The Formation Of The Metropolitan Association Of Strict Baptist Churches
The formation of the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches is inseparably linked with the church meeting at Silver Street Chapel, Notting Hill Gate, and her pastor, David Crumpton. The Association, church and pastor subscribed to a restricted communion table and the tenets of Hyper-Calvinism. These are the leading features which set apart the Strict Baptist denomination from other churches, unions, societies and associations.
On 4 April 1866, a Strict and Particular Baptist Church was organized in Stormont House, Queen’s Road, Bayswater, London. Several of the founding members seceded from the Strict Baptist church, meeting on Johnson Street, Notting Hill Gate. On the day of the new church’s formation, David Crumpton was appointed the pastor. Within two years, the church acquired a building—the Silver Street Chapel, located on the corner of Silver Street (Kensington Church Street) and Kensington Place, in Notting Hill Gate. Interestingly, there was only a three minute walking distance between the Johnson Street Strict Baptist Chapel and the Silver Street Chapel.
It should be noted, the distinguishing features of the Strict and Particular Baptist denomination is that of a restricted communion table and high views of sovereign grace. What is often styled Hyper-Calvinism, high views of sovereign grace include the rejection of duty faith, the repudiation of the free offer and the gospel (rather than the ten commandments) serving as the rule of conduct for the believer’s life. During the 19th century, there were hundreds of churches of this kind scattered around England, particularly the London area. Although the number has significantly decreased in modern times, the aforementioned church (Silver Street Chapel) continues to this day as a Strict Baptist Cause, now called Bethesda Chapel.
In addition to serving as the first pastor of this church, David Crumpton was responsible for spearheading the formation of the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches in the year 1871. This Association was founded upon the distinguishing features of the Strict and Particular Baptist denomination, and for almost one hundred years retained its identity. However, with the decline of church memberships following the Second World War, together with the instability of an untaught generation, the congregations began to totter, leaving them vulnerable, as sheep without a shepherd, to the grievous wolves of the Reformed Baptist movement. By the mid-1960’s, a new doctrinal statement was adopted by the Strict Baptist denomination, removing the distinguishing features of Hyper-Calvinism. By the early 1980’s, the name ‘Strict Baptist’ was changed to ‘Grace Baptist’—another nomenclature for Reformed Baptist—thus ratifying their takeover of the Strict Baptist denomination.
It has been said, “The ‘truth’ belongs to the victors.” The winner is afforded the privilege of writing, or creating, the narrative. This is clearly the case with reference to the Grace (Reformed) Baptist churches and officers.
Take, for instance, the writings of Baptist Historian, Jack Hoad, a dear family friend throughout my childhood, and one of my mentors when training for the gospel ministry. In 1986, he published a history entitled, “The Baptist”. On page 140, he writes:
“It was not until 1871, that the London Strict Baptist churches succeeded in forming a stable association with twenty-two founder churches. It was named, ‘The Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches’…The term ‘Strict Baptist’ came to be a convenient common denominator for those churches which, alone of all groupings in the British Isles, still held to the historic confessions of the seventeenth century.”
This is partially true. While the Strict Baptists paid homage to the 17th century confessions of faith, they did not subscribe to them as authoritative documents. Due to several reforms in doctrine, which came about during the 18th century, the Strict Baptist denomination based their doctrinal statements upon John Gill’s Goat Yard Declaration of Faith, 1729. Henceforth, the teachings of the Strict Baptist denomination reflect the Hyper-Calvinism of John Gill, rather than the Moderate-Calvinism of the 17th century confessions.
“Underwood stated in his ‘History of the English Baptists’ that the London Confession 1689 ‘is not now endorsed by British Baptists except by some who have remained Strict and Particular’.”
Like Hoad, Underwood oversimplified and misrepresented the doctrinal convictions of the Strict Baptist denomination. The 1689 Confession was never used by the Strict Baptist denomination as an authoritative statement of faith among the churches or between the pastors. In fact, even Benjamin Keach, one of the men who endorsed the Confession in 1689, repudiated its covenantal framework three years later. And when his church at Horsley Down requested he provide them with their own doctrinal statement, rather than recommending to them the 1689, he drew up his own statement of faith which was adopted by the church. The Strict Baptists continued to refine their teachings after the 17th century, the reforms of which became the distinguishing feature of the Strict Baptist denomination (Hyper-Calvinism).
“He wrote that in 1945, since which time there has been a revival of Calvinism generally among evangelicals in this country and there have emerged many new churches calling themselves by various names and none, some using the name ‘Reformed’, ‘Evangelical’ or ‘Grace’ baptist churches.”
Hoad is here making reference to the newly emerged Reformed Baptist movement, which came into existence during the 1950’s. He calls the movement “a revival of Calvinism generally among evangelicals.” However, this ‘Calvinism’ was not that of the Strict Baptist denomination. It was a Moderate-Calvinism reflective of the 17th century confessions and revived by the teachings of Andrew Fuller during the latter part of the 18th century. Fuller was a fierce antagonist to the doctrinal reforms embraced by the Strict Baptist denomination, responsible in large measure for dividing the churches.
“The secession from ‘Union’ churches has continued and the independents have greatly increased their numbers. The seventeenth century baptist confessions have been re-discovered and a growing appreciation of baptist heritage exists.”
Hoad’s reference to the ‘Union’ is that of the Baptist Union. What he does not mention, is that the churches and pastors during the 19th century, belonging to the Moderate-Calvinist (Fullerite) set of teachings, joined the Baptist Union, whereas the churches and pastors belonging to the Hyper-Calvinist (Gillite) set of teachings remained separate. By the end of the 19th century, the churches belonging to the Baptist Union devolved into Arminianism and Liberalism, eventually fading into oblivion. Whereas the Hyper-Calvinist (Gillite) churches which remained separate were preserved from Arminianism and Liberalism. Eventually, some of these churches formed Associations, among which was the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches. It is therefore quite misleading to assert this Association was founded upon the Moderate-Calvinism of the 17th century Confession.
Again, Hoad writes on page 141:
“An interesting example of this trend is found in the re-naming of the ‘Strict Baptist Mission,’ which had lasted 120 years, as ‘Grace Baptist Mission’ and so providing a common instrument of mission for all those churches adhering to the historic Particular Baptist confessions.”
The ‘Strict Baptist Mission’ was founded by a Hyper-Calvinist church in 1861 and became the ‘missionary vehicle’ for the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches, all of which were Hyper-Calvinist congregations. Again, these churches were not founded upon ‘the historic Particular Baptist confessions’, but upon the reforms to those confessions which came about during the 18th century. It is ironic. The Reformed Baptist movement, which reflects the Moderate-Calvinist teachings of those churches belonging to the Baptist Union (according to its original formation), have had to steal the missionary society belonging to the Strict Baptists, a Hyper-Calvinist Cause.
With reference to the doctrinal changes that were beginning to emerge among the Strict Baptists during the 1960’s, Hoad writes on page 141:
“A ‘National Federation’ existed for twenty-two years from the end of the Second World War. Its failure has been attributed to the non-participation of the ‘Gospel Standard’ (that is, those Strict Baptist churches which tend towards hypercalvinism and are strongly anti-Fuller; they are so-called by the name of their periodical), and other churches fearful that it might develop into an authoritarian organisation such as the Baptist Union.”
One of the main reasons the Gospel Standard churches refused to participate in the National Federation is because they rightly discerned the National Federation was not founded upon Strict Baptist teachings. Indeed, the Gospel Standard churches were Hyper-Calvinist and anti-Fuller, as were the Strict Baptist congregations belonging to the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches, along with other Associations in other parts of the country. But there was a slipping away among the non-Gospel Standard churches, which ultimately led to their demise.
“This failure was followed by a totally unstructured assembly of pastors and deacons which met a real need and led to regular gatherings for prayer for revival in which there was some degree of success. It was out of this ‘prayer fellowship’ that the present ‘Grace Baptist Assembly’ was born. It brings together the pastors, elders and deacons of like-minded churches and provides a national forum for worship, prayer and discussion of doctrinal, practical and social concerns.”
The ‘Grace Baptist Assembly’ is a Reformed Baptist denomination, embracing the Moderate-Calvinism of the 17th century confessions as well as the Modified-Calvinism of Andrew Fuller. It does not represent the historic Strict Baptist denomination.
Again, Hoad writes on page 137:
“The ‘strict anti-Fullerism’ churches tended toward hypercalvinism and came to be called ‘Gadsbyites’ after the name of one of their leaders, William Gadsby, a Manchester minister. These churches expressed their ‘anti-Fullerism’ explicitly, stating that ‘saving faith was not a natural duty but the sovereign gift of God’. They also declared that ‘the invitations of the gospel were not for the unregenerate’.”
All anti-Fullerite churches were Hyper-Calvinists. Yes, they were sometimes called ‘Gadsbyites’, but were usually denominated ‘Gillites’, after one of the leading reformers of the 18th century, John Gill. And yes, historic Hyper-Calvinism is the denial of duty faith and a repudiation of the free offer. The Reformed Baptists, especially those who now control the historic Strict Baptist chapels and organizations, present themselves as the heroes who have rescued the poor deluded Strict Baptists from their Hyper-Calvinism. Their ignorance on the doctrinal issues is exceeded only by their arrogance.
Again, Hoad writes on page 144:
“William Jeyes Styles (1842-1914) of the Meards Court church was a protege of Spurgeon and a student of his Pastor’s College. He published in 1887 ‘A Manual of Faith and Practice’ which he said was designed for young and enquiring Christians and in which he set out to systematise Strict Baptist standards of faith and order. In 1902, he issued a ‘Guide to Church Fellowship’ which recited the ‘Articles of the Faith and Order of a Primitive or Strict and Particular Baptist church’. It was based on the ‘Declaration of Faith and Practice’ of John Gill 1720. These books met a need at the time but had been lost sight of within fifty years.”
Yes, these things are certainly true. The position maintained by Styles was representative of ALL Strict Baptist churches belonging to the denomination. Their views were not based upon the Moderate-Calvinism of the 17th century Confessions, as Hoad asserted elsewhere in his book, but upon the reforms of the 18th century to those Confessions, articulated by John Gill in his doctrinal statement of 1729. But as Hoad points out, fifty years after Styles published his books, around the 1950’s, there was a falling away from these reforms and doctrinal convictions.
“It is an interesting and instructive study to compare these works of Styles with those published in 1966 and 1971 by his successors of a century later.”
The 1966 ‘We Believe’ was a doctrinal statement drawn up by those not representing the Strict Baptist denomination. Baptist historian, Kenneth Dix, while instructing me on the history of this confession, asked, “Upon what authority did they draw up this new statement of faith? What right did they have imposing their new views upon the churches?” Indeed, as Hoad points out, if the works of Styles, representative of the Strict Baptist denomination, are compared with the Reformed Baptist statements of faith a century later, the reader will be convinced the teachings are different and so are the groups subscribing to them.
“Here no mention is made of the duty faith problem, Christ is absolutely the Eternal Son of the Father and the gospel is to be presented to all men as worthy of acceptation. The ‘high Calvinism’ remains but all tendencies towards hypercalvinism and antinomianism are totally absent.”
Hoad presents himself, together with his Reformed Baptist fellowship, as the saviors of the Strict Baptist denomination. They have been able to extract the Hyper-Calvinism from these otherwise sound and honorable churches. The irony is rich. The Reformed Baptists call themselves reformed and always reforming, yet reject the reforms of the 18th century Strict Baptists. They are anti-reform. Furthermore, Hoad wishes to distinguish between high and hyper Calvinism, claiming the former for himself. Andrew Fuller, however, used the terms synonymously—a High-Calvinist is a Hyper-Calvinist. That which represents the views of Hoad and the Reformed Baptists is a Moderate-Calvinism intermixed with the Modified-Calvinism of Fuller.
“The Strict Baptist at the end of the twentieth century stands in the historic heritage of the Particular Baptist Confessions of the seventeenth century and is an earnest propagator of the gospel in all the world.”
Hoad now makes full circle. Having detailed the Reformed Baptist takeover of the Strict Baptist denomination, showing how they even changed the name to “Grace Baptist”, he then reclaims the name “Strict Baptist” presenting themselves as the legitimate heirs of its history and heritage. This is a matter of stolen identity, my friends. There are historic Strict Baptists remaining today, and they stand in the historic heritage of the 18th century reforms and remain earnest propagators of the gospel in all the world. The Reformed Baptists are an entirely different group, propagating a set of teachings staunchly apposed by the historic Strict Baptist denomination.
In addition to the false narrative set forth in Hoad’s book (and I speak of principle, not personality), the same may be found in many new publications, one of the more recent being, “Association: Local Independent Baptist Churches In Fellowship And Mission”, edited by Ryan King and Andrew King.
Chapter 3, “From Metropolitan Association Of Strict Baptist Churches (MASBC) to the Association Of Grace Baptist Churches South East (AGBC(SE)”, Paul Smith writes:
“Standing on fundamentals.
“The Association [Metropolitan of Strict Baptist Churches] endured the rise of liberalism by standing resolutely for what it believed.”
The Association endured the rise of Liberalism because first, it never joined the Fullerite Baptist Union, and second, because it held tenaciously to high views of sovereign grace (Hyper-Calvinism). It is Moderate-Calvinism which opens the door to Arminianism and Liberalism, which was the cause for the Baptist Union’s decline.
“The central defining characteristic was communion. The first resolution of the opening meeting illustrates this: “That an Association of Particular Baptist Churches, in and around London, holding Strict Communion principles, be formed and called, “The Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches.””
Of course, it is most convenient for the Reformed Baptists if the central defining characteristic among the churches belonging to the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches was that of communion. However, what if another central defining characteristic was that of Hyper-Calvinism? Indeed, it was. On page 11 of the MASBC minute book, the following addition was made to the doctrinal statement, proposed by John Hazelton, seconded by David Crumpton and unanimously agreed by the Committee—“And that saving faith is not a legal duty but the sovereign and precious gift of God.” This is one of the tenets of Hyper-Calvinism, the denial of duty faith and by default, a repudiation of the free offer. The minute books continue—“That should a Minister or Church depart from the Doctrinal Basis of the Association he or it be expelled on proof of the fact.”
Nowhere does Jack Hoad or Paul Smith bring this Associational Rule to light. So serious were these Strict Baptist churches to maintain the tenets of Hyper-Calvinism, that they put in place a mechanism for the removal of any pastor or church in opposition. By this Rule, every Reformed Baptist church should be expelled from the Association. But their conceit knows no end, for they see themselves as the enlightened ones, setting straight the crooked paths of the Strict Baptists. The Rule does not apply to them.
“There were other Baptist churches (like those in the Baptist Union) and there were other particular Baptist churches (like the Metropolitan Tabernacle). But the Association was of Strict Baptist churches.”
First, the Metropolitan Tabernacle was a member of the Baptist Union. Second, many of the churches belonging to the Baptist Union also practiced Strict Communion, so this alone was not the central feature that separated them from the Strict Baptists. Third, the Calvinist churches belonging to the Baptist Union embraced the same soteriological teachings as the Reformed Baptists—they were Fullerites. And it was this that ultimately separated the Strict Baptist denomination and its associations from other churches.
“The Association considered itself part of the Strict Baptist denomination.”
This is because it was part of the Strict Baptist denomination. They were Gillites in doctrine.
“Within this grouping of churches its doctrinal basis was relatively broad.”
Not so broad as to open the door for the Fullerites to enter. A church espousing the Moderate-Calvinism of the 17th century or the Modified-Calvinism of Andrew Fuller was shunned. No fellowship was extended to the congregation or its pastor. If the Reformed Baptists were around during the 1870’s, the Strict Baptist churches would have opposed their ecclesiastical innovations and soteriological perversions.
“At its inaugural meeting in 1871, the MASBC unanimously agreed ‘that saving faith is not a legal duty but the sovereign and precious gift of God.’ The founders rejected: ‘duty faith’—those not chosen to receive the gift of faith did not have a duty to believe the gospel. In those early years, the man teaching young MASBC preachers—William Jeyes Styles (1842-1914)—was a firm opponent of duty faith. At the 1873 AGM he said ‘the personal honor of the Holy Spirit’ was at stake. Styles called Spurgeon, in whose Pastors’ College he trained, ‘our most beloved and esteemed friend’ but he fiercely critiqued Spurgeon’s open offer of the gospel.”
The doctrine of “duty faith” and the “open offer of the gospel” are two sides of the same coin, but two different things. The falsehood of one exposes the error of the other. Nevertheless, there have been some to deny the “open offer of the gospel” (free offer), while staunchly arguing in defense for the doctrine of “duty faith”, among whom are David Engelsma and the Protestant Reformed Churches of America, Henry Mahan and that section of the sovereign grace Baptist churches, and the notable Arthur Pink, author of “The Sovereignty of God” and other titles. However, this contradictory position is akin to those who claim to be three or four point Calvinists, believing they can Scripturally and logically embrace some points, but reject the others. The points stand or fall together. While the definition for ‘duty faith’ provided by Paul Smith is true, it is not complete. The doctrine of ‘duty faith’ imposes upon unregenerate sinners saving faith as a condition for their new birth, either in a spiritual capacity (as understood by the Arminians) or in a moral capacity (as understood by the Moderate-Calvinists). With reference to the Moderate-Calvinists, the doctrine of ‘duty faith’ is based upon their conditional covenant of grace, God makes with sinners in time, requiring of them saving faith in Christ. The Hyper-Calvinists reject the covenantal framework of the Moderate-Calvinists, believing there to be only a covenant of redemption (made between the Persons of the Godhead) which is also called a covenant of grace. All conditions of this covenant are assumed by the Father in electing love, the Son in redeeming grace and the Spirit in regenerating power. There are no conditions imposed upon the sinner in order for him/her to receive the blessings of this covenant. So long as the sinner remains in an unregenerate condition, he/she is under the authority and curse of the covenant of works, and is therefore duty-bound to perfectly obey the law inscribed upon his/her heart. But when a sinner is regenerated by the Spirit of God, he/she is delivered from the covenant of works and is brought experientially under the authority and blessings of the covenant of redemption (grace), and is therefore privilege-bound to savingly believe on Christ. Henceforth, it is not the preacher’s duty to ‘offer’ the gospel to unregenerate sinners, for the preacher knows not whether a person is earmarked by God as a recipient of it, and the very nature of an ‘offer’ implies he/she has the ability/authority to receive it. Now, if the free offer is so Scriptural, as the Arminians and Moderate-Calvinists claim, why is it the Scriptures never once refer to the gospel being ‘offered’? Rather, the Scriptures always and only refer to the gospel being preached and taught, which are very different things from offering. Hyper-Calvinists believe the gospel is to be freely and fully preached and taught to all sinners, which is why the Strict Baptist Mission was started in 1861 by a Hyper-Calvinist church and also why there were hundreds of Hyper-Calvinist churches scattered around England during that time. Hyper-Calvinists have always maintained the Scriptural mandate of evangelism (preaching the gospel). Arminians and Moderate-Calvinists, on the other hand, have always maintained the unscriptural practice of proselyting (offering the gospel). Hyper-Calvinism identifies and rightly defines the responsibility of sinners before God—the unregenerate are responsible and accountable to God under the authority of the covenant of works; the regenerate are responsible and accountable to God under the authority of the covenant of redemption (grace). Moderate-Calvinism confuses these responsibilities, imposing upon unregenerate sinners a saving faith which belongs only to the regenerate, and imposing upon the regenerate obedience to the heart law which belongs only to the unregenerate. And yet, the Reformed Baptists have the nerve to accuse the Hyper-Calvinists of being “confused on the gospel offer”, as asserted by Paul Smith in the following statement:
“Thus, the MASBC was formed by those with clarity on the gospel but confusion on the gospel offer.”
And just like that, the Reformed Baptists can erase the central defining characteristic of the Strict Baptists, dismissing it as “confusion on the gospel offer”. They act as if their “enlightenment” on the issues was never known or considered by these giants of the faith. If only Jack Hoad and Paul Smith lived during the days of Gill, Gadbsy, Crumpton and Hazelton, they could have instructed them in the way more perfectly. My dear friends, their cavalier dismissal of the tenets of Hyper-Calvinism, together with their condescending attitude towards faithful ministers of the gospel and haughty disdain for the heritage they claim to represent, is indicative of the same spirit imbibed by their Fullerite predecessors. If from the beginning of their movement, they stayed in their lane, aligning themselves with Fullerite churches and unions, then we would have little cause to disrupt their journey. But since they have moved into the Strict Baptist lane, pushing the Hyper-Calvinists off the road, is there not a cause, my dear friends? Is there not a cause? One must therefore exercise discernment, grounded in knowledge and understanding, when reading the historic narratives and doctrinal treatises of the Reformed Baptist denomination.
Returning to the formation of the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches, the best way to present the facts is to arrange the historic documents in a form which tells the story by those who witnessed the events. Because the formation of the Silver Street Congregation and the Metropolitan Association cannot be separated, I am intwining their histories chronologically.
Voice of Truth 1866, Page 115:
FORMATION OF A NEW CHURCH AT NOTTING HILL.
On Wednesday, the 4th of April, 1866, a new church was formed on primitive Christian principles, consisting of about thirty persons, who were formerly members of Johnson-street, Notting Hill. Mr. David Crumpton, late of Huddersfield, was at the same time recognized as their future pastor. These friends have for some months past met at Stormont House, Notting Hill, where Mr. Crumpton preaches to them; but the services of the day were held in the United Methodist Chapel, Queen’s Road, Bayswater, which was very kindly lent for the occasion.
The nature of a gospel church was stated, and the questions necessary to be put were asked by Mr. Hazelton, who, in describing a New Testament church, observed that, as to its materials, it was composed of regenerate persons, baptized on a profession of their faith in the Son of God, who were decided for God’s truth, loved the brotherhood, and lived in practical godliness. As to its form, it was not national, provencial, parochial, nor diocesan; but congregational and independent, and united by mutual consent, for mutual benefit.
In reply to questions put by Mr. Hazelton, it was stated that the friends about to be formed into a separate community were formerly members of the church at Johnson Street; but no reason was assigned for their leaving that connection. The articles of faith, and rules of conduct on and by which the new interest was proposed to be based and regulated, were read by one of the brethren, and were admirably clear, full and explicit. The articles and rules having been read, were assented to by those to whom they related, as being such as they were prepared to embrace, maintain, and defend. The new church was then in due order formed by the friends intending to comprise it, giving to each other the right hand of Christian fellowship, which was done with much feeling and many tears. Mr. Box recognized the infant community as a sister church, by giving to each of its members the right hand of fellowship, accompanying the same with very fatherly, appropriate, and affectionate remarks.
Brethren were then allotted for to serve in the office of deacon, who, when chosen and announced, were very appropriately addressed by Mr. Higham, as to the duties of their office. Mr. Crumpton was then formally chosen as the pastor of this little flock: in which part of the proceeding Mr. Dickerson presided; and afterwards prayed, and the assembly adjourned to take tea.
At the evening service, Mr. Curtis read the Scriptures and prayed,—Mr. Dickerson gave the charge to the minister from Col. 4:17,—Mr. Hazelton addressed the church on their duties to their pastor, themselves, other churches, and to the Lord Jesus Christ; and Mr. Higham addressed suitable words to the congregation. At the close of the services these thus newly associated disciples broke bread together, in remembrance of Him whose thy are. Mr. Crumpton presided at this celebration of the Supper of the Lord, which was united in by many friends, members of other churches, who were present. May peace and spiritual prosperity attend this Christian interest with their respected pastor, and the God of grace be glorified thereby.
R. H.
Earthen Vessel 1866, Page 157
NOTTING HILL.—FORMATION OF A PARTICULAR BAPTIST CHURCH,—On Wednesday, April 4th, 1866, special services were held by the Baptist friends worshipping in Stormont House, Notting Hill, in the United Methodist Free Church, Queen’s Road, Bayswater (kindly lent for the occasion), for the purpose of forming a Strict Communion Particular Baptist Church. At half-past two Brother Curtis, of Hayes, commenced by giving out the well-known hymn, “Kindred in Christ for his dear sake,” &c. Those sweet words having been sung, Brother Box, of Woolwich, read a portion of God’s word, and most earnestly implored the divine guidance and blessing. After again singing, Brother Hazleton described the nature of a Gospel Church, and at the close of his address enquired what had led the friends to wish to form a Christian Church? And what were the principles they intended to adopt as the basis of their union? The questions being satisfactorily answered by two of the friends, he requested those persons wishing to form a Church, to stand up and give to each other the right hand of fellowship, which they did. Brother Box then, on behalf of the sister Churches in London, gave with kind words and good counsel, the right hand of fellowship to each member of the infant Church, wishing it in a fatherly and touching manner, God’s special presence and blessing. After again singing, Brother Higham, of Camden Town, described the deacon’s office as laid down in God’s Holy Word, a portion of which he read, and then spoke very practically of its intents and duties. After which, the Church voting by ballot, elected five of its members to that office; brother Higham naming the persons chosen, asked them if they accepted the appointment, and they all said with God’s help they did; some verses were then sung, after which brother Dickerson, of Little Alie street arose, and after a few very suitable words, observed that they a Church had elected their deacons, but in the New Testament we read of pastors as well as deacons, and he had been requested to superintend that afternoon the election of their pastor. The Church then unanimously and heartily expressed their wish for Mr. D. Crumpton to be their pastor, and he having consented and also given a brief but interesting account of his conversion to God and call to the ministry, Brother Dickerson, and the other ministers present welcomed him as a brother pastor, affectionately expressing their desire for his success. The service was concluded by singing and prayer, and the friends adjourned to the school-room, where tea was provided. At half-past six they again assembled in the chapel; brother Frith, of New Bexley, gave out the hymns, and brother Curtis read the Scriptures and prayed, brother Dickerson in a very kind manner addressed the pastor, expressing his conviction that the Gospel attended with the power of the Holy Ghost, could alone benefit souls, and he believed his brother Crumpton would be content to preach Christ crucified, being persuaded that the old story of the Cross had still power to save. Brother Hazelton addressed the Church on their duty to each other and the world, and with weighty words counselled them conscientiously and faithfully to discharge their obligations. After singing of a few verses, brother Higham spoke to the congregation on the only way of salvation, reminding them that there was no other name under heaven given among men, whereby they could be saved, but the name of Christ Jesus. These most interesting services were concluded by the pastor, assisted by the ministers present, administering the Lord’s Supper to the young Church, and to the friends present, who were members of Strict Baptist Churches, and between sixty and seventy joined in this act of remembrance of the dying Saviour’s love. Thus closed these profitable services, each of which as well as the tea meeting were well attended. We affectionately ask all who love Jesus, and his cause to pray for us.
Earthen Vessel 1866, Page 379
NOTTING HILL.—Services commemorative of the commencement of the particular Baptist cause in Stormont House, Bayswater road, London, were held in that place, on Lord’s-day, November 11, 1866. Mr. Crumpton, the pastor, preached in the morning from 1 Sam. 7:12, “Ebenezer, Hitherto hath the Lord helped us;” and in the evening from Zech. 4:6, “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord.” Mr. Hazleton, of Chadwell street, preached in the afternoon from Psa. 115:3, “Our God is in the heavens.” ‘l’he preacher very ably illustrated the glorious relationship Jehovah sustained to his saints as their God, and entered very sweetly into his subject. Mr. Crumpton in the morning traced the Lord’s gracious dealings with Israel, and spoke of him as the helper of his people from age to age, and in his concluding remarks, stated that he had helped them, observing, that fifteen persons only attended the first service held twelve months ago in that place. Now, the congregation was steadily good, and had so increased that it had been necessary to open the adjoining spacious room, and it was felt desirable to obtain as soon as possible a larger and more suitable place; a church was formed in April last, and now numbers forty-two members; peace, unity, and brotherly love were enjoyed, and grace had enabled each to persevere. In the evening’s discourse, he dwelt on the Holy Spirit as the source of life, light, peace, comfort, and salvation to the church, and urged the importance of earnest and believing prayer for his gracious and divine influences, and very properly observed, that the Holy Spirit alone must be their hope as a church for the future. The services of the day were refreshing, and the congregations cheerfully and liberally contributed for the support of the cause; the collections amounting to between £9 and £10.
Earthen Vessel 1867, Page 379
NOTTING HILL.—Silver Street Chapel. This place of worship (sometimes called “The Labourer’s Church,” because services were held in it for the navvies engaged in the construction of the extension line of The Metropolitan Railway passing through the locality), was originally built by the Baptists, and was occupied some years ago, by the church under the care of that eminent and honoured servant of God, the late Rev. John Broad, and more recently by the Rev. W. G. Lewis, now of Westbourne Grove chapel. Ultimately it passed into the hands of the Railway Company, its removal being thought necessary for railway purposes. As yet it is spared, though it is not certain that it will not be removed either entirely or in part for the extension of the High street station, now in the course of erection at its rear. The Baptist friends, who for some time have met for Divine worship in Stormont House, Bayswater road, having arranged for the purchase of a freehold property, in the immediate vicinity, on which to build a chapel and schoolrooms, to be put in trust for the Strict Baptists, have, for their present accommodation, taken the above-named place of worship, and repaired it at considerable expense. The opening services were held the first Sabbath in last month (November) and the following Tuesday. On Lord’s day, November 3rd, 1867, the brethren assembled at 10 am, for special prayer, and great liberty and blessing were enjoyed. The pastor, Mr. D. Crumpton, preached at eleven, and at half-past six o’clock, at the close of the evening service, immersed four believers in the presence of a large, and most orderly congregation, many evidently feeling it to be a solemn and blessed season. In the afternoon, at three, brother Higham, of Camden Town, preached an excellent sermon, founded on the words, “Things that accompany salvation.” (Hebrews 6:9) It came with power. The following Tuesday, November 5th, at three in the afternoon, brother Wall, of Gravesend, read the Scriptures and prayed, and brother G. Moyle, of Rye lane, Peckham, preached an unusually good and effective discourse from the words, “For Zion’s sake will I not hold my peace, and for Jerusalem’s sake I will not rest, until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness, and the salvation thereof as a lamp that burnt.” (Isaiah 62:1) At five a goodly number of friends gathered for tea, in the upper school-room. It was soon found that all could not be there accommodated, and additional tables were laid in the lower school-room, all comfortably provided for. The female members of the church and congregation furnished, at their own cost, all the tables, and consequently the whole proceeds of the tea will go to the funds of the church. At a quarter past six a public meeting was held in the chapel, the pastor, presiding; brother Box, of Woolwhich, offered prayer. The Chairman then expressed the pleasure it gave him to see so many present, and especially so many from neighboring churches; he took it as an evidence of their approval and goodwill, and for their information, observed that he wished it distinctly understood that the cause was not commended at Stormont House in opposition to any one, neither did they open that place in the spirit of opposition, but solely from a desire to promote each other’s spiritual good, and to advance the kingdom and glory of Jesus Christ. He then alluded to the success God had given them, observing that at their first meeting, two years ago, there were not twenty persons present, now they had large and increasing congregations; and the Church, which was formed in the April last year, numbers more than fifty members, and others were seeking admission. Love and peace reigned, and the true fellowship of the Gospel was enjoyed; for all which, he, and his people, felt grateful to God, and desired to give him all the glory. He regretted the absence of several honored ministerial brethren, who had kindly promised to be with them, and the more regretted it was several of them were prevented by affliction. The meeting was afterwards addressed by brethren Frith, of New Bexely, Wall, of Gravesend, Box, of Woolwhich, Wilkins, of Soho, Osmond, of Bermondsey, and George Thomas Congreve, Esq., of Coombe Lodge, Pechham; Brother Moyle was also upon the platform, and entered very heartily into the spirit of the several addresses, all of which were remarkably judicious and suitable, and had a happy influence on all present. The entire services were well attended, and the contributions exceeded £25. We would take this opportunity of thanking those friends who came from Soho, Mount Zion (Mr. Foreman’s), Keppel street, Peckham, and other places to encourage and help us. The Lord will reward them. To the Eternal Three in One, be equal and endless glory.
“The Church Index”, by Rev. William Pepperell (1872)
JOHNSON-STREET BAPTIST CHAPEL, NOTTING HILL.
This is one of the plainest of buildings for religious purposes, low and uncommanding, and almost lost even among the humble dwellings amidst which it stands—a simple meeting-house, with a stuccoed front, but looking neat and clean, having been recently repaired and painted, and the walls newly coloured within, giving it a fresh and healthy look. The pewing is of a humble character and unvarnished, and the pulpit plain and high. There is a gallery in the west end, which, added to the accommodation on the ground-floor, gives about 250 sittings, the ordinary congregation being at present about 100. The church and people are Strict Baptist in persuasion. Upon the corner-stone we find the following inscription: “This stone was laid by Messrs. Foreman and Wells, Oct. 13, 1851. The chapel is for the use of the Particular Baptists. P. W. Williamson, Pastor. J. Cook and T. Rowley, Deacons.” The chapel has thus been in existence twenty years. The church—never very vigorous or flourishing—has had a chequered history, disputes having arisen among its members from time to time upon subjects relating to its internal affairs, and which resulted six years ago in a division, further weakening its situation and diminishing its few members. From this blow it appears never to have recovered, there being now no more than between fifty and sixty acknowledged members. The present minister is the Rev. C. W. Banks, who has been there one year, and the cause is supported by pew-rents and voluntary weekly offerings. A “Free-will Offering” box is fixed on the inside of each entrance to the aisles, and on every succeeding Sunday the amount so collected is placed in large figures against the side walls. On the occasion of our visit, the account for the previous Sabbath stood thus: “Loose money, 3s. 8d.; in thirteen envelopes, 10s. 3d.” The preacher had a strong voice, and exerted it even beyond the natural requirements of his small audience; but at times it would be almost impossible to hear him if he did not, in consequence of the noisy costermongers, who shout one against the other in the narrow street and immediately in front of the chapel, without any regard to its presence or the service proceeding within. This is certainly a crying evil, and should attract the attention of the police. We had no idea that vegetable and other carts (hand and donkey drawn) were so numerous and noisy during the hours of Divine Service, as we witnessed them in Johnson-street, and other adjacent back streets and ways in the rear of High-street, Notting-hill. Surely there is yet need for a “Suppression of Sunday Trading Society.” There is a small Sunday-school, attended by a few self-denying teachers, and the public services are—Sunday at eleven and half-past six; prayer meeting at three p.m. Wednesdays, preaching at half-past seven; and on Monday evenings, prayer-meeting; and a special monthly prayer-meeting every first Friday evening in the month. There is manifest care under difficulties for the Christian work.
SILVER-STREET BAPTIST CHAPEL, NOTTING HILL.
The place known by this name is situated in Kensington-place, near its junction with Silver-street, a poor unsightly edifice, within two or three minutes’ walk of the Johnson-street Chapel, and is the meeting-place of the separated portion of its former congregation. The building is in a dilapidated state, the plaster broken away, and the woodwork the worse for lack of paint. The congregation was celebrating its sixth anniversary, and from all appearances there was great need of replenishing the exchequer. However, the event did not seem to have aroused much enthusiasm, for scattered over a rather larger area there was even a smaller congregation than in the former place. The chapel will apparently hold about 350, and there must have been less than 100 present. There is a gallery at one end, and all the other sittings are on the ground floor. The present minister is the Rev. D. Crumpton, whose voice, in its general tone, was indicative of discouragement, assuredly with every apparent reason. The two congregations together might make up an appearance in the smaller of the two chapels; but separately they appear weak and helpless in the extreme, a sight to make a good man mourn over strife and division. It will be next to a miracle if ever these churches rise to a position of influence and power in the neighbourhood. The locality is low and in great need of evangelistic efforts; and if anything could be done to bring the noisy, idle people who fill those narrow streets, or stand at their wretched little open shop-doors, waiting for stray customers, who steal out to market in the hours of Divine Worship, it would be a great boon. There is a Sunday-school attached to the chapel, in which some of the poor children around are collected together, and in this circumstance there may linger hope. The order of services is: Sunday, prayer-meeting at 7 a.m.; preaching at 11.0 a.m. and 6.30 p.m., and prayer-meeting at 3.0 p.m. The school is held at 9.30 a.m. and 3.0 p.m. On week-days there is prayer-meeting on Monday evening at 7.30, and preaching on Thursday evening. The prayer-meeting at 7.0 a.m. on Sunday morning may be noted as a rarity in these days, and if tolerably well attended, shows that there is life, amidst all existing discouragements.
“Kensington, Notting Hill And Paddington”, By An Old Inhabitant (1882)
SILVER STREET CHAPEL,
Now Westbourne Grove Baptist Chapel, was erected 1823 by several humble Christian men, who were soon joined by Mr. Baxter, editor of the Polyglot Bible. The names of Mr. Farmer, Mr. Worger and Mr. Baxter ought to be remembered by the Church.
The first pastor was Rev. W. Southwood (1826–1830)
The second Rev. John Broad (1831–1841)
The third Rev. John Berg (1841–1843)
The fourth Rev. Frances Wills (1843–1847)
The fifth Rev. W. G. Lewis (1847–1881)
Under Mr. Lewis the church increased so much that it was felt necessary to take ground to build a larger chapel.
Old Silver Street chapel would hold about 200 people, it had one gallery in front of the pulpit, and behind the pulpit sliding doors opened on to the Sunday School Room. On great occasions the minister could have a congregation both in front and behind him. This however did not often happen.
WESTBOURNE GROVE BAPTIST CHAPEL
Was erected 1853. The first cost was £5,500. Galleries had soon to be erected at cost of £579, and in 1866 it was thought necessary to enlarge the building by adding 16 feet on each side at cost of £5,895; total, £11,974, the whole of which was raised by voluntary subscriptions, under the pastorate of the Rev. W. G. Lewis. In 1881 Rev. J. Tuckwell, of Luton, accepted the pastorate, and under his ministry the church and congregation have largely increased. On the 20th of April, 1882, one of the finest organs in London was opened here, which has added much to the beauty of the building. It was built by Brindley and Foster, of Sheffield, at a cost of £820.
Horbury chapel was a sister church of Hornton Street, and was erected about 1846. The present honoured pastor, Rev. W. Roberts, being the first minister.
Earthen Vessel 1868, Page 195
NOTTING HILL.—Silver Street Chapel. On Tuesday, April 8th, the second anniversary of the church under the pastorate of Mr. D. Crumpton was held. In the afternoon a good sermon was preached by Mr. Milner of Keppel street, after which about 200 friends took tea. In the evening a public meeting was held, Mr. Crumpton in the chair, when the following ministers addressed the meeting: Brethren Box, Wall, Dickerson, Milner, Frith, Griffith, and Wilkins. The Gospel was truth fully preached by all, and, at the close of the day, many were able to say, “Truly this is none other than the house of God, for it has been the gate of heaven to my soul.”
Earthen Vessel 1870, Page
NOTTING HILL.—Silver Street Baptist Chapel. My dear Editor, on Tuesday, April 6th, the third anniversary of the opening of this place of worship was held. This section of the church of Christ are laboring under a very heavy trial; the pastor, Mr. Crumpton, has been prevented through bodily affliction from occupying the pulpit for four months; but being a little better, was able to be present on this occasion, as he was also on the previous Sabbath evening, and spoke a few words from the table to his loving and affectionate flock. On the afternoon of the before mentioned day, Mr. Wilkins, of Soho, in the stead of Mr. Goerge Moyle, of Peckham, delivered a most excellent discourse from Deut. 33:9. The school-room was well filled with persons to tea, who were hospitably waited upon by the ladies. At half-past six, a public meeting was held in the chapel, when James Peters, Esq., presided, who was introduced to the meeting, in a very Christian and brotherly way by the pastor. After singing the hymn commencing, “Jesus, I love thy charming name,” a prayer being offered by Mr. Anderson, of Deptford, the chairman, in a brief, but terse speech, remarked that though he did not belong to this section of the church of Christ (he being an Episcopalian) he was nevertheless, a great admirer of Christian unity, and that was one reason for occupying the post he did this evening. With reference to the people who worship here, although known to but few, he had had pleasing opportunities of witnessing the progress they had made since their commencement three years ago. Their pastor had his deepest sympathy, believing that the overruling hand of providence was in all these matters, he was compelled to come to the conclusion that all things would work together for good. He then called upon one of the deacons to give some account of last year’s proceedings. Mr. Linforth stated that three had been removed by death, four had been added, others were about to join. The affliction of their pastor was a trial to them, but, hitherto the Lord had helped, and to Him they looked for the future. Mr. Crumpton essayed to speak upon the name of Christ; his heart and mind were evidently full of the subject, but want of strength rendered him almost inaudible. Many of the congregations manifested their sympathy for him by the tear trickling down their cheeks. It appeared to me, Mr. Editor, that this good man had had a sight of the better land, and had taken up the position marked out by Stennett, when he wrote,—
“On Jordan’s stormy banks I stand,
And cast a wishful eye
To Canaan’s bright and happy land,
Where my possessions lie.”
Mr. Box, of Woolwhich caught the note of Christian unity to which the chairman referred, and gave utterance to the union which exists between Christ and his church. Mr. Osmond followed with a savory exposition of “Truly our fellowship is with the Father,” &c. Mr. Anderson continued in the strain of Mr. Box, on unity. Mr. Griffiths, of Bethnal Gree, gave free utterance to some things touching matchless grace. Mr. Hazelton, of Chadwell Street, took as the foundation of his speech, the words of Paul, “He worketh all things according to his own will,” and in a humble, and intellectual way, illustrated the text, going through the life of Joseph. Mr. Griffin, of City road, Mr. S. Bradbury, superintendent, of Soho Sunday school, Mr. Doncaster, and others took part in the meeting. Each speaker gave a few kind and brotherly words to the pastor. Mr. Maycock was absent through domestic affliction, and sent a letter of apology. After the benediction, a cordial vote of thanks to the chairman was proposed by Mr. Crumpton, and seconded by Mr. Linforth, which was acknowledged in reciprocating terms. Mr. Adams, and Mr. Brabery, have supplied the pulpit during the last four months.
Earthen Vessel 1870, Page 157
NOTTING HILL.—Silver Street Chapel, Kensington Place. The fourth anniversary of the formation of the church in this place, was held on Tuesday, April 5th, 1870, at three o’clock in the afternoon. Mr. Anderson, of Deptford, read and prayed and Mr. John Foreman, of Hill street chapel, Dorset square, preached a very able sermon from Heb. 11:14. At five, a large number of friends took tea in the schoolroom; and at half-past six, a public meeting was held, when Mr. John Short (Hon. Sec. and Treasurer to the Young Men’s Christina Association, Notting Hill) presided. Prayer was offered by Mr. Jackman, of Peckham. The pastor, Mr. D. Crumpton, then gave a brief account of the state of the church, from which it appeared that peace and unity was enjoyed, the attendance encouraging and after the removal of nine by death, &c., the number of members was sixty, eleven persons having been added during the year. He then said he had received a note of Mr. Curtis, informing him, that owing to pressing engagements, he could not be with them; also from G. T. Congreve, Esq., of Peckham, expressing his regret that as he was labouring under severe indisposition, he could not come, as he had intended to do, but had sent them one guinea, as “token of his good will and affection. The Chairman then expressed his cordial sympathy with them in their attempt to raise that cause, and said he thought he might now congratulate them on the success of their efforts, and hoped still greater blessings may be vouchsafed to them. Mr. Box, of Woolwich, then spoke on practical godliness, and trusted they would still “Dwell together in unity,” “Be steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know your labour is not in vain in the Lord.” Mr. Wilkius of Soho, said the time was come for those who knew and loved the truth tovunite in one holy band, and in the name of the Lord to stand face to face with infidelity, and every other evil, remembering that the triumphs of truth and righteousness were certain, for “all enemies must be put under Immanuel’s feet,” and he shall reign from the river to the ends of the earth.” Mr. Anderson, of Deptford, dwelt on the glorious doctrines of grace, and said the signs of the times unmistakably showed that there was danger at hand, and it behoved the ministers and friends of truth to combat error, by a bold and uncompromising declaration of the “whole couusel of God.” Mr. Drisroe, of St. Luke’s, observed that whilst there may be danger to man-made systems, and law established creeds and churches, there was no danger to the true church of Christ, for she was “built upon a rock,” and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Mr. Hazelton, of Chadwell street, opportunely pointed out that whilst it was true that there was no danger to the invisible and spiritual church, there were, no doubt, many mighty influences at work, which created grave apprehensions in devout minds, and which may hereafter prove sources of great trial and affliction to the people of God and church of Jesus Christ, illustrating his remarks by the sufferings and persecutions many had endured in former times for truth’s sake. He then enlarged on these two subjects, viz., the danger and security of the church of God, by ably expounding the precious words of truth written in the forty-sixth Psalm, remarking that the church then had a time of trouble, for “the heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved, he uttered his voice, and the earth melted,” but “God was her refuge, strength, and present help,” and the church said “therefore will not we fear,” &c. “The Lord of Hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge.” After a few words from Mr. Flack, of Wilton square, and “brief address by the chairman, the usual votes of thanks were given, and the delightful services of the day were closed with the doxology and benediction. Mr. Crumpton then said the chairman had that moment given him a cheque for two guineas, as his contribution to the chapel funds.
Earthen Vessel 1870, Page 378
NOTTING HILL.—Silver Street Chapel, Kensington Place, W.
The fifth anniversary of the commencement of this cause was held last month. On Lord’s day, Nov. 13th, Mr. Dickinson, of Little Alie Street, preached morning and evening, and the pastor, Mr. Crumpton, in the afternoon. On Tuesday morning, Nov. 15th, snow fell freely, and it was truly November weather; at mid day it somewhat brightened, but still seemed unpropitious, so that the friends were surprised but delighted to see such a goodly number assembled in the afternoon to hear Mr. John Foreman, who, at the close of an excellent sermon, said he was astonished to see so good a congregation. At five o’clock a large number of persons sat down to tea in the school room; and in the evening, at half past six, a public meeting was held in the chapel, over which Mr. E. Wilson very kindly and ably presided. After singing, the pastor read a portion of Scripture, and Mr. Hoddy implored, in a very earnest manner, the Divine presence and blessing; and from the hallowed feeling which pervaded the entire proceedings, it was evident the prayer was heard and answered. Mr. Crumpton then made a few remarks, reminding the Church of her indebtedness to God for his help and blessing on their endeavours to raise that cause and ascribe all success to Him; observing; “Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain who build it.” He then read some letters from brethren not able to attend; among which was one from G. T. Congreve, Esq., enclosing a cheque for one guinea. The chairman, in his remarks, made some excellent observations on the right of private judgment, and also on liberality in giving. Mr. Box, of Woolwich, with much feeling, reviewed the past history of the Church, and expressed his satisfaction with the results which had followed the efforts of the friends in that place. Mr. Anderson, of Deptford, spoke in an impressive manner on the branches of the vine, showing that the dead branches were nominal and carnal professors, who would be cut off, but living branches, true believers, were not cut off, but would abide in Christ, and bear fruit, some in one way and some in another. Mr. Briscoe, of Salem Chapel, Meard’s Court, by a striking anecdote exposed the fastidiousness and unreasonableness of some, in reference to the sort of pastor they required, very properly remarking that prosperity depended as much on the church as on the minister, and it was impossible for them to transfer their responsibility to him. His motto and theirs, must be progress. Mr. Alderson, of Walworth, enlarged on the subject of fruit-bearing, and in a bold manner set forth the excellence of a fruit- bearing church, observing that there were fruits of faith, of love, of patience, of zeal, of holiness, and of joy. He then referred, at some length, to the state of the denomination, and concluded by expressing the hope that an association would be formed, or something done to promote its unity, prosperity and extension. Mr. Wilkins of Soho, dwelt on the social, as well as the personal nature of religion, and enquired, was it not possible to enlarge the sphere and influence of such meetings? and by a proper and laudable sectarianism, to promote the interests of the churches, and thereby advance the cause of truth? and taking up some remarks made by the preceding speaker, intimated that there wanted “closer bond of union between ministers and churches, and said he should be most happy to do his part to further such an object. Mr. Crumpton said, that some time ago, he proposed the formation of a strict Baptist Association in London, but that proposal was not entertained. He was still willing to unite with others, and if his brethren then present would publicly engage to aid him, he would do his utmost to bring about the desired result. To which appeal, they all said they would most cordially unite, and should be most happy so to do. We may therefore hope that an effort will be made to bring pastors and churches nearer to each other, and thereby to promote their edification, power, and good. May Jehovah approve and bless. The time being gone, other brethren on the platform did not address the meeting, but after a few remarks from the chairman, the doxology was sung, and the benediction pronounced. Thus closed these interesting services, of which it may be truly said— the congregations, sermons, addresses, collections, tone, and spirit, were all excellent. To God be all the glory.
Earthen Vessel 1870, Page 157
PECKHAM.—Solemn and interesting services were holden in Baptist chapel. Rye lane, in March. Mr. Crumpton preached a baptizing sermon, then addressed the young candidates, and led them down into the water. Mr. Moyle, the pastor, read the Scriptures, and pleaded in prayer for the Lord’s blessing. Mr. Crumpton looked ill, but he was strengthened in and honoured for, his work. In this day when that most striking ordinance, the baptism of believers by immersion, is so increasingly slighted, we receive with gladness tidings of a steady growth in many of our New Testament churches.—May 2, 1870
Earthen Vessel 1871, Page 381
Notting Hill.—Silver Street Chapel. Sixth anniversary was held Lord’s-day, October 29, and following Tuesday. Messrs. Crumpton, Briscoe, Hazelton, and Foreman, were the preachers. It was pleasing to see Mr. Foreman so much improved in health, and to hear him preach with so much point and power. We hope the Lord will yet spare him to the churches; in such times as these we know not how to give up such veterans in Immanuel’s army. A large company took tea; a public meeting was held, over which Thomas Pickworth, &q., kindly presided. Another veteran, Mr..C. Box, earnestly supplicated the Lord’s blessing. The pastor then gave a brief statement of facts, respecting the rise and progress of the cause, observing that the first meeting held was attended by fifteen persons; now the church consisted of sixty-two members, whilst others had been removed by death, dismission, &c.; and as to pecuniary matters, they had raised for all purposes nearly £200 per year. He also anticipated that they must arise, and build, as the chapel was required by the railway directors, to whom it belonged, and was likely to be taken down, so that they would need, and affectionately solicited, the help of the churches, and of all who were willing to assist in the good work. After some kindly and excellent remarks by the chairman, the following ministers spoke: brethren Anderson, Wilkins, Anderson, Kevan, and Dickerson; brother Bennett concluded with prayer. The attendance was very good. We thank God for the sympathy and aid of so many beloved ministers and Christian friends. The chairman kindly presented £5 to the funds, and our highly esteemed friend, Joseph Peters, Esq., sent £5. These amounts, with the collections, and contributions, raised the proceeds of the occasion to £34 15s., 5d. To our God be glory and honor, for ever and ever. Amen.
Earthen Vessel 1871, Page 125
Metropolitan Association Of Particular Baptist Churches
A strong desire for closer union among the Strict Baptist Churches in London and its suburbs, has long been felt by ministers and others connected with that portion of the Baptist denomination. Several preliminary meetings have been held, to consider what steps should be taken to effect this object, the importance of which will appear from the fact that these churches contain about 7,000 members, to say nothing of their families, Sabbath schools, and congregations. At one of these meetings, held last January, at Salem Chapel, Meard’s-court, Wardour Street, at which Mr. Crumpton presided,—after earnest prayer for divine guidance, it was decided “that a circular calling a special meeting to consider the propriety of forming an Association, should be sent to the churches which had expressed approvable, requesting them officially to appoint delegates, who, in conjunction with their pastor (if any) should attend the meeting, and be empowered to act for and on their behalf, that the proposed Association, if that step was approved, may be duly formed.” In response to this, a large number of ministers and delegates from the churches met in Soho Chapel, Oxford street, on Friday, March 10th, 1871; Mr. Wilkins, minister of the place, presiding; when, after fervent prayer to God for wisdom and blessing, and, after due consideration and deliberation, it was resolved unanimously: That the proposed Association of Particular Baptist Churches be now formed, and called, The Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches, in and around London, maintaining the principles and practices set forth in the Doctrinal Basis and Rules now agreed upon; and that its objects be:
“1. To promote the unity, edification, and prosperity of the Churches.”
“2. To devise and employ means for extending the Cause of God in London and its suburbs.”
The following are the DOCTRINAL BASIS and RULES unanimously adopted:—
DOCTRINAL BASIS:—
1. The equality and distinct personality of the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, in the unity of the Godhead.
2. Eternal and personal election unto salvation.
3. The fall of all mankind in Adam—their guilt and condemnation—together with their entire and universal depravity, by which they are utterly alienated from God, and are unable in and of themselves to turn to Him.
4. Particular redemption by the vicarious sacrifice of Christ.
5. Justification by grace, through faith, by the imputed righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ.
6. Regeneration and sanctification by the direct agency of the Holy Spirit, through the instrumentality of Divine truth; and that saving faith is not a legal duty, but the sovereign and gracious gift of God.
7. The absolute necessity for a holy life, as the result of true faith, and the evidence of regeneration.
8. The final perseverance of true believers.
9. The resurrection of the dead and the universal judgment.
10. The everlasting punishment of the wicked, and the everlasting happiness of the righteous.
11. The duty of preaching the gospel to every creature of the fallen race of Adam.
12. The necessity of immersion on a profession of repentance and faith, in order to church fellowship and admission to the Lord’s table.
13. The congregational order of the churches.
RULES AND REGULATIONS:—
1. That, to promote the objects of the Association, meetings for mutual prayer, consultation, exhortation, public preaching, and the despatch of business, be held at such times and places as shall be agreed upon—one such meeting in each year to be the annual meeting of the Association.
2. That the anniversary services be extended to two days or parts of them—the former day to be occupied in the transaction of the necessary business of the Association, the latter in public services.
3. That two ministers be appointed to preach at each anniversary—one to be chosen by the Association at a previous meeting, and the other by the church in connection with which the services are held. In each case a second preacher to be appointed, in case of failure.
4. That the parties entitled to vote on any question be the following:
(1) The pastors of the associated church.
(2) Messengers appointed by the churches (or in case of failure their substitutes) in the following proportion: under 100 members, two; 100 to 200 members, three; 200 or more members, four; beyond which number no increase of representatives will be allowed.
5. That each of the associated churches send an annual letter descriptive of its state; and that any church neglecting to send such letter for two successive years, be written to: and if it neglect the third year without a justifiable reason, it be considered as no longer belonging to the Association.
6. That each church connected with this Association make an annual contribution to defray its incidental expenses, and to form a fund for the assistance of weak churches, and for the promotion of the kingdom of Christ by the preaching of the Gospel, and the establishment of new Interests in connection with the denomination.
7. That every church wishing to join this Association (except those represented at this meeting) and sending a written application to that effect, stating its agreement with the doctrinal basis and rules thereof, within the next six months, be received on the vote of at least three-fourths of the meeting at which such application shall be presented; but that after that time, all applications be presented at the annual meeting twelve months prior to voting on the question, and that the reception of all churches be approved in like manner by not less that three-fourths of the representatives present.
The Meeting then proceeded to the appointment of the officers of the Association, and also a committee for the arrangement of business, &c.; and unanimously elected for the ensuing year the undermentioned, viz., President, Mr. D. Cremation; Vice-President, Mr. C. Wilson. Treasurer, Mr. J. O. Kennard. Secretary, Mr. J. T. Briscoe. Committee, Messrs. W. Anderson, J. S. Anderson, J. Battersby, W. Bracher, J. Corney, E. Falkner, H. F. Griffen, J. Griffith, J. Hazelton, T. Sadler, W. S. Waterer, and J. Wilkins. The said officers and committee to be eligible for re-election. It was also unanimously agreed,
“That the Association meet in three months time at Chadwell street chapel, for receiving applications from the churches wishing to join the Association, and other business; and, if possible, for public worship.
“That the Annual Meeting be held (D. V.) at this time next year, arrangements being left to the Committee.
It was likewise decided:
“That the proceedings of the present meeting be reported in The Earthen Vessel, Gospel Standard, and Gospel Herald; and that the proceedings of the meeting in circular form be forwarded to all Strict Baptist church in the metropolis and suburbs.”
The meeting was concluded with the doxology and benediction. From the number of churches represented, the spirit of earnestness manifested, and the unanimity of the decisions, we may hope that this movement is of God, and will prove to the churches a source of abundant blessing.
Earthen Vessel 1895, Page 200
From a record in the July number of the Voice of Truth, 1865, I find our brother [Thomas Higham] attended the meeting of the Suffolk and Norfolk Association, held at Grundisburgh. Now, that of itself was nothing particular; many others did the same, but often from little things issue great events, and so it was in this case. After returning home our brother wrote a letter to the periodical quoted, as follows:—
“Dear Sir,—Attending with a friend the meeting of the Suffolk and Norfolk Association held in June last, at Grundisburgh, I could not help reflecting that the Strict Communion Churches in London and its suburbs had no such organisation. The Churches in Suffolk and Norfolk in association are united upon the great doctrinal truths of the everlasting Gospel, and are also steadfast in holding fast by the laws of Zion’s King for the government of the Church upon earth. They have sympathies in common with each other, to help where help is needed, by advocating each other’s cause and rendering pecuniary help to their sister Churches who are unable wholly to support themselves. They are zealous in the great cause of missionary labour, in carrying the Gospel into villages where no chapels exist, and also the claims of foreign missions are not disregarded. I feel we in London might go into Suffolk and take a few useful hints from the Suffolk and Norfolk Association, and organise such an one ourselves. And why should the Churches of London and the suburbs remain without an association? It might be argued that no benefit could be derived in a city like this by having such an organisation. I think there are several reasons why we should unite.
“1st. Because the importance of the great truths we believe demands that we should lose no effort to make them known, and endeavour by encouraging young men from our ranks to preach them, and giving young men countenance by rendering them help by our presence, counsel, and mutual support.
“2nd. The small causes of truth demand our help. How many of them are languishing for want of a little help. They cannot command, at times, acceptable supplies for lack of funds. And many of the itinerent ministers (worthy men they are), by reason of labouring for the bread that perisheth, dare not devote much of their time to study for fear of robbing their families.
“3rd. The young and rising generation claim our help. An organisation has begun. May God prosper it and give it permanent usefulness.
“4th. The cause of foreign missions claims our help and advocacy. A movement has begun at Keppel-street, which, supplemented by help from several sister Churches, has resulted in maintaining a minister in India, and a chapel has been built at Tulleygaurn for his stated ministrations. Why not more? A necessity arises still for united effort.
“5th. We, as ministers, and the several Churches in and around London should unite for mutual counsel, and endeavour to promote brotherly love, also to aid each other, to use united effort to publish the name of the Lord. Also to have, at least once in the year, a statement of the progress or other-wise of the state of the various Churches, by which means we should be brought into contact with each other, and he stirred to much brotherly love and more earnestness in the service of our Divine Master.
“May God arise and shine upon us, stirring us up to more diligence. So prays,
“Yours for Jesus’ sake,
“Thomas Higham
Avenue Chapel, Camden-town.”
This letter had its effect, and led the late Mr. Crumpton to consult with myself and others. Result, the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches was formed. When we look at what it is now, we may well exclaim, “What hath God wrought?” To His holy name be all the glory and praise.
Earthen Vessel 1872, Page 169
Our Two Questions
How are we to build our new Chapels? And, How are we to fill the Pulpits and the Pews of our old Chapels?
Think us not wilfully wicked when we refer with sacred astonishment to that singular translation which the margin gives to the thirty-fifth verse of the thirty-seventh Psalm, which reads thus, “I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a green tree, that groweth in his own soil, yet he passed away, and lo, he was not; yea, I sought him, but he could not be found.”
That green tree, “growing in it’s own soil” representeth any proud, prosperous man, who fears not God, who is not devoted to the pure worship of God, who lives not, aims not to honour God’s Son in the Gospel, by the grace and power of the Spirit of God, let his name or profession be what it may. Think of this.
A friend from CAMDEN TOWN says:—“We are meeting, thinking, and talking of building a chapel, wherein our pastor, George Webb, and his church and congregation may meet for worship, and for preaching the Gospel.” By a zealous, united, and persevering course of action, surely this desirable enter-prize may be achieved. New chapels are now wanted for Mr. D. Crumpton, at Notting Hill; for Mr. Lawrence, at Bermondsey; for the church at Enfield Highway; for Mr. Langford, at Dalston; for Mr. Z. Turner, at Poplar; and for others we name not now. Should not all the Strict Baptist churches in London and throughout the whole of Christendom, unite together, and by ONE charitable effort, raise a fund to help our brethren who are doing their utmost to prevent the Strict Baptist Churches from falling into decay?
Let us all remember that while we are dividing into what some people term Vessel men [those subscribing to the Earthen Vessel], Standand men [those subscribing to the Gospel Standard], &c., while we are speaking evil, and acting ill one towards another, our rivals and opponents are uniting and working with all their might to cast us into the shade—to drive us away altogether. The public papers are falsley maligning us: the open-communion leaders are sneering at us; the hosts of young aspirants who advocate the modem systems [such as duty-faith] look and speak of us as an antiquated remnant of a race which they consider, as did Saul of Tarsus, they shall be doing God service by extinguishing as soon as possible. Brethren, the truly spiritual Particular Baptists, who continue steadfast in the Apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, are the genuine successors of our Saviour’s first disciples; and because we do KNOW the truth, and by that truth are made free, we believe we are the people to whom the exhortation belongeth, “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.”
We are to remember that the fifty-fourth of Isaiah’s Prophecy belongeth most specially to this dispensation: to us, Christ there speaketh with strong emphasis, “Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitation; spare not; lengthen thy cords and strengthen thy stakes.” These prophecies belong to us; they have been fulfilled, in measure, in us. All who read our Church history carefully know that the churches of the New Testament pattern have been increased by honest Particular Baptists. Now, however, all other denomination unite to advance themselves, and to occupy the ground, and so to gather up the people, as to reduce us to the same state as in the days of Gideon when “Israel was greatly impoverished because of the Midianites.” May the God of all grace give us his Spirit, that we may do as they did, for then “the children of Israel cried unto the Lord.”
There are some things we feel constrained to declare ought to be done. First of all, let I every church in the kingdom set apart special times, for special prayer: and at those meetings let those brethren cry unto God who have faith in the Saviour’s promise, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Secondly, let there be public meetings in all our chapels everywhere for the express purpose of seeking for unity in the faith, union of heart, and a oneness of co- operation for the lifting up of our churches, and for the increase of them, by the blessing of the Lord. Thirdly, let every true Baptist in the world contribute his mite towards a fund to erect new chapels for such brethren as are manifestly called of the Lord into spheres of usefulness in his truth. And, lastly, let us hold meetings for the encouragement and assistance of all good brethren who are qualified to preach the Gospel, but who require mental and ministerial aids, the better to fit them to meet the educated people of our own times. We leave these few words in the hands of the good and great Master. If He has inspired them, they will not fall to the ground.
Earthen Vessel 1873, Page 94
“At Silver Street Baptist Chapel Mr. R. G. Edwards is preaching with pleasing hope of raising up the cause which during Mr. Crumpton’s illness rather declined. Notting-hill does not appear a very fruitful soil for Strict Baptist Churches. Mr. Henry Varley’s Tabernacle, and all his mission work, goes forth successfully. Mr. G. W. Lewis has a flourishing institution. Mr. Saphir, a converted Jew, is gathering multitudes. The different churches, episcopal and congregational are largely and fashionably attended. Notting-hill must not be written down an irreligious district; thousands upon thousands attend the means of grace; but, in no part of London, are the Strict Baptists less encouraged than they are in those immense localities called Bayswater, Kensington, Hammersmith, Brompton, and their surroundings.”
Earthen Vessel 1873, Page 260
”HAMMERSMITH.-Mrs. Crumpton, wife of the late pastor of Silver street church, died June 28th. In peace she left this world.”
Earthen Vessel 1874, Page 264
Mr. Crumpton’s Death
Some years since Mr. Crumpton left his Church in Yorkshire and came to Soho: from thence to Silver-street, Kensington. Much illness compelled him to resign his pastorate there. Since then he has preached in different places. A few months back he lost his wife by death; then his son. On Monday, August 17, 1874, he entered into rest himself. His path, for a long time, has been one of personal and of domestic affliction. Of his life and ministry we may give a fuller note next issue.
[The Earthen Vessel did not give a fuller note on the life of ministry of David Crumpton—Jared Smith]
Further Study
