 |
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
Introductory Concerns
Thesis of the work
John Tombes, B.D., represents an untold chapter from the seventeenth century in two important ways. The first has to do with the history of Puritanism in England and New England. The second with his baptismal theology. This introduction will show how Tombes has been neglected and miscategorised from that age until the present. A fuller presentation in the body of the work will become a exposition of his thought in order to show his unique contribution to the history and development of Christian doctrine. It also will display the peculiarities of Tombes's ecclesiology which have further ostracised him from his theological progeny. Thus, there is one sustained argument with many facets. Tombes was unique. He deserves a place among his contemporary peers.
This main thesis for which this paper contends is simple. It
is for a new historical modifier for theologians like Tombes. The
new term for which this work argues is Anglican
Antipaedobaptist.1 Such a denominator is needed to give enough specificity to protect
against the future miscategorisation of those who may have been or
would be like-minded with the subject. The presentation of Tombes's
theology is an attempt to codify what has fallen into disuse. It is also
to show the brilliance of his thought drawn from an ingenious, yet
typical, methodology. All but two of his fourteen antipaedobaptist
works were collections of individual interactions with others with whom
he disagreed. The remaining two works attempted to present his
views in a popular form for his day. For the academics and divines,
he wrote an exercitation2 and for the masses he penned a catechism.
Literature Review
Three of the major reference works used by those who
seek to understand the seventeenth century are responsible for the pre
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
vailing understanding of who Tombes was and what he represented.
Calamy Revised presents Tombes as the ejected minister from
his position as the "Vicar of Leominster, Herefs.
1662".3 The article is an accurate presentation of the historical facts. It does not,
however, explain sufficiently the seemingly irreconcilable elements
from Tombes's life. It simply presents ingredients of Tombes's life
and thought that are difficult for most researchers to harmonise. Such
a list leaves a great deal of incongruity unresolved. It is detail
without needed interpretation.
T. L. Underwood wrote the article in the Biographical Dictionary of British Radicals in the Seventeenth Century.4 By using the denominator "Baptist minister", he biased the reader against a proper understanding of who Tombes was. "Baptist minister" gives the impression of service in a Baptist Church of one persuasion or at least a baptistic congregation. The term has sacramental and ecclesiological overtones, too. In the body of the article Underwood presents one of the apparent contradictions around the life of Tombes. He wrote, "Nevertheless, his refusal to conform as a minister cost him his living at Leominster, though he did conform as a lay communicant".5 The context is clearly and unambiguously referring to Tombes as a former minister and layman in the Anglican Church. Therefore, Baptist, as a modifier, lacks precision to define one who continued in outward lay conformity with the National Church. Alexander Gordon wrote the article in the Dictionary of National Biography.6 His initial descriptive denominator for Tombes is "baptist divine". Again, the connotations of the term, "baptist", entail sacramental and ecclesiological positions. "Divine" captures the essential elements of Tombes's methodology and manner. It is from this article that many have misunderstood Tombes in the twentieth century. A vague term or lack of historical precision in one generation leads to misunderstanding and miscategorisation in subsequent generations who look to the records of the earlier ones for guidance. The following progression is a representative sample of this phenomena. M. J. Walker penned an article for the Baptist Quarterly in | ||||
|
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
1966. In the article he implied that Tombes was a Particular Baptist.
Under Section Two of the article, where he dealt with the
Particular Baptists as regards the Baptist theology of infancy, he wrote:
In addition to their insistence upon the prior authority of Christ. The
Particulars also drew attention to the difference in the two covenants. In his
An Exercitation about Infant-Baptism, submitted to the Westminster Assembly
in 1646, John Tombes drew attention to the differences between the
Abrahamic covenant and that enjoyed by
believers.7
Walker linked Tombes with the Particular Baptists in
another place as if he were their major spokesman with these words:
If the Particular Baptist understanding of covenant, church and baptism
excluded children, they nevertheless recognised, as had the General
Baptists, that the infants of believers stood in a particular relationship to the church.
John Tombes could speak of the children of believers as being "born in
the bosom of the Church, of godly parents, who by prayers, instruction, example,
will undoubtedly educate them in the true faith of
Christ...."8
Walker added a few more citations and allusions to Tombes.
Walker was unaware that he was using a lifelong Anglican to
present a positive doctrine of the Particular Baptists. The presentation
and conclusions are therefore tainted by a misunderstanding drawn
from some undocumented miscategorisation of Tombes, perhaps the
DNB.9 The progression does not end there. In 1973, David Kingdon
wrote a work on baptism using the Walker article as a source of
historical data on Tombes. Kingdon refers to Tombes as "...another
Calvinistic Baptist of the 17th
century..."10 Based on the Kingdon allusion
to Tombes by way of Walker, in 1993, Timothy George wrote an
article for Interpretation on "The Reformed Doctrine of Believer's
Baptism."11 In that work, he calls Tombes a "Reformed
Baptist".12 All of the preceeding are in error.
Tombes will be shown to be reformational,
Calvinistic, baptistic as regards baptism and his view of the Covenant of Grace,
a "divine" in the sense of one who attained great proficiency in
divinity. However, he was not a Baptist in the common use of the
term, then, or in the present. A belief that states that baptism is for believ
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
ers exclusively is not enough to call someone a Baptist, just as
this view alone was not enough to denominate one as an Anabaptist
in the seventeenth century. Strangely enough, to illustrate the
point about the vagaries inherent in the use of some terms, "Baptist" as
a title entails more than a certain view of baptism.
It is the Baptist historians who have muddied the historical waters surrounding John Tombes. They have perceived him as one of their own standing against the establishment for his ideals. In actuality, Tombes was trying to bring greater reform to the established church. This is a needed distinction in order to understand the tension between his sacramental theology and his ecclesiology. Thomas Crosby set out to write as an English Baptist Historian and apologist for the movement. He published The History of the English Baptists from the Reformation to the Beginning of the Reign of George I between the years 1738 and 1740.13 He drew extensively from the Gould Manuscript, a self-proclaimed "Repository of Divers Historical Matters relating to the English Antipedobaptists".14 Benjamin Stinton began to make this collection in Jan 1710-11".15 Crosby presented the complexities that make up all that Tombes was in his time. He wrote about Tombes's position in restoring "right baptism",16 his letter to New England to help calm the disquiet over paedobaptism,17 and his personal history and theological development.18 It is in this context that Crosby is not careful. He presented Tombes as one who "gathered a separate church of those of his own persuasion, continuing at the same time minister of the parish." Crosby continued:
His society of Baptists was not large, but consisted of such who were of
good esteem for their piety and solid judgment; and three eminent ministers of
their persuasion were trained up in it, viz. Mr. Richard Adams, Mr. John
Eccles, and Capt. Boylston; and it continued till about the time of the king's
restoration.19
In the main portion of the work it will be demonstrated that Tombes was not a separatist. He could not justify withdrawal from the National Church. This "society" was not a gathered church, but a group | ||||
|
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
within the church in Bewdley that met together for mutual
encouragement and edification. All those who have used Crosby, the
father of Baptist history, for their foundational understanding of
Tombes as regards conformity, are liable to misunderstand an important
part of Tombes's personal ethoshis continued conformity as a lay
communicant in the Anglican Church after 1660.
Crosby pulled together citations from five
near-contemporaries of Tombes to give a word about his character and
achievements: Dr. Ward, Bishop of Salisbury, Richard Baxter,
Anthony Wood, Edmund Calamy, and William
Wall.20 All of these were well known Paedobaptists. This praise from all perspectives further
confuses the casual reader unfamiliar with the dynamics of the
personal history of John Tombes.
Joseph Ivemy was the next in the succession of Baptist
historians. His History of the English
Baptists appeared between 1811 and
1830.21 Ivemy presented Tombes in three ways. The first was
to show Tombes's relationship to the Westminster Assembly and
the history of personal persecution and discomfort that flowed
therefrom.22 The second was to portray Tombes as a Baptist who
gained great position as a trier under
Cromwell.23 The final use of Tombes was to demonstrate that Tombes was the founder of the first
Baptist Church in Bewdley.24 In the last case, wrong inferences were
drawn from the data.
Not all historians were affected by these writings.
John Aubrey's short biographical synopsis was included in his
Lives of Eminent Men.25 It presents Tombes's life accurately as a
personal reminiscence. Aubrey gives the impression, however, that
"Putting aside his Anabaptistical positions, he was conformable enough to
the Church of England".26 This study will point out that this was
another misconception. Tombes never put aside his baptismal theology.
He was gracious, however, in quiet protest. Tombes's outward
conformity to Anglicanism after the restoration had everything to do
with his ecclesiology and nothing to do with his
antipaedobaptist (anabaptist) distinctives. His last antipaedobaptist work was
published one year before his death in 1676. Outward continuity with
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
the Anglican Church does not entail Tombes put any personal
views aside.
In other biographical works of that era, Tombes is
categorised as "one of the most learned Baptist divines of the seventeenth
century",27 "a learned Baptist
Divine",28 "conformable enough to
the Church of England",29 and that "...in his day he was efficient
beyond most men in securing the extension of the Baptist
denomination".30 Tombes represents disparate ideas. These have hardly ever
been rightly understood and presented to readers of any era. These are
the basic research tools available to the modern enquirer. If they
represent a man and his thought wrongly, subsequent generations have
no other corrective than fresh attempts to understand those who are
now deceased, yet speak through their words that were bound and
sold for their contemporaries and posterity. It was Tombes who
realised this present and future use of his writings. He wrote to Robert
Baillie about some false accusations that appeared in print, "...[A]nd to
remain a record to posterity".31 Although Tombes had his
personal reputation in mind, the writings from his contemporaries to the
present have cast Tombes in a mould he does not actually fit.
In the Leominster History Church Book, a product of the mid eighteenth century, Joshua Thomas perpetuated the common misconceptions. He wrote: However, this is plain, about 1631, John Tombs was the public Minister of this Town and Parish. Tis true he was then a minister of the Church of England, a very great Scholar and as popular a Preacher, being more concerned with the glory of God and the Souls of Men than the generality of the Clergy are. He declared then that he was in doubt concerning Infant Baptism. In the beginning of the civil war, the King's forces coming his way, Mr. Tombs was plundered and drove off. He went to Bristol, and from thence to London, where he seriously consulted learned men and Books about the ordinance; but could never find Infant Baptism properly defended. At last upon full conviction, he was baptized according to scripture, and to answer a good conscience. He continued some years in London; but in the course of Providence some time after he was again settled at Leominster, in Cromwell's time, as the Public Minister of the Town and Parish as before. He was then a professed Baptist, very famous for his learning, and an ingenious Disputant: Therefore he was engaged in several of the debates of those times.32 | ||||
|
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
This obscure source is a faithful and succinct presentation as far as
it goes. As will be shown, however, there is far more to the history
and theology of John Tombes as regards infant baptism.
Tombes was enshrined twice in the
Minutes of the Sessions of the Westminster
Divines. On December 25, 1645, "Dr.
Gouge moved about Mr. Tombes, his book, and the Committee licenser".
There was much discomfort and agitation from Tombes's first
public publication on the matter of Baptism. Four months later, Mr.
Marshall was thanked for "...his great pains and respect..." after writing
to answer Tombes.33 This mention of Tombes in this work has
furthered the notion that Tombes was a non-conforming anabaptist
of some sort.
The primary historian of the Puritan era, Daniel Neal,
writing between 1732 and 1736, wrote of Tombes in the context of
writing about the "Anabaptists" who penned the
Baptist Confession of Faith published by seven congregations in
London (1646). Neal wrote:
The Advocates of this Doctrine were, for the most part, of the meanest of
the People; their Preachers were generally illiterate, and went about the
Countries making Proselytes of all that would submit to their Immersion, without
due regard to their Acquaintance with the Principles of Religion, or their
moral Characters. The writers of these Times represent them as tinctured with
a kind enthusiastick Fury against all that oppos'd them. Mr. Baxter says,
"There were but few of them that had not been the Opposers and Troublers of
faithful Ministers That in this they strengthen'd the Hands of the Profane, and
in general, Reproach of Minister, Faction, Pride, and scandalous Practices,
were fomented in their Way." But still there were among them some learned, and
a great many sober and devout Christians, who disallowed of the
Imprudence of their Country Friends. The two most learned Divines that espoused
their cause were Mr. Francis Cornwall, M.A. of Emanuel College, and Mr.
John Tombes, B.D. educated at the University of Oxford, a Person of
incomparable Parts, well versed in the Greek and Hebrew languages, and a most
excellent Disputant. He wrote several letters to Mr. Selden against Infant
Baptism, and published a Latin Exercitation upon the same Subject containing
several arguments, which he presented to the Committee appointed by the
Assembly to put a stop to the Progress of this Opinion. The
Exercitation being translated into English brought upon him a whole Army of Adversaries, among
whom wer the Reverend Dr. Hammond, Dr. Holmes, Mr. Marshal, Fuller, Geree,
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
Baxter, and others. The People of his Perswasion were more exposed to
the publick Resentments, because they would not hold Communion with
none but such as had been dipp'd. All must pass under the Cloud before they
could be received into their Churches; and the same narrow Spirit prevails too
generally among them even at this day.34
Neal commited a double fallacy: he lumped all perceived Baptists (Anabaptists) together as if they had one monolithic understanding of all doctrine and practise, and he imputed the errors of a movement onto an individual who never associated with Baptists of any sort. Tombes had nothing to do with the Confession that framed the context of Neal's words. Tombes did not practise a restricted Lord's Table because he was an Anglican. He was not an "open communion", nor any other kind of Baptist. The modern presentations of Tombes do nothing but reiterate these prejudicial views. They draw from those of the past who are considered as faithful guides. However, as regards Tombes, truth is mingled with error, or at least misunderstanding. Even one as aware of the times and tensions as B. R. White unknowingly perpetuated this understanding in his definitive work on the seventeenth century Baptists in England. While drawing together his summary conclusions, he wrote: Some seven hundred ministers whose appointments had been made during the interregnum had already been compelled to vacate their livings by various kinds of pressure before this. Now another thousand or more ministers were to abandon their positions because they were unable to make the declarations required. Because, as has been seen, on principle the vast majority of Baptists, whether Arminian, Calvinistic, or Seventh Day rejected the whole concept of an established Church and its methods of appointment and payment even if they were qualified to receive them, as for example was Hanserd Knollys, formerly a Church of England minister himself, only a tiny minority of their men was affected. In England, these included John Tombes, perhaps the most learned of all the Baptists, vicar of Leominster....35 It should be noted that White used the language of Calamy and Chalmers as previously stated. This use of the ancient sources to perpetuate a ossified un | ||||
|
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
derstanding of Tombes is typical of other twentieth century
Baptist historians. This is why a fresh appraisal of Tombes and his
thought became necessary. A few examples should suffice.
W. T. Whitley gave an accurate assessment with the
single exception of his use of "Baptist" as an imprecise term in an article
on "Baptists and Bartholomew's Day". Therein he wrote:
John Tombes, B.D. Of Leominster, one of Cromwell's Tryers, by far the
most learned Baptist of the age, who had never fallen into line with the
Baptist churches and ministers, gave up his living and ended his days as a lay
communicant of the Church of England, having married a rich
widow.36
"Baptist" denotes a theological understanding of the
sacraments, rather than a term that entails a given ecclesiology. However,
in another article, Whitley implied that Tombes was a leader
amongst some of these Baptist Churches. He wrote, "A second
important group evolved from the Calvinistic Separatist Churches, often
headed by exclergymen, such as
Tombes...."37
While allowance must be made for scholars to grow in
their specialities, realising that no one person is omniscient, even
within an area of speciality, it is curious that these two irreconcilable
allusions to Tombes by Whitley are found in the same volume not
too many pages apart. Tombes cannot be a leader in the
"Calvinistic Separatist Churches" and a man "who had never fallen into line
with the Baptist Churches and ministers", who "ended his days as a
lay communicant of the Church of England" at the same time and
with the same sense. Yet, in the same issue of the
Transactions of the Baptist Historical
Society, James Ford further confuses the understanding of Tombes as he attempted to reconcile the twin notions
of Tombes, the Anglican, and Tombes, the Baptist. He wrote, in
the context of John Eckels, a one-time disciple of Tombes and a
pastor of the Bromsgrove Church:
The name of the first pastor was John Eckels, who as a youth came from
Bewdley, ten miles distant, to Bromsgrove to learn his trade as a
"clothier," the town being then formed for its production of cloth and linen. This
youth, according to Crosby, had been baptised at Bewdley by John Tombes,
B.D., the "Anabaptist lecturer" of the Parish Church there, who formed the
Baptist
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
Church in that town whilst ministering at the Parish
Church.38
Crosby's work became the authority for yet another
misunderstanding.
A few years later there was "An Index of Notable
Baptists whose Careers began within the British Empire before 1850". In
the entry for Tombes, it was implied that he was a "Baptist". With
an asterisk, the reader is directed to the DNB
entry by Alexander Gordon who incautiously calls him a "baptist
divine".39 "Baptistic"
would be more accurate since it has the connotation of being only that
which is of or pertains to being a "Baptist". "Baptist" has too many
varied connotations. In the case of Tombes, the term lacks specificity,
while passing misunderstandings on to subsequent generations.
Scholars have sought to put these facts together in a
sensible manner. Inevitably, they fail to do justice to Tombes as they see
him through the term "Baptist". Often assumptions are made that
undermine the credibility of what is presented. M. A. R. Graves and
Robin Silcock illustrate this point. Of Tombes and the Cromwellian
period, they wrote:
Events in the Civil War and Interregnum seemed to justify the fears of
those who wished to limit toleration. Indeed, they convinced some who had
once been strong advocates of toleration that only a strong Church with
extensive powers of discipline could prevent anarchy. One such was John
Tombes, active in the West Midlands during the Interregnum as a Baptist. He
opposed both the national Church and the schemes for voluntary co-operation
among parish churches. By 1660 he had been converted, by his horror at the
heresies of some sects, to acceptance of the Anglican
Settlement.40
It will be shown that Tombes maintained conformity,
although as a layman, to the National Church. It is lay conformity
simply because he would not accept the Anglican Settlement. He laid
down his living of his own volition. Tombes did not oppose a
National Church on principle. His ecclesiology was based on the notion
that God works to establish churches in nations. The work by
Graves and Silcock shows, therefore, another attempt at creative
synthesis based on a confusing set of historical writings.
| ||||
|
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
H. Leon McBeth calls Tombes a "...leading Baptist of
that time...."41 Writing as a Baptist, McBeth's history and
historiography of Baptists further upholds the misunderstanding of Tombes.
McBeth implies that Tombes represented those essentials that define a
"Baptist" for the modern reader. In another place, McBeth makes
Tombes out to be a "Baptist" champion of religious liberty, although he
adds, "...some doubt he was ever a
Baptist.42
Therefore confusion reigns over content and context as
regards Tombes and all he represents.
The need for a systematic query into the life and thought
of John Tombes is therefore evident and justified by an examination
of the writings of others to date. Tombes was a complex man, but
one who can be understood and placed among the thinkers of his
day with a specific denominator.
Methodology and Presentation
In the first chapter the work will argue for a new
classification for Tombes and those like him. Their number may be proven
to be less than compelling, yet Tombes's influence upon his
contemporaries and the era through the shaping of covenantal
paedobaptism and credobaptism43 was tremendous.
The use of some ecclesiastical denominators will be
presented in order to make a case for specificity as regards John Tombes.
In the taxonomy of Antipaedobaptists there exist a number of subsets.
Those in common use include: Anabaptist, Baptist, and Abaptist.
These will be shown deficient in order to argue for the use of
Anglican as a modifier of antipaedobaptist in this specific instance.
The second chapter will argue for Tombes's place as a
compelling thinker and prolific writer within the history of ideas of
the seventeenth century. The development of his polemic provides
a unique contribution to the debate. He engaged all of the major
thinkers in England on the issue of Baptism. Everything Marshall
and Baxter, among other notables from England, Scotland, Ireland
and Wales, wrote touching the issue of baptism were usually penned in
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
the context of discussions with Tombes or at least with others
who were brought into the controversy. Tombes's interaction with
the Divines at the Westminster Assembly is an untold portion of the
history of the times.
The third chapter starts to codify the baptismal theology
of John Tombes in order to give context and understanding to his views.
The chapter develops the influences upon his slow acceptance of
a divergent viewpoint to show that Tombes was not individualistic
flotsam adrift on the seas of his age, but a careful thinker taking time
to untie the Gordian knot. Through his career in academia and
pulpit, Tombes's thought is perused to show a consistent application of
his first principles. In some cases, principles taken from his early
works are compared and expanded using his mature concerns.
The fourth chapter builds on this foundation in order to
display the exegetical arguments used by Tombes to undermine a
belief in Infant Baptism. It presents his rigid methodology borrowed
from Reformed Scholasticism. In Tombes's argumentation, the
syllogism is everything. The middle term is examined with the evidence
brought from texts of Scripture. Tombes then compares texts with others
to derive by good and necessary inference his doctrine. There is
really one basic argument with fifteen subsets. These sub-arguments
are fifteen exegetical presentations that establish the authoritative
superstructure for his theology of Baptism.
The fifth chapter is a presentation of how Tombes dealt
with the theological argumentation. These were attempts to draw
together the texts in order to present a coherent and systematic presentation
of the doctrine. There are five theological arguments he used to
answer his critics. They show great insight into the issues pressed
against him by so many.
The sixth chapter is a presentation of Tombes's three
basic historical arguments. It displays Tombes's abilities as an
antiquarian researcher and historian. Although the number of arguments is
only three, these arguments cover the history of Baptism from the time
of the Apostles to his own day. He deals with the fathers, the
Scriptures, and the implications therefrom to show that his exegesis and
| ||||
|
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
theology was consistent with an understanding of the issues
throughout the Christian era. Tombes's use of authorities from history
is fascinating and compelling. As a pre-modern scholar, he shows
how the craft of historical theology was practised in the twilight of an
age steeped in a well-developed methodology. He teaches those in
the modern age the need for thorough scholarship and commitment
to accuracy in presentation.
Chapter Seven gives the arguments of a practical nature.
Subsequent generations of Antipaedobaptists would demonstrate
how many of these arguments could be turned upon the positions of
the one proposing them. They are the least satisfying part of
Tombes's entire polemic. Yet, without their rhetoric calling others to
practical accountability, the discussion could have remained in the
theological ivory tower. The practical concerns bring the discussion down
to where people live and express some of the concerns of every
day, ordinary folk.
This section also presents Tombes's ultimate starting
point for his own view. His argument is presented and applied using
one firm base for his view.
The eighth chapter deals with the reaction to Tombes's
thought by his contemporaries. It shows the complexities of the discussion.
It displays the lack of unanimity of thought. It directs the
attention to one of the real issues-how one conceives of the doctrine of
the Covenant of Grace and how that relates to children of believers
and to those who profess faith in adulthood. It becomes clear that
theologians can use the same vocabulary while never understanding
what the other writer means. This is a problem with societal
equivocation. People from a given societal group, the clergy, can use
terms with non-analogous meanings.
This chapter deals also with some historical matters to
give context to the importance of the dispute. Seventeenth century
English society was dynamic in that changes were taking place
quickly with great impact and upheaval at all levels. Tombes was a cause
of schism as he was a product of an age that questioned all things
against a variety of authorities. Tombes will be displayed with warts and moles.
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
moles, beauty and brilliance in order to argue for a denominator
of specificity and his rightful place amongst the theologians of his time.
| ||||
|
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
Notes for Introductory Concerns:
1. The term "Antipaedobaptist" should be understood as one
who does not promote a belief in, or practise, the baptism of infants.
"Antipaedobaptism" should be understood as the theological
position that argues against infant baptism and for an alternative
position. Some Antipaedobaptists are advocates of believer or
disciple baptism (Credobaptists), some are not. To be an Antipaedobaptist
is not to be against other Christians who practise infant baptism, but
to argue against the theological foundations for the practise.
Conversely, some Paedobaptists will baptise first generation adult Christians
after they come to believe. Most Paedobaptists will baptise adults
if they have had no previous baptism. Subsets and intramural
controversies abound. See also M'Clintock and Strong
"Antipaedobaptists" in Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical
Literature, New York, Harper and Brothers, 1894, Vol. I, p. 275.
2. Exercitation: a written polemic designed to elicit responses
from other scholars on a particular point.
3. A. G. Matthews, "John Tombes",
Calamy Revised, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1934, pp. 487f.
4. T.L. Underwood, "Tombes, John, 1603-1676", in Richard
Greaves and Robert Zaller, Biographical Dictionary of British Radicals
in the Seventeenth Century, Vol. III, Harvester House, Brighton,
1984, pp. 245f.
5. Underwood, Tombes, p. 247.
6. A. J. Gordon, "Tombes, John (1603?-1676)" in
Dictionary of National Biography, Smith, Elder and Co., London, 1909. Reprinted
at Oxford University Press 1921-22. Vol. XIX, p. 930, col. 2.
7. M. J. Walker, "The Relation of Infants to Church, Baptism
and Gospel in Seventeenth Century Baptist Theology",
Baptist Quarterly, Vol. XXI (1966), p. 254.
8. Walker, Relation, p. 256.
9. B. R. White admits to the need for an updated presentation in
the DNB article. See, B.R. White, The English Baptists of the
Seventeenth Century, London, The Baptist Historical Society, 1983, p. 73,
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
n.12 "D.N.B. entry is extensive but requires bringing up to date".
10. David Kingdon, Children of
Abraham, Sussex, Carey Publications, 1973, p. 98.
11. Timothy George, "The Reformed Doctrine of Believers
Baptism" in Interpretation, Vol. XLVII, No. 3, July 1993. pp. 242-254.
12. George, Reformed
Doctrine, p. 252.
13. Thomas Crosby, The History of the English Baptists from
the Beginning of the Reign of George I, London, 1738-1740.
14. Gould Manuscript is housed at the Joseph Angus Library,
Regents Park College, Oxford.
15. Gould Manuscript, note inside title page.
16. Crosby, History, Vol. I, pp. 104f.
17. Crosby, History, Vol. I, pp. 120ff.
18. Crosby, History, Vol. I, pp. 278-297.
19. Crosby, History, Vol. I, p. 288.
20. Crosby, History, Vol. I, pp. 292ff.
21. Joseph Ivemy, History of the English
Baptists, Four Volumes, London, 1811-30.
22. Ivemy, History, Vol. I, pp. 180-183.
23. Ivemy, History, Vol. I, p. 262.
24. Ivemy, History, Vol. I, p. 588. The entire narrative as
regards Tombes and his influence is found on pp. 588-594. Ivemy
follows the outline of Crosby in this section. Ivemy adds new material
perpetuating the misunderstanding of Tombes as a Baptist, rather
than an Antipaedobaptist.
25. John Aubrey, Lives of Eminent
Men, in British Biographical Archives, London, K C Saur, n.d., microfilm frames 413-416.
This personal reminiscence was taken from Aubrey's
Brief Lives, London, 1691.
26. John Aubrey, Lives of Eminent
Men, microfilm frame 415.
27. A. Chalmers, The General Biographical
Dictionary, 1812-1817, as it appeared in British Biographical Archives, London, K C
Saur, microfilm frame 421.
28. "Tombs, John," unsigned article in John M'Clintock, and
James Strong, Cyclopaedia,Vol. X, p. 459.
| ||||
|
|
|
Introductory Concerns
| ||
29. Anthony Wood, Athenae
Oxonienses: an exact history of all writers and bishops who have had their education in the University
of Oxford, London, 1691-1692, pp. 409f.
30. "John Tombes", unsigned article in William Cathcart,
The Baptist Encyclopaedia, Philadelphia, 1881, pp. 1156f.
31. Robert Baillee, Anabaptism, the True Fountain of
Independency, Antinomy, Brownisme, and Familisme, and most of the other
Errours, which for the time doe trouble the Church of England,
Unsealed, London, 1647, p. 38.
32. Joshua Thomas, Manuscript copy of
Leominster History Church Book, Joseph Angus Library, Regents Park College. The date of
the work is approximately 1769. In conjunction with the date 1739,
in the introduction, Thomas remarks "near 30 yrs".
33. Alex Mitchell, and John Struthers,
Minutes of the Sessions of the Westminster
Divines, Still Waters Revival Books, Edmonton,
Canada, 1991 (from the 1874 edition), pp. 172f & 216.
34. Daniel Neal, The History of the Puritans or Protestant
Non-Conformists, London, 1732-1736. Third edition, 1822. Vol. 3, pp. 162f.
35. Barry R. White, The English Baptists of the Seventeenth
Century, The Baptist Historical Society, London, 1983, p. 102.
36. W. T. Whitley, "Baptists and Bartholomew's Day",
Transactions of the Baptist Historical Society,
(BHST), Vol. I, 1908-1909, p. 36.
37. W.T. Whitley, "Baptist Literature till 1688",
BHST, Vol I, 1908-1909, p. 115.
38. James Ford, "A Seventeenth Century Baptist
Church: Bromsgrove", BHST, Vol I, p. 100.
39. "An Index of Notable Baptists whose Careers began within
the British Empire before 1850", BHST, Vol 7. 1920-1921.
40. Graves and Silcock,
Revolution, p. 299.
41. H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist
Heritage, Broadman Press, Nashville, 1987, p. 64.
42. McBeth, Heritage, p. 110. McBeth directs the reader to a
work, The ancient Bounds, or Liberty of Conscience, Tenderly Stated,
Modestly Asserted, and Mildly Vindicated, London, 1645, which he
attributes to Tombes, the Champion of liberty of conscience. The work
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
Antipaedobaptism in the Thought of John Tombes
| ||||
is misattributed to Tombes by McBeth. This writer believes it
is spurious for the following reasons: 1. The work was not printed
by Tombes's usual printer during those years; 2. It is not
Tombes's choppy Latinesque style; 3. It is inconsistent with the vow taken
in the Solemn League and Covenant; and it presents a more
independent ecclesiology than Tombes believed and practised. Given
the typical misunderstandings about Tombes, it is no surprise that such
a work would be attributed to him assuming he was a "Baptist" in
the full sense of the word, and a separatist which "Baptist" in the
seventeenth century usually entails. He was neither, giving rise to
the doubt of some. In this vein, Tombes's name is annexed to
another curious document, A Proposall Humbly Offered, for the Farming
of Liberty of Conscience, London, 1662. This work is an appeal for
the magistracy to sell the right for liberty of conscience by way of
license "...within the Kingdome of England, Dominion of Wales,
and Town of Barwick..." It proposes various yearly rates one would
pay for such liberties. The names of forty-three men are proposed as
the Grand Commissioners and Farmers of Liberty of Conscience (p.3.).
These names are an unlikely collection of notable figures from
the era including Edmond Calamy, George Fox (The Quaker),
Doctor Owen, Mr. Kiffen, Mr. Tombes, late of Lemster, Henry Jessey, Dr.
Cornelius Burges and Thomas Brooks.
43. Credobaptism is the belief that those who believe should
receive a subsequent baptism. It is a commingling of a Latin and
Greek ideas. Credo meaning "I believe" as a descriptive modifier for
baptism.
| ||||
