 |         | |
 | ||
|
Note: I am not responsible for the content of banners appearing on my web site.
| | |
| ||
|
Ecclesiological Differences
among Baptists
Ecclesiological differences have been a key factor in the vicissitudes of Baptist history. Controversies have centered on various beliefs about the ordinances, nature, history, and mission of the church. In the mid-nineteenth century there arose an ecclesiological controversy which threatened to "split" the Baptist denomination.(1) The movement around which the controversy gravitated was called "Landmarkism." In the opinion of Lynn E. May, Jr,, "had the Civil war not intervened, Landmarkers would likely have caused a major split in the denomination."(2) Under the leadership of J. R. Graves the Landmark movement grew until "by 1880 Graves could boast that a majority of denominational papers had endorsed Landmarkism."(3) According to W. Morgan Patterson, "the distinctive tenets of this movement fall into the category of ecclesiology, fitting into a very logical system centered around the primacy of the local church."(4) Despite approximately fifty years of controversy (1850-1900), a major separation of Landmarkers into a separate body "did not occur until 1905, when, led by Ben M. Bogard and others, the General Association of Landmark Baptists was organized at Texarkana," Arkansas.(5) The name American Baptist Association was assumed in 1924 when the General Association was reorganized. In 1950 a group of churches left the American Baptist Association and formed the North American Baptist Association. The name of this latter group was changed subsequently (1969) to Baptist Missionary Association of America.
In the midst of the controversy, the terms "Convention Baptist" and "Associational [or Association] Baptist" came to be used to distinguish between the Landmark and non-Landmark movements.(6) Both the American and North American Baptist associations have made progress in their missionary, educational and benevolent outreach, although their work is quite modest in proportion to the larger Southern Baptist Convention. According to I. K. Cross, a leading American Baptist Association official, this association was composed in 1968 of 3,247 churches with a membership of 731,000.(7) Leon Gaylor, director of the research and public relations office of the Baptist Missionary Association of America, has stated that the newer association in 1968 was composed of 1,611 churches in twenty-five states.(8)
Need for Analysis of Associational Baptist
History and Ecclesiology
Previous Studies
A number of books and theses covering the formative years of the Landmark movement, as well as the theology of the early leaders (J. R. Graves, A. C. Dayton, and J M. Pendleton), have been written.(9) The "post-Graves" era, however, largely has been neglected, except for a study in 1949 by D. O (sic) Moore, "The Landmark Baptists and Their Attack upon the Southern Baptist Convention Historically Analyzed." As the title indicates, however, Moore's work is primarily an historical study. Only eight pages of the 161 page dissertation are devoted to Graves' doctrinal position per se and only forty-one to the theological arguments of Associational Baptists.(10) Likewise in James E. Tull's massive 727 page analysis in 1960, "A Study of Southern Baptist Landmarkism in the Light of Historical Baptist Ecclesiology," except for a brief treatment of twelve pages, consideration of Associational Baptists is lacking.(11) Calvin C. Turpin wrote in 1967 "A Critique of Ben M. Bogard's Leadership."(12) His study, however, is limited because it is based primarily upon Moore's earlier study and a three-volume work edited in 1965 by Lawton Durant Foreman and Alta Payne, The Life and Works of Benjamin Marcus Bogard.(13) Study of Associational Baptists and their ecclesiology has been, therefore, extremely limited.
Questions in Need of an Answer
Among questions needing to be answered relative to Landmark and Associational Baptist ecclesiology are the following: (1) Did Landmark scriptural interpretation during the "post-Graves" era (1875-1900) move away from the ecclesiological positions set forth by the early Landmarkers (i.e., Graves, Pendleton, and Dayton)?(14) (2) To what degree do Associational Baptists agree and/or disagree with the respective ecclesiological tenets of Graves, Dayton, and Pendleton? (3) How does Associational Baptist ecclesiology compare with that of later Landmarkism? (4) Was Landmark ecclesiology indeed the major factor in the rise of the Associational Baptist movement?(15) (5) Was the 1950 split among Associational Baptists the result of a Landmarker versus non-Landmarker conflict or was it primarily the result of a clash of personalities? (6) What role did ecclesiological differences in interpretation play in the delay of Associational Baptists until 1924 in effecting apparent union among the various Landmark associations and churches? (7) How did ecclesiological presuppositions and differences enter into the 1950 formation of the North American Baptist Association? (8) What assessment can one make of the validity of hermeneutical and exegetical principles used by Associational Baptists as proposed solutions to the controversial issues involving Landmarkist ecclesiology? These questions constitute a problem requiring analysis with a view toward solution.
Proposed Solution to the Problem
Solution to the above problem is the purpose of the following study. In conducting the research and in writing the following analyses, the author has had no particular hypothesis to test or point to prove. The study is an analysis, "An Analysis of the Ecclesiology of Associational Baptists, 1900-1950." Since the study attempts to uncover and analyze the ecclesiological factors leading to the rise and early development of Associational Baptists into a distinct movement, it is historical. Baptists have always considered their ecclesiological doctrines and practices to have a biblical basis. The study, therefore, is also biblical, focusing on the Associational Baptist contention that "church" in the New Testament must always be interpreted as "local." Hence, the study cuts across both biblical and historical disciplines. For the first time, apparently, the rise and early development of Associational Baptists as a distinct movement within the Baptist denomination is analyzed primarily in relation to their ecclesiological presuppositions. The study is intended to provide an understanding of the differing theological presuppositions which have produced and continue the divisions between Associational and Convention Baptists and among Associational Baptists themselves.
Methodology and Limitations
The historical, critical method of research has been employed in preparing the following analysis. Pamphlets, books, associational minutes, and periodical articles giving historical details and theological arguments of Associational Baptist writers are the primary sources for the study.
Research and analysis in this study has been limited purposely: (1) historically to the period 1900-1950; (2) to the state and national associations which had a direct, chronological connection or affiliation with the American Baptist Association prior to 1950 and with the North American Baptist Association immediately after 1950; (3) to writers who were active in Associational Baptist circles prior to 1950, even though some of the literature was written after 1950;(16) (4) to state associations affiliated with the North American Baptist Association which were organized as a result of the schism in the American Baptist Association in 1950.(17)
Structure of Study
Analysis of the ecclesiology of early Landmarkism (i.e., Graves, Pendleton, and Dayton) uncovers five distinctive tenets (chapter two). Detailed analyses of the works of S. H. Ford and J. N. Hall follow in chapter three. Ford and Hall are representative of later Landmarkism. Ford was a moderate Landmarker, and Hall served as a vital connecting link between the ecclesiology of later Landmarkism and early Associational Baptists. Chapter four relates briefly historical facts surrounding the establishment of various state and national associations which Associational Baptists have organized since 1900. In chapter five analysis of official Associational Baptist documents is made to determine the extent of Landmark tenets officially set forth. Then a study of unofficial Associational Baptist literature is conducted (chapter six) to illustrate in detail the Landmark beliefs present in chapter five. Finally, a summary of the information that has been obtained, as well as a few conclusions based on this information, is presented in chapter seven. Analyses of later Landmarkism and official and unofficial Associational Baptist literature (chapters three, five, and six) are structured according to the same tenets set forth in chapter two, although another tenet came into focus in the time of J. N. Hall. Chapter five is also structured according to the state and national associations which are discussed historically in chapter four.
NOTES
1. In the present study, the word "split" is utilized often because it is the most common expression used in Associational Baptist literature to describe the various organic divisions which have occurred in the Baptist denomination.
2. Lynn E. May. Jr.. "Crises, Southern Baptist," Encyclopedia of Southern Baptists [cited hereafter as ESB], I, 1958, 335.
3. W. M. Patterson, "Landmarkism," ESB, II, 1958, 757.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. See David O [sic] Moore, "The Landmark Baptists and Their Attack upon the Southern Baptist Convention Historically Analyzed" (unpublished Th.D. dissertation, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary [cited hereafter as SBTS], 1949) pp. 9-10, for a similar interpretation. But, see S. H. Slaughter, "Don't play on Words," Baptist Progress [cited hereafter as BP], Sept. 30, 1915, p. l, for an article by an early Associational Baptist leader who denied any difference in the meaning of the terms!
7. I. K. Cross, "American Baptist Association," ESB, III, 1971, 1565.
8. Leon Gaylor, "Baptist Missionary Association of America," ibid., p. 1597. Since the present investigation is limited to the years 1900-1950, "North American Baptist Association" is the name used throughout the study.
9. L. T. Mays. "A History of Old Landmarkism" (unpublished Th.D..dissertation, SBTS, 1900); T. A. Patterson, "The Theology of J. R. Graves and Its Influence on Southern Baptist Life" (unpublished Th.D. dissertation, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary [cited hereafter as SWBTS], 1944); E. T. Moore, "Background of the Landmark Movement" (unpublished Th.M. thesis, SWBTS, 1947); J. E. Tull, "A Study of Southern Baptist Landmarkism in the Light of Historical Baptist Ecclesiology" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1960); W. C. Huddleston, "James Madison Pendleton: A Critical Biography" (unpublished Th.M. thesis, SBTS, 1962); Andrew H. Lanier, "The Relationship of the Ecclesiology of John L. Waller to Early Landmarkism" (unpublished Th.M. thesis, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary [cited hereafter as SEBTS], 1963); J. E. Taulman, Amos Cooper Dayton: A Critical Biography" (unpublished Th.M. thesis, SBTS, 1965); Le Roy B. Hogue, "The Antecedents of Landmarkism" (unpublished Th.D. dissertation, SWBTS, 1966); H. S. Smith, "A Critical Analysis of the Theology of J. R. Graves" (unpublished Th.D. dissertation, SBTS, 1966); D. E. Lewis, "Some Basic Southern Baptist Concepts of the Church" (unpublished Th.D. dissertation, SWBTS, 1968).
A number of shorter studies have been made also. Among the most important are: John E. Steely, "The Landmark Movement in the Southern Baptist Convention," What Is the Church? ed. by Duke K. McCall (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1958), pp. 134-47; R. G. Torbet, "Landmarkism," Baptist Concepts of the Church, ed. by W. S. Hudson (Philadelphia: The Judson press, 1959), pp. 170-95; and Hugh Wamble, "Landmarkism; Doctrinaire Ecclesiology among Baptists," Church History, XXXIII (December, 1964), 429-47.
10. D. Moore, pp. 25-32, 80-121.
11. Tull, pp. 618-29. Even here Tull was dependent upon D. Moore's earlier work.
12. Calvin C. Turpin, "A Critique of Ben M. Bogard's Leadership" (unpublished S.T.D. thesis, Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary [cited hereafter as GGBTS], 1967).
13. L. D. Foreman and Alta Payne, The Life and Works of Benjamin Marcus Bogard (3 vols.; Little Rock, Ark.: Seminary Press, 1965). Volume 3 is a lithographed copy of an earlier work by Bogard with an additional chapter by Bogard, as well as a biographical sketch. See below, p. 17, for reference to the original edition.
Turpin, p. 3, is critical of Foreman and Payne's work, but he relies primarily upon it as his major source. Consequently, the historical data of his thesis are often inaccurate. See below, chapter four, for examples of this.
14. In the present study the expressions "early Landmarkism" (see especially chapter two) and "later Landmarkism" (chapter three) have been selected arbitrarily to identify respectively: (1) the formative period of Landmarkism, i.e., before about 1875 (the days of the ascendancy of Graves, Pendleton, and Dayton), and (2) the period immediately after the ascendancy of these men and prior to the establishment of the first associations by Associational Baptists (ca. 1875-1900).
15. The term "Associational Baptist movement" is used in the present study to refer to the associations arising at and since the turn of the century and which have had direct connection with the American Baptist Association and North American Baptist Association [cited hereafter as ABA and NABA respectively], as well as the preachers and churches in these associations.
16. Such a procedure was necessary in the case of state associations, for none had official "doctrinal statements" before 1950.
17. New ABA-affiliated state associations in Texas, Mississippi, and Missouri, therefore, are not
included in the analyses of chapters four and five.
Go to Abstract and Acknowledgements.
Go to Chapter II: "Early Landmarkism: Graves, Pendleton, Dayton."
Go to Chapter III: "Later Landmarkism: Ford and Hall."
Go to Chapter IV: "Historical Survey of the Rise of the Associational Baptist Movement".
Go to Chapter V: "Landmark Tenets Reflected in Official Associational Baptist Documents."
Go to Chapter VI: "Landmark Tenets Reflected in Non-Official Associational Baptist Documents."