Canadian Baptist History

April 22, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Ian Hugh Clary

Canadian Baptists have a history too, eh? Though some of you may have heard of T. T. Shields, you are probably not as familiar with names like Alexander Stewart, R. A. Fyfe, Henry Alline, or C. J. Holman (and his powerful wife Caroline!). These are just a selection from a group of men and women who helped establish the Baptist denomination in Canada. Our history is colourful, theologically rich, and is deeply significant not only to Canadian Baptist identity, but to Canadian history as a whole—for instance, did you know that the man who discovered that the Germans were using chlorine gas in the Great War was Col. George Nasmith who attended Jarvis Street Baptist Church in Toronto?

Last month the Canadian Baptist Historical Society met at Heritage College in Cambridge, ON. We were delighted to see our numbers doubled and two members join the executive—including yours truly. Papers were given by our president, Michael Haykin, and one of his students, Michael Plato, who is also a professor at Seneca College in Toronto. Dr. Haykin presented on Andrew Fuller and trinitarianism, while Plato gave a stimulating paper on E. Y. Mullins. You might find it odd that neither address dealt with a Canadian; we’re okay with that, we have confidence in our identity!

The Society is based out of McMaster Divinity College and is connected to the work at the Canadian Baptist Archive. We were thankful to hear a report that the Archive is making progress in terms of preserving old and deteriorating manuscripts, and that they have made changes so that scholars have an easier and more comfortable time doing their work. I, for one, have benefited greatly from the Archive this past year. The Society is also hoping to have a social media presence, so keep your eyes peeled for us on Facebook and Twitter in the coming weeks. Our most important work, however, is the publication of various works related to Baptist history. McMaster’s series in Baptist history published with Wipf & Stock is a vehicle towards that end. Our first book dealt with Baptists in Canadian public life, and our upcoming book is on Baptists and War; many of the papers from a recent Fuller Center conference will be included.

As a Canadian and a Baptist, I am thankful that there are a growing number of men and women committed to keeping the memory of our forebears alive. If you are a Chronicling Canuck with a Baptist flavour, or you if are merely interested in coming to the next event or becoming a member of the Society, please go to our website to find out how.

_____________________

Ian Hugh Clary is finishing doctoral studies under Adriaan Neele at Universiteit van die Vrystaat (Blomfontein), where he is writing a dissertation on the evangelical historiography of Arnold Dallimore. He has co-authored two local church histories with Michael Haykin and contributed articles to numerous scholarly journals. Ian serves as a pastor of BridgeWay Covenant Church in Toronto where he lives with his wife and two children.

The Recruiting Pastor

April 16, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Ryan Patrick Hoselton

Christians implore the help of their pastor for a range of reasons—at a range of hours of the night. I know this not because I’m a pastor but because I’m a Christian. But how many requests for help does the average pastor make of his congregation? He likely won’t get many, so he better choose his petitions wisely.

Andrew Fuller (1754-1815) requested the help of his congregation in evangelism. In 1806, he wrote a letter to believers entitled, The Pastor’s Address to His Christian Hearers, Entreating Their Assistance In Promoting the Interest of Christ.[1] He asked for help to promote the gospel, and pastors today can learn from his recruiting methods.

First, he aimed to convince his congregation that evangelism was their mission too, “There is an important difference between Christian ministers and the Christian ministry. The former…exist for your sakes…but the latter, as being the chosen means of extending the Redeemer’s kingdom, is that for which both we and you exist (345-46).” Sharing the gospel is the job description of every Christian. As Nehemiah and Ezra enlisted the help of the Israelites to construct the temple, argued Fuller, so pastors today need believers to build the church (346).

Secondly, Fuller made his congregants aware that their involvement in the Christian mission was necessary for the continuation of churches. People are more willing to participate when they know that they are needed. God uses means to save unbelievers, and the “ordinary way in which the knowledge of God is spread in the world is, by every man saying to his neighbour and to his brother, ‘Know the Lord’ (351).”

Thirdly, Fuller not only entreated their assistance for the mission but he also equipped them for it. Perhaps the reason why many think that their sole duty in evangelism “consisted in sending the [unbelieving] party to the minister” is because they’ve never been trained in evangelism (348). Fuller would not allow his congregants to make this excuse. The chief rule in evangelism, Fuller instructed, was to “point them directly to the Saviour” (349). Merely sharing truths about Christianity without directing the unbeliever to Christ will only mislead him or her to “a resting place short of him (350).” Thus, it is crucial for every believer to “be skilful in the word of righteousness; else you administer false consolation (349).”

To put these principles to use, Fuller suggested three accessible opportunities. First, parents can assist the pastor in evangelism by dialoging with their children about the sermon. Second, Christians should invite their unbelieving friends to the preaching of the Word and discuss it with them. Thirdly, believers’ lives must be walking testimonies to the fruit of the gospel before their neighbors. “Enable us to use strong language when recommending the gospel by its holy and happy effects,” Fuller begged (351).

[1] This appeal was a circular letter for the Northamptonshire Baptist Association. Andrew Fuller, “The Pastor’s Address to His Christian Hearers, Entreating Their Assistance In Promoting the Interest of Christ,” in The Complete Works of the Rev. Andrew Fuller with a Memoir of His Life by Andrew Gunton Fuller, 3 Vols., ed. Joseph Belcher (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1845. Repr., Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle, 1988), 3:345-351.

__________________

Ryan Patrick Hoselton is pursuing a ThM at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He lives in Louisville, KY with his wife Jaclyn, and they are expecting their first child in August.

Should Baptists Care About Social Concerns? William Ward Believed So (PART TWO)

April 12, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By J. Ryan West

As shown yesterday, Ward was concerned deeply to see significant changes regarding social issues in India. Successful social action would not, however, come without the power of Christ’s gospel according to Ward. When reading this book, it is highly important to note Ward’s evolution concerning how he addressed injustices. Otherwise, readers easily misunderstand his position. In his earlier years, Ward proved to be a radical activist that nearly escaped imprisonment twice. Political upheaval modeled on the French Revolution was his ideal during the 1790’s. His conversion and subsequent development over several decades of ministry in India brought about a much different approach to such concerns by the time he preached these sermons. For the seasoned Ward, lasting social change would only occur if the gospel permeated a society: “Let the females of the United Kingdom speak, and they must be heard…By such an interposition, so worthy of the sex in these countries, the females in India will be blessed with all that profusion of privileges which women in Christian countries enjoy; and, being thus blessed, will become the light, the shade, and the ornament of India” (83-84). As one can see, he never expected significant change apart from the gospel taking root in India. Ward had thus transformed from a political activist to a ‘gospel activist’ by the end of his career.

For Ward, addressing social concerns was a given. Biblical Christians could not be concerned with their neighbors’ eternal condition without caring for their immediate needs. Biblical Christians had no choice but to pursue biblical justice through the means of social action coupled with anchoring a society in biblical beliefs. As contemporary Baptists think about the relationship of addressing the physical, social, and mental needs evident in the surrounding culture, it would be helpful to look to our Baptist predecessors. Baptists should concern themselves with rescuing women from sex trafficking, loving—and possibly adopting—children abandoned to foster care or absentee parents, and speak out against the horrors of abortion and systemic oppression. To ignore these matters is irresponsible and unloving. Such responses would prove equally irresponsible and unloving, however, if Baptists do not seek to establish gospel wisdom in these conversations. Lasting social change will only come through individuals who experience the grace and peace of Jesus Christ. The gospel activist William Ward certainly thought so.

____________________

J. Ryan West (PhD Candidate, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is the LoveLoud National Coordinator at the North American Mission Board. He assists Southern Baptist churches and educational institutions throughout the United States and Canada in establishing and conducting gospel-centered ministries of mercy to proclaim Christ while meeting human needs in significant and sustainable ways. Also, he was tasked recently as an Assistant Editor for The Andrew Fuller Works Project, a fifteen-volume series to be published by Walter de Gruyter.

Gordon Wood on the Threat of Presentism in Historical Studies

April 12, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Nathan A. Finn

A couple of years ago, I had the pleasure of reading Gordon Wood’s fine book The Purpose of the Past: Reflections on the Uses of History (Penguin, 2008). The book is a collection of Wood’s published review essays of significant historical books written by others, most of which deal with American history during the Colonial Era and the Early Republic. It is a gem of a book.

In his introduction, Wood warns against the temptation toward presentism that is so common among so many historians.

But the present should not be the criterion for what we find in the past. Our perceptions and explanations of the past should not be directly shaped by the issues and problems of our own time. The best and most serious historians have come to know that, even when their original impulse to write history came from a pressing present problem. The best and most sophisticated histories of slavery and the best and most sophisticated histories of women soon broke loose from the immediate demands of the present and have sought to portray the past in its own context with all its complexity.

The more we study the events and situations in the past, the more complicated and complex we find them to be. The impulse of the best historians is always to penetrate ever more deeply into the circumstances of the past and to explain the complicated context of past events. The past in the hands of expert historians becomes a different world, a complicated world that requires considerable historical imagination to recover with any degree of accuracy. The complexity that we find in that different world comes with the realization that the participants were limited by forces that they did not understand or were even aware of—forces such as demographic movements, economic developments, or large-scale cultural patterns. The drama, indeed the tragedy, of history comes from our understanding the tension that existed between the conscious wills and intentions of the participants in the past and the underlying conditions that constrained their actions and shaped their future.

See Gordon S. Wood, The Purpose of the Past: Reflections on the Uses of History (Penguin, 2008), pp. 10–11.

_______________________________

Nathan A. Finn is associate professor of historical theology and Baptist Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is also an elder at First Baptist Church of Durham, NC and a senior fellow of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies.

Should Baptists Care About Social Concerns? William Ward Believed So (PART ONE)

April 11, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By J. Ryan West

A growing conversation has emerged within Baptist life surrounding the believer’s responsibility concerning the poor, the neglected, and other social issues. In fact, Tuesday was set apart by many leading evangelicals such as Louie Giglio and Andy Stanley to raise awareness concerning sex trafficking, forced labor, and other forms of modern-day slavery. An individual can read about the End It Movement and find ways to become involved if one is inclined to do so. Such calls for action, however, raise fundamental concerns for many within the Baptist fold. Questions abound as to whether believers should engage in actions such as helping the poor or pursuing social justice for the oppressed. Or, should Christians simply share the gospel and make an eternal difference by saving souls? To be fully informed, believers must consider these issues from several angles, including Scriptural teaching and historical inquiry. Many authors have made convincing arguments from Scripture regarding this topic including Russell Moore and Tim Keller. One perspective that is rarely addressed is the historical perspective. How have Baptists handled this issue in the past?

For a helpful case study, one should look to William Ward (1769-1823). William Ward was one of the famous Serampore Trio in Bengal India and a leading missiologist in his day. During his twenty-plus years as a missionary, he encountered atrocities that were horrific. Infanticide, euthanasia of the elderly, beheadings to placate Hindu gods, and widespread prostitution were commonplace. His approach to undermine such evils was two-fold. He sought to take appropriate action and to ensure that the gospel permeated all of India’s society. These two forms of response were based on a fundamental conviction: lasting social change would occur only when the gospel took root within a culture.

The best source for understanding Ward’s mentality, which undergirded this approach, comes from his Farewell Letters (1821). Originally, these letters were sermons that he delivered while on a three-year preaching tour of America and Britain. Eventually, he rewrote his manuscripts as if sending them as letters to various recipients. Letter VI offered insight to his view of social action in relation to gospel proclamation. His preached it to “awaken in the minds of benevolent females in Britain and America…which will ultimately secure an amelioration of their [oppressed Indian women] condition” (63).[1] Through preaching this sermon, Ward expected Christian women to respond to the message with benevolence and action. By raising awareness concerning the abuse of women in India, Ward believed he would “ultimately secure an amelioration” of their suffering. Allowing Indian women to continue as prisoners and slaves would be unimaginable in Ward’s mind once he preached this sermon (69). Throughout this book of letters, Ward’s emotions leap off of the page and readers cannot help but imagine how deeply his words must have pricked his audience. After offering a gruesome account of families killing women by burying their mothers alive, he urged the women of Britain and America to unite and make the case of Indian women their common cause (81-82). Thus, Ward called for significant action to affect horrific social issues in India.

Part two will be posted tomorrow.

[1] All references are taken from William Ward, Farewell Letters to a Few Friends in Britain and America, on Returning to Bengal in 1821, 2^nd edition, (London: S. & R. Bentley, 1821).

____________________

Gospel Worthy: The Weblog of Evan Burns (part 2 of an interview)

April 11, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Dustin W. Benge

This post continues an interview with Evan Burns begun on Tuesday (see here for Part 1).

How does Fuller's personal spirituality impact his public gospel witness?

Fuller’s missionary spirituality is marked by God-enamored activism. The unbreakable force of the Doctrines of Grace and atonement-centered theology that Fuller beheld so clearly in Scripture awakened his heart to love God and glorify him by declaring the gospel indiscriminately for the salvation of sinners.

What contribution do you think Fuller's theology of mission can make upon a new generation of missionaries?

I am a product of the exciting rebirth of Reformed theology of the last ten years, which is seen in movements like The Gospel Coalition, Together for the Gospel, etc. My concern is that the current of our narcissistic culture will sweep away too many Reformed ministers into ministerial self-promotion, theological pipe-smoking, and a functional hyper-Calvinism masked behind a trendy “Gospel-centered” sub-culture that talks a lot about the right doctrines, applies them to our families and churches, but fails to equally call for proclaiming the gospel to the lost, both at home and abroad, and for investing our lives to make disciples of all people groups. I fear that the next generation could end up practicing a neo-Scholasticism or hyper-Calvinism….enter Andrew Fuller. I believe the Reformed zeal of today’s young ministers and seminarians could regularly use a strong dose of the convergence of Fuller’s Edwardsean theology, Scripture-driven reasoning, cross-centered instinct, God-enamored spirituality, and missions-promoting activism.

What is the mission of your blog, “Gospel Worthy”?

The aim of my blog is to essentially promote the God-enamored missionary spirituality of Andrew Fuller to two main types of readers: the first are those ministers who love Reformed theology, Jonathan Edwards, the Puritans, etc. to be pastor-theologians that summon, train, and send out the next generation of God-enamored missionaries like William Carey; and the second are those missionaries who have compassion for the nations to work hard at thinking theologically and biblically, to cultivate God-enamored piety, and to proclaim fearlessly the gospel to the lost and make disciples through the Christ-centered Word.

Please visit Gospel Worthy often and feast from the words of Fuller as he helps us understand how our call to the Christian mission must flow out of a Christ-centered spirituality.

_____________________________

Dustin Benge serves as the senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Jackson, Kentucky. He is also a PhD candidate at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and a junior fellow at The Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies. Dustin and his wife, Molli, live in Jackson.

Glendinning’s failure, God’s mercy

April 10, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Ian Hugh Clary

In 1625 the Scottish Presbyterian Robert Blair was in Carrickfergus in the province of Ulster and happened upon the preaching of a man named James Glendinning. After hearing Glendinning rage against sin and preach ferociously about the wrath of God, Blair was nonplussed. Glendinning had an odd style, and Blair was concerned that the sub-par and intellectually-challenged sermons would do more harm than good. Blair advised Glendinning to return home to work on his preaching, advice that Glendinning took.

In Oldstone, near Antrim, Glendinning again began to preach his hell-fire sermons, only this time to a different effect: the people who heard him were deeply convicted of their sin, and cried out for mercy. The problem for Glendinning—and for the people under his ministry—was that he did not know how to preach the gospel. Sinners were thus being left in their misery. Thankfully ministers in the area heard of what was happening and set up evangelistic meetings to preach the gospel to the soul-burdened populace. It was not long before hundreds, and eventually thousands, were coming to the meetings to hear the gospel, to pray, and to receive the Lord’s Supper. This was the beginning of what is known as the Six-Mile-Water Revival in Ulster.

In Romans 10 the apostle Paul asks, “How can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” It is sad that James Glendinning could not preach the gospel, and is a mark of grace that God provided ministers to bring the healing balm of Christ’s atoning sacrifice to those troubled Irish souls. May this serve as a reminder to us, as we evangelise or preach the gospel from our pulpits, to preach sin—yes—but to also preach the gospel. Revival came to Ireland with the preaching of the gospel—and it can come to our lands too, if only we are faithful.

___________________________

Gospel Worthy: The Weblog of Evan Burns (part 1 of an interview)

April 8, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Dustin W. Benge

A unique opportunity students have in Ph.D. studies at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is the ability to personally interact and engage with other people. You learn quite a bit about a person after sitting in class with them for eight hours a day as biblical, theological, historical, and cultural ideas are thrown around the room. Evan Burns is one person I have appreciated getting to know during my own studies at Southern. Evan works for Training Leaders International and lives with his family in Southeast Asia where he currently serves on the faculty of Asia Biblical Theological Seminary of Cornerstone University. Evan is currently a Ph.D. candidate at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary where he is researching the spirituality of Andrew Fuller under the supervision of Dr. Michael Haykin.

Evan’s heart for missions and his love of the theology and spirituality of Andrew Fuller led him to the creation of a blog entitled, Gospel Worthy. Gospel Worthy is dedicated to the spirituality and missiology of Andrew Fuller and his legacy. As he researches, Evan posts his thoughts and musings about Andrew Fuller’s connection between mission and spirituality. I recently asked Evan to answer a few questions that I thought would serve us all in understanding Fuller’s theology of mission:

How and when were you first introduced to Andrew Fuller? 

I was first exposed to Fuller in 2004. I had just become an appointed missionary and I was raising support to go overseas. A few individuals in one of my supporting churches found out that I was Reformed and they stridently rebuked me for adhering to the "heresy" of Lordship Salvation. Because they were so ardently certain about their position, I wanted to know more about their perspective so I could better dialogue with them. I discovered that their theological roots could be traced back to Robert Sandeman. Being a student of church history, I did some research and found that an Evangelical Reformed Baptist pastor--Andrew Fuller--had contended against Sandemanianism, and he had also fought against hyper-Calvinism. As an Evangelical Calvinistic missionary with heroes such as William Carey and Adoniram Judson, I detested both Sandemanianism and hyper-Calvinism and their contemporary spin-offs. Consequently, I found a friend in Andrew Fuller.

What do you see as the central theme running through Fuller's missiology?

At this stage of my reading and research, I don’t think I can conclusively say what is the central theme running through Fuller’s missiology. But I think a dominant theme running through his missiology is what he calls, “love to God”, or another way I have described his missiology is, “God-enamored activism.”

Part 2 of this interview will be posted on Thursday. In the meantime you can check out Evan's blog at www.gospelworthy.com.

_____________________________

Travel to New England with Dr. Haykin (and receive SBTS course credit!)

April 8, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

Southern Seminary is offering a study abroad program to New England this May. This is an incredible opportunity to earn up to 9 hours of on-campus credit and spend invaluable time with professors. The trip will include field lectures at historical sites of American and Church History. In one week you can complete a semester of seminary.

Dr. Gregory Wills, Dr. Michael Haykin, and Dr. Owen Strachan will be leading the expedition May 19-26. One course is included in the cost of the trip. Several of the courses being offered include: 26410 Jonathan Edwards, 25120 Church History II, 25177 Studies in Church History: Puritan and Evangelical Spirituality, and 26100 Baptist History.

More information and registration is available online at http://events.sbts.edu/expeditions_ne/

Overlooking Scottish Christianity

April 4, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Michael A.G. Haykin

Today I picked up a copy of T.M. Devine’s Scotland’s Empire: The Origins of the Global Diaspora (Penguin, 2004): it is an excellent work. Noticed an interesting oversight near the beginning of the book, though. Devine is noting the way that Scottish emigration and “engagement with empire [the British Empire] impacted “almost every nook and cranny of Scottish life.” And then gives his reader a list of these nooks and crannies: “industrialization, intellectual activity, politics, identity, education, popular culture, consumerism, labour markets, demographic trends, Highland social development and much else” (p.xxvii).

Now what is missing from that list? Any Scot living in the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century world that Devine is interested in would see it right away: why it is the lack of the word “religion.” Now why do contemporary historians assume that their subjects of study are as secular as themselves? Of course, Devine knows about the presence of religious groups in the period he is writing about: for example, he mentions Presbyterians and Baptists (though his use of the term “Baptistry” to describe the set of Baptist beliefs, on a parallel with Presbyterianism or Congregationalism reveals a certain lack of familiarity with church history—see p.157). But this list from the beginning of the book may well be a give-away: religion is not important for us, ipso facto, it has never been important. But nothing could be further from the case.

Devine’s main thesis, of course, stands: the British Empire was built by expatriate Scots and were “at the very cutting edge of British global expansion” (p.360). Anyone familiar, for example, with Ontario Baptist life in the nineteenth century will know that nearly all of the key figures in the nineteenth century were Scots or of Scottish descent. Now, there is a thesis or book!

_______________

Michael A.G. Haykin is the director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies. He also serves as Professor of Church History and Biblical Spirituality at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Dr. Haykin and his wife Alison have two grown children, Victoria and Nigel.

Ellen Charry and Implications for Historiography

April 3, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Ryan Patrick Hoselton

Ellen Charry’s work, By The Renewing of Your Minds: The Pastoral Function of Christian Doctrine (1997), is among those rare gems that challenge you to consider a serious paradigm shift in the way you do theology. Even more, I think her arguments have implications for historiography.

Charry contends for the restoration of theology that is sapiential (which she understands as knowledge that emotionally engages the knower to the known), aretegenic, and salutary. She attempts to show that the best Patristic, Medieval, and Reformation theologians thought, wrote, and spoke about God in this way. Theologians such as Basil of Caesarea, Anselm of Canterbury, and John Calvin insisted on correct doctrine—on knowing God accurately—because it was conducive to moral transformation and flourishing in the Christian life. Knowing and loving God rightly enables authentic imitation of him, and this is the key to human virtue, excellence, and happiness. Thus, pastoral concern drove their theological reflection and engagement in doctrinal controversy.

The modernism of Locke, Hume, and Kant severed faith and sapience from reason, eliminating both from the category of knowledge. Charry suggests that these epistemic shifts facilitated the waning of sapience from theology. Modern academic theology, preoccupied with pursuing knowledge of God on the terms of this modern epistemology, reduced theological reflection to factual knowledge, scientias. However, for classical theologians like Augustine, the goal of scientias was to move the knower to sapientia, wisdom.Knowing factual things about God must be paired with knowing God in wisdom and love. The verity of a doctrine rests largely in its result. For example, Basil of Caesarea argued that the Holy Spirit must be God on the basis that he makes us more like God and unites us to him—only God can do that. Basil contended for this doctrine because he believed that if his congregants denied it they would not grow in godliness. These classical theologians did not separate scientias and sapientia in the way that the modern Academy often does. For them, theology and pastoral theology were synonymous. Their doctrinal battles and treatises functioned primarily to protect and promote their congregants’ holiness.

Charry’s thesis applies to church historians as well. Treatments in historical theology that are limited to broad sweeps of ideologies could fall into the modern trap of severing scientias from sapientia. Historians must avoid imposing this modernist separation on past theological thought. Church historians are responsible for uncovering the pastoral concerns that lie behind the subject’s theological reflection. As Robert Darnton says, the point is “to show not merely what people thought but how they thought—how they construed the world, invested it with meaning, and infused it with emotion” (Darnton, 1985, 3). The historian must investigate the relationship between a theologian’s ideas and his behavior, shepherding, and spirituality. This kind of historiography will assist theologians and pastors in understanding why historic Christian doctrines mattered and still matter to the lives of believers.

__________________

Ryan Patrick Hoselton is pursuing a ThM at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He lives in Louisville, KY with his wife Jaclyn, and they are expecting their first child in August.

A Family History of Sabbatarianism

April 1, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Dustin Bruce

Hearing bits of anecdotal family history is one of the most interesting parts of holiday gatherings. When aspects of family history intersect with theological concepts, I find them even more fascinating. Recently I enjoyed learning of the Sabbatarian practices my grandparents experienced as children in the early twentieth-century rural south.

Growing up in a devout Baptist family, my grandfather was not allowed to work or attend any worldly amusements on the Lord’s Day. Slight exceptions were made to allow for some cooking and feeding of animals. Work was not allowed, but the Sabbath was not to be spent frivolously. Fishing and hunting, common pastimes in rural Alabama, were simply out of the question.

It is interesting to note how quickly the practice of keeping the Lord’s Day has faded from the church culture. Area churches that would have encouraged Sabbath keeping just 70 years ago likely have no current members who give the concept much thought. The shift away from Sabbatarianism has been so swift and decisive that my grandfather’s childhood experience in this area more closely resembles that of Andrew Fuller’s than my own.

In an 1805 letter to a friend, Fuller defends the practice of keeping the Lord’s Day. Responding to doubts as to its observance, Fuller asks, “If the keeping of a Sabbath to God were not in all ages binding, why is it introduced in the moral law, and founded upon God’s resting from his works. If it were merely a Jewish ceremonial, why do we read of time being divided by weeks before the law?”^{^[1]}Fuller possessed a theological conviction that compelled him to set apart the Sabbath as a holy day to the Lord. He instructs, “The first day then ought to be kept as the Lord’s own day, and we ought not to think our own thoughts, converse on our own affairs, nor follow our own business on it.^”

One wonders if Fuller first learned this Sabbatarian practice as a child growing up in the home of Particular Baptist parents. Like my grandfather’s mother, Fuller’s mother may have prevented him from hunting or fishing or attending to other worldly amusements, setting an early example of keeping the Lord’s Day.

Anecdotal family history is interesting, but should also be instructive. Like other types of history, learning of the religious beliefs and practices of those who form my family tree should cause me to reflect on whether I am being more or less faithful in my Christian walk. Feel free to share any interesting examples of your family’s religious history in the comments below.

^{^[1]} Andrew Gunton Fuller, The Complete Works of Andrew Fuller, Volume 3: Expositions—Miscellaneous, ed. Joseph Belcher (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 1988), 828.

_____________________________

Dustin Bruce lives in Louisville, KY where he is pursuing a ThM in Church History at Southern Seminary. He is a graduate of Auburn University and Southwestern Seminary. Dustin and his wife, Whitney, originally hail from Alabama.

I'm a Historian, Not a Prophet

March 29, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Nathan A. Finn

Historians are often asked to be prophets. In my classes at Southeastern Seminary, hardly a week goes by that one or more students don’t ask me to speculate about how the past might influence the future. This phenomenon is even more pronounced when I teach on church history in local churches. It is most common, both in class and in the church, when I teach on Baptist history. Many folks suppose that being relatively learned in Baptist history means that one is able to discern what will happen in the future. That might be true of Michael Haykin or Lloyd Harsch or Jason Duesing or Jim Patterson, but not this historian.

Recently, I was reading George Nash’s fine book Reappraising the Right: The Past and Future of American Conservatism (ISI Books, 2009). Nash has spent his career studying the conservative intellectual movement in modern America (see his landmark monograph on this topic). Apparently, historians of conservative intellectual history are similar to historians of Christian thought when it comes to requests for one don the prophetic mantle. I like what Nash writes in the introduction to Reappraising the Right.

“Historians are not necessarily good prognosticators, but by deliberately taking a longer view we can try to liberate our readers from the provincialism of the present” (p. xviii).

Now we’re talking. I have no idea if the Cooperative Program will go the way of the buffalo, if the SBC will divide on account of soteriological debates, if the Convention will become less southern and southwestern in its cultural ethos over the next generation, or who will be the next president of such-and-such theological seminary or mission board or other denominational agency (to mention but a few of the questions about which I’m regularly asked to prophesy). I’m a historian, not a prophet.

However, I do know that history reminds us to take the long view on each of these issues. The Cooperative Program has only been around for about half of Southern Baptist history and took a generation to catch on after its inception. Though critically important and worthy of our generous support, the CP is not intrinsic to our identity. The relative center of Southern Baptist soteriology has shifted over time because of a variety of factors, some of them non-theological in nature. Besides, its rather difficult to tell to what degree grassroots Southern Baptists have been in step with the relatively small handful of SBC leaders writing on soteriology at any given point in SBC history. The contemporary SBC is far less southern and southwestern (and Caucasian) than it was two generations ago, even if this isn’t entirely clear at the SBC Annual Meeting. But then the Convention is also more age diverse than is evident at the SBC Annual Meeting. As for denominational ministry presidents and other leaders, you simply never know when someone might retire (or not) and who will arise as a good candidate in such kairos moments. Nobody would have guessed in 1975 that Paige Patterson would become the president of not one but two SBC seminaries, to give but one example.

Historians aren’t prophets, and they shouldn’t pretend to be. But historians have something to offer our students and ministry colleagues as we ponder the great questions of our day. That something isn’t some infallible or even possible future, but rather historical perspective. And maybe, just maybe, if we inject a bit more historical perspective into our discussions of said great questions, such conversations might prove to be more profitable (though not prophet-able) than they so often are.

_______________________________

New Michael A.G. Haykin Conference Audio

March 23, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Steve Weaver

Earlier this week, Dr. Haykin spoke at Mount Vernon Baptist Church in Atlanta, GA. Dr. Haykin spoke in the morning worship service at the church on Sunday and twice at a special one-day conference on Monday. On Sunday, Dr. Haykin preached on "The Treasure of Moses" (MP3) from Hebrews 11:23-26. On Monday, Dr. Haykin spoke on "The Piety of the Preacher" (MP3) and "Friendship and the Preacher" (MP3). Please feel free to download these free audio resources provided courtesy of the Mount Vernon Baptist Church pastored by Dr. Aaron Menikoff. Audio of the entire "Feed My Sheep" conference is available here.

__________________

Steve Weaver serves as a research assistant to the director of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies and a junior fellow of the Center. He also serves as senior pastor of Farmdale Baptist Church in Frankfort, KY. Steve and his wife Gretta have six children between the ages of 2 and 13.

Fuller’s Three Classes of Religious Dissenters

March 18, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Dustin Bruce

Often when considering the English Reformation, we distinguish only between those who remained within the newly formed Church of England and those who dissented from it. In “A Brief Statement of the Principles of Dissent,” Andrew Fuller reminds us that “as all dissent is expressive rather of what is disapproved than of what is embraced, it is natural to suppose that the objects of disapprobation will be different in different persons.”^{^[1]}

Fuller goes on to distinguish three classes of dissenters:

Those who disagree with the theology of the Church of England.
Those who approve of the theology, but desire further Reformation within the English Church.
Those who approve of the theology, but reject the establishment of a nation church in principle.

Concerning the first class of dissenters, Fuller speaks of those who abandoned the Church of England due to some unorthodox beliefs or practice. For Fuller, disagreement with the doctrine of these dissenters provides no justification for persecuting them. None who hold respect for private judgment and the authority of Christ “can forbear to regret that the Reformation should at so early a period have been stained with blood.”

The majority of Puritans and Nonconformists form the second class of dissenters. These men did not take issue with the establishment of a national church, but desired a national church with a Presbyterian form of government, which they found “more agreeable with the Scriptures.”

For the third class of dissenters, the primary objection to the Church of England was not one of theology, but of the very existence of a national church. Fuller states,

“The temporal power of bishops, the imposition of ministers, to the exclusion of the free election of the people, the mixture of godly and manifestly ungodly characters at the Lord’s table, the corruption of worship, the total want of discipline, and all other deviations from primitive Christianity, appeared to them to be no more than might be expected, if circumstances admitted it, to grow out of a national establishment. They, therefore, peaceably withdrew from its communion, with the view of forming churches on the plan of the New Testament.^”

To this third class of dissenters belongs the Independents and the Baptists. Both holding to a form of congregational church government, the Baptists further dissented from the Independents by rejecting the practice of infant baptism.

Interestingly, Fuller makes two points of application for the third class of dissenters.

“If the government should even offer to make theirs the established religion, however they might be obliged to them for their kindness, they could not accept it without relinquishing their first principles relative to church government.^”
“Neither can they, without relinquishing the first principles of the system by which they are distinguished from other Christians, persecute any man for his religion, whatever that religion be. They may think and speak of men according to their true character; they may refuse all religious connexion with them; they may expose their principles to just abhorrence; but their hand must not be upon them.^”

^{^[1]} Andrew Gunton Fuller, The Complete Works of Andrew Fuller, Volume 3: Expositions—Miscellaneous, ed. Joseph Belcher (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 1988), 459.

___________________________

On Puritan Preaching

March 15, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Nathan Finn

In his wonderful book A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life (Crossway, 1990), J.I. Packer includes a chapter titled “Puritan Preaching.” It’s a gem of a chapter in a book that is filled with many jewels. Packer argues that Puritan preaching was characterized by eight priorities:

It was expository in its method. This in contrast to the topical pabulum that is served up too regularly in modern pulpits.
It was doctrinal in is content. This in contrast to the overly pragmatic, self-help homilies that confuse law and gospel and, in turn, confuse God’s people.
It was orderly in its arrangement. This in contrast to the meandering musings of many modern preachers. (Since I’m writing about preaching, I thought I’d include some free alliteration.)
Though profound, it was popular in its style. This in contrast to the two extremes of shallow erudition or esoteric theological treatises, both of which are quite common in evangelical pulpits.
It was Christ-centered in its orientation. This in contrast to moralistic preaching, especially of the Old Testament, and the tendency among many preachers to concentrate upon word studies and background information more than they do the life, death, resurrection, ascension, session, and return of the Lord Jesus Christ.
It was experimental in its interest. This in contrast to preaching that is divorced from vital spirituality and has little concern for redirecting affections God-ward.
It was piercing in its applications. This in contrast to preaching that artificially severs thinking rightly about God from living rightly before God.
It was powerful in its manner. This in contrast to weak preaching that seeks to “inspire” or “educate” rather than transform as the Spirit works through the Word.

I appreciate what modern pastors can learn from the Puritans about the art of preaching. This is not to say that modern pastors should preach ninety-minute sermons or divide their sermons in exactly the same manner as the Puritans did. We don’t need to slavishly copy the Puritans (or anyone else). Nevertheless, as we seek out historical role models for faithful preaching, we could hardly do better than the Puritans. If you want to read a Puritan textbook on biblical preaching, see William Perkins’s The Art of Prophesying, which has been reprinted by Banner of Truth.

_______________________________

Interview with Dr. Haykin on the Wisdom of Church History

March 14, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Steve Weaver

Dr. Michael Haykin was recently interviewed by Daryl Dash on his blog. Daryl asked Dr. Haykin some great questions. Dr. Haykin's responses reveal his understanding that wisdom can be gained through a study of church history. Dash's questions to Dr. Haykin are listed below.

Sadly, most evangelicals don't seem to have a good grasp of church history. Why do you think this is so?
What are some of the results of this lack of knowledge in the church
What can pastors do to promote an awareness of church history?
Is there a particular era of church history that especially needs to be rediscovered in today's church?
I've really appreciated your books. Are you working on one right now?

You can find Dr. Haykin's answers to these pertinent questions at DashHouse.com.

Remember that you can submit your questions to Dr. Haykin at "Ask Me A Question" on this website (see link in left sidebar).

____________________

“Heart-Piercing Conviction” in Logan County, Kentucky

March 6, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Dustin W. Benge

James M’Gready (1763–1817) was born in Pennsylvania and later settled in North Carolina with his father. After theological training for ministry, he became a Presbyterian pastor and leader during the Second Great Awakening. In 1796, M’Gready left his North Carolina home for southern Kentucky. He was called to serve the congregations of Gaspar River, Red River, and Muddy River in Logan County, Kentucky. In the summer of 1798, he reported “some movement” among the congregations in Logan County. He describes the event as “a very general awakening.” The spirit of prayer deepened and twelve months later it was apparent that a powerful work of conversion was in progress. During a communion service at Red River at the end of July 1799, “many of the most bold and daring sinners of the country were brought to cover their faces and weep bitterly.” A month later the same “heart-piercing conviction” was also evident during services at Gasper River. Some individuals were reported to have been so overcome with emotion that they fell to the floor. Much more was to follow.

M’Gready writes, “The year 1800 exceeds all that our eyes ever beheld on earth. All the blessed displays of Almighty power and grace, all the sweet gales of the divine Spirit, and soul-reviving showers of the blessings of Heaven which we enjoyed before, and which we considered wonderful beyond conception, were but like a few scattering drops before a mighty rain, when compared with the overflowing floods of salvation, which the eternal, gracious Jehovah has poured out like a mighty river, upon this our guilty, unworthy country. The Lord has indeed shewed [sic] himself a prayer-hearing God: he has given his people a praying spirit and a lively faith, and then he has answered their prayers far beyond their highest expectations.”

For more information on James M’Gready and his ministry, please visit here.

________________________________

The Intellectual Origins of the 1644 London Baptist Confession

March 4, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Dustin Bruce

During a recent reading of David Bebbington’s Baptists Through the Centuries, his mention of a scholarly dispute regarding the intellectual origins of the 1644 London Baptist Confession peaked my interest.[1]

The difficulty in view focuses on Article XL (on baptism), which states:

The way and manner of the (Mat. 3:16; John 3:23; Acts 8:38) dispensing of this ordinance the Scripture holds out to be dipping or plunging the whole body under water: it being a sign, must answer the thing signified, which are these: first, the (Rev. 1:5; 7:14; Heb. 10:22) washing the whole soul in the blood of Christ; secondly, that interest the saints have in (Rom. 6:3-5) death, burial, and resurrection (of Christ); thirdly, together with a (1 Cor. 15:28, 29) confirmation of out faith, that as certainly as the body is buried under water, and rises again, so certainly shall the bodies of the saints by raised by the power of Christ, in the day of the resurrection, to reign with Christ.[2]

According to Glen Stassen, the Particular Baptist framers of the 1644 Confession are indebted to Anabaptist theologian Menno Simons, especially his Foundation of Christian Doctrine, for the motif of “death, burial, and resurrection” in relation to baptism.[3] Stassen’s claim is significant. If the authors of the early Baptist Confession were drawing heavily from Simons’s work, then an intellectual kinship could be established between the Mennonite Anabaptists and the fountainhead of the Particular Baptist stream. Stanley Nelson, however, counters Stassen’s assertion by proposing a different influence, that of William Ames.[4] Ames’s The Marrow of Theology was a popular work during the first half of the seventeenth-century and the Particular Baptist framers of the Confession were almost assuredly familiar with it.

Upon examining the sources, it is quite evident that Simons uses the motif of “death, burial, and resurrection” in his section on baptism. In his section entitled “Concerning Baptism,” Simons writes:

Behold, this is the word and will of the Lord, that all who hear and believe the word of God, shall be baptized (as above stated), thereby to profess their faith, and declare that they will henceforth not live according to their own will, but according to the will of God. That for the testimony of Jesus they are prepared to forsake their homes, chattels, lands and lives, and to suffer hunger, affliction, oppression, persecution, the cross and death; yea, they desire to bury the flesh with its lusts, and arise with Christ to newness of life, even as Paul says, "Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life;" Col. 2:11, 12; Rom. 6:3, 4.[5]

However, it is also apparent that such a motif was available in Ames’s Marrow of Theology as well. In his section on “Baptism and the Lord’s Supper,” Ames writes:

Although it seals the whole covenant of grace to all believers, when it is specially made our own, it represents and confirms our very ingrafting into Christ. Rom. 6:3, 5, We have been baptized into Jesus Christ…being planted together with him; 1 Cor. 12:13, We have been baptized into one body.[6]

While Simons clearly makes use of the “death, burial, and resurrection” motif in his section on baptism, this of itself does not suggest an intellectual influence upon the Particular Baptist framers of the 1644 document. The connection between Romans 6:3-5 and baptism was clearly made by Ames in his The Marrow of Theology, which even Stassen recognizes as influential upon the 1644 Confession.

Upon examination of the texts, there is no reason to conclude the authors of the 1644 London Baptist Confession were necessarily drawing from the Anabaptist Simons. The association of the “death, burial, and resurrection” of Christ with baptism was available in Ames’s work. Then again, it could be that the originators of the first Particular Baptist confession were not relying on either work, but thoughtfully reading their Greek New Testament.

[1] David W. Bebbington, Baptists Through the Centuries: A History of a Global People, Waco: Baylor University Press, 2010, pp. 30-31.

[2] The First London Confession of Faith, 1644 Edition, available at http://baptiststudiesonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/1st-london-1644-ed.pdf.

[3] Glen H. Stassen, “Anabaptist Influence in the Origin of Particular Baptists,” Mennonite Quarterly Review 36 (1962): 322-48.

[4] Stanley A. Nelson, “Reflecting on Baptist Origins: The London Confession of Faith of 1644,” Baptist History and Heritage 29 (1994): 34-35.

[5] Menno Simons, A Foundation Plain Instruction of the Saving Doctrine of Our Lord Jesus Christ, 1554, available at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/simon/works1.iv.vii.html.

[6] William Ames, A Marrow of Theology, trans. John Dykstra Esuden,Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997, p. 210.

___________________________

Diarmaid MacCulloch: All history writing is autobiography

February 25, 2013 Andrew Fuller Center

By Ian Hugh Clary

Recently I had the opportunity to hear Sir Diarmaid MacCulloch give a lecture on the history of Christianity and sexuality. MacCulloch is a church historian from Oxford who specializes in the English Reformation. As an evangelical, I find that his interpretation of history squares with my own, so I was perplexed by his talk.

For those who may not know, Prof. MacCulloch is an out-of-the-closet homosexual—just check the acknowledgements section of his masterful biography of Cranmer. He is also an advocate in the Church of England—where he was once an office-bearer—for gay rights. He recently left the church and now considers himself a “friend” of Christianity. As you can imagine, his lecture provoked questions. I believed that I would hear a very careful handling of sources, though admittedly there may be revisionist elements. I was wrong in my assessment.

Before I explain why, I should say that MacCulloch is an exciting lecturer—the hour or so he took in his first talk went by quickly. He addressed the role of sexuality from the Old Testament to the late Middle Ages; it was fast-paced and he covered a lot of ground, but it was never confusing or boring. I could only imagine what it must have been like to take one of his classes.

As the lecture progressed, however, I became troubled. From beginning to end, MacCulloch gave a large polemic against traditional interpretations of scripture and history. I also became more and more incredulous. This was not due to hearing an historian defend gay rights, that doesn’t shock me—it’s commonplace in academia. My upset was due to my hearing one of the world’s leading ecclesiastical historians be so shaped by his personal bias that it allowed him to crudely handle texts and history. As for scripture, MacCulloch used Boswell’s hermeneutic, alluded to gay relationships between figures like David and Jonathan, and drove a wedge between the sexual ethics of Jesus and Paul (saying the latter was the more liberal); all of this has long since been repudiated by scholars like Robert Gagnon. MacCulloch was dishonest to his audience by making his case seem so open and shut, when such is far from the case.

MacCulloch based his historical arguments on Hellenization that he argued infected the early church so that it denigrated the physical world and thus sexuality. He also hammered against the celibacy that has so dominated the western church. While I have sympathies with his views of monastic celibacy, he did not give a rounded view of the early church on the goodness of sex and marriage—the work of David Hunter offers a needed corrective. Though I was not able to attend his second lecture the next day, a friend told me that MacCulloch also did not deal with the Puritans and their views of sex, marriage, and the body—the Puritans, as Leland Ryken and others have shown, had a healthy view of sex, and were not Platonists in their view of the material world.

In the Q & A I shocked myself by raising my hand. Seemingly without control I stood and asked, “If you will allow me to ask a personal question, that is not at all meant to be cheeky, I wondered how you view your reading of history in light of your own personal story and struggles in the church. Could traditional historians not accuse you of allowing your own bias to inappropriately control your historiography, as you have accused Augustine?” He was gracious in his response, and even acknowledged the importance of the question. He replied that “all history writing is autobiography.” I found this so perplexing to hear from a scholar who has been such a model historian to me. For one who could appropriate the findings of Catholic revisionists like Eamon Duffy, yet do so while being true to the English Reformation and vindicating earlier historians like A. G. Dickens, I was disappointed to hear him justify a reading of history that would not square with his earlier historiographic methods.

Professor MacCulloch serves as a reminder to all of us: as historians, now matter how great or prestigious, we must be aware of our personal biases and strive towards objectivity. While pure objectivity is impossible, I do believe that historians can put forth a body of work that can withstand scrutiny from specialists. And while my autobiography may lurk, I cannot allow it to so colour my work that it misleads readers.

_________________

Blog

By Ian Hugh Clary

By Ryan Patrick Hoselton

By J. Ryan West

By Nathan A. Finn

By J. Ryan West

By Dustin W. Benge

By Ian Hugh Clary

By Dustin W. Benge

By Michael A.G. Haykin

By Ryan Patrick Hoselton

By Dustin Bruce

By Nathan A. Finn

By Steve Weaver

By Dustin Bruce

By Nathan Finn

By Steve Weaver

By Dustin W. Benge

By Dustin Bruce

By Ian Hugh Clary