command of Christ it was his duty to be baptized on a profession of his faith. In his view, this could not justly be called anabaptism, or second baptism, inasmuch as he could not admit that he had ever been baptized at all, and the rite which had been applied to him in his infancy, was classed by him amongst the corruptions of Christianity.

The difficulty which immediately arose however, was the want of a proper administrator, for at that time no ordained minister could be found in America, who had been immersed on a profession of his faith. A regard for order, would naturally lead Mr. Williams and those who were with him, to wish for such a person; and if any of them had laid any stress on the prevalent idea of the necessity of a regular succession of baptized ministers from the apostles, in order to administer baptism properly, their case would be somewhat embarrassing. The same question had been discussed in London a short time before, in the year 1633, in a Baptist church which was formed by an amicable secession from a body of Independents, of which Rev. John Lathrop was the minister. Some of the members following out the same principles which Roger Williams promulgated in Massachusetts, came to the conclusion that there was no divine warrant for infant baptism. Among these was Kiffin, a

princely merchant well known in the court of Charles II., and from whom that monarch condescended to ask a loan of thirty thousand pounds; a request to which Kiffin replied that he could not command so much money just then, but at the same time presented to his Majesty one third of that sum. Kiffin left a manuscript containing an account of the formation of the new church, to which Crosby in his history of the Baptists, makes a reference.* It seems that some of these were very desirous to receive baptism in a manner the least objectionable; and though there were Baptists in England who could have administered the ordinance to them, they chose to send to the Netherlands, where there were those whose baptism was said to have descended from the Waldensian Christians. One of their

*Thomas Crosby was a Mathematical teacher in London, the early part of the last century, and a deacon of the church of which Dr. John Gill was Pastor. He was led to publish his history of the Baptists, by the following circumstance :Having heard that Mr. Neal was preparing a history of the Puritans, he placed in the possession of that writer many valuable materials from which a just representation of the condition and progress of the Baptists might have been drawn. But on the publication of Neal's work, it appeared that little use had been made of these papers, and that to the subjects of which they treated, the partialities of that author had rendered him incapable of doing historical justice. For an illustration of Neal's failure at this point, see Dr. Price's History of Protestant Nonconformity, vol. II. p. 319.

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.t Backus thinks it probable, that he concluded that his case was similar to that proposed by Zanchius, Professor of Theology at Heidelberg, 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