Sloo's Baptist History Adventure

[slooroo]

I've always had a fascination with Baptist history, partly due to that's what I grew up as. I don't necessarily plan on writing this in historical order because trying to make a perfect Baptist timeline would be difficult anyway. I'll also try to avoid arguing for/against the theology since that'd be a separate thread entirely. What I will also try to avoid the certain terms such as "Old School/New School" and my reason for that is this. If I go to my childhood church they sing traditional hymns on piano and organ. By SBC standards that's old school compared to ones who switched to CCM. If I go to a Missionary Baptist church they'll tell me I was raised new school because I went to a church that sang the hymns in a more modern fashion compared to a more folksy way. After if I went to a Primitive Baptist church they would tell me the Missionary Baptists are new school for using a piano and that acapella is old school. If I went to an Old Regular Baptist church after that they would tell me the Primitives are singing in a modern acapella style instead of using the old school line singing. So "Old/New" tends to be very subjective to Baptists. So with that said I'll dip in!

Chapter 1: Primitive vs Missionary?

In the US Baptists were (relatively) united, mostly Calvinistic because Particular/Strict Baptists had a bigger influence on the colonies than the General/Regular Baptists that shied away from Reformed theology. That said Baptists had to react to two major phenomena in the US: Weslyean/Methodist theology and Campbellite/Restorationist theology. Methodists were Arminian in nature and put a much larger emphasis on the emotional side of things, including massive revivals and proto-charismatic traits. Alexander Campbell and Barton Stone meanwhile left their Presbyterian/Baptist background in such of two things: Christian unity and the ability to worship as closely as possible to the New Testament model. One of the major slogans of the Restorationists was "Speak where the Bible speaks, be silent where the Bible is silent" which meant that if the Bible didn't specifically cover a subject then it wasn't proper to do otherwise the Bible would tell you to do it. Of course Baptists had to adapt to the changing American landscape. It was simple enough to build new churches faster than Anglicans and Presbyterians due to not requiring the same level of education on their ministers but Methodists and Restorationists were major rivals on the frontier. This led to congregations going in a wide variety of directions, trying everything from missionary tracts, Sunday Schools, seminaries, Bible publishing groups, and so on. This caused one of the major breaks in American Baptists although the split wasn't really official until the Black Rock Address in 1832.

The majority of Baptists became "missionary" Baptists due to their dabbling away from strict Calvinistic thinking and embracing all of these new institutions. The Southern Baptist Convention (different topic) is an example of many "missionary" Baptists getting together to pool resources but you also have independent Missionary Baptists who do not agree with the SBC and have their own way of doing things. From my own childhood having a taste of Missionary Baptists (of the non-SBC type) there's a very high emphasis on choice and the belief that you should have a very strong, very emotional testimony you could share at any time. It's pretty Arminian in flavor, although perhaps not full blown Arminian (Missionary Baptists I usually find aren't as concerned about apostasy as Free Will Baptists). Their method of supplying missionaries is also usually more localized than many SBC congregations. It's more common to see people go to the altar at a Missionary Baptist service for things than a SBC church (usually in a SBC church it's more for converting or someone is really on your heart.) Generally Missionary Baptists are also not against membership to groups such as Freemasonry and it's nothing to see Missionary Baptists (and Southern Baptists) involved in their local lodge. Most Missionary Baptists also usually work off of a Pastor/Deacon system with the Pastor as the sort-of head of the congregation. The independent Missionary Baptists however tend to shy away from seminaries, believing that God will provide the wisdom needed to preach. They also tend to make their own local Sunday School materials over using a larger service like Lifeway.

In 1832 the Black Rock Address was given by a group of "Particular" Baptists denouncing many of the innovations of the Missionary Baptists. They saw tracts as dangerous for potentially taking more precedent than the Bible and teaching false doctrine. Sunday Schools were taking the teaching of the Gospel away from the two factors they believe it was meant to be taught: Elders to the congregation and parents to their children. Bible publishing groups were ecumenical in nature which meant mingling with false teachers. Seminaries were trying to teach something only God can give you. The less spoken part of the address however was the fact that the United States was leaning away from Reformed thinking. These Calvinistic leaning Baptists couldn't tolerate this. Over time they became known as Primitive Baptists, Hard Shell Baptists, or even Foot Washing Baptists due to incorporating foot washing into the communion service. They also became big believers in the "Trail of Blood" theory that Baptists were the original Christians but most of their own history is lost due to Catholic persecution (some Missionary Baptists may believe this too but I don't find it as common). Primitive Baptists also over time became more Calvinistic than their own founders with some leaning into Hyper-Calvinism. That said don't call a Primitive Baptist a Calvinist or you'll get your ear chewed off because they'll gladly inform you of their differences to Calvin. A Primitive Baptist church is very simple with no crosses or images of any form, sings only in acapella, and their preaching can be done by one or more elders. Due to no seminaries congregations create elders and elders often have their theology checked by other elders for orthodoxy. With no Sunday School usually a service is about 20-30 minutes of singing then two sermons by two different elders with a little more singing in between each sermon. Everyone stays in the same room for all ages. Primitives do have missionary work, but it's rather minimal and a missionary must support himself without help. Even elders are not paid a salary, although some will give minor compensations to their elders for things like gas to get to the building. In fact tithing is rather unique. They don't pass around a collection plate, instead often times a Primitive slips their tithe to the clerk without it being seen how much is even given. For the most part tithes are only used to building maintenance, essential utility bills, and any taxes so their need for funding is usually minimal anyway. While I haven't been to a Primitive Baptist church yet I am rather fond of them in a strange way. It also worth a minor note there are two subsects of Primitives: Primitive Baptist Universalists and Progressive Primitive Baptists. The first happened when a group of Primitives essentially went so predestination they landed on universalism, believing no one goes to hell because there is no hell. Their services are often considered cheerful due to this because they believe all of humanity will be reunited with God. The second group meanwhile finally adopted pianos and Sunday Schools but kept most of the other Primitive theology as well as formed their own denomination of sorts to supposed elderly elders.

This doesn't mean the two groups lack any similarities. Things such as the trinity, believer's baptism, and so on the two would agree on 100%. Both are usually closed communion although Primitives add foot washing and Missionary do not. Both tend to baptize in bodies of water like creeks, lakes, or rivers over a baptismal although I know Missionary Baptists aren't against using a baptismal if necessary. Most Missionary Baptists as far as I know will recognize baptisms of at least some other churches while Primitive Baptists refuse to recognize any baptism not done by a Primitive Baptist elder. They sing similar hymns even if one uses a piano and the other uses acapella. The buildings are usually similar, often times one room churches with the church covenant on the wall although Missionary Baptists are willing to use crosses while Primitive Baptists will not. I would even say while the two will be eternally theologically opposed there has been some mild thaw in recent years. I saw a Pan-Christian Christmas service last year and both Missionary and Primitive Baptists attended to no conflict. It makes me hopeful that wounds of the past are slowly healing.

[slooroo]

Chapter 2: Northern vs Southern?

One of the most infamous separations in the history of US Baptists however is between the north and south. In 1814 (most) Baptists in the United States were united under one banner thanks to the Triennial Convention. This worked great until two major issues arose: missions and slavery. Missions is a bit less controversial to discuss and it was mostly a difference in opinion. Baptists in northern states preferred a bit more decentralized approach while southerners preferred a larger, more centralized body to handle it. This however is a far less issue than the issue of slavery. In theory the Triennial Convention was made to be apolitical, allowing abolitionists and slaveowners to stay in one convention. In reality it became quickly evident politics would be a major factor. Northern Baptists quickly took stances against slavery and refused to make any slaveowning southerner a missionary as well as refused to place many resources in the south to be used by slaveowners. This angered the south who in 1845 separated to form the Southern Baptist Convention while the Triennial Convention morphed into the Northern Baptist Convention and later the American Baptists. Needless to say the slavery origins of the SBC has eternally been a stain on the convention that it has struggled to wipe off, especially in the face of racist attitudes occasionally popping it's ugly head and African American congregations leaving the SBC in disgust to this day.

Is there a real theological difference between the two today however? The American Baptists are considered mainline Protestants and are considered far more liberal due to allowing female pastors, LGBT pastors, and other things (but this is situational. Some American Baptists are still very conservative) unlike the evangelical SBC that to this day refuses to do any of this. American Baptists can be a bit more liturgical than the SBC but again varies from congregation to congregation. One interesting difference is that the SBC has a wide camp of 5 Point Calvinists, 4 Point Calvinists, and some Arminian while the American Baptists are more influenced by the Freewill Baptists, typically skewing more towards the Arminian viewpoint. There also tends to be more racial diversity in the American Baptist camp because racist attitudes still bleed into the SBC leadership at times which has driven a wedge between African American Baptists and the SBC with many African American churches leaving the SBC over it. In an average Sunday service however I think the two would be relatively similar with the American Baptists perhaps a hair more "high church." The services can vary widely from very traditional to very contemporary in both conventions. As for will they ever reunify? The answer for now seems no. There have been talks over the decades but they never led anywhere due to theological differences.

[JHG]

Now how did the Westboro Baptist Church get attached since they aren't Baptist at all?

[slooroo]

Now how did the Westboro Baptist Church get attached since they aren't Baptist at all?

Westboro could be a chapter in itself (and I'm tempted to sometime) but the short version is Westboro is Baptist in theology (specifically Calvinistic Baptist) but they commune with no one. They have zero friends in other Baptists. This isn't necessarily due to Westboro being heretics in most finer points of Baptist theology but because Westboro utterly lacks any sort of Christian love and grace. They gleefully gloat at the idea of God's hatred being unleashed on the world at the giant list of enemies Westboro has. In the Westboro mindset there is no such thing as love and forgiveness, just a sneering attitude towards anyone who isn't them with the joy of believing God will destroy all but them. That said they were considered the local cult cranks of Topeka until 1989 when they began their anti-LGBT protests, noticed the attention that got them, and turned their protests into practically full time careers. My main advice is if you ever do meet them to just ignore them. The Phelps family are largely lawyers and will use every trick in the book to convince you to do something to them they can sue you for. If Westboro has accomplished anything it's in being denounced by 99.9% of the Baptist world of all flavors.

[Jarkko]

^They are extremely Hyper-Calvinist and have many cultic tendencies. They don't evangelize (preferring instead to mock, troll, and rail against anyone who doesn't share their beliefs), they deny common grace (the notion that God "makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust" - Matt 5:45), and they take the broader Hyper-Cal notion that only Calvinists are saved and narrow it even further to suggest that anyone who doesn't share their specific views is going to Hell for being a <insert slur here>-enabler.

[slooroo]

Chapter 3: Other Interesting Baptists

You'll find all of the above Baptists in the Appalachian Mountains and other parts of the US. To be confusing however there's even more groups that are often only found in some areas. For the sake of some brevity I'll take to mention them.

Union Baptist: During the American Civil War many border states were split between Union and Confederate supporters. This made going to church rather dangerous. So some Baptists adopted the Union Baptist name to show their church was sympathetic to the Union but also because many Union Baptists were originally in Primitive Baptist churches but due to Primitive Baptists believing in not being in secret organizations and since some were joining Union Leagues they were booted out of Primitive Baptist churches. Today they're far less Calvinistic but do often times retain acapella singing and foot washing but usually reserve line singing for certain events like baptism. They also allow Sunday Schools and revivals unlike many that had Primitive Baptist origins.

Old Regular Baptist: Mostly famous for still doing line singing and having a fascinating form of chanting in parts of the sermon this group is mostly Calvinistic (but not always. This group allows a lot of tolerance on Calvinist/Arminian debates due to some old agreement) but are stricter than many other Baptist groups by enforcing strict dress codes and codes of conduct on both men and women. There's theories that this group may have origins in a type of Baptist that originated in Scotland. Another interesting aspect is deceased members often have their photos on the walls of the church which really gives you an idea of the history of a local congregation.

Free Will Baptist: This group has New England origins but spread across the US. These Baptists are very Arminian in theology and do believe you can lose your salvation. They're fine with Sunday Schools, missions, pianos and other things but do participate in foot washing.

[slooroo]

Chapter 4: Baptist Music

So because there are many Baptist traditions there's a huge variety of how music works. So I'll provide some examples

1. Line singing. This is perhaps one of the oldest forms of Baptist singing. Sadly it's only really practiced in Appalachian churches today, especially in Old Regular Baptist churches. This form of singing has the singer sing the line then the congregation repeats it in response.



2. Acapella singing. This is exactly what it sounds like, singing without instruments. Non-Appalachian Primitive Baptists are known for this (Primitives of Appalachia sometimes still do line singing) and in fact secular groups like Sacred Harp largely meet to keep up this tradition without the religion.



3. African American forms of acapella singing. It's very similar to the first two examples but African American congregations are often fine with clapping or stomping feet which is often seen as a no no in many white churches. Personally I rather like the spirit of these churches.



4. "Standard" hymn singing. This is common in SBC and IFB churches. Missionary Baptists sing similar hymns but it may have a bit more of a southern twang to it. This particular rendition I believe is done by an IFB church but musically it's what I would've grown up hearing in a SBC church.



5. CCM. This is essentially what a lot of SBC churches are heading towards due to the rise of more modern worship from charismatic sects like Hillsong or even former SBC churches like Elevation. It isn't my cup of tea but it's worth noting since it's so common now.

[slooroo]

Chapter 5: Landmarkism and the Trail of Blood

If you go to a Roman Catholic church or Orthodox church or even some Lutheran and Anglican churches you will hear about the concept of apostolic succession, the idea that there is an unbroken link from the twelve apostles to their churches of today. Now whether these churches actually practice what the apostles would've practiced is for a radically different thread but it became a sticking point of theology for many Protestant churches as their critics accused them of being in error because they're "innovating" new things. So Landmarkism was founded in 1851 by three Baptist ministers who came to the belief that only Baptists were the true church and all other denominations were false and that only Baptists had true lineage to the apostles. This mindset was further elaborated in 1931 with the book The Trail of Blood that taught that Baptist history is mostly lost due to persecution by other churches but claimed groups like Donatists, Paulicans, Cathars, and other groups were signs that true Baptists always existed but were savagely persecuted by the false churches. However Landmarkists were kicked out of the Southern Baptist Convention, forcing them to form their own conventions. 

Today some churches still go by the Landmarkist name. Other churches however can be a bit influenced by the Landmarkist ideas even if they don't directly embrace it. I think you can see veins of it at times in many Baptist churches outside of the American Baptists or Southern Baptists regardless of their other theological points. Most Baptists however reject Landmarkism, seeing it as a false doctrine and a series of conspiracy theories.

[Jarkko]

Most Baptists however reject Landmarkism, seeing it as a false doctrine and a series of conspiracy theories.

Myself included.