number, therefore, Mr. Richard Blount, who understood the Dutch language, was commissioned to go for this purpose. On his return, he baptized Rev. Samuel Blacklock, and these two baptized the rest, "whose names are in the manuscript, to the number of fiftythree."*

Most of the Baptists in England however, it is said, regarded this as "needless trouble, and what proceeded from the old popish doctrine of right to administer sacraments by an uninterrupted succession, which neither the Church of Rome nor the Church of England could prove to be with them. They affirmed therefore, and practised accordingly, that after a general corruption of baptism, an unbaptized person might warrantably baptize, and so begin a reformation."†

In the year 1609, a treatise was published in Holland, by Rev. Mr. Smyth, in which, says Crosby, he defended the two following principles-First, that "upon the supposition of the true baptism being lost for some time, through the disuse of it, it is necessary there should be two persons to unite in the administration." The second is, that "the first administrator must be a member of some church, who shall

* Crosby's History of the Baptists, vol. 1. p. 182, London edition, 1738.

+ Persecution Judged and Condemned, p. 41, quoted by Crosby.

call and empower him to administer it to the other members."*

On these latter principles, Mr. Williams and his friends seem to have acted; for Mr. Holliman, who was afterwards a Deputy from the town of Warwick to the General Court, was appointed by the little community, to baptize Mr. Williams, and then he baptized the rest.† Backus thinks it probable, that he concluded that his case was similar to that proposed by Zanchius, Professor of Theology at Heidel · berg, in his commentary on the fifth chapter of Ephesians. He supposes a Turk, by reading the New Testament, to become converted, and to be the means of converting his family to Christ. Not living in a christian country, nor having access to christian ministers, Zanchius desires to know whether he must necessarily live without practising the christian ordinances? He answers in the negative, saying that he may be baptized by one of his own converts, "because he is a minister of the word, extraordinarily stirred up of Christ; and so as such a minister, may, with the consent of that small church, appoint one of the communicants and provide that he be baptized by him." But it is

* Crosby, I. p. 100.

+ Backus's Hist. vol. I. p. 105-6.

supposed by some, that one higher than Zanchius, even the great head of the Church himself, has anticipated such a case, and has provided for it by direct legislation; for in that part of the eighteenth chapter of Matthew, where Christ converses with his disciples, respecting the discipline of the church, he says, "where two or three are gathered together, or associated, in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” Those have reason for their opinion, who think that Christ intended to lay the proper basis for a true church, and in effect declares that whenever any unite by solemn covenant, in his name, to walk together in obedience to his commandments, there he will be to ratify and bless their union; and that thence they have from his word as much authority for their acts as a church, as they would have if his personal presence were revealed among them, and they were to receive a commission directly from his lips. A church thus united would be bound to take his word as their rule, to observe all things whatsoever he has commanded them; to appoint their bishops and their deacons, and to do every thing decently and in order; and would thus exemplify the great principle that succession arises from order, and not order from succession.

In regard to a case of baptism, however, like that of Mr. Williams's, it is worthy to be men

tioned, that in every age and in every church, baptism by the hands of a layman has been deemed valid in case of necessity. Numerous authorities might be adduced to show this, but suffice it now to name Potter, Archbishop of Canterbury, who says, in the age of Tertullian, it was permitted to laymen to baptize when necessity required it; and in the time of Ambrose, it was the common opinion that laymen may baptise in cases of extreme danger, neither can any instance be produced where this practice was condemned by any council.*

Thus was formed (in March, 1639, according to Winthrop,) the first Baptist church in America. The members who first constituted it were ten in number, and their names were these:Roger Williams, Ezekiel Holliman, William Harris, Stuckley Westcot, John Green, Richard Waterman, Thomas James, Robert Cole, Francis Westcot, and Thomas Olney.

It is quite remarkable that the work of founding this Church, devolved chiefly on a man who had been at first a clergyman of the Church of England, and was a Pædo-Baptist when he emigrated to America, instead of some one of that multitude of Baptists who were then living in England and in Holland. Although the cir

*Potter on Church Government, p. 233-4. Phila. 1824.

cumstances in which the baptism of the first members of this Church occurred were quite extraordinary, and excited at first some question as to the validity of the rite, yet it is now generally regarded as satisfactory, according to the principles admitted by all protestant Christians. For as we have seen, according to the sentiments generally held by the Baptists themselves, it must be admitted to be valid, and in the view of Pædo-Baptists, Mr. Williams was, of course, qualified to administer Christian ordinances. Nevertheless, if it were otherwise, the question would not have so much practical importance, as some who have made but slight inquiry into the subject have been disposed to think. An impression has to some extent prevailed, that Roger Williams may be justly called the head and founder of the Baptist denomination of America, and also, that of what was considered in his day the heresy of religious liberty, he has the credit of being not only the promulgator, but the author. Historical justice requires that we give to both of these points some attention.

Touching the first, a few words will suffice. Comparatively few of the members of this Church have derived their baptism from Roger Williams, and comparatively few of the Baptists of America have sprung from this body. For more than half a century, this Church has had