Website by Allen Harrington
https://blue-hare.com/stennett/Samuel/sauellt.html
Copyright © 1950, 2012 Oscar Burdick & 1999-2022 Allen Harrington
Free JavaScripts provided
by The JavaScript Source
Samuel Stennett, in contrast to his father who desired theological orthodoxy, was a champion of the
necessity and validity of freedom of individual religious belief. For Samuel, freedom of religious belief. For Samuel, freedom of
religious belief was built on (1) human rights and (2) the need for every Protestant to have sound Christian faith. According to
Anthony Lincoln in his book Some Political and Social Ideas of English Dissent 1763-1800 ,
The Dissenting theory of toleration passed through a remarkable series of evolutions in the century and a half following the civil wars. Beginning as something purely Biblical and spiritual, it gradually changed its character, transforming itself from a Christian liberty into a natural right and, as such, into a political demand... it marks the death of Calvinism as a social or political force: the disappearance of a specifically religious approach to civil government. 296
Lincoln's generalization describes quite accurately the evolution of toleration in religious
thought that moved from Edward to Samuel Stennett. Edward was tolerant because Christian love demanded it, Samuel believed in
toleration, in part, because it was a natural right. However, the Stennetts did not let Calvinism be completely destroyed as a social
and political force. Samuel did not think in that category, so he holds ideas that both support and refute the destruction of
Calvinism as a social and political force. On the one hand, he admits that Dissenters take little part in government in order to avoid
contamination by the world; on the other hand, he is pleased that John Howard was active in prison reform and Samuel himself says that
men should go about doing good as Jesus did. 297 A
corollary of natural individualism and freedom of thought, in contrast to religious tolerance, is Utilitarian individualism. 298 Stennett, however, keeps Christianity central in life and says occasionally in his sermons,
including one that very subject, that Christians should avoid conforming to the world. 299
Thus by not conforming to the world, his view of religion has not become a naturalistic Utilitarianism. Jeremy Bentham had set forth
Utilitarianism in 1789 in his Introduction to Principles of Morals and Legislation , 300 but Stennett had not followed him and perhaps was not aware of the book.
Systematically, in the traditional categories of theology, Samuel Stennett gives us the comparatively
little material, yet we can get a good idea of his theology for he wrote a great deal. God is omnipotent, 301 omniscient, 302 and infinitely wise and good. 303 God is the "great object and author of religion." 304 He is not cruel, but a merciful God; not your enemy, but your friend." 305 Samuel does not agree with Deism which said God is not active in the world. Stennett believes in a
Providence that over-rules all the motions of the material, and all the actions of the intellectual world... . it would not have been worth his [God's] while to have created the world, if, when he had so done, he had left it to govern itself, of which it is utterly incapable ... . Nor is his self-sufficiency a bar against providence, for if this were a reason why he should not govern, it would be a reason why he should not create. 306
Such extensive freedom of physical action in the world on the part of God precludes a thoroughgoing belief in natural law. As Dr. C. C. McCowan points out, eighteenth century rationalism joyed in the advances of natural science, but yet did not formulate natural law which is basically contradictory to physical providence. 307 Samuel Stennett does have some idea of natural law. He says that in early Christianity, Ignorant men had their faculties filled with knowledge in a "preternatural" (inexplicable) way. Ministers today are not given their knowledge in that way, they must study and think.
miracles are now ceased. There is no further occasion for them. And though we may still expect the instruction and assistance of the Holy Spirit in any to ask and hope for those blessings, while they lived in the allowed neglect of those means of cultivating their understanding which reason and the Bible direct us to. 308 God deals with us as reasonable creatures. No new faculties are given us. The order of nature is not reversed. We are not required to understand without thinking, to believe without considering, or to feel without receiving impression... . Nor does the doctrine of divine influences at all militate against this duty; on the contrary, it is a great incentive to it. 309
Thus Samuel believes in Providence, but he is beginning to see how nature does work; he values
highly the advances of science in his day. 310 Specifically, he does recognize the
scientific view of a round world which revolves around the sun in contrast to the biblical square world with a sun moving across the
firmament. 311
Jesus has "true and proper divinity." yet in Jesus, "deity united itself to
humanity." Of the incarnation, Samuel says, "what unexampled philanthropy was this!" 312 As a Protestant, Stennett says that Jesus is the head of the Church. 313 In the last few years of his life, Samuel is more concerned that Christians believe in the divinity of Jesus;
314 yet he never demands a theological test of Christians.
To complete the Trinity, he believes in the action of the Holy Spirit. 315 I do not recall, however, that he ever uses the word "Trinity."
As I have said before, Stennett believed in "the worth, importance, and dignity of man." In
this positive vein, man is a "brother of Jesus." 316 On the other hand, Samuel
retains considerable Calvinism." Man has a "depraved nature," 317
"corrupt affections," 318 and a depraved wilt." 319 However, he never speaks of this corruption as "original," but prefers to prove it from his own
experience. 320 Yet he does say twice that death is a result of sin; 321 that, of course, is a corollary of original sin. Samuel also
gives a definition of the "soul of man":
It is a rational intelligent spirit, endowed with the powers of perception, judgment, reflection and consciousness; with a will to impel us to action; and with numerous affection to facilitate our actions, and to give them each its proper denomination as either good or bad . . .. 322
According to his definition, the soul is linked inseparably to the mind. Heaven will be a place
where man can exercise his basic qualities of intelligence and sociability. 323 Stennett
differed distinctly with John Wesley on one aspect of man. Wesley believed that absolute perfection was obtainable; Stennett says
clearly that man cannot expect to achieve absolute perfection: "Absolute perfection is not necessary, nor is it attainable in the
present life." 324
Stennett is concerned about man's ultimate salvation, but in none of his works does he ever
mention Calvinistic election, or, for that matter, any kind of election. Instead, he makes salvation dependent on personal faith:
"It is necessary, in order to our being saved, that we believe." 325 Yet Stennett
also expresses belief in the "doctrine of the saints' final perseverance," 326 which is a Calvinistic doctrine. 327 It should be pointed out that
Stennett's preaching emphasizes the quality of life to be lived in this world; he believes in future salvation, but does not dwell
on it to the detriment of ethical living in this world.
Although in later life Samuel puts value on the wonderful achievements of science, 328 he occasionally expresses the unsatisfactoriness of this world. This world is vanity and our
present enjoyments are transitory. 329 The world is an enemy of the Christian. 330 Dissenters do try to avoid the evil influences that are present in this world. 331 Samuel's hesitancy about accepting this world probably stems from the Calvinistic caution
that this world is evil. Samuel's objections to this world are not nearly as violent as these of his grandfather, Joseph I. In
fact, by accepting and cherishing the achievements of science, Samuel is taking the first step toward a modern acceptance of the world
and the recognition that life is not necessarily miserable. Samuel is definitely deemphasizing the Calvinistic doctrines of original
sin, election, and the evil quantity of the world. If I may hazard a guess, I would say he is not sure that he should accept those
Calvinistic formulations. Likewise, he is having to come to grips with a scientific concept of the world, and he a ccepts the science
of his day. Of course, he has not thoroughly come to grips with the concept of natural law and its implications in regard to
Providence.
The eighteenth century has often been called the Age of Rationalism. In regard to the use of
"reason," Samuel Stennett took the position that the rest of his family had held. Thus Samuel believed that
Christianity's doctrines should he proven by the use of Scripture and reason. 332 He
believes that reason and the Bible are in full agreement. 333 In studying Christianity, one
should be guided by "the calm dictates of reason and Scripture," or in other words, he should be guided by "the tests
of impartial; reason and the sacred Scriptures." 334 "We are serving ... [God]
when we are conforming to the dictates of reason and conscience in the general course of our lives." 335 Samuel warns against emotionalism taking the place of clear thinking: "Let the appeals to the passions ...
be withdrawn, while the character of the present age is tried at the bar of impartial truth." 336
Everything in Christianity, however, is not discernable by reason. There are times when
Reason and conscience shall submit,
And pay their homage ... 337
at God's feet. Like his father, he says that there are truths which are not discernable to natural reason.
Demonstration is not to be attempted, where only moral proof can be admitted. Nor is a doctrine of pure revelation to be proved by the weak principles of natural religion. 338
As I have said before, Samuel believes the Bible is either inspired as a whole, or it is not inspired at alt. He does not agree with some of his contemporaries who would discard portions of the Scripture. Although he says that miracles, except for the general action of Providence in history, have ceased by his time, he gives miracles and fulfillment of prophecy as the two internal bases for his judging the Bible to be inspired. 339 He is desirous that people study the Bible from a viewpoint of doubt so that their faith may be made deeper when they are convinced of the truth of the Bible. He says that the Bible has not been hurt by allowing people freedom to study it critically. 340 He himself is very willing to consider criticisms and opinions about the Bible; witness the following discussion of Job:
It has been questioned by some whether the story of Job is to be considered in any other light than
a fable or allegory, after the manner of the easterns, and agreeable to some other parts of Scripture. But there does not appear to me
ground sufficient to support this opinion. The story, exclusive of the discourse between the several parties, in short, told with a
great air of simplicity, expected in a mere apologue. But besides the internal marks of its being a true history, there are external
ones which seem to me unanswerable; I mean, Ezekiel1s mentioning Job in company with Noah and Daniel (14: 14).
... .
As to the author, it is not certain who he was, whether Job himself, Elihu or Moses. The latter seems
most likely, as the name of Jehovah (by which God began to be known, or however chiefly known, in the time of Moses) is frequently
known, or however chiefly known, in the time of Moses) is frequently used in the historical part of the book... . 341
Samuel insists that reason be one of the criteria in understanding the Bible; in considering the interpretation of a group of passages, he says, "we may surely with all confidence pronounce upon any such interpretation of them as contradicts reason, Scripture, and fact, that it cannot be genuine." 342 At another time, he uses a commentary contemporary to him to refute a historical note placed in the King James edition of the Bible:
That the first epistle to the Corinthians was written, not from Philippi (as is said in the note added in the epistle in our Bibles) but from Ephesus, Dr. Whitely has, I think clearly shown in the preface to his commentary on that Epistle. 343
It should be pointed out that Samuel lives at a time when Priestly's "historical
criticism" and the German J. G. Eichhorn's "higher criticism"have just appeared. The former was announced in 1782
and the later in 1787. 344 Stennett does not mention either man's work in this field,
though, of course, he knows Priestly and values his scientific work, but thinks he is politically extreme. The Stennetts seem little
concerned with German theology, so I doubt that Samuel even knew of Eichhorn. Some years before that (1753), Jean Astruc, a French
physician published a book suggesting that the book of Genesis was composed of a number of documents. One of Astruc's criteria was
the two names for God in Genesis, Elohim and Jahweh. 345 I note that in his paragraphs on
Job, Stennett recognizes there is more than one name for God in the Old Testament and that is a valid datum for use in the historical
study of the Bible. Even though he used a datum Astruc used, I doubt if he knew of Astruc.
Samuel Stennett regards study as essential to sound Christian faith, but he does not stop with the
knowledge.
How vain a thing is mere speculation in religion! ... we are to judge therefore of the importance of a doctrine by its practical tendency, and by it our zeal is to be regulated. If this idea were duly attended to, we should neither be indifferent to the faith, nor value ourselves on our profound speculations. 346
Likewise, Christian faith should be based in "experimental [experiential] acquaintance with
all the essential truths of Christianity." 347 This seems to mean that a person should
have knowledge of Christianity coupled with a degree of prayer or mysticism that should convince a person of the greatness of
Christian principles and major doctrines.
Samuel occasionally makes generalizations about the Dissenter movement. It is valuable to get the
underlying basis of the Dissenter movement from the Dissenters themselves, rather than from the principles later writers have read
into the movement. The Dissenters originated from the Puritans, 348 and similar to the
Puritans,
we, Protestant Dissenters, are bound by our profession to a peculiar regularity and strictness of
matters. 349
Samuel attributes to the Dissenters a desire to avoid contamination by too many worldly cares.
350 As a Dissenter, Samuel objects to requiring any forms in Christianity that were not
suggested by Jesus or the early church. 351 In other words, the Dissenters reject human
authority, such as was expressed in much of the form of the Church of England. The Dissenters believe the church is "'a
congregation of faithful men,' and so collected out of the world." The Dissenters do not believe in a temporal state church.
352 I note that Samuel includes in his definition of a "Dissenter" a strong
ethical emphasis, a clear statement on polity, and nothing about theology proper!
Of special interest to Seventh Day Baptists is Samuel Stennett's belief in and practice of the
seventh day Sabbath. Two months before Samuel's death, John Evans called on him, and Samuel, as a "Sabbatarian," gave
Evans information about that movement. Evans wrote up this material in A Sketch of the Denominations into Which the Christian World
is Divided . The following I would think are Stennett's ideas in Evans' words:
The Sabbatarians are a body of Christians who keep the seventh day as the Sabbath, are to be found principally, if not wholly, among the Baptists... . The Sabbatarians ... assert that the change of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first day of the week, was effected by Constantine, upon his conversion to the Christian religion. The three following propositions contain a summary of their principles as to this article of the Sabbath, by which they stand distinguished. 1st, That God bath required the observation of the seventh, or last day of every week, to be observed by mankind universally for the weekly sabbath. 2ndly, That this command of God is perpetually binding on man till time shall be no more; and 3dly, That this sacred rest of the seventh day sabbath is not (by divine authority) changed from that the scripture doth no where require the observation of any other day of the week for the weekly sabbath, but the seventh day only. 353
Previously we have noted that Samuel mentioned the day of worship in two of his discourses. He
spoke about Sunday rather than about his personal Sabbath, which I suppose was the same as that of his great-grandfather, from sunset
Friday to sunset Saturday. Thus Samuel spoke of "the day of worship" as a daytime and evening afterward, rather than of
Friday night as the preparation for the morning and afternoon of Saturday. For "the day of worship" he recommended personal
devotions before going to the church in the morning. After attending no more than two services, the family should return home and
leisurely talk of Christianity in the family circle. He thought that children might not be bored or unduly fatigued. In all, "the
day we dedicate to divine service ought to be deemed the pleasantest in all the week." 354
These have been the thoughts of a great Baptist Dissenter minister of the last half of the eighteenth
century. They are his creative, personal approach to Christianity and are based historically on the Bible, perhaps on Calvinism, and
finally on the Dissenter movement of which his family had been a part for nearly a century and a half. Although these were his
personal evaluations of the elements of Christianity, He cherished personal freedom of thought for everyone, and he loved all people,
regardless of differences in creed.
Website by Allen Harrington
https://blue-hare.com/stennett/Samuel/sauellt.html
Copyright © 1950, 2012 Oscar Burdick & 1999-2022 Allen Harrington
Free JavaScripts provided
by The JavaScript Source
296 Lincoln, op. cit. , p. 182.
back
297 Sermon ... decease of John Howard , pp. 3, 18.
back
298 Tawney. op. cit. , p. 189.
back
299 Works , III, 395-414, 478.
back
300 Encyclopedia Britannica , III, 417.
back
301 Samuel Stennett, Works III, 544.
back
302 Ibid. , II, 454.
back
303 Ibid. , I, 154.
back
304 Ibid. , I, 79.
back
305 Ibid. , I, 321; cf. I, 319; III, 534.
back
306 Ibid. , I, 316; cf. especially An Answer to ... the Christian Minister's ... , p. 47;
cf. also Works , I, 103, 267, 154, 422, III, 194, 276, 423.
back
307 Class lectures at the Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, California on March 30, 1953.
back
308 Works , III, 242f.
back
309 Ibid. , II, 495.
back
310 Ibid. , III, 479, 315
back
311 Ibid. , III, 3f.
back
312 Ibid. , III, 308f.
back
313 Ibid. , III, 407.
back
314 The Mortality of Ministers ... (1791) and a letter entitled "On the Divinity of Christ"
(Jan. 13, 1795) now found in Rippon, Annual Baptist Register , 1798-1801, pp. 290f.
back
315 Works , I, 243; III, 248.
back
316 Ibid. , I, 62; John Evans, A Preservation against infidelity ... , p. 206.
back
317 Works , I, 375, 10; II, 359, 454; cf. III, 332.
back
318 Ibid. , I, 423.
back
319 Ibid. , I, 132.
back
320 Ibid. , III, 332.
back
321 Ibid. , I, 401; III, 174. The dates on these references are 1769 and 1771, respectively.
back
322 Ibid. , I, 80.
back
323 Ibid. , I, 432; cf. on life after death: I, 421; III, 332.
back
324 Ibid. , I, 135.
back
325 Ibid. , II, 385.
back
326 Ibid. , II, 415.
back
327 Walker, op. cit. , p. 455.
back
328 Samuel Stennett, Works , III, 315, 479; the dates on these are 1791 and 1793, respectively.
back
329 Ibid. , III, 197 (1760).
back
330 Ibid. , I, 95 (1769).
back
331 Ibid. , III, 478 (1793).
back
332 An Answer to a Christiam Minister's ... , pp. 34, 82; cf. Works , III, 533.
back
333 Ibid. , II, 255; III, 246.
back
334 Ibid. , II, 367, 389.
back
335 Ibid. , II, 26.
back
336 Ibid. , III, 453.
back
337 Ibid. , III, 545.
back
338 Ibid. , III, 425f.; cf. I, 252, 259, 364.
back
339 Ibid. , I, 219; III, 355, 455, 376.
back
340 Ibid. , III, 89; Samuel Stennett, The Faithful Minister Rewarded , p. 31.
back
341 Samuel Stennett, Works , III, 282f.
back
342 Samuel Stennett, An Answer to a Christian Minister's ... , p. 39.
back
343 Samuel Stennett Works , II, 45; this quotation is also in Helping Hand , LXIX, no. 2
(April-June 1953), p. 38.
back
344 J. Eistlin Carpenter, The Bible in the Nineteenth Century (London: Longmans, Green, and Co. 1903).
p. 3.
back
345 Ibid., p. 111; George H. Gilbert, Interpretation of the Bible (New York: Macmillan, 1908), p. 253.
back
346 Samuel Stennett, Works , II, 457; cf. III, 286.
back
347 Ibid. , I, 319, etc.
back
348 Ibid. , III, 479.
back
349 Ibid. , III, 456 ( National Calamities ... , p. 35).
back
350 Works , III, 478.
back
351 Ibid. , III, 466; cf. Priestly: "We agree in nothing but this that we equally reject all human
authority in the matters of religion" (in Lincoln, op cit. , p. 19). cf John Evans, Sermon in Memory of Rev. Samuel
Stennett . ... , p. 16: "The cause of the Protestant Dissenters, which asserts the right of private judgment, and maintains
the sufficiency of scripture, lay near their hearts."
back
352 Samuel Stennett Works , III, 466.
back
353 (London: 1796, Third edition), pp. 102f.
back
354 Samuel Stennett, Works , II, 482; cf. II, 479-484, 39f.
back