Explanations and Information regarding Baptist Groups in the USA, February 2022 update
Introduction.
The broad divisions used in this outline descend from those created by Albert W. Wardin, Jr., and explained in his book Baptist Atlas.[i] He developed classifications specifically to make sense of Baptists in America – a difficult project to say the least! The categories take into account Baptist divisions based on theology, history, culture, ethnicity, and means – including developmental differences in the Northern and Southern United States, ethnic differences, the Calvinist/Arminian theological divide, and ideas concerning centralization, including the anti-missions controversy of the 19th century. A working knowledge of the history of Baptists in the United States will illuminate and simplify the way forward, helping the reader understand the classification of Baptist bodies in the United States.
Who are Baptists?
The question “who are Baptists” is broad and difficult. A cursory knowledge of the bodies listed in Baptist Groups in the United States will inform one of a wide range of disparate beliefs and practices. The thread that binds these groups together are a common heritage of history and theology, even where the fellowship of that heritage is now essentially broken. The purpose of this list is not to biblically define who the Baptists are, but rather to try to make sense of the loosely connected or disconnected groups of churches, associations, conferences, conventions, fellowships who define themselves as Baptists.
For this listing, the bodies included are historically connected Baptists who would likely espouse the following distinctives. [ii]
- Believer’s baptism by immersion
- Local church government, congregational and independent
- Priesthood of believers
- Religious Freedom
- Soul Liberty
- The Bible as the rule of faith and practice
Some groups with “Baptist” in their denominational
designation are not included in Baptist Groups in
the United States. Either (1) they are not historically
connected to the main body of Baptists in the United States – for example,
German Baptist Brethren – or (2) they have moved themselves outside the main
body of Baptists, in doctrine, practice, and their own choices of fellowship. Some
taxonomists include Baptist splinters – such as the Pentecostal Free Will
Baptist Church, the Holiness Baptist Association, and General Conference of the
Evangelical Baptist Church – as Baptists. However, in these cases, usually
neither the Baptists, nor these groups themselves, recognize them as Baptists
in the traditional sense. For example, the Pentecostal Free Will Baptist Church
is “Free Will Baptist” in origin. However, they look to other Pentecostal
groups for like-minded fellowship rather than towards the Baptists. For this
reason, I have created a separate List of Holiness and Pentecostal Baptists.
Explanation of the Framework.
I. Black Baptists. The thread that binds this group together is their African-American heritage. They otherwise exhibit a wide range of belief. The largest number of Black Baptists are in the South. During the existence of slavery, they were members of the same churches as Southern whites. Gaining freedom after the War Between the States, they organized their own churches and associations. They have for the most part operated separately and distinctly from the predominantly white organizations. This justifies a distinct grouping for Black Baptists.[iii]
II. General Baptists. The thread that binds this group together is either a heritage related to the English General Baptists (some Free Will Baptists), or the adoption of beliefs that are like the English General Baptists, and eventual separation from the Regular Baptists on account of those beliefs (e.g., General Association of General Baptists). These groups teach free will and falling from grace, hold open communion, or, at the least, do not break fellowship over those issues.
III. Primitivist and Patternist Baptists. The thread that binds this group together is the rejection of most or all church auxiliaries (mission boards, seminaries, Sunday schools, women’s societies, etc.) and/or having Primitive Baptist historical roots.[iv] Some of the more “progressive” among them have adopted some of the church auxiliaries. Soteriologically and theologically, Primitivist Baptists run the gamut from absolute predestinarian to mildly Calvinistic (holding general atonement in combination with total depravity and eternal security). These churches usually unite in following older worship patterns, including a cappella singing, extemporaneous preaching, and the practice of feet washing.
IV. Reformed and Sovereign Grace Baptists. This grouping represents a move in the latter half of the 20th century returning to the Calvinistic heritage of their 17th and 18th century Particular and Regular Baptist ancestors. They tend to adopt the 1646 or 1689 London Baptist Confessions of Faith, reject modern evangelistic techniques, and some may even feel a stronger bond with other Reformed churches than to “non-Reformed” Baptists (especially those who are dispensational, revivalist, and anti-Calvinism).
V. Regular Baptists (Northern-oriented). The thread that binds this group together is historical and cultural. These churches are descendants of the Particular Baptists from England, becoming known in the U.S. primarily as “Regular” Baptists. Through years of mergers and changes, most became moderately Calvinistic (holding general atonement in combination with total depravity and eternal security). The Baptists in the North – due to various backgrounds in origin, in addition to separation from the Baptists in the South over slavery and other regional issues, developed along different lines from the brethren in the Southern United States.
VI. Regular Baptists (Southern-oriented). The thread that binds this group together is historical and cultural. These churches are descendants of the Particular Baptists from England, becoming known in the U.S. primarily as “Regular” Baptists. Through years of mergers and changes, most became moderately Calvinistic (holding general atonement in combination with total depravity and eternal security). The Baptists in the South – due to various backgrounds in origin, in addition to separation from the Baptists in the North over slavery and other regional issues, developed along different lines from the brethren in the Northern United States.
VII. Ethnic Baptist Bodies. The thread that binds this group together is separation from the larger bodies of Baptists (primarily of English language and heritage) due to cultural and, especially, language differences. These associations, conferences, and conventions exist either distinctly from or within general conventions. Nevertheless, these groups often relate in some way to larger national bodies. Therefore, some may not be distinct groups of Baptists in the same way as those in the first six groupings. It is not always clear whether some of the bodies are autonomous or semi-autonomous. They are here divided into three categories: (1) those that partner with or through the American Baptist Churches; (2) those that partner with or through the Southern Baptist Convention; and (3) those who are autonomous or whose status in this regard is unknown to the author. Notably, two of the Baptist bodies in Group V, Converge and North American Baptist Conference, began as ethnic Baptists (Swedish and German, respectively) though they are no longer considered so, having assimilated into the broader culture of American Baptists.
The ethnic Baptist bodies in Group VII exist (at least initially) because they speak a different language from the main body of Baptists. The Black Baptists, however, are and have always been English-speaking churches. I do not list the Black Baptists with these linguistically diverse ethnic bodies. They exist distinctly mostly because of historical social and racial separation. Their Baptist origins can be traced (usually, initially) to either the General or Particular Baptist churches that came from the United Kingdom (since they came out of the predominantly white organizations).
Various notes and explanations.
Apples and oranges. It is hard to produce a valid comparison of different types of Baptist bodies. It is possible to categorize them in various ways. One outline does not cover all the ground or answer all questions. Bodies that stand in the same place in the outline often differ vastly in makeup. The Southern Baptist Convention is a distinct body made up of churches that support some or all of its programs. In contrast, the Foundations Baptist Fellowship is a fellowship of individuals who agree to the Statement of Faith and purposes of the FBFI. Others, however, may operate more like an autonomous mission board. There is a new “networking” model that may not correspond well with previous understandings of Baptist operations. Placing Baptist bodies at an equal level does not consistently offer comparing apples to apples, but often apples to oranges instead. Such, however, is the “nature” of the “Baptist beast” – independent churches with no higher governing authority will organize as they wish!
Each “equivalent” listing generally recognizes the highest level at which participating churches affiliate. Churches in groups such as American Baptist, National Baptist, Southern Baptist, etc. usually participate in local, regional, and/or state associations or conventions in addition to the general organization. In contrast, independent Landmark Missionary Baptist churches, for example, have no formal affiliation beyond the local church level.
Overlapping membership. Each listing in Baptist Groups in the United States does not represent a “clean break” with no overlap. Some of the groups tend to be exclusive, that is, members affiliate only with one distinct body. However, others are not. Quite a few Black Baptist churches affiliate with more than one of the National Conventions, and some dually-align with the ABCUSA or the SBC. A number of churches that identify as “Reformed Baptist” also participate in the SBC. Within the fundamentalist fellowships – many of whose membership is by individuals rather than churches – there can be much overlap. Preachers who participate in the Southwide Baptist Fellowship might also participate in the BBFI and/or the WBF. The new networking model likely creates new areas of overlap.
Difficulties. How to “name” a particular group presents its own difficulties. Obviously, many are straightforward. The name of the entity will be the name in the list – American Baptist Association, National Primitive Baptist Convention, New England Baptist Fellowship, Western Presbytery of the Council of Evangelical Christian-Baptists. However, other categorizations present the need to create a distinguishing name under which to classify similar bodies.
I use “Birdwood College Related Churches” to distinguish a group of Progressive Primitive Baptists from another group of Primitives who are progressive – because they started Birdwood College in Thomasville, Georgia in 1950.[v] The wording is outdated though, because the college officially severed relations with the Progressive Primitive Baptists several years ago, and is now Thomas College. The other body is the Eastern District Association of Primitive Baptists. They no longer correspond with any other Primitive Baptist associations, no longer hold limited atonement, and have adopted other more progressive stances (such as Sunday school and other auxiliaries). However, they still identify themselves Primitive Baptists. They are progressive. Therefore, they are included as “Progressive Primitive Baptists.” “Progressive Old Line” is another problematic naming choice. It describes a certain faction of the Old Line Primitive Baptists who have adopted some form of mission work and have Bible study somewhat like Sunday school. They are not progressive to the degree of the “Progressive Primitive Baptists,” – and do not consider themselves progressive. However, other Old Line Primitive Baptists have disfellowshipped them because they consider them progressive.
Classifying the “United Baptists” exposes another difficulty. The name developed out of the union of Regular and Separate Baptist Associations in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. They adopted the name “United” to express their unity. Therefore, many Baptists who are now Missionary Baptists, Southern Baptists, and even Primitive Baptists may have once called themselves United Baptists. For this reason also, those churches and associations that still use the name “United Baptist” represent a wide variety of belief and practice. Because of the variety, I have placed them in three different categorizations, and created a “distinguishing” name for each – United Baptists, Landmarkist; National Association of United Baptists and Related Associations; and United Baptist, Regular. Landmarkist United Baptists are closely allied with the Old Time Missionary Baptists. The National Association of United Baptists and related associations is an assortment of similar associations. Some participate in the National Association and some do not. However, those who do not correspond with those who do. Open communion is practiced in these churches, and some teach falling from grace. Those who do not are willing to fellowship with those who do. Regular United Baptists maintain a primitivist approach, rejecting modern church auxiliary societies. These three sub-groups of United Baptists reflect differences in benevolences (e.g. Sunday school), historical affiliations (e.g. Landmark), and worship styles (e.g. a cappella vs. musical instruments).
Finally, “Regular Baptist,” though not fraught with as many problems, is nevertheless a name that may crop up over a wide range of Baptists that are quite different. In certain areas of the country, Primitive Baptist churches prefer the name Regular Baptist. The GARBC, very different from Primitive Baptists, also use the name. Many missionary Baptist associations in the South, though not prominently displayed on their church names or signs, often have the terminology in their Constitutions, such as “membership is composed of Regular Baptist Churches.”
Trends. A trend, perhaps found most among Conservative Evangelicals, is the move toward generic operational names that remove the word “Baptist.” The Baptist General Conference is now Converge, American Baptists of the West becomes Growing Healthy Churches, American Baptist Churches of the Pacific Southwest is Transformation Ministries, and the Conservative Baptist Association (which had already removed Conservative and Baptist to become CB America) has become the Venture Church Network. Less pronounced, but moving in the same direction, in 2017 the board of the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship International voted to change their name to Foundations Baptist Fellowship International (removing Fundamental). While retaining their official and legal name, in 2012 messengers of the Southern Baptist Convention approved the use of “Great Commission Baptists” as an alternative name (stressing purpose over geography).[vi]
Words like “network” and “networking” are finding favor over words like association and convention – even though a network is an association of individuals or entities having a common interest, formed to provide mutual assistance, etc. In the trendy world of name changes, it is not always clear when “network” is simply a replacement name for association or convention, and when it is a new concept of operation. Perhaps when it most diverges from the old way of operation, networking may be seen as operating more horizontally that vertically.
Information on the web. In the online version of Baptist Groups in the United States, posted at Seeking the Old Paths, I am including links. Preferably, the link is to the official web site of the Baptist body listed. In lieu of that, I am posting links to other sites that give some kind of information about the groups. I have learned that many groups that do not have any official website (and even some who do) have some kind of presence on Facebook. When that is the only source available, I include that link. Unfortunately, many of the smaller bodies have no web presence. Books about the Baptist denomination overlook them. In addition, it is also frustrating that many of the websites created do not remain functional sources of information.
Changes. I have made some changes from previous iterations of Baptist Groups in the United States. Most are minor. Of course, Baptist bodies that are known to be extinct are removed. However, it is often uncertain whether a Baptist is, in fact, extinct. A prime example of the need for caution can be seen in The Encyclopedia of Southern Baptists, Volumes I-IV, from 1958-1982, listing a number of Baptist associations as extinct that still exist in 2022! New Baptist bodies are added. Some bodies have changed their names. I have changed the ordering of the main divisions to alphabetical – except for the “Ethnic Bodies.” The listing remains last because it is the least efficient. It is clearly incomplete and probably somewhat inaccurate by my not having sufficient information on and understanding of these bodies, and their relationships (or lack thereof) to conventions such as ABCUSA and SBC. I have changed the numbering system, partly for my own convenience – but hopefully helpful to others. Rather than sequential numbers from beginning to end (e.g. 1 through 75), each main division is renumbered. Division I (Black Baptists) is 1.1 through 1.15. Division II (General Baptists) is 2.1 through 2.8, and so on.
Conclusion.
Such lists are beneficial, yet soon outdated. It is challenging to keep up with the changes that take place among Baptists. Groups merge, split, and expire. They may change practice or theology and realign in a new direction. In 1963 Richard L. Greaves, addressing primarily a British readership, wrote, “The bewildering disarray which the flourishing Baptists of the United States manifest is as confusing to the average American as it is to the on-looking Englishman.” (“The Baptist Scene Today in the U.S.A.,” The Baptist Quarterly, Volume 20, No. 4, October 1963, pp. 170-175). It is no less bewildering nearly 60 years later, both to the outsider looking in and the insider looking around.
I highly recommend that anyone interested in this subject also read Albert W. Wardin’s books, Baptist Atlas, Baptists around the World, and The Twelve Tribes of Baptists in the USA: a Historical and Statistical Analysis. The details supplied there will exponentially increase one’s knowledge of the subject of Baptist taxonomy, or classification.
Endnotes.
[ii] In stating this, however, it is not clear that all continue to maintain even this limited list of distinctives.
[iii] However, another way of grouping the Black Baptists would order the National Baptist bodies with the Southern-oriented Conservative Evangelical (VI.A), the Black Free Will Baptists with the General Baptists (II.A), the Black Primitive Baptists with the Primitivist Baptists (III.A), and the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship with the Northern-oriented Separatist Fundamentalist (V.C).
[iv] Primitivism is broad descriptor that transcends different associations or fellowships. It is in that sense comparable to words like fundamentalism, landmarkism, etc. The “primitive” idea is in its meaning as “original,” the strain of Baptist that best represents what Baptists or biblical Christians originally were – the primitive or original Baptists. The desire of primitivism is to recreate and live New Testament Christianity, not just in theology but also in practice. Martin Marty calls it “the dream of restoration of a purer order” (though most primitivist Baptists likely believe they have it preserved without need of restoration). Patternism stresses following the patterns or practices observed in the early New Testament churches.
[v] In this context, the word “progressive” refers to things like using musical instruments, Bible studies, youth camps, and other auxiliary organizations that are rejected by other Primitive Baptists.
[vi] By a vote of 53 percent for to 46 percent against. Marshall Blalock, a Baptist pastor who served on the name change task force, wrote that they recommended and approved it “for the sake of mission, to break down barriers, and to describe our purpose.” The SBC’s North American Mission Board appears to operate under the name “Send Network.”
No comments:
Post a Comment