FIRST & SECOND BAPTIST CHURCH, NEWPORT RI NOT CALVINIST?

 First Baptist Church, Newport RI was founded around 1638 by John Clarke and Obadiah Holmes. Both were Calvinists according to most historians, but there seems to be some few contradictions as to how they viewed those doctrines. For instance, Holmes wrote out his own articles of faith to describe what he believed, and for the most part, they seem quite calvinistic. However, there also seems to be contradictions. In article 8 he quotes John 3:16 which is never seen in Calvinist articles. When he said in article 23 "I believe although God can bring men to Christ, and to cause them to believe in him for life, yet he hath appointed an ordinary way to effect that great work of faith, which is by means of sending a ministry into the world, to publish repentance to the sinner, and salvation, and that by Jesus Christ; and they that are faithful shall save their own souls and some that hear them." That last part is a very unusual statement for a Calvinist. First, it implies that we can "save ourselves" by faith, and that we can save others. As a Non Calvinist/Provisionist, I have no objection to that, as Jesus most certainly said "Your faith has saved you," and the Apostle Peter said "Save yourselves from this evil generation" and then he immediately baptized 3,000 who "saved" themselves. No one of course, believes we have any power to save ourselves from sin. We do, however, 'save ourselves" by trusting in Him who can deliver us, we can reach for the hem of his garment and be healed. If this sounds like heresy to the Calvinist, I might remind him of John Calvin's own words when he said in his sermon on 2 Timothy and Ephesians the following;

 “For it is no small matter to have the souls perish which were bought by the blood of Christ.” Similarly, a sermon on Ephesians exhorted, “Also we ought to have good care of those that have been redeemed with the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. If we see souls which have been so precious to God go to perdition, and we make nothing of it, that is to despise the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Calvin would even state, “So we must beware, or souls redeemed by Christ may perish by our carelessness, for their salvation to some degree was put into our hands by God.” Calvin clearly was not as guarded in his wording as many later “high” Calvinists tended to be. He evidently believed in general atonement and that those who perish were in fact "redeemed".  If their salvation was put into our hands by God, as Calvin says, and our carelessness causes many to perish, what does that say about the determinism Calvinist teach? It seems Calvin agreed that "to some degree" we save ourselves and others.

Evidently, in 1652, if First Baptist was indeed Calvinist, the church abandoned that system and became a General Six Principle Baptist church. This would mean that Obadiah Holmes embraced Arminian doctrines as well, because he remained pastor of this church (after John Clarke) until his death in 1682. It can certainly be proved they were not Calvinist in the late 1700's. In William Buell Sprague’s Annals of the American Baptist Pulpit, it says "...the orthodoxy of Edward Upham (1709–1797), who for twenty three years served as pastor of the First Baptist Church of Newport, RI, was “not of the straitest sect” insofar as his views “probably did not rise above Arminianism” (44) Upham became pastor in 1748 through 1771, after having pastored Second Baptist Church in Boston. Read about it here and here . 

 In 1656 the Second Baptist Church was organized in Newport. Its organization was the result of a disagreement as to the necessity of laying on of hands on newly baptized members. The original church allowed the practice, but did not require it. This practice was a doctrine held by General Six Principle Baptists, who were totally Arminian. The latter group, led by William Vaughn, believed laying on of hands was a requirement of the ordinance of baptism. Though the membership of Second Church apparently had a basic disagreement with those of First, as to the means necessary to initiate church fellowship, it did not seem to affect interchurch fellowship. It appears they continued fellowship with one another, sat in each others ordinations and exchanged pulpit duties. There is no doubt this issue resulted in a division of the First Church; however, it appears the split was friendly. Was this church in doctrinal agreement with First Church other than laying on of hands? Second Church became a General Six Principle Baptist church, so they must have been Arminian. Out of them sprang the Seventh Day Baptists, who were also General Atonement, while adhering to eternal security. this has never been disputed by any historian, and is recorded in the Historical Sketch of the First Baptist Church, Newport RI, in 1876, by C.E Barrows, pastor of that church. (see here or here )

According to the Rhode Island Historical Society, Neither First Baptist nor Second Baptist was founded on calvinistic principles. It seems First Baptist did not become Calvinist until after Edward Upham was no longer pastor, and James Manning assumed the pastorate. the historical notes on these churches say;

"The First Baptist Church in Providence (founded in 1638) was the first American church to adopt Six Principle doctrine, in 1652. The Second Baptist Church in Newport was formed along the same principles in 1656. Another early Six Principle church was in Swansea, founded in 1680.

            In 1771, the First Baptist Church in Providence adopted Calvinist theology when James Manning, President of Brown University became pastor. Some Six Principle adherents broke off and formed their own church in Johnston at this time." Read it here If this proves to be true, then both churches were not Calvinist for the first hundred or more years of their existence.