless of the truth of it – two of Gano’s grandchildren claimed in an affidavit that their aunt, John Gano’s oldest daughter, told them that her father had baptized Washington – it seems that George Washington remained outwardly affiliated with the Episcopal Church.

* Missouri may best be considered a “border state” rather than “Northern.”

Danbury Baptist Association to Thomas Jefferson

The letter of Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association – with the phrase “separation between church & state” – is oft-mention in both historical and political discussions. The letter from the Danbury Baptists is not as well known. A transcription of it can be read at the National Archives online.

Danbury Baptist Association to Thomas Jefferson, [after 7 October 1801]

“…though our mode of expression may be less courtly and pompious than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, Sir to believe, that none are more sincere.”

Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association, 1 January 1802

“The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction.”

Interestingly, there is also a Draft Reply to the Danbury Baptist Association, showing how Jefferson started and then edited the letter to be more concise.

“I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.”

John Alden and the King James Bible

For some background for this post, please see Bibles at the Pilgrim Hall Museum at Plymouth.

Some ubiquitous KJV critics think they have found the smoking gun to discredit Mayflower passenger John Alden and his King James Bible. My, my, did not only the Geneva Bible come over on the Mayflower! Urban myths tell us so. The Pilgrim Hall Museum allows that they cannot prove that any Bibles were on the Mayflower – in the sense that there exists no log or record of the items that were on the Mayflower. However, they are reasonably sure of two of them. “Among the books in Pilgrim Hall are four Bibles of unusual interest. One belonged to Governor William Bradford, the Pilgrim Governor, and one to John Alden. These are among the very few objects existing today which we feel reasonably sure ‘came over in the Mayflower.’” Those who have some expertise in this area of history are “reasonably sure” these Bibles came over on the Mayflower. Yet for the purpose of Bible version arguments some anti-KJVO people become unreasonably unsure and overly obstinate about Alden’s King James Bible not coming over on the Mayflower.

Anti-KJVO folks such as Rick Norris will argue that John Alden was not a Pilgrim, and also suggest that he did not bring the Bible with him. I guess they want to cover all bases. He didn’t bring the Bible with him, but ordered it later and had it shipped over. Even if he did (to the antis) it does not matter since he was not one of the Pilgrims.

Here are some facts about John Alden:

• He was hired as the ship’s cooper, a job of maintaining and repairing the ship’s barrels.
• He was initially a member of the ship’s crew rather than a New World settler.
• He became a signatory of The Mayflower Compact, signed while the travelers were still on the ship, November 1620.
• He was at the time of his death the last surviving signer of The Mayflower Compact.
• He signed a political and religious covenant, unto which the signers promised under God “all due Submission and Obedience.” From that time Alden would have been a part of the Pilgrim group.
• There is a surviving 1620 KJV Bible in the Pilgrim Hall Museum that belonged to John Alden – and the museum is reasonably sure it came over with him on the Mayflower.

Those who take the “and/or” argument (that Alden was not a Pilgrim and/or did not bring a King James Bible with him) eventually are impaled on the horns of their own dilemma. After signing The Mayflower Compact, John Alden at that point became a covenanted member of the Pilgrims. John Alden owned, used, and passed down in his family a King James Bible printed in 1620. Here are the two horns of their dilemma.

• Either

1. If John Alden brought this King James Bible with him initially as a “non-Pilgrim”, he did not throw away his 1611 translation when or after he became a Pilgrim.

• Or

2. If John Alden did not bring this King James Bible with him, then after he became a Pilgrim and as a Pilgrim John Alden ordered a 1611 translation and had it shipped over to him.

Understanding these two options takes the edge off the claim that the Pilgrims passionately hated the King James Bible and only used the Geneva Bible. This “separatists-hated-the-KJV” argument is broken down and needs to be taken out of service!

Early Baptist Churches in the Northeastern U.S.

Recently our daughter treated the “old folks” to a vacation with her to the northeastern United States. We saw many marvelous things while there – from fall foliage to Mount Washington to Niagara Falls to the Cincinnati Zoo. Part of the trip included visiting the sites of some historic Baptist churches. Here is a brief report of what we saw. Some locations were deliberate encounters, and some we happened across while traveling. I will take them in chronological order.

First Baptist Church, Providence, Rhode Island.

It was dark when we arrived at this location, but I was able to get some pictures. This church at Providence claims to be the oldest Baptist Church in America. The church claims its organization from 1638. Roger Williams gathered a congregation in 1638, but it is not clear that he was a Baptist at the time. I consider Williams a “halfway Baptist” – one who accepted some of the principles of the Baptists, and may have connected himself with them for a very brief period but was never fully committed to Baptist doctrine. Additionally, it appears that the Williams church died out, and the current First Baptist Church is the continuation of a General Baptist Church organized in 1652. Nevertheless, they claim to be the first Baptist Church in America. The building used by First Baptist Providence was built in 1775. The church is now a very liberal society affiliated with the ABCUSA and American Baptist Churches of Rhode Island.

United Baptist Church, Newport, Rhode Island.

The Baptist Church at Newport was organized in 1638 by John Clarke. It is the oldest Baptist Church in the United States and America. The building in which the church currently meets was built in 1826. The church is affiliated with the ABCUSA and American Baptist Churches of Rhode Island, but appears to be a much more conservative evangelical church than the one at Providence. They hold the New Hampshire Confession of Faith as their doctrinal statement.

“Sometime during the year 1638, it is believed, the church now known as The United Baptist Church, John Clarke Memorial, of Newport, was organized and he [i.e., John Clarke] became its first pastor, holding that office until his death. He is believed to have been the first American Baptist pastor, and it is thought by many that the church he founded and served as pastor is entitled to the distinction of being the oldest Baptist church in this country.” Wilbur Nelson, The Life of Dr. John Clarke, Newport, RI: Men’s Bible Class of First Baptist Church, 1924, p. 17. 

Pennepack Baptist Church, Busleton, Pennsylvania.

The Pennepack Church was organized in 1688 by Elias Keach, son of English Baptist leader Benjamin Keach. Though not the first Baptist church constituted in Pennsylvania, it is the oldest Baptist church in Pennsylvania in continuous existence. The first meeting house was built in 1707, and the current building was built on the same location in 1805. The church is affiliated with the ABCUSA.

Welsh Tract Baptist Church, Newark, Delaware.

The Welsh Tract Baptist Church was organized in Wales in 1701, and then moved to the “Welsh Tract” purchased from William Penn in 1703. The current meeting house was built in 1746. The picture from one side (below) shows a brick wall repair of a cannon ball hole made during the Revolutionary War Battle of Cooch’s Bridge. The meeting house is surrounded by the cemetery on three sides, which includes burials of early members and pastors. The Welsh Tract Church rejected the concept of parachurch societies for carrying out the Lord’s work, and followed the “old school” local church ministry. Welsh Tract Old School Baptist Church meets here monthly on second Sundays.

Baptist Church, Hopewell, New Jersey.

The church at Hopewell was constituted in 1715. Some of its first members were baptized by the Pennepack Church in Pennsylvania. The Old School Baptist Meeting House at Hopewell was built in 1747. No congregation currently meets here. Declaration of Independence signer John Hart is buried in the graveyard, as well as Joab Houghton, who in front of this meeting house made a call for volunteers for the Continental Army.

Second Baptist Church, Harbourton, Hopewell, New Jersey.

This building built in 1879 was once the home of the 2nd Hopewell Baptist Church. There was a church meeting here by 1803, when the cemetery was established. The Baptist Church disbanded around 1930. The Harbourton Cemetery Association was incorporated in 1931 to maintain the cemetery – which had been owned by the church. I believe a generic community church probably meets here now.

Old Stone Church, Old School Baptist, Locktown, New Jersey.

It is not clear just when this church at Locktown was constituted, but at least by 1819 when Old Stone Church building was built. The nearby Kingstown Baptist Church held meetings in Kingstown as well as in this area. Eventually a church was established here as well. The church disbanded in the 1960s, and the location is now maintained as an historic building by the “Friends of the Locktown Stone Church, Inc.”

Union Baptist Church, Mystic, Connecticut.

This church building in Mystic, Connecticut was originally built in 1829 for use by different denominations. Some members from the First Baptist Church founded the Third Baptist Church in 1831. The Third Baptist congregation met here. As different groups built their own buildings and moved out of this location, this meeting house was left to the use of the Baptists. In 1861, the Third Baptist Church merged with the Second Baptist Church to form Union Baptist Church. The current building itself is also a combination of the Second and Third Baptist meeting houses, the building of Second Baptist being moved to the back of the original building. The Second Baptist Church dated back to 1765, when it was organized in Fort Hill, Groton, Connecticut.

Wearts Corner Baptist Church, Wertsville, New Jersey.

The Baptist Church in Wertsville, New Jersey was formed by “New School” Baptists who left the “Old School” congregations at Hopewell and Flemington. These departing Baptists supported missionary societies and other extra-church organizations. They had organized by 1834, when the stone meeting house was constructed. The congregation ceased to meet in 1908. The building is now a residence. (Apparently also called Amwell Baptist Church, which name is on the gable front.)

Baptist Church, Weston, Vermont.

The “church on the hill” building was built in 1838. It was originally built by the Baptists, so there was a Baptist Church in Weston by that time. However, the building is now home to the Weston Community Church. It is said to be one of the most photographed buildings in southern Vermont.

Tremont Temple Baptist Church, Boston, Massachusetts.

Tremont Temple Baptist Church was founded in Boston in 1839. My understanding is that it was a Free Baptist Church—believed in a general atonement and free (that is, open) communion. The building was completed in 1894. Several stories, it is now used by others as well as the church. The old sign over the church door says “The First Integrated Church in America.” I am unsure what nuance they use to make that claim. Many Baptist churches in America had integrated congregations long before this. The church affiliates with the ABCUSA, but also is part of the 9Marks orbit.

Pawcatuck Seventh Day Baptist Church, Westerly, Rhode Island.

There were Baptists in England and America who worshipped on the 7th day rather than the 1st day. This church house is the meeting location for the Pawcatuck Seventh Day Baptist Church in Westerly, which was organized in 1840. Apparently, based on there being two signs, and considering the Seventh Day Baptists meet on Saturday, another church called “The Church at Westerly” meets in the building on Sunday.

The church locations we visited cover a founding history of over 400 years, 1638-1840. Obviously, there were other locations we could have seen, but these constitute two that I was determined to see – Newport and Welsh Tract – and others that my daughter determined we would be close to, or places we happened to drive by. In most cases the buildings were locked, no one was around, and we were unable to go inside (Welsh Tract & Tremont Temple being exceptions). I did not do detailed research on the foundings of these churches, but generally accepted the dates they proposed. We saw other non-Baptist historical buildings, such as the Old North Church where the lanterns of warning were hung prior to “the midnight ride of Paul Revere” and William Dawes. I thought I would share a bit of history and a few pictures.

Baptist Whipped for His Convictions

The story of Obadiah Holmes running afoul of the Church and government in Massachusetts is a well-known and oft-repeated story in Baptist history. He was publicly whipped for his religious beliefs in September of 1651. Before Obadiah Holmes, there was Thomas Painter. Painter was whipped 7 years earlier, for holding anabaptist convictions and refusing the baptism of his child.

In his July 15, 1644 journal entry, Massachusetts Bay Colony Governor John Winthrop wrote the following:

“A poor man of Hingham, one Painter, who had lived at New Haven and at Rowley and Charlestown, and been scandalous and burdensome by his idle and troublesome behavior to them all, was now on the sudden turned anabaptist, and having a child born, he would not suffer his wife to bring it to the ordinance of baptism, for she was a member of the church, though himself were not. Being presented for this, and enjoined to suffer the child to be baptized, he still refusing, and disturbing the church, he was again brought to the court not only for his former contempt, but also for saying that our baptism was antichristian; and in the open court he affirmed the same. Whereupon, after much patience and clear conviction of his error, etc., because he was very poor, so as no other but corporal punishment could be fastened upon him, he was ordered to be whipped, not for his opinion, but for his reproaching the Lord’s ordinance, and for his bold and evil behavior both at home and in the court. He endured his punishment with much obstinacy, and when he was loosed he said, boastingly, that God had marvelously assisted him.” Winthrop’s Journal, “History of New England” 1630-1649 Volume 2, James Kendall Hosmer, editor. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1901, p. 171.

Not even a year earlier, at the court at Boston “the 5th of the 10th month, 1643” Painter was sentenced to time in the stocks for “disturbing the Church.” This likely shows the beginnings of his anabaptist convictions, though the court record is not specific as to how he disturbed the church.

“Painter stockt. Thomas Painter for disturbing the Church of Hingham, was censured to bee sett in stock a Lecture day, at Lecture time, except hee humble himself, and give the Church satisfaction.” Records of the Court of Assistants of the Colony of the Massachusetts Bay, 1630-1692, Volume II, Boston, MA: County of Suffolk, 1904, p. 135.

Thomas Painter was apparently a charter member of the Baptist Church at Newport, Rhode Island.

“The last name on the list is that of Painter, the Christian name being omitted, probably Thomas Painter, of Hingham [Massachusetts].” History of the First Baptist Church in Newport, R. I.: A Discourse Delivered on Thanksgiving Day, November 30, 1876, Comfort Edwin Barrows. Newport, RI: John P. Sanborn & Co., 1876, p. 15.

Thomas Painter was born in England in 1610. He was in the American colonies by 1630, when he married Katherine (Last Name Unknown) in Boston, Massachusetts. Some sources report his death occurred in 1706, looking it seems somewhat lacking in solid corroboration.

Benjamin Franklin’s “Faith”

I have seen the following quote online, credited to Benjamin Franklin:

“Here is my Creed. I believe in one God, the Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His Providence. That He ought to be worshipped.”

I have heard a lot of conflicting things about Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790). So, I put a question mark by the quote. Would he have said that? Well, he did – or rather wrote it. These are the words of Franklin. However, the brief extracted quote above sounds more “orthodox” Christian than Franklin actually was. The context brings out more of the “faith” or “religion” associated with Franklin. He follows this statement above in saying “That the most acceptable service we render to Him is in doing good to His other children.” He goes further to address man being judged by his good works, that the religion of Jesus is “the best the World ever saw,” but that he has “some Doubts as to his Divinity, tho’ it is a Question I do not dogmatise upon.” Nevertheless, Franklin saw “no harm however in its [Jesus’ Divinity] being believed,” as long as that belief resulted in the good consequences.

I suppose the whole is a good summary of what Benjamin Franklin believed – and that is what Franklin intended it to be. He did not hold biblical Christianity, though he considered it to be generally a good thing.

The statements are made in a letter from Franklin to U.S. educator and theologian Ezra Stiles, dated March 9, 1790, written a little over a month before his demise.

In a slough of incompetence

A slew of incompetence in a slough of incompetence

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, one who rises to the top in a slough of incompetence, is leading a charge to impeach Supreme Court justices — apparently just the ones she does not like. She said, “If we allow Supreme Court nominees to lie under oath and secure lifetime appointments to the highest court of the land and then issue, issue without basis — if you read these opinions — issue without basis rulings that deeply undermine human civil rights of the majority of Americans.”

The first takeaway any listener to or reader of that statement should have is this: Ocasio-Cortez has herself not read these opinions. If she had, she would know that they have a basis, even if she does not agree with it. The other options would seem to be that she has little to no reading comprehension, or she is a bald-faced liar.

There is definitely some serious misrepresentation going on about what was said in those hearings about Roe and Casey, but it’s not coming from the Justices...No Supreme Court nominee has ever come close to saying any such thing about any precedent. In fact, for decades, nominees of both parties have studiously avoided giving even what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg described in her 1993 hearing as “hints … forecasts … [or] previews.” Transcripts of those hearings, which are available here, here, and here, show exactly what the Justices said and expose how accusations of “lying” are pure fiction.
The Justices Didn’t Lie About Roe v. Wade—And Democrats Know It

America — my country

Samuel Francis Smith wrote “My country, ’tis of thee” circa 1831. Smith was born in Boston, Massachusetts on October 21, 1808. He died November 16, 1895 at age 87 years, and is buried at the Newton Cemetery in the city of Newton, Middlesex County, Massachusetts.

In The Psalmist: a New Collection of Hymns for the Use of the Baptist Churches, the hymn appears as No. 1000 on pages 524-25 under the title “National Hymn.” Smith wrote that he wrote this patriotic hymn in the same measure (meter 6s. & 4s.) as “God Save the King” and gave it, along with other pieces, to Lowell Mason. Mason paired it with Thesaurus Musicus / Harmonia Anglicana – which we know here as America – and it was first sung in public on July 4, 1831 or 1832 (sources differ) at a children’s Independence Day celebration at the Park Street Church in Boston (where Mason served as choirmaster and organist).

Smith authored numerous hymns, including “Down to the sacred wave” and “The morning light is breaking.” In addition to The Psalmist (with Baron Stowe), he also published Lyric Gems: a Collection of Original and Select Sacred Poetry (1844), Rock of Ages: Original and Selected Poems (1866/1870), Missionary Sketches: a Concise History of the Work of the American Baptist Missionary Union (1879), and many others. Smith was inducted into the Songwriters Hall of Fame in 1970.

S. F. Smith

1. My country, ’tis of thee, 
Sweet land of liberty,
Of thee I sing; 
Land, where my fathers died.
Land of the pilgrim’s pride,
From every mountainside,
Let freedom ring.

2. My native country, thee—
Land of the noble free—
Thy name — I love;
I love thy rocks and rills,
Thy woods and templed hills; 
My heart with rapture thrills,
Like that above.
 
3. Let music swell the breeze, 
And ring from all the trees
Sweet freedom’s song: 
Let mortal tongues awake;
Let all that breathe partake; 
Let rocks their silence break,—
The sound prolong.
 
4. Our fathers’ God, to thee,
Author of liberty,
To thee we sing;
Long may our land be bright,
With freedom’s holy light; 
Protect us by thy might,
Great God, our King!

Samuel Francis Smith attended Harvard University 1825-1829, and was a classmate of Oliver Wendell Holmes. Afterward Smith enrolled in and studied at Andover Theological Seminary 1829/30-1832. Smith was ordained to the Baptist ministry at Waterville, Maine in 1834. He pastored churches in Massachusetts and taught at Waterville College. He served as secretary of the Baptist Missionary Union fifteen years.

In Oliver Wendell Holmes (New York, NY: Twayne Publishers, 1963, p. 75, United States authors series; Vol. 29), Miriam Rossiter Small reported that in 1893 Harvard classmate Holmes recommended Samuel Francis Smith as a candidate for a Doctor of Letters degree from Harvard University. Harvard declined. Holmes retorted, “His song will be sung centuries from now, when most of us and our pipings are forgotten.”

Lowell Mason

Peevish reactions to Dobbs v. Jackson WHO

Some guy named Billie Joe Armstrong is apparently an important rock star. (You couldn’t prove it by me.) While in London, he told concertgoers that he will protest the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision by renouncing his United States citizenship and moving to England. Good for him. Pray for England.

Another rock/pop star had plenty of cuss words for America (as did Billie Joe Armstrong). Pink told her fans who agree with the Supreme Court decision re Roe v. Wade to “never (cuss word deleted) listen to my music again.” Thanks, I will take you up on that, although the again part won’t be a problem for me! Perhaps she assumes a lot in thinking that pro-life folks actually listen to her music. She assumes more in thinking she gets to control who listens to her music.

We probably should praise these peevish reactions because (1) they are angry but not violent, and (2) they expose the underlying unthinking hypocrisy of many abortion proponents. The article I read says Armstrong is a native of California. Rather than controlling what Americans think, the Supreme Court decision pushes abortion laws back to the states. Armstrong’s state will have abortion freely available. Pink does not want the Court controlling her views and actions – yet she wants to control who can and cannot listen to her music! Pot meet kettle.

C’est la vie.

Sad Anniversary post removed

Sometimes I prepare posts ahead of time for a specific upcoming anniversaries, dates, events, and/or holidays. Today I removed a “Sad Anniversary” post I had scheduled for the 50th anniversary of the Roe versus Wade Supreme Court Decision. Six months before its fiftieth birthday, the Supreme Court aborted it with its Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision.

Held: The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.

The vote was 6-3 to uphold the Mississippi law in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. However, though Chief Justice John Roberts agreed with that opinion, he held that the court should not have overturned Roe. The other three liberal justices opposed.

Biblically

• The Bible condemns murder – the taking of human life without justification.
• The Bible affirms the humanity of unborn children.
• Since the Bible establishes the humanity of the unborn child, then abortion is murder and cannot be morally permissible.

Legally

• The U. S. Constitution does not affirm abortion as a right.
• Murder should be regulated at the State rather than Federal level.
• The choice being made in abortion is the choice to take an innocent human life.

John Clarke’s Four Religious Principles

After the arrest of Baptists John Clarke (1609-1676), Obadiah Holmes (1610-1682), and John Crandall (1618-1676), for holding an unauthorized religious service in Massachusetts, Governor Endicott replied that they deserved death! He instead ultimately challenged them to a discussion with their ministers, which John Clarke accepted. According to Henry Sweetser Burrage (A History of the Baptists in New England, American Baptist Publication Society, 1894, pp. 35-36), Clarke proposed four points of discussion – of which Burrage gives excerpts. I followed this back and found the complete information in Clarke’s Ill News from New England.

The Testimony of Iohn Clarke a prisoner of Iesus Christ at Boston, in the behalf of my Lord, and of his people, is as followeth.

1. I Testifie that Iesus of Nazareth, whom God hath raised from the dead, is made both Lord and Christ; this Iesus I say is the Christ, in English, the Anointed One, hath a name above every name; He is the Anointed Priest, none to, or with him in point of attonement; The Anointed Prophet, none to him in point of instruction; The Anointed King, who is gone unto his Father for his glorious Kingdom, and shall ere long return again; and that this Iesus Christ is also The Lord, none to, or with him by way of Commanding and ordering (with respect to the worship of God) the household of Faith, which being purchased with his Blood as Priest, instructed, and nourished by his Spirit as Prophet, do wait in his appointment as he is the Lord, in hope of that glorious Kingdom which shall ere long appear.

2. I Testifie that Baptism, or dipping in Water, is one of the Commandements of this Lord Iesus Christ, and that a visible beleever, or Disciple of Christ Iesus (that is, one that manifesteth repentance towards God, and Faith in Iesus Christ) is the only person that is to be Baptized, or dipped with that visible Baptism, or dipping of Iesus Christ in Water, and also that visible person that is to walk in that visible order of his House, and so to wait for his coming the second time in the form of a Lord, and King with his glorious Kingdom according to promise, and for his sending down (in the time of his absence) the holy Ghost, or holy Spirit of Promise, and all this according the last Will and Testament of that living Lord, whose Will is not to be added to, or taken from.

3. I Testifie or Witness, that every such believer in Christ Iesus, that waiteth for his appearing, may in point of liberty, yea ought in point of duty to improve that Talent his Lord hath given unto him, and in the Congregation may either aske for information to himself; or if he can, may speak by way of Prophecie for the edification, exhortation, and comfort of the whole, and out of the Congregation at all times upon all occasions, and in all places, as far as the jurisdiction of his Lord extends, may, yea ought to walk as a Child of light, justifying wisdom with his ways, and reproving folly with the unfruitfull works thereof, provided all this be shown out of a good conversation, as Iames speaks with meekness of wisdom.

4. I Testifie that no such believer, or Servant of Christ Jesus hath any liberty, much less Authority, from his Lord, to smite his fellow servant, nor yet with outward force, or arme of flesh, to constrain, or restrain his Conscience, no nor yet his outward man for Conscience sake, or worship of his God, where injury is not offered to the person, name or estate of others, every man being such as shall appear before the judgment seat of Christ, and must give an account of himself to God, and therefore ought to be fully perswaded in his own mind, for what he undertakes, because he that doubteth is damned if he eat, and so also if he act, because he doth not eat or act in Faith, and what is not of Faith is Sin.

Ill Newes from New-England, or, A narative of New-Englands persecution wherin is declared that while old England is becoming new, New-England is become old, by John Clark, London: Printed by Henry Hills, 1652, pages 9-10.

The current state of separation of church and state

As were our Baptist forefathers, so am I a proponent of the free exercise of religion – that is, in regard to state interference in it (we are not free from God). However, I think that oft times in the modern U.S., our first amendment has been stood on its end, making it an enemy of religion rather than a friend. This reason for this is that secularism often functions in the place of a state-adopted religion.

When secularism functions as the state religion, then it is given preference over religion under the guise of separation. That sends a message to all residents of the United States that non-religious secularism is better than religion. If you are not a religion, then we will give you this, and support you in that. If you are a religion, we will shut you out.

By not adopting a state religion, the United States has on the other hand developed a religion of state, a secular type of “religious non-religion” that functions as religion. There is no way our forefathers could have foreseen this. They set the constitutional idea of freedom of religion in place in a culture saturated with a Judeo-Christian ethic. In practice, Christianity often functioned beneath the surface as the de facto “state religion” without it being established as such – simply because of the large number of people who were Christians, at least functionally, or at least accepted the general principles found in the Bible as legitimate and good. We are no longer there.

Over the years, secularism has taken over as a de facto state religion with Christianity incrementally being rooted out of the public square. In our current applications of state religion, any “moral” philosophy that claims to arise from some source other than “religion” is given preference or ascendancy over any moral philosophy that rises from a religious base. Therefore, very truly the state functions in supporting one (yes, establishing secularism to function as religion) while opposing the other (actual religion).

I see the problem, but do not have the answer for it. Perhaps we are beyond implementing any answer even if we had one. Perhaps it will “solve itself” (and perhaps not in the way we might prefer). It seems likely that we have reached a time and place in the history and culture of the United States where there is going to be a separation of those who are heart Christians and those who are nominal Christians.

“So there was a division among the people because of him” [i.e., Jesus Christ]. John 7:43.

Bibles at the Pilgrim Hall Museum at Plymouth

Absolutist authors arbitrarily affirm that the Pilgrims only brought the Geneva Bible to America on the Mayflower, that it is the only Bible they would have brought, and that they would not have brought or used a King James Bible. One consideration calls this into question.

Having posted several times re the Geneva Bible,[i] I found the following quite intriguing. The Pilgrim’s Society was founded in 1820, incorporated by the State Legislature of Massachusetts. Then resolutions were passed to build a Pilgrim Hall, which was completed in 1824.[ii] The Pilgrim Hall Museum in Plymouth, Massachusetts maintains four very early Bibles – three Geneva Bibles and one King James Bible. There is general agreement that two of these were brought to America on the Mayflower in 1620.

The following information comes from “Four Early Bibles in Pilgrim Hall” by Charles C. Forman (Pilgrim Society Note, Series One, Number Nine, April 1959).

“Among the books in Pilgrim Hall are four Bibles of unusual interest. One belonged to Governor William Bradford, the Pilgrim Governor, and one to John Alden.[iii] These are among the very few objects existing today which we feel reasonably sure ‘came over in the Mayflower.’ Of the history of the other two we know little, but they are Geneva Bibles, the version most commonly used by the Pilgrims.”

William Bradford’s Bible

“Governor Bradford’s Bible is a Geneva Bible...The Table of Contents lists the Apocrypha, but the actual books are no longer present, and may never have been included...The early pages of this Bible, up to Genesis XII, are gone, but the title page of the New Testament gives the name of the printer and the date: Christopher Barker … London … 1592.’”

John Alden’s Bible

“No. 90 in the Pilgrim Hall catalogue designates the Bible which once belonged to John Alden. Some of the leaves are missing, but the colophon at the end of Revelation shows that the New Testament was printed in London by Robert Barker, ‘Printer to the Kings most excellent Majestie,’ in 1620. The Concordance was printed by Bonham Norton and John Bill in 1619. This is not a Geneva Bible, but the ‘King James’ or ‘Authorized’ version.”

The Bibles at Pilgrim Hall supply a few other interesting facts about the Geneva Bible:

“Bradford’s Bible is printed in black letter, or ‘Old English,’ type, except for the marginal notes, conclusive evidence that the familiar statement that the Geneva Bible was always printed in Roman type is inaccurate.”

“The Bibles in Pilgrim Hall show that different editions of the Geneva Bible varied considerably in detail; that the material bound together also varied, either by the owner’s choice or the caprice of the bookseller; and that the firm of Barker in London printed both King James and Geneva Bibles, sometimes using the same decorative material for both.”

It cannot be proven beyond a shadow of doubt that Alden brought his Bible with him on the Mayflower. (Neither can it be proven regarding Bradford’s Bible, for that matter.) The careful position of the Pilgrim Hall Museum is that they do not have absolute proof that there were any Bibles on the Mayflower. However, it is reasonable to believe that a deeply religious people would bring Bibles with them, and almost inconceivable that they would not.

A cautious approach to history would be that some Geneva Bibles probably came over on the Mayflower, and that probably at least one King James Bible did so as well. Absolute proof cannot currently be provided.

---

[i] HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.
[ii] “The mission of the Pilgrim Society and Pilgrim Hall Museum is to achieve worldwide awareness of the Pilgrims’ significance, and the story of early Plymouth, as an enduring narrative of America’s founding.”
[iii] John Alden was a cooper and carpenter, and may not have been a Separatist or Puritan at the time he came to America. On the other hand, he signed the Mayflower Compact.

The seeds of a new nation

“The courageous Pilgrims became the seeds of a new nation. They sacrificed fortunes and endured hardships solely for the freedom to worship God according to the dictates of their conscience. Prizing that liberty above life itself, they surmounted all obstacles to gain it.

“In paying tribute to them, the forefathers of this great nation, we must also acknowledge the source of their inspiration, their comfort in sorrow, the magnet that drew them 3,000 miles across the cold and stormy Atlantic waters to a country beyond the edge of civilization. It was the book that for them was supreme in all matters of faith and practice—the ‘Indestructible Book’.” 

W. Kenneth Connolly, The Indestructible Book, p. 176

Declaration of Independence

In Congress, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, 
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Georgia

Button Gwinnett

Lyman Hall

George Walton

North Carolina

William Hooper

Joseph Hewes

John Penn

South Carolina

Edward Rutledge

Thomas Heyward, Jr.

Thomas Lynch, Jr.

Arthur Middleton

Massachusetts

John Hancock

Maryland

Samuel Chase

William Paca

Thomas Stone

Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia

George Wythe

Richard Henry Lee

Thomas Jefferson

Benjamin Harrison

Thomas Nelson, Jr.

Francis Lightfoot Lee

Carter Braxton

Pennsylvania

Robert Morris

Benjamin Rush

Benjamin Franklin

John Morton

George Clymer

James Smith

George Taylor

James Wilson

George Ross

Delaware

Caesar Rodney

George Read

Thomas McKean

New York

William Floyd

Philip Livingston

Francis Lewis

Lewis Morris

New Jersey

Richard Stockton

John Witherspoon

Francis Hopkinson

John Hart

Abraham Clark

New Hampshire

Josiah Bartlett

William Whipple

Massachusetts

Samuel Adams

John Adams

Robert Treat Paine

Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island

Stephen Hopkins

William Ellery

Connecticut

Roger Sherman

Samuel Huntington

William Williams

Oliver Wolcott

New Hampshire

Matthew Thornton