THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
and became mighty in favor of education, evangelization, and religious liberty.
In 1749 Oliver Hart from the Philadelphia Association went to Charleston, S. C, where he was influential in reviving the Baptist cause and in formin^ the Charleston Association after the model of the Philadelphia. From 1742 onward members of the Philadelphia Association (Gano, Vanhorn, Miller, Thomas) visited the scattered and unorganized Baptists of Virginia and North Carolina, won some Arminians to Calvinism, intro- 4' AsToda™ duced better church discipline, and tlon"a" secured tne organization (1765) of the Kehukee Association, composed of churches in Virginia and North Carolina. Through the labors of David Thomas, also a gift of the Philadelphia Association, several churches were constituted in the Northern Neck of Virginia and in 1766 formed the Ketokton Association with the approval and cooperation of the Philadelphia. This association adopted the Philadelphia Confession, with its requirement of the laying-on of hands.
Of momentous importance for the diffusion of Baptist principles throughout the South was the enthusiastic evangelism of Shubael Stearns and Daniel Marshall, " New Light " Baptists from New England (1754 onward). Stearns had become a Baptist in New England (1751) and had felt an irresistible impulse to devote his life to missionary work in the South. Marshall was led to Baptist views after his arrival in Virginia from contact with Baptists of the Philadelphia Association type. Within the next thirty years multitudes were converted and accepted Baptist views through their ministry, and churches were organized in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. The Sandy Creek (N. C.) church was 5. Evangel- organized by Stearns in 1755 and in a few years it had over 600 members.
istic Work of Stearns
and Mar- ^n m>8 t'le Sandy Creek Association shall. was formed, which for years embraced all the churches of the Separate type in the South. In seventeen years the connection had grown to forty-two churches with 125 ministers. The evangelism of Stearns and Marshall was characterized by an enthusiasm that verged upon fanaticism. Many new converts, without previous educational equipment or subsequent training, entered zealously upon the work of evangelization and the people heard with gladness their uncouth but earnest testimony to the power of the Gospel.
Because of their fiery enthusiasm and their unwillingness to take out licenses and conform to the Colonial conditions of toleration the Separate Baptists of Virginia suffered much persecution in genuine martyr fashion and thereby won for themselves great popular acceptance and made the episcopal establishment highly odious. Virginia Baptists of the older type conformed to the laws and suffered little persecution, and looked 6. Separate with disfavor upon the Separate Bap- Baptists in tists as unduly enthusiastic and as Virginia, allowing untrained and untried men (and even women) freely to evangelize. Stearns was disposed to lay more stress on the interdependence than the independence of the numer-
ous and widely scattered churches of the Sandy Creek Association. Under his influence overtures from the Regular Baptists for the union of Regulars and Separates were rejected (1767) by a small majority. By 1770 many churches and ministers of the association had become dissatisfied with the rigorous ruling of Stearns and insisted upon the division of the body into three associations. The result was the formation of the General Association of Separate Baptists, for Virginia, and the Rapid- Ann Association, for South Carolina. From 1770 onward the Separate Baptists increased in Virginia from 1,335 in 1771 to 3,195 in 1773. In 1774 it was determined by the General Association to restore the office of apostle, and Samuel Harris, the most successful of the Virginia evangelists, was appointed apostle for the southern district, and a little later John Waller and Elijah Craig became apostles for the northern district. In 1775 the question of general and particular redemption was debated in the General Association, and by a small majority particular redemptfon prevailed. The three apostles withdrew by way of protest and disruption seemed inevitable. But better counsels prevailed and mutual toleration was agreed upon. Arminian tendencies gradually disappeared and in 1783 the Philadelphia Confession was adopted with provision against its too strict construction.
Virginia Baptists were among the earliest and stanchest supporters of the Revolution and led in the struggle for religious equality. The General Association in 1776 appointed a committee on grievances, which zealously devoted itself to the abolition of dissenters' disabilities until the establishment itself was abolished, the glebe lands confiscated, and absolute separation of Church and State secured. Not content with being chiefly instrumental in securing religious equality in Virginia, Virginia Baptists watched closely the forming of the Federal Constitution ^i -r l • S and were instrumental in procuring the
. „T41, "insertion of art. i, which prohibits
ious Lib- ' . ^
erty. Congress from taking any cognizance of religion. From 1883 onward Regular Baptists of Virginia joined hands with the Separates in the struggle for religious equality and the separation of Church and State and in 1787 the two parties united, agreeing to bury in oblivion the names Regular and Separate, and adopting the name " United Baptist Churches of Christ in Virginia." In New England the struggle for religious liberty on the part of the Baptists was no less heroic, but it was far less successful. In Virginia the Episcopal clergy were corrupt and oppressive and were bitterly opposed to the Revolution, and Baptists had the cooperation of leading statesmen, of the patriotic masses, and (in most measures) of the Presbyterians; while in New England the clergy and members of the standing order were leaders in the cause of Colonial independence and Baptists became unpopular by agitating their grievances and threatening to appeal to England for their redress at the very time when resistance to British authority was being determined upon. This difference of attitude of the Established Churches in the two sections accounts for the fact that the