BAPTIST BITES: Thomas Helwys

 The first people we could truly call “Baptists” developed under the leadership of two men: John Smyth, the Pastor of the congregation (whom we discussed last month) and his associate, Thomas Helwys. Helwys wasn’t a pastor at the time; he was a well-to-do layman. He came from a land-owning family and was educated at a prestigious law school in London. It’s likely he paid much of the cost for the English church to emigrate to Holland in search of religious liberty. His leadership gifts were an excellent mesh with Smyth’s. It was said that  “If Smyth brought oares, Helwys brought sayles.” [archaic spelling]  The intended meaning was that Helwys knew how to get things done. It appears that Smyth was more the “big idea” man, but prone to flights of fancy. Helwys was the clear-thinking, practical one. 

Helwys developed Baptist beliefs along with Smyth: that only true Christians composed the true church (regenerate church membership), demonstrated via believer’s baptism. They believed that infant/child baptism was not attested to in Holy Scripture. Helwys also agreed that his prior baptism was invalid, because it had been performed when he was an infant. That’s why Smyth and Helwys were rebaptized.  But when Smyth came to believe his baptism was invalid, because it should have come from a church with historic succession, Helwys parted company with him. He and 10 others maintained that baptism was a testimony of the individual’s faith, and there was no mystical power in receiving it from a church with historic succession. 

In 1611, Helwys led his small group back to England, where they planted a church in London’s Spitalfield area. This could truly be said to be the first Baptist church in England. It might seem a courageous step for this tiny group of Baptists to return to the country they had fled because of persecution. Remember that King James had vowed the expulsion of anyone refusing to conform to Anglican teachings. For those who remained, there was the real threat of being burned at the stake for heresy. That’s what happened in 1612 to two men, Bartholomew Legate and Edward Wightman.  Regardless, Helwys had come to believe that they were wrong to flee their homeland. He reasoned that if believers with the truth all fled the country, there would be no true teaching left in their own country. It was admirable for his little group to follow him. 

Helwys took on himself to try and reach the heart of the King, that he would repent of his sins. He published a book called A Short Declaration of the Mistery of Iniquity [archaic spelling]. In this book he attacked the corruption of the Church of England—especially its bid to coerce the consciences of the English subjects to worship according to its dictates. He pled for true religious liberty as a divinely-given right. His reasoning was compelling: every person will give personal account before the Judgment Seat for his beliefs and life, and it won’t avail to tell God that we were ordered to forsake the true path by some earthly authority.  It is unjust, then, for any government to threaten dungeon or death against a person for spiritual beliefs. He called for all people to have the “blessed liberty, to understand the Scriptures with their own spirits.” 

Helwys penned a handwritten note on the flyleaf of the book and sent it to King James. To put it mildly, the King was not amused. He threw Helwys into Newgate Prison, where he died in the year 1616.  His forceful response is understandable when you read even a short passage of Helwys’ challenging words:

 

Heare O King, and dispise not ye counsel of ye poore, and let their complaints come before thee. The King is a mortall man, and not God, therefore [he] hath no power over ye immortall soules of his subjects, to make lawes and ordinances for them, and to set spirituall Lords over them. If the King have authority to make spirituall Lords and laws, then he is an immortal God and not mortall man. O King, be not seduced by deceivers to sin so against God Whom thou oughtest to obey, nor against thy poore subjects who ought and will obey thee in all things with body life and goods, or let their lives be taken from ye earth. God save ye King. [archaic spelling] 

Never fear that Helwys’ death spelled the end of the Baptist movement. The mantle of leadership was passed onto others. This little band of Baptists didn’t dwindle—they grew! By 1626, there were at least 150 Baptist believers distributed among 5 churches. By 1644 there were 47!  It is surely by God’s hand that Baptists continued to thrive, even under the severe persecution they experienced under Kings James and Charles I. 

As we review Helwys’ life, we can see that though it was cut short too soon, he had a great impact on Baptist identity that continues to our day. Along with Smyth he developed the doctrines of regenerate church membership and believer’s baptism. But his powerful writing and preaching demonstrate that his biggest contributions were in the area of religious liberty. He was a champion of separation of Church and State, a belief that makes up a vital part of who we are. His book also indicates why soul freedom is such an important part of our belief as well. If we are indeed to give account before God for our own belief and behavior, it is essential that we are able to follow the leading of God’s Word, the Holy Spirit, and our consciences without constraint.  Some people may indeed fall into error, and that grieves us! We should pray for them and reason with them from Scriptures, gently and respectfully. But it is true that no person can compel the conscience of another. 

When we return next month, we’ll cover the growth of the Baptist movement with its division into two main groups, the General Baptists and the Particular Baptists. What do these terms mean, and what do they mean for us? Tune in next month to find out!

BAPTIST BITES: John Smyth and the English Separatists

The next step in our journey to understand how Baptists came to be and believe as they do takes us to the English Separatists in the late 16^th-17^th centuries.  We will see that our Anabaptist forebears continue to play a role in this journey, but Baptists themselves came into being through the leadership of John Smyth and his friend, Thomas Helwys.  This time we’ll focus our camera on Smyth, looking into Helwys’ role next month.

John Smyth was born around the year 1570. As a young man he graduated from Cambridge in 1593 and a candidate for ministry in the Church of England. He was appointed to preach in the city of Lincoln, England in 1600, but already by 1603 he was removed from office. It seems he was very boldly preaching ideas which did not conform to the doctrine of the Anglicans. In short, he was on the road to becoming a Separatist.

The Separatists believed that the Church of England needed to be further purified from unscriptural beliefs and practices they’d retained from the Roman Catholics.  You may have heard of the Puritans; that group believed that these impurities could be cleansed from within the church. The Separatist sect was more radical. They saw a big problem with the Church of England: it was established and controlled by the State. That made it impossible to purge or preserve it from corruption. Separatists were convinced that the only workable solution was to break away entirely, to preach the Word of God exactly as it is written, free of manipulation from church hierarchies or political corruption.  In this you’ll see major components of Baptist belief: our firm belief in separation of Church and State, as well as insistence on the Word of God as our only authority for belief and practice.

After his removal from the parish at Lincoln, John Smyth went back to his home town of Gainsborough, England.  There, he was quickly appointed pastor of a Congregational church.  Under his teaching, the whole congregation at Gainsborough adopted Separatist views. But they quickly came under persecution from the new King of England, James I (of King James Bible fame). He immediately set out to crack down on the Separatists, declaring that “I will make them conform themselves, or I will have them out of the land.” Pastor Smyth, accompanied by fellow church leader Thomas Helwys, fled England with their whole congregation of about 50 believers in 1607. They traveled to Amsterdam in the Netherlands, a country renowned for its religious freedom. There Smyth pastored his little, refugee congregation. As they pursued their course of study and reform, this would become history’s first Baptist congregation.

As Smyth and Helwys continued to study, they took up the question of who is scripturally qualified to be church members. Smyth grew convicted that the true church is only composed of those who have responded to the Gospel with repentance and faith and have testified to their new life in Christ through believer’s baptism.  They were convinced that infant baptism is not taught in the Bible. Of course, this is the main doctrine that forms the identity of Baptists to this day.  And the idea of “regenerate church membership,” only true Christians as members, is still cherished by us.

Other beliefs that Smyth set forth included two-fold church leadership, with pastors (elders) and deacons as the pattern set forth in the New Testament.  Even those officers would be accountable to the members. Financial support of the church should come only from the church membership—the State should not fund the Church in anyway, because with funding comes control. All of this continues to make up our spiritual DNA as Baptists.

With his new beliefs concerning Baptism, what was Smyth to do? His church was not part of a denominational body which practiced believer’s baptism.  How could they be properly baptized, then? He could think of only one course, and Helwys agreed.  Smyth first baptized himself in front of them all, after recounting his testimony and setting forth his beliefs.  Then, all the other members of the church were baptized as believers.  Note that this was a baptism by affusion, or pouring. Immersion wasn’t yet on their radar, but of course that would come with time. 

Smyth and Helwys led their church as it congregated in a meeting house rented from a local congregation of Mennonites. They found they were in close harmony with these Anabaptists on many things.  They formed deep friendships and conversations with them, and it was the Mennonites that convinced Smyth and Helwys to turn away from the Calvinist doctrine of predestination (more on that when we look at Helwys next month).

As they fellowshipped with their Mennonite friends, however, doubts were raised about whether it was legitimate for Smyth to have baptized himself.  It was suggested to him that true baptism should be administered from a church with historic succession over the generations. For good or bad, Smyth was an impressionable man, and he agreed that he’d been in error.  He, along with the majority of the congregation, applied for membership with the Mennonite church.

Helwys, however, parted ways with Smyth at this point. Along with eight or ten other members, they maintained that baptism was solely an expression of one’s personal faith and testimony—historic succession was unnecessary. They broke from Smyth’s group and continued as the “true” first Baptist church in Amsterdam.  As the mainstream of Baptist history continues with Helwys’ group, we will follow their story with the next article.

As you read this article, I trust you saw that several points of Baptist faith came together quickly through the ministry of John Smyth. Though he and Helwys had a falling-out, Smyth’s studies in God’s Word made a tremendous contribution to who we are today.  I hope you continue to find this survey to be helpful, and that you’ll have a firmer sense of footing in your own identity as a Baptist.