The History of Texas Baptists, reprise

I wrote the following several years ago, when I was thinking about the need for a true Texas Baptist Historical Society, one that was not geared toward a particular flavor of Baptists. Now that I am doing a microcosm of that with my Rusk County Baptist history, I thought it would be could to republish this (slightly edited) before writing about my work in the county.

The history of Texas Baptists is one of the great loves of my life. I do not remember exactly when it happened, but it is an ongoing affair of about fifty years. In 2019, I focused on the history of the Sabine Baptist Association, the earliest Baptist association in our area (organized 1843). I found a treasure trove of information at Baylor University’s archives (oh, sure, I wish for more).[i] As I began to understand what is there, a sad wonderment struck my mind. How long has this information lain dormant there? How many historians who mention the Sabine Baptist Association ever bothered to check these primary documents? I would love to see a new history of Texas Baptists refocused on primary documents that have previously been undiscovered or ignored. Perhaps we have long had the big picture, but the devil is in the details.

Previous histories are too partisan in outlook. What is labeled “a history of Texas Baptists” is most often “a history of my Texas Baptists.” Don’t get me wrong. There is a place and need for denominational histories. The Free Will Baptists write theirs, Missionary Baptists write theirs, the National Baptists write theirs, Primitive Baptists write theirs, Southern Baptists write theirs, and so on.[ii] The plus side includes access to records not easily obtained, and that they offer their own unique perspective and understanding of themselves, things frequently missed by “outsiders.” The minus side is that they often fail to assimilate their story into the whole of the history of Texas Baptists (and miss the insight of “outsiders”). Even the large tomes of Carroll and McBeth, in my opinion, only make meager mention of the existence of other Baptists after they move on from the earliest years.

Previous histories are too narrow in research. Hand in hand with the partisanship in history writing is its narrowness.  For example, to many historians, Daniel Parker is a wart on the nose of Texas Baptists. Mention him we must, but let’s move on. Quickly![iii] However, those who bother to check might find that Asa Wright labored in the west in the late 1830s with “missionary” Z. N. Morrell and in the east in the early 1840s with “anti-missionary” Daniel Parker – then later hooked up with “missionary” Lemuel Herrin and “anti-missionary” Isaac Reed to form the Sabine Baptist Association. Or, that Thomas Hanks was a member of the “Separate” Union Baptist Church near Nacogdoches before he was a member (and later pastor) of the “Regular” Pilgrim Baptist Church of near Elkhart.[iv] Through this narrowness, historians fail to branch out and learn all they might about the vagaries of even their own partisans.

Previous histories are too predictable in narration. Too often the same sources are used repetitively without seeking for other available and overlooked primary sources. I know one person will never find them all. Nevertheless, I can’t express how mind-numbing it has been to see the same story about the Sabine Baptist Association repeated over and over, when the writers kept checking the same old source, apparently never bothering to check the Sabine’s own sources – their minutes. This must be true (unless they were afraid or dishonest). Had they checked the available Sabine Association minutes, reporting accurately and honestly, they would not have repeated the same old sad story of the association .[v] Leon McBeth writes, “Any history of Texas Baptists must begin with Z. N. ‘Wildcat’ Morrell…”[vi] I have no particular quarrel with that. Morrell’s book is a wonderful record of one who lived the early history of Texas Baptists, from when he arrived in December 1835. On the other hand, Morrell is the source of the some of the errors on the Sabine Baptist Association. I find no evidence that he ever attended its sessions.[vii] His information is second-hand. Should not those who attended and recorded their sessions receive some priority of testimony?

What to do? Southern Baptists have written the majority of the history of the Baptists of Texas. I don’t fault them. They are the majority of Baptists in Texas. They may have the “training and necessary leisure.” However, they have frequently been sectarian while at the same time blaming sectarianism on their foes. Smaller Baptist sub-denominations then rebut with their own clannishness, and ultimately we fail to read the whole story. Future writers could learn a lesson from Albert W. Wardin in his Tennessee Baptists: A Comprehensive History, 1779-1999. The bulk of the book is about the majority party, but Wardin clearly takes an interest in all the Baptists of Tennessee. Further exacerbating the Texas problem, in my opinion, is that the main (if not only) Baptist historical society (if it even still exists) is connected to and funded by the Baptist General Convention of Texas. Even though they don’t/didn’t restrict their membership to BGCT folks, others often feel restricted by the integral connection. Creating an historical society not connected to or dependent upon a particular association, conference, or convention might reflect the greater diversity of Baptists in the state, create greater buy-in of Baptists across the state, and promote the kind of research that sees the connectivity of early Texas Baptists of various “stripes.” Such a society would allow historical corroboration without compromising denominational connections. I have no problems wrestling with you over faith and practice while uniting with you to better understand our history. What about you?

Maybe one day we will have an integrated account of all Texas Baptists.

That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it.

---

[i] The Texas Collection “is Baylor University’s oldest special collections library.”

[ii] Some Texas Baptist denominational histories include A History of Texas Baptists: Comprising a Detailed Account of Their Activities, Their Progress and Their Achievements, James Milton Carroll, Dallas, TX: Baptist Standard Publishing Co., 1923; A History of the Primitive Baptists of Texas, Oklahoma and Indian Territories, Joseph Sylvester Newman, Tioga, TX: Baptist Trumpet, 1906; From the Red to the Rio Grande: a History of the Free Will Baptist in Texas, 1876 to 2014, Thurmon Murphy, Columbus, OH: FWB Publications, 2017; History of the Baptist Missionary Association of Texas, William Henry Parks, Cleburne, TX: [n.d., before 1916], Missionary Baptists in Texas, 1820-1998, Oran Heaton Griffith, Henderson, TX: History & Archives Committee of the Missionary Baptist Association of Texas, 1999; Texas Baptists: a Sesquicentennial History, Harry Leon McBeth, Dallas, TX: Baptistway Press, 1998.

[iii] As does Baker in The Blossoming Desert, p. 26.

[iv] And [1] Deacon William Sparks was a member of the “Regular” Hopewell Baptist Church in Cooks Settlement (Nacogdoches County) before he was a member of the “Separate” Union Baptist Church. [2] William Brittain had been an ordained Elder nearly 30 years (ordained 1810) before he came to Texas. William and Rosanna moved from North Carolina to Arkansas, then they moved to Texas in 1837. They were first connected with the Pilgrim Church of Parker, with which church they united in 1838. They organized a church in Shelby County in 1841, then reorganized it in 1846 after splitting with the Parker churches. At this time they began to fellowship with Isaac Reed and the Sabine Baptist Association. While likely not called Missionary Baptist in the lifetime of Elder Brittain, they would come to be recognized as such.

[v] This is not to say that they got it all wrong, but that the minutes would have corrected what they did have wrong.

[vi] Texas Baptists: a Sesquicentennial History, p. 495

[vii] Z. N. Morrell does not say he did, neither is he mentioned in any of the existing minutes. On the other hand, Morrell does say he was informed on the subject by David Lewis (pp. 263-264). Though Morrell probably did not know, we have enough information today to know that Lewis was both a scoundrel and a primary cause of dissension in the association.

Holes in your stockings

“…in one place in Virginia, where Mr. [John] Leland went to preach one cold day, the principal people were in the habit of going out before the meeting was done, if the minister spake much over three quarters of an hour. Some of the brethren told him they hoped he would not preach long, for if he did, there were some gentlemen that would leave the house. He said nothing, but went to meeting. After speaking about forty-five minutes, he noticed that some grew uneasy, and acted as though they meant to go out. Observing this, he paused a moment, and then said, ‘My friends, it is cold, and I have now got about half through my discourse, and I suppose those of you who have holes in the heels of your stockings will be obliged to leave the house before the meeting is done.’ This saying removed all the apparent uneasiness; and no one dared leave the house, till the meeting closed.”

From The Life, Conversion, Preaching, Travels, and Sufferings of Elias Smith, pp. 225-226

Elder Robert G. Green

I am hoping/trying to identify Robert G. Green, who was involved in the organization of Union Baptist Church in 1838 near Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County, Texas and Plum Grove (Hopewell) Baptist Church in 1839 near La Grange in Fayette County, Texas. Morrell mentions him three times in his book Flowers and Fruits from the Wilderness.

Flowers and Fruits, page 187

At the time of the organization of Union, Reed lived probably 30 miles north of Nacogdoches

Flowers and Fruits, page 141

In this Morrell is quoting from the letter of the church to the Union Baptist Association

Flowers and Fruits, pp. 200-201

This last mention of Green by Morrell is concerning Baptist ministers who were in Huntsville, Walker County, Texas around the time he was trying or organize a church there. It is certainly not complimentary, but perhaps instructive of both from whence he came (Tennessee) and the last-certainly-known place he was living in Texas. He was evidently around Nacogdoches early in 1838, and was living in or near Bastrop when he helped organize the church at Plum Grove. He may have only been passing through Nacogdoches. The Union Church was organized in May 1838, and at least as early as September 1838, Green was advertising as an attorney-at-law in Bastrop. Though Morrell describes Green in Huntsville, he evidently had still been a member of Providence in Bastrop County up to the time he was excluded for drunkenness. The Robert G. Green in the 1830 Tipton County, Tennessee census may well be him. (For example, an R. G. Green filed a Tipton County circuit court legal notice in 1832.) If so, his age range puts his birth between 1781 and 1790.

J. M. Carroll in A History of Texas Baptists (pp. 124-125), quotes from History of the Primitive Baptists of Texas, Oklahoma, and Indian Territory, by J. S. Newman (pp. 37-38, 1906). According to Carroll, Newman had access to the minutes of the Providence Baptist Church, which met on or near the Colorado River in Bastrop County, about 12-15 miles south of the town of Bastrop. The church was organized in 1834, in the district of Mena (Mina) of the State of Coahuila y Tejas – while this still belonged to Mexico. Both Asahel Dancer and R. G. Green were members of this church when they organized the Plum Grove Church. Newman writes:

“Elder R. G. Green joined by letter in December, 1838, and was excluded for drunkenness in February, 1840” (p. 125).

Green is not mentioned as a member of the Union (Old North) Church near Nacogdoches. He served on the organizational presbytery, prayed the organizational prayer, and served as moderator of the conference when the organized church adopted the name Union.

It seems easy to believe – though proof is not positive – that this could be the R. G. Green who briefly edited a paper in Lexington, Holmes County, Mississippi; who served on the Board of Trustees of the Judson Institute, while living in Choctaw County, Mississippi; and who married Mrs. Elizabeth Boren (or Bowen) in Warren County, Mississippi December 25, 1837.

Perhaps because R. G. Green disgraced himself with drunkenness, was excluded from his church, and is left frenzied in the streets of Huntsville in Morrell’s history – no one has bothered to discover what happened to him. Additionally, he may have been estranged from wife and children (the former of which would seem to be suggested by Morrell, assuming domestic troubles means family troubles). However, if he is found to be the R. G. Green, Esq. of Crockett, Texas, he may have recovered at least a modicum of respect.

A proposed outline suggesting a line for further research on Robert G. Green.

• 1781-1790. Birth; guess based on 1830 census.
• 1815. Possible marriage; guess based on 1830 census.
• 1830. Tipton County, Tennessee. (Census)
• 1831. Tipton County, Tennessee (A Commissioner).
• 1834. Ordained by or before 1835, when Z. N. Morrell left Tennessee.
• 1835. Lexington, Holmes County, Mississippi.
• 1836. Choctaw County, Mississippi.
• 1837. Warren County, Mississippi.
• 1838. Bastrop, Bastrop County, Texas.
• 1840. Bastrop, Bastrop County, Texas.
• 1842. Huntsville, Walker County, Texas (at least before September 1844).
• 1845. Crockett, Houston County, Texas.

With nothing obvious turning up for R. G. Green after 1845, perhaps his death occurred 1845-1850. The use of “Esquire” after the name R. G. Green in 1835 in Lexington, Tennessee and in 1845 in Crockett, Texas might suggest a man who was an attorney-at-law (which our R. G. Green was) – though not necessarily. This Crockett R. G. Green seems to make a court filing in 1844. It would be good to discover that R. G. Green came to repentance and recovered respectability before the end of his life.

Baptist Presidents

Connecting U. S. History and Baptist History: Baptist Presidents of the United States.

Thus far four men affiliated with Baptist churches have risen to become the President of the United States. Three were Democrats and one was a Republican. Two were northerners and two were southerners.[i]

1. Warren G. Harding (29th President. Republican from Ohio, 1921–23), Harding was a member and trustee of the Trinity Baptist Church, Marion, Ohio. He joined the church on May 6, 1883, when he was 17 years old and it was then still called the Free Baptist Church. Organized in 1824, Trinity was a Freewill or Free Baptist Church until joining the Northern Baptist Convention in 1911. Historians have generally ranked Harding as one of the worst Presidents. This is based on the idea that he accomplished little while in office, and for the corruption occurring during his administration – several of his appointees went to prison for various scandals. However, but I don’t think he was accused of improprieties beyond allowing it to go on.

2. Harry S. Truman (33rd President. Democrat from Missouri, 1945-1953), Truman is probably best known for following Franklin Delano Roosevelt, being plain-spoken, and authorizing dropping the atomic bombs on Japan. Some have called him a “cussin’ Baptist” (not an unique moniker). I know little about his presidency otherwise, or of his Baptist beliefs. At the age of 18, Truman was baptized at the Benton Boulevard Baptist Church in Kansas City, Missouri, where he was living at the time. In 1916 he later became a member of the First Baptist Church of Grandview, Missouri, (then called the Grandview Baptist Church). In 1945 Truman wrote, “I am a Baptist because I think that sect gives the common man the shortest and most direct approach to God.” (Source: Michael Devine, director of Harry S. Truman Library and Museum)

3. James Earl “Jimmy” Carter, Jr. (39th President. Democrat from Georgia, 1977-1981). Carter is often remembered for speaking of being born-again (and by some for giving away the Panama Canal). His presidency is by many thought of as ineffective, and after one term the American people replaced him with Ronald Reagan. At the time of his presidency, he was a Southern Baptist, but his church is now also affiliated with the more liberal Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. He was a popular Sunday School teacher at Maranatha Baptist Church, Plains, Georgia. My in-laws once traveled to visit his Sunday School class. As a Baptist he would be considered on the liberal end of the spectrum. No questionable moral dealings or improprieties are associated with his presidency.

4. William Jefferson “Bill” Clinton (42nd President. Democrat from Arkansas, 1993-2001). He was baptized by Park Place Baptist Church in Hot Springs, Arkansas. One of the most remembered acts of this Southern Baptist president is the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. Though a Baptist, the president and his family attended the Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, D.C. while he was president.

Honorable mention.

Abraham Lincoln was raised by Baptist parents. They were members of the Little Pigeon Baptist Church, near Lincoln City, Spencer County, Indiana. Lincoln himself, however, was never baptized nor a member of any church.

Baptist preacher John Gano is supposed to have baptized George Washington (1st President) during the Revolutionary War. This is a matter of controversy (i.e., some historians believe it happened and some do not). Two of John Gano’s grandchildren claimed in an affidavit that their aunt, John Gano’s oldest daughter, told them that her father had baptized Washington. Nevertheless, it seems that Washington remained outwardly affiliated with the Episcopal Church.

Information about all the presidents can be found at https://guides.loc.gov/presidents-portraits/chronological.

---

[i] Missouri may best be considered a “border state” rather than “Northern.” However, I think Truman’s baptizing church may have been affiliated with the Northern Baptists. (This needs a more research; currently, First Baptist of Grandview is affiliated with Southern Baptist Convention.)

“First” Baptist Baptist Church

A little humor at the expense of Baptist church names: Underachieving Christian Settles for Third Baptist Church.

In theory, “First” Baptist should mean the first Baptist Church established in a place – to distinguish it from other churches that were organized later. In the 1800s in Texas, a Baptist Church in a town was often simply called the Baptist Church of [name of town]. When other churches were organized it seems that the trend developed from calling the Baptist Church of [name of town] to calling it the first Baptist Church of [name of town]. And then this developed into the name First Baptist Church. (I can’t speak for how this occurred in other places, but I would expect it to be much the same.) Nowadays, the name “First Baptist” seems to have a different sort of connotation.

This morphed historical practice creates some odd situations, when the “First” Baptist Church isn’t the first Baptist Church. I won’t mention names, but these are some actual situations in the area where I live.

I know of one church named “First Baptist Church” which is the oldest existing Baptist Church in that particular town, but it is not the first Baptist Church. The first Baptist Church organized in the town died out, ceased to exist, but I suppose “Oldest Baptist Church” is not a very appealing name for a church.

I know of two different churches in neighboring counties in which the “First Baptist Church” was organized later than another church in the town – meaning they certainly are not the “first” Baptist Church. Both of these cases are cases of historically white churches not recognizing (at least in their naming) historically black churches that are older, and evidently first.

I know of two churches in a place that both used “First” in their names. They existed because of a church split. The churches added modifiers after “First” to distinguish which “First Baptist” was which. Eventually, the older church (the one really first) died out, ceased to exist, and the other church dropped the modifier to simply be “First Baptist Church” – but it still is not the “first.”

We Baptists sometimes are quite odd ducks.

Baptist history on Ancestry

If you have an Ancestry subscription, are interested in Texas Baptist history, and especially if you are interested in the Anderson Baptist Church (formerly Antioch) of Grimes County, Texas, there are 29 pages of membership records here:

https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/62267/records/3289

There are some records of five other churches that follow alphabetically (some, unfortunately, not that well labeled).

Or for broader searches, see HERE.

Baptists afraid of water?

A Little Humor in Baptist History: 

...Elder Hastings...had just returned from the ordination of Mr. Whelpley, a baptist minister, in Sandersfield, Mass. This young man was educated at Providence college, as I heard; studied divinity with Dr. Stillman, of Boston, and was quite in clerical fashion. As he had a college education, and was something like the clergy in Connecticut, several of the presbyterian clergy attended. Elder Hastings stated to us that Elder John Leland was appointed to preach the ordination sermon. He said that when the people came together, the meeting-house would not hold them. The people then went to a grove, near the house; erected a stage that the people might hear. Mr. Leland had not spoken long, before it began to rain a little, so that several people went to the meeting-house for a shelter. As they were going, Elder Leland said to old Elder Thomas Morse, “What shall I do, father Morse?” He replied, “Wait a little while; the rain will soon be over, and the people will return.” He sat a while; the cloud passed over, and the people returned. After they were all seated, ready to hear, Mr. Leland rose up, and after looking around, as though surprised, and wishing also to sting the clergy severely on account of their infant sprinkling, he said, “My friends, I am astonished to see baptists afraid of water! But when I come to think, it is sprinkling; and I do not wonder that you flee from it.” This was a severe stroke upon the Connecticut clergy, and very mortifying to Mr. Whelpley. Mr. Leland having said this, proceeded in his sermon as he had proposed before the shower.

From The Life, Conversion, Preaching, Travels, and Sufferings of Elias Smith, pp. 224-225

3 Views of Baptist Origins

“A Roundtable Discussion on Baptist Origins” in The Journal of Baptist Studies, Volume 3 (2009) contains articles representing three different historical views of the origin of Baptists.

• The Successionism View of Baptist History, by James R. Duval -- “There is an identity problem among present-day Baptists and the gulf seems to be widening.”
• The Spiritual Kinship Theory of Baptist Origins, by W. Glenn Jonas Jr -- “The spiritual kinship theory was a type of Baptist successionism although different than Landmarkism.”
• A Brief Defense of the English Separatist Origins of Modern Baptists, by James M. Renihan -- “The question of Baptist origins is like a carpet worn thin from more than a century of debate and discussion.”

More John Leland

Captain Abner Lee, who lived near Lyme, Massachusetts, would have meetings in his house. He would bring in seats and a moveable pulpit. On one occasion he had Elder John Leland preach in his house, Captain Lee “said to Mr. Leland, ‘I do not know as you can put up with our wooden pulpit.’ He made no reply, but began his meeting. After preaching a while, he had occasion to notice the preaching the people had in old times; and noticed the difference between that and the popular doctrines of the day in which he lived. ‘In the days of the apostles, said he, they had wooden pulpits and golden preaching but now they have golden pulpits and wooden preaching. Give me a wooden pulpit and golden preaching, rather than golden pulpits and wooden preaching!”

From The Life, Conversion, Preaching, Travels, and Sufferings of Elias Smith, p. 227

Missions and Anti-Missions

Some people will not allow themselves to believe there is a distinction between being for preaching the gospel and starting churches (missions) and being against mission boards and mission societies. This Southern Baptist pastor studied Daniel Parker and recognized the difference. He concluded:

“When Daniel Parker died on December 3, 1844, after ten years in Texas, he had successfully demonstrated that his opposition was directed not against missions but against the mission society.” 

“Daniel Parker: Politician, Baptist, and Anti-Mission Missionary,” Max Lee (Pastor, First BC, Winnsboro, LA). The Journal of Texas Baptist History, Volume VI, 1986, William L. Pitts, Editor. Texas Baptist Historical Society, p. 8

A traveling church

Another church on the move

Excerpt from “Baptists of Denton County to Hold Golden Jubilee Celebration,”

Denton Record-Chronicle, Wednesday, May 27, 1936, page 2

Liberalism at Southern Seminary

I am not Southern Baptist. I have never been Southern Baptist. I never intend to be Southern Baptist. However, I appreciate that of all the larger and mainline denominations in the United States, it seems only the Southern Baptist Convention has successfully pushed back against theological liberalism in any meaningful way.

In “The Conservative Resurgence and Southern Baptist Seminary,” Mark Terry sheds some personal light on what he experienced during his early tenure as a teacher at Southern Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. It is inconceivable that it had been allowed to get so bad, but perhaps more unbelievable that the conservatives in the SBC were able to oust the liberals from Southern.[i]

A few examples:

“He reported that he was the only student of ten who believed in the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. The professor himself did not believe in the physical resurrection of Christ.”

“The faculty members who studied at Southern in the 1980s shared experiences from their student days. One reported that he kept a running count of the curse words one professor uttered in class. He stopped counting at 152.”

“…one of the ethics professors often spoke at abortion rights rallies and made pro-abortion statements on local television.”

---

[i] I suspect, as happens in most things like this in religion and politics, that some “liberals” turned “conservative” as the tide was turning.

William Kiffin answers Robert Poole

QUERIE V. How can you vindicate by the Word of God, your Anabaptisticall way, from the sinfull guile of notorious Schisme, and disection from all the Reformed Churches?

Ans. They that run may reade what fire this pen and heart was inflamed withall in the writing and inditing this querie; but first of all, if by Reformed Churches, you mean those Churches planted by the Apostles in the Primative times, which are the platforme for all Churches in all ages to look unto, to be guided by these Apostolicall Rules left them; wee then shall vindicate by the Word of God our Anabaptisticall way, as you are pleased to call it, from that guile; and first, although wee confesse our selves ignorant of many things, which we ought to know and desire, to waight daily for the further discoveries of Light and truth, from him which is the only giver of it to his poor people, yet so far as we are come, we desire to walke by the same Rule they did, and first of all, wee Baptize none into Christ Jesus, but such as professe faith in Christ Jesus, Rom. 6.3. by which faith they are made sonnes of God, and so having put on Christ, are Baptized into Christ, Gal. 3.26, 27. and that Christ hath commanded this, and no other way of Baptisme, See Matth. 28.19. Mark. 1.4, 5. Luke 3.7, 8. and that this also was the Practise of the Apostles, See Acts 2.41. and 8.12.36, 37 and 10.47, 48. and that being thus baptized upon profession of Faith, they are then added to the Church, 2 Act. 41. and being added to the Church, wee conceive our selves bound to watch over one another, and in case of sinne, to deale faithfully one with another according to these Scriptures, Levit. 19.17, 18. Matth. 18.15. and if they remain obstinate, to cast them out, as those that are not fit to live in the Church, according to that Rule, 2 Cor. 5.4, 5. Matth. 18.19, 30. by all which, and many other parteculars I might name, it appears through Mercy, we can free our selves from that guile; and truely, if your eyes were opened to peruse your own practises and wayes, you would then see wee could better free our selves from that notorious guile of Schisme from those Reformed Churches, then you can free your selves from the notorious guile of Schismying from Rome; For 1. You hold their Baptisme true, their Ordination of Ministers true, their maintenance by Tythes and Offerings true, their people all fit matter for a Church, and so true, and yet you will seperate from them for some Corruptions; now for our parts, wee denie all and every one of these amongst you to be true, and therefore doe seperate from you; so then, when you have made satisfaction for your notorious Schisme, and returne as dutifull Sonnes to their Mother, or else have cast off all your filthty Rubbish of her abominations which are found amongst you, we will returne to you, or shew our just grounds to the contrary.

Pages 12-13 of A briefe remonstrance of the reasons and grounds of those people commonly called Anabaptists, for their seperation, &c. Or certaine queries concerning their faith and practice, propounded by Mr. Robert Poole; answered and resolved by William Kiffin. London: 1645.

An Association Dissatisfied

“Upon questions of policy…”

“5th. That we disapprove of the policy of supplementing the Nacogdoches, Wichta (sic) Falls and other churches in their pastor’s salaries, when such churches do not come in the scope of destitution but are able to maintain and support a pastor; for if such churches are not able to afford the luxury of a $1200 preacher alone, we believe that they should be resigned to listen to the words of truth coming from the mouth of a $500 preacher.” 

The above is from a resolution adopted by the Mt. Zion Association in 1898, during very stiff dissension on policies and practices in the Baptist General Convention Texas. A resolution was presented by Elder W. H. Hendrix, then a substitute by Judge R. W. Priest. After discussion, the substitute offered by Priest was adopted. After a preamble, there was a “one-point” statement affirming “our allegiance to all time-honored and blood-bought Doctrines of our Lord and master, Christ Jesus, as are taught in his Holy Word and expressed in the Baptist Declarations of Faith and Church Covenants” (p. 13) – and then 15 points discussing state convention policies.

Excerpt from a report on the “denominational troubles” among Baptists in Texas, Minutes of the Forty-Second Annual Session of the Mt. Zion Baptist Association, October 1-3, 1898, p. 14.

Baptists who were U.S. Presidents

Four men affiliated with Baptist churches have become President of the United States. Three were Democrats and one was a Republican. Two were northerners* and two were southerners.

1.     Warren G. Harding (Republican from Ohio, 1921–23), 29th president. He was a member and trustee of the Trinity Baptist Church, Marion, Ohio. He joined the church on May 6, 1883, when he was 17 years old and it was still called the Free Baptist Church. Historians have generally ranked Harding as one of the worst Presidents. This is based on the idea that he accomplished little while in office, and for corruption during his administration – several of his appointees went to prison for various scandals. I don’t think Harding himself was accused of improprieties beyond allowing it to go on.

2.     Harry S. Truman (Democrat from Missouri, 1945-1953), 33rd president. Truman is probably best known for following Roosevelt, being plain-spoken, and authorizing dropping the bombs on Japan. I know little about his presidency otherwise, or of his Baptist beliefs. At the age of 18, Truman was baptized at the Benton Boulevard Baptist Church in Kansas City, Missouri, where he was living at the time. He later became a member of the First Baptist Church of Grandview, Missouri, (then called the Grandview Baptist Church) in 1916. In 1945 Truman wrote, “I am a Baptist because I think that sect gives the common man the shortest and most direct approach to God.” (Source: Michael Devine, director of Harry S. Truman Library and Museum)

3.     James Earl “Jimmy” Carter (Democrat from Georgia, 1977-1981). Carter is often remembered for speaking of being born-again (and by some for giving away the Panama Canal). His presidency by many is thought of as ineffective, and after one term the American people replaced him with Ronald Reagan. At the time of his presidency he was a Southern Baptist, but later his church are affiliated with the more liberal Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. He was a popular Sunday School teacher at Maranatha Baptist Church, Plains, Georgia. As a Baptist he would be considered on the liberal end of the spectrum. No questionable moral dealings or improprieties are associated with his presidency.

4.     William Jefferson “Bill” Clinton (Democrat from Arkansas, 1993-2001). He was baptized by Park Place Baptist Church in Hot Springs, Arkansas. One of the most remembered acts of this Southern Baptist president is the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. Though a Baptist, the president and his family attended the Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, D.C. while he was president.

Related:

Abraham Lincoln was raised by Baptist parents, but he was never a member of any church. George Washington was purportedly baptized by John Gano during the Revolutionary War. Regardless of the truth of it – two of Gano’s grandchildren claimed in an affidavit that their aunt, John Gano’s oldest daughter, told them that her father had baptized Washington – it seems that George Washington remained outwardly affiliated with the Episcopal Church.

* Missouri may best be considered a “border state” rather than “Northern.”

Baptists and Baptism Lite

“Baptism has been secularized; God, for all intents and purposes, is shuffled to the sidelines. The entire focus is on what those being baptized are doing. They are taking a step of obedience to God, and they are publicly professing their faith. But what, if anything, was God, who we know best in Jesus Christ, doing? Was God involved at all? Was God even present? If so, how, and what was he doing? Did baptism do anything? Or is baptism a matter that is entirely human, without any significant divine involvement?” Mark G. McKim, The Secularization of Baptism: How Baptists Took God out of Baptism, and How to Fix the Problem, Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2025

“The ordinances are a crucial part of what makes a church a church. When rightly understood, they present to the eye and the mouth a sensible gospel—a gospel that can be felt, seen, and tasted.” Josh Manley in “Who Should Administer the Ordinances?”

How singularly strange that many of the churches identified as “Baptist” possess an anemic and ambiguous view (and practice) of their most defining characteristic, baptism of believers by immersion!

It is theologically important. The Bible is our rule of faith and practice, and therefore the source of instruction on the meaning and practice of baptism. Baptism should follow the Bible, not modern secular philosophy. Baptism of the believer is important, but the God of the baptism of believers is the most important focus of biblical truth. Cf. Romans 11:36; 1 Peter 5:11; Revelation 4:11.

It is practically important. If the God of all the universe, who commanded baptism, is not involved in each baptism, then we become weak and sickly in the importance we place on it. Many modern Baptists try to “de-stress” baptism as much as possible – it doesn’t matter, it is not that important, it is okay for a believer to go through life unbaptized, and such like. This is ridiculous! Many professing Baptists live by a secular and deistic pattern, as if God has little involvement in the day-to-day matters of their lives. Acts 8:37-39; 1 Peter 3:21; Hebrews 8:5.

It is relationally important. The right heart, the right response, the right sincerity that moves the believers to identify initially, objectively, and publicly with their redeeming Lord. The heart of the matter should dwell in unity, with the Lord of the baptism and in the mode of baptism. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism. Cf. John 4:24; Ephesians 4:5; 1 Corinthians 3:1-3.

In The Secularization of Baptism, McKim theorizes and demonstrates that “four factors led to the symbolic-only position becoming dominant. These were suspicion, in reaction to Roman Catholicism, of the idea of God revealing himself through the physical; the influence of the Enlightenment (and ‘embarrassment’ with claims that God could be acting in the world today); reaction against the Oxford Movement; and reaction against the understanding of baptism advocated by the Disciples of Christ (‘Campbellites’).”

Let me be clear. We Baptists believe that baptism is symbolic rather than salvific. I believe there is a bad tendency among some to go into a kind of sacramentalism on this issue. However, the it-is-only-a-symbol-and-does-not-matter-much is not the true Baptist position. Consider historically that the early American Baptist language on baptism was so strong that many of them initially mistook Alexander Campbell to be saying the same things they were. (Boy, were we fooled!) I fear that often modern Baptists just find it easier to adopt the it-is-only-a-symbol-and-does-not-matter-much attitude rather than do the hard work of carving out the middle position where the Bible stands. It is easy, and it fits the spirit of the age. And it is or can be hard work to explain it correctly. If you veer too far one way, it sounds like salvific sacramentalism. If you veer too far the other way, it sounds like anything, everything, and (mostly) nothing! It leads to many of the errors of modern day Baptists, from careless (e.g., not carefully requiring a sound profession of faith) to indiscreet (e.g., fire engine baptisteries and water slide baptisms). May God help us seek the old paths and walk therein.

Romans 6:3-6 ;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. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

Chalmers on the English Particular Baptists

Thomas Chalmers (1780-1847), a Scottish Presbyterian minister, speaking about a difference on baptism, nevertheless made these complimentary remarks on the English Particular Baptists.

Let it never be forgotten of the Particular Baptists of England, that they form the denomination of Fuller and Carey and Ryland and Hall and Foster;[i] that they have originated among the greatest of all missionary enterprises; that they have enriched the Christian literature of our country with authorship of the most exalted piety, as well as of the first talent and the first eloquence; that they have waged a very noble and successful war with the hydra of Antinomianism; that perhaps there is not a more intellectual community of ministers in our island, or who, have put forth to their number a greater amount of mental power and mental activity in the defence and illustration of our common faith; and, what is better than all the triumph of genius or understanding, who, by their zeal and fidelity and pastoral labour among the congregations which they have reared, have done more to swell the lists of genuine discipleship in the walks of private society—and thus both to uphold and to extend the living Christianity of our nation.

He notes their (1) zealous missionary endeavours, (2) excellent religious writings, (3) active defense of the Christian faith, and (4) faithful making of disciples. Thomas Chalmers, “Lecture XIV,” Lectures on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, New York, NY: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1844, 76. (Thanks to Michael A. G. Haykin for calling attention to this passage in Chalmers.)

---

[i] These men are Andrew Fuller, William Carey, John Ryland Jr., Robert Hall Jr., and John Foster.

Dossey preachers in early Texas

I am saving the clip below for historical reference. In his 1846 travels, Z. N. Morrell mentions two brothers named Dorsey who had a church near Springfield in Anderson County. Morrell is probably spelling their surname as it sounded to him, and through my research I have concluded that these men were “Dossey” rather than “Dorsey” – Thomas Franklin Dossey and William Pinkney Dossey, possibly sons of William Greenberry (or Greenberry William) and Mary Dossey (but possibly relatives, misunderstood by Morrell to be brothers). Except for the slight difference in surname spelling, the Dosseys fit the statement provided by Morrell. Though the Dosseys were in Limestone County, Springfield in Anderson County was well within an area a Baptist preacher would travel to preach in that day. Thomas Franklin Dossey (Sr) was born about 1810 in Franklin County, Tennessee, and died in Texas in August of 1871. He is buried in the Faulkenberry Cemetery near Groesbeck in Limestone County, Texas. William Pinkney Dossey was born about 1815 in Tennessee (probably Franklin County) and died probably in Texas (unless he died in Civil War service away from home), at least before 1870. He married Ellen H. Acock in Morgan County, Alabama in 1832. Thomas married Lavinia Curry in 1835 in Morgan County, Alabama.

Flower and Fruits from the Wilderness, Z. N. Morrell, 1872, pp. 227-228

Danbury Baptist Association to Thomas Jefferson

The letter of Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association – with the phrase “separation between church & state” – is oft-mention in both historical and political discussions. The letter from the Danbury Baptists is not as well known. A transcription of it can be read at the National Archives online.

Danbury Baptist Association to Thomas Jefferson, [after 7 October 1801]

“…though our mode of expression may be less courtly and pompious than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, Sir to believe, that none are more sincere.”

Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association, 1 January 1802

“The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction.”

Interestingly, there is also a Draft Reply to the Danbury Baptist Association, showing how Jefferson started and then edited the letter to be more concise.

“I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.”

Appomattox Baptist Association condemns A. Campbell translation

1830.

“The Appomattox Association issued the following statements signed by Abner Clopton as clerk:

“1. Resolved, that it be recommended to all the churches composing this association, to discountenance the writings of Alexander Campbell.

“2. Resolved, that it be recommended to all the churches in this association not to countenance the new translation of the New Testament.”

Alexander Campbell and His New Version, page 80 referencing The Millennial Harbinger, Volume 1, 1830, p. 261.

Alexander Campbell and His New Version, Cecil K. Thomas (St. Louis, MO: The Bethany Press, 1958).