AMERICAN BAPTISTS: A UNIFYING VISION
COMMENTARY
Preface
On February 24, 1984 the President of the American Baptist Churches, Margaret L. Prine, in consultation with the General Secretary, Dr. Robert C. Campbell, and with authorization by an action of the Executive Committee of the General Board of the American Baptist Churches, appointed a commission “to identify who we are as American Baptists.” The Commission was chosen to reflect the wide diversity which characterizes our American Baptist Churches in the USA and Puerto Rico. We recognize and affirm, however, that there are Baptists in other nations with their own expressions with whom we share a common theology and with whom we are in partnership in world mission. Those serving on the Commission included the following: Ralph Elliott, Chair; Jan Chartier, Eduardo Font, Norman Maring, Dean Nelson, George Peck, George Vanderlip and James Washington; from ABC staff William Brackney and Robert C. Campbell; and ex-officio Margaret L. Prine and Jitsuo Morikawa.
The Commission’s statement is presented with the intent that it may give a clear affirmation of who we are as American Baptists and that it may also set before us a clear goal of what we perceive to be God’s present call to us in terms of ministry and mission.
A quest for American Baptist identity and a quest for Baptist identity are not the same. It is necessary to understand Baptists in general, but the additional step is to understand American Baptists in particular. We have a heritage and an identity which is peculiarly ours.
The Commission regards the search for identity to be an ongoing process. Our American Baptist traditions remain with us as convictional or spiritual “genes” which continue to emerge in new forms. Consequently there is a two-fold emphasis in this report. It is both descriptive and prescriptive. While giving a description of who we are, this Commission has also given attention to the question of what we ought to become in the future. What is our goal? What is our task? What is our destiny?
Diversity is one of our distinguishing characteristics as American Baptists. This quality leaves opportunity for personal growth and change. At the same time it must be recognized that such pluralism can be source of conflict. The richness of our diversity means that various divergent points of view find expression within our fellowship. While on some issues we are sharply divided, it is fair to say that there is nevertheless great agreement on most. There is, in other words, a common center from which we all operate. As a result of our study this Commission has come to the conclusion that American Baptists have a sufficient common core of basic beliefs, practices and purposes to provide an overarching unity.
It is gratifying that so many Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans and Caucasians belong to the American Baptist Churches. This presents an exciting challenge. The interests, aims, styles of ministry and forms of worship of these different communities do not always coincide with the practices or objectives of a formerly predominant Caucasian membership.
Our task has involved several methods of inquiry. One has been that of research and discussion. People with expertise in various phases of Baptist studies have written scholarly papers which have carefully detailed various aspects of our heritage. We were aware of numerous formal and informal groups who were working on similar issues and we tried to gather material from as wide a variety of sources as possible. The Commission was diverse in its composition and sought perspectives from the various constituencies represented in American Baptist life.
Although it has not been the Commission’s intention to do its work through a public opinion survey, we have recognized the importance of sensitivity to constituency concerns. We therefore created a questionnaire for use at the American Baptist Churches, USA Biennial in Portland, Oregon, 1985, and this was especially helpful. The survey revealed a high level of interest in rediscovery of the biblical and theological perspectives which should motivate us and aid us in forging our identity.
I.A. God’s Sovereignty (The Kingdom)
The term “Kingdom” is a historical and biblical “given,” and is used here to affirm that everything in the perspective of Scripture is rooted in the sovereignty of God. By the Kingdom is meant God’s rule or reign. It has three aspects. In one sense it is eternal (Psalm 145:13; I Chronicles 29:10-12). In another sense it was inaugurated in a new way with the coming of Jesus into the world. In Mark 1:14, for example, it is said to be “at hand.” Additional passages state that with Christ’s coming God’s Kingdom broke into history (Matthew 12:28; Luke 17:21; Romans 14:17; Colossians 1:13). In yet a third perspective the full consummation of the Kingdom awaits the return of Jesus Christ in glory and power (Matthew 8:11-12; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:28-30; I Corinthians 15:24; Revelation 11:15; 12:10).
Matthew, Mark and Luke make it clear that the Kingdom of God was the central message of Jesus. In John we enter the Kingdom by faith and the new birth through the work of the Holy Spirit (John 3:3,5). The Church is the company of persons who have submitted themselves to God’s rule and who are the proclaimers and instruments of the Kingdom. Where God’s will is done, God’s Kingdom is seen (Matthew 6:10). It is God who is bringing in the Kingdom. God uses the Church to manifest the Kingdom in the world. The full realization of the Kingdom will only be realized with Christ’s return.
The stress on the Kingdom is not uniquely American Baptist. It is a biblical theme which has recently been re-emphasized by scholars in biblical theology and is a focus which we share with other denominations of the Christian Church. In speaking of the importance of the Kingdom and of its relationship to the Church, the priestly and the prophetic dimensions of the Church’s ministry are also to be given their due weight. These aspects of the Church’s life are of crucial significance.
I.B. God’s People (The Church)
There is a continuity between the “saints” of the Old Testament and the “saints” of the New. A term which expressed well the continuity between believers under the Old Covenant and believers under the New Covenant is the phrase “the people of God” (Exodus 6:7; I Peter 2:10). Jesus, however, also spoke of the fact that he would build his church (Matthew 16:18). This was a promise of something new. The saints of the Old Testament lived in an era of expectation; the saints of the New, in an age of fulfillment. The people of God in the Old Testament and in the New Testament were people of faith and recipients of God’s grace. The term “the body of Christ” affirms the newness that came in Jesus. Another way in which the contrast between the old and the new was frequently expressed was to speak of “this age” and of “the age to come.” “The age to come” referred to the messianic age. For the Christian “the age to come” was inaugurated with the coming of Jesus as God’s Messiah.
II. A Peculiar People
This unusual English phrase, “a peculiar people,” is an allusion to the 1611 King James version of the Bible in its translation of I Peter 2:9 which reads: “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” In Elizabethan English the word “peculiar” meant “particular,” “unique,” or “special.” A literal translation of the phrase “a peculiar people” is “a people for God’s possession.” Two contemporary renderings are: “a people belonging to God” (New International Version) and “a people claimed by God for his own” (New English Bible).
II.A.1. The Context Which Called Us Forth
Baptist identity emerged out of English Congregationalism. The reforms instituted in the Church of England did not go far enough in the minds of some reformers, and there rose in England a movement known as Puritanism. Among the dissenters within the Church of England was Robert Browne who around 1580 advocated a congregational form of church government. Instead of the “parish church,” to which everyone in the community belonged, he called for a “gathered church” composed solely of persons who gave evidence of conversion. When within this movement the appropriateness of infant baptism came to be questioned, (since no basis could be found for it in the New Testament and since it was held that church membership should be limited to a regenerate church membership), the Baptist movement emerged. The first example of a congregational-style church becoming a Baptistic church occurred with a refugee congregation in Amsterdam.
Freedom of religion has from our earliest days been an important emphasis. The Minutes of the General Assembly of the General Baptists in England, 1654-1728, for example, state: “It is the will and mind of God (in these Gospel times) that all men should have the free liberty of their own CONSCIENCES in matters of Religion, or Worship, without the least oppression, or persecution simply upon that account.” Our nonconformist ancestors did win major concessions, like the 1689 Act of Toleration. (The term “Nonconformist” applies to those who dissented from the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England). While this act applied both in England and the colonies, mere toleration did not provide complete religious freedom. Hostilities and repression continued because Baptists were not satisfied with the requirements of taxes for church support, to have meeting places approved and ministers licensed. This led to our struggle for complete separation of church and state. When the framers of the United States Constitution presented their first draft, it was an American Baptist, John Leland, who argues persuasively for separation of church and state. His influence upon James Madison led to the writing of what became the first amendment guaranteeing complete religious freedom and the separation of church and state.
II.A.2. The Challenge of our Kind of World
The challenge of our kind of world is aptly expressed by the following quotation:
“Is it again possible to fashion a theology catholic enough to affirm redemption’s force enfolding nature?...We are being driven to claim the world of nature for God’s Christ just as in the time of Augustine, the Church was driven to claim the world of history as the City of God for his Lordship and purpose.” (Joseph Sittler, “Called to Unity,” Ecumenical Review, Vol. XIV, No. 2, January, 1962, pp. 182-183).
For the Christian Church a fundamental question arises: How does the universality of Christ relate to the issue of religious pluralism and cultural diversity which characterizes our world? If Jesus Christ is “the way, and the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me” (John 14:6), how do we deal with these non-Christian faiths in such a way as to affirm what is legitimate in them and yet claim, as we must, the finality of Jesus Christ as Lord of the world?
The word “eschatology” refers to that branch of theology dealing with the final events in the history of the world or of humanity. Care and humility needs to be exercised in formulating our understanding of the biblical teaching concerning the future. The Scriptures do not present a detailed blueprint. Dogmatism in this area often causes division among Christians.
Walter Rauschenbusch (1861-1918) was an American Baptist clergyman who began his ministry among German immigrants in New York City. In 1902 he became professor of church history at the Rochester Theological Seminary. He was an influential leader in the social interpretation of Christianity.
Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1969) was educated at two American Baptist schools, Morehouse College and Crozer Theological Seminary as well as at Boston University. A Baptist minister, he led the civil rights movement. For his leadership in urging nonviolent demonstrations he was awarded the 1964 Nobel Peace Prize.
II.B. A Biblically Based People
American Baptists strongly affirm the divine inspiration of Scripture. The centrality of Scripture was well expressed at the beginning of the seventeenth century by Thomas Helwys, an early Baptist, when he wrote that the Scriptures are “the only sufficient, certain and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience.”
No particular human “theory” of inspiration, however, is endorsed or universally held. Arguments about such theories are divisive. The Bible affirms its inspiration by the Spirit of God (II Timothy 3:16). How God inspired the Scriptures is not an article of faith. What is important is that the Scripture stand as a reliable and all-sufficient record of God’s revelation through chosen persons and ultimately through God’s only Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.
The primary American Baptist emphasis is that individual interpretation of the Scripture must be tested within the context of the Christian community. “No one can interpret Scripture by himself” (II Peter 1:20, NEB). On the matter of individual interpretation an extreme position was once advocated by Francis Wayland, (1796-1865) President of Brown University, who stressed that the Scriptures were primarily given to individuals. Wayland’s legacy on private understanding contributed greatly to fragmentation.
John Smyth was the pastor of the Baptistic congregation that he helped form in Amsterdam in 1609. Ten or eleven of the members of this new congregation returned to England in 1612 led by Thomas Helwys to become the first Baptist Church in England.
William Carey (1761-1834) was an English Baptist who became the first Baptist missionary. He helped found the Baptist Missionary Society in 1792 and shortly thereafter went to India.
Augustus H. Strong (1836-1921) was the president of Rochester Theological Seminary (1872-1912) and author of the well-known Systematic Theology.
A.J. Gordon (1836-1895) was the pastor of the Clarendon Street Church, Boston, and was noted for his effectiveness in evangelism and his strong interest in national and international missions.
William Rainey Harper (1856-1906) was an American Baptist educator and Hebrew scholar who became the first president of the University of Chicago.
Helen Barrett Montgomery was elected president of the denomination in 1921-22. She was a licensed minister and published a highly regarded translation of the Greek New Testament.
William Newton Clarke (1841-1969) was an ordained American Baptist minister who was Professor of Practical Theology at Union Theological Seminary, New York, and served as pastor of the Riverside Church in the same city.
The Latin phrase “sola Scriptura” means “Scriptures only” and was commonly used at the time of the Reformation to call people back to the authority of Scripture over all other authorities. The phrase affirms that the Bible is the ultimate authority.
II.C. An Inclusive People
After the Civil War through a union of three major regional societies the Women’s American Baptist Home Mission Society was formed. It established its own fields and appointed its own missionaries. In 1955 the work of this society was integrated with that of The American Baptist Home Mission Society.
II.C.1. Timely Questions
With regard to our diversity as American Baptists there are some timely questions which we may well ask ourselves.
Is there a focus, a central core which is more important to a people than obvious differences? Is it possible to have a family which enables each part to contribute its uniqueness without pressure for uniformity and the “we/they” thinking which prescribes tests of faith? Are we ready for honest and open dialogue in order to find our way to the goal of unity in Christ? Is there a spirit of love more cohesive than all the orthodoxies, right or left?
Are American Baptists of Caucasian background prepared no longer to set the pattern, but to be willing to work with other ethnic communities among us in life, power and mission? Is the Caucasian constituency prepared to relinquish its role in providing the “norm?” Is there a willingness to share power?
II.C.2. Perceptions and Contributions
The American Baptist churches which practice the ordination of women do so because of their understanding of the Gospel and of the ministry. Christ breaks down human barriers and there is in Christ neither male nor female. (Galatians 3:28). It is acknowledged that some local churches have questions in this area. There have been instances of the ordination of women by Baptist churches for over one hundred years. Among the Free Will Baptists Libby Gilly Griffin was ordained to be a pastor in the 1890’s. We need to examine again what roles women played in the life of the early church. We need to ask how contemporary social practices of the first century entered into the instructions given concerning women, as, for example, the wearing of a veil in the worship services (I Corinthians 11:5). Furthermore, we need to examine the broad principles of Scripture in addition to specific restrictions. Are there trajectories which point in certain directions? The practice of slavery, for example, does not come under direct attack in the New Testament, but it is undercut in several ways. Onesimus is to be received as a “beloved brother” (Philemon16) and the wicked city “Babylon” is indicted for trafficking in “slaves, that is human souls” (Revelation 18:13). Also in Christ, we are told, there is “neither slave nor free” (Galatians 3:28). Such principles need to be explored and their implications spelled out. We cannot simply stop where the New Testament closes, for the trajectories imply certain future developments. We are responsible to seek to trace where they are headed. In doing this the community of faith relies on Scripture and on the guidance of God’s promised Holy Spirit. In the Gospel according to John the promise is given: “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot hear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come” (John 16:12-13).
II.C.3. Cooperating Christians
American Baptists have consistently cooperated with other Christians. This is an important element in our heritage and in our identity. As early as 1612, John Smyth’s congregation stated: “All penitent and faithful Christians are brethren in the communion of the outward church wheresoever they live, by what name soever they are known.” In 1806 William Carey, Baptist founder of the modern missionary movement, and in keeping with the above principle, proposed that every ten years there should be held a “general association of all denominations of Christians from the four quarters of the world.”
The National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA, founded in 1950, is a fellowship of autonomous denominations and other confessional bodies. It continues the mission and witness of 12 interdenominational bodies some having begun cooperative work before 1910. For example:
The American Baptist Churches in the USA is one of thirty-one member churches in the National Council. The prerequisites for membership in this body are a confession of Jesus Christ as “the incarnate Word of God, as Savior and Lord.” The World Council of Churches, which was organized at Amsterdam in 1948, has been open to churches of every denominational type “which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Savior according to the Scriptures and therefore seek to fulfill together their common calling to the one God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” The American Baptist Churches were founding members of both the NCCC and the WCC.
These organizations exist to help the churches and to enable them to serve one another as well as people around the world in need. Since there are many parts of the world where we do not have American Baptist representation it is through Church World Service, for example (which is part of the NCCC), that we can channel funds for humanitarian purposes. The NCCC enables denominations to do things together which they cannot do separately.
Some of our members would prefer that the ABC not cooperate with the NCCC and the WCC. Ecumenical relationships have, however, been part of our heritage from the beginning. The denomination has from time to time reexamined these relationships and has repeatedly reaffirmed its commitment to a cooperative stance. This does not imply total agreement with everything that the NCCC or WCC may do. As a member body of these organizations our voice can be heard and our influence can help significantly to shape the witness and worldwide ministry of these bodies. The Ecumenical Relations Review Commission currently reports to the General Board of the American Baptist Churches.
From the biblical perspective, the Church is “one” (Ephesians 4:4) despite our denominational fragmentation. Jesus prays that the unity of the body of Christ may be seen in the love which binds his followers both to God the Father and to one another (John 17:11). These Scriptural emphases would appear to be a mandate for love and cooperation with all Christians in the fulfillment of Christ’s Great Commission. The unity of the Church is a “given.” It is not something that we achieve. Cooperating with other denominations does not mean that we are working for an organizational super church. The Church of Jesus Christ is organically one even though we express our faith with differing denominational traditions.
II.D.1. Membership in the Redemptive Body
The practice of believer’s baptism emphasizes the explicit profession of faith by the person who responds to the grace of God.
Such baptism upon personal profession is the only clearly attested pattern in the New Testament. Baptists do not believe that baptism saves. The word “sacrament” has two distinct uses. One connotation of the word implies that the rite practiced conveys grace to the recipient by the very performance of the sacrament. This understanding of baptism Baptists would reject as out of keeping with the teachings of the New Testament. Another use of the word “sacrament” implies that through the rite, grace may be experienced by the recipient provided the ceremony or ordinance is entered into in genuine faith by the recipient and is carried out in faithful obedience to the commands of Scripture. If understood in this way the use of the word “sacrament” for baptism would be quite acceptable to most Baptists. When the word “sacrament” is employed in this way, one could properly say that preaching is “sacramental,” for through it also God has chosen to minister to those who in faith hear the Word of God.
One might well ask, “What do people mean when they use the word ‘grace?’” Grace is, first of all, God’s attitude towards us. It is also God’s loving action, especially in the sending of Jesus Christ, God’s Son, into the world for our salvation. The basic meaning of the word is “favor” and in many ways it is almost a synonym for “love.” God in unconditional love seeks to transform our character and to help us to grow in Christian maturity, God invites our response to that love.
There are various “means of grace” or ways in which God’s love brings about these positive changes within us. Prayer, Christian fellowship, a receptive study of Scripture, the hearing of the proclaimed Word, the believing community’s observance of baptism and the Lord’s Supper can all be viewed as ways in which God’s grace comes to us.
Baptists in their understanding of grace would not want to tie it in too limited a way to the “sacraments.” Making baptism and the Lord’s Supper the locales where grace is primarily to be found is viewed as too restricted and ritualistic an interpretation of the biblical witness. One of the reasons for this reservation, in addition to biblical ones, is that such an interpretation has in the history of the Church led on some occasion to undue ecclesiastical control.
Since the word “sacrament” seems to many to imply an almost magical conception of the bestowal of divine power, Baptists in general prefer to speak of ordinances rather than of sacraments. In earlier years Baptists were less hesitant to call the Lord’s Supper a sacrament. In fact, that term is still common among British Baptists. When properly observed both baptism and the Lord’s Supper can and should bring a heightened consciousness of God’s presence and power.
What practices regarding baptism exist among us? A substantial number of our churches practice “open” membership, which means that those baptized as infants in other communions are admitted to full membership upon affirmation of faith without the requirement of believer’s baptism. In a large sampling of churches, many were found to follow this practice. One argument for this practice is: If such persons have made their infant baptism their own by personally identifying with it, should we insist on another baptism for them, since this mode of baptism is accepted by the majority of Christians?
Others maintain that since infant baptism is not believer’s baptism, persons uniting with a Baptist congregation should first profess their faith through the ordinance of baptism before they can be given the privilege of full membership in the local church.
Can those who were baptized as infants and who later have come to personal faith and confession of Christ be accepted into membership without believer’s baptism by a congregation which continues to recognize that the primary focus should be upon believer’s baptism and the gathered church? Throughout much of our history we have wrestled with questions of this kind. Further study and dialogue on how to deal with this significant question is clearly called for.
II.E.2. The Associational Principle
Associations are intended to be close-knit fellowships. The term “association” is not used as much today as in earlier days, but the principle of association is still with us. Today we use expressions like “clusters,” “areas,” and “regions.” These, too, are associations. Our cooperative work through such structures incorporates the historic Baptist associational principle.
On the matter of sharing power, it is part of our heritage as Baptists to recognize that power derives from the congregation. The local congregation ordains the pastor, albeit upon the recommendation of representatives from sister churches. Our associational principle keeps us from total autonomy. We are responsible to one another, although ultimately we are responsible to the Lord of the Church. We have a congregational type of church government. This is coupled, however, with an interdependence acknowledged by our voluntary associational relationships.
In the past individual congregations (whose leadership may have lost sight of this relational principle) have severed ties with the American Baptist Churches in the USA. Given this experience, today when new churches are begun, the founders often draw up a legal statement know as a “reversionary clause.” Such a document indicates that if the congregation should cease to be related to the American Baptist Churches the property of the congregation will become the property of the ABC. A sense of responsible Christian stewardship has prompted such provisions. A local church, in its concern for autonomy, should never ignore the intent and the stewardship of earlier members who in good faith devoted their talents and offerings to establish an American Baptist Church for the proclamation of the Gospel and the carrying out of the Great Commission.
II.E.3. The Ministry of the Whole People of God
More important than changing the vocabulary by which we describe our denominational leaders is the need that our model of church government closely resemble that of the New Testament church. The pastor-teacher (or “bishop”) should first of all be an apt teacher of the Word (I Timothy 3:2) and Christ’s shepherd before being an administrator of an organization. The gift of administration is important, but this should be understood in terms of personal relationships, not desk work.
More attention needs to be given in our churches to the role of deacons who share with the pastor the spiritual oversight of the congregation. Often much of their time and energy is consumed in peripheral concerns.
The term “bishop” occurs in Acts 20:28 and in Philippians 1:1. In these places perhaps the best way to translate the word episkopos “overseer.” It occurs three other times in the New Testament, namely, I Timothy 3:2, Titus 1:7 and I Peter 2:25. In the final reference it is Jesus who is given this title. In I Timothy and Titus the qualifications of the episkopos are outlined. The overseer is to be an apt teacher, “to care for God’s church,” and to give instruction in “sound doctrine.” In Acts 20:28 overseers are to look after the flock. Both in Philippians and in Acts the word is used in the plural which suggests that a congregation had more than on “bishop.” Since they were “appointed” to their task the term “bishop”
appears to refer both to their function and to their status. The exact nature of that status is left undefined within the New Testament. Their primary function would, from the description of their responsibilities, appear to be pastoral, that is to say, the preaching of the Word and the care of the flock.
In later church history the bishop’s role became expanded and more clearly defined. The bishop became an overseer over several churches. The office gradually evolved and as it did so the bishop gained increasing authority. Bishops were seen as guardians of the apostolic faith and of the unity of the Church.
Many of the titles we use as American Baptists for our denominational leaders, such as executive minister or general secretary, seem to reflect a business model rather than a biblical perspective on their ministerial duties. Perhaps the New Testament terms of episkopos (bishop) and presbyteros (elder) would better project their ministry as pastors and proclaimers of the Word.
II.F. A Missional People
During the Great Awakening many Baptist churches were formed from existing Congregational churches which experienced a transformation to Baptist principles. In the 1790’s associational missionaries began scores of new churches in the South, West and New England frontiers. Many felt that these efforts should be continued on a permanent basis and formal missionary societies were organized. The first was the Boston Female Society for Missionary Purposes (1800) and soon thereafter the Massachusetts Baptist Missionary Society (1802) which was focused on domestic endeavor. In 1814 delegates from each state met to form the General Baptist Missionary Convention to inaugurate overseas missions and later to foster domestic and educational projects.
Women have contributed in particular ways to the mission program. For example, in 1871 they formed the Woman’s American Baptist Foreign Mission Society and in 1877 the Woman’s American Baptist Home Mission Society.
II.F.2. The Local Connection
Early in the twentieth century the Woman’s American Baptist Home Mission Society developed a program of Christian Friendliness. In the 1920’s the work was expanded to include a program of Christian Centers which were places of refugee education, recreation, and worship for all the people of the cities, including newcomers from outside the United States. In turn both individuals and groups who were influenced by these ministries, have expanded and enriched the life of the denomination through vital participation and leadership.
II.G.1. Corporate Worship
Among significant Baptist preachers a few names out of many may be mentioned as illustrative of a great company. In Great Britain these might include Robert Hall (1764-1831), considered the foremost pulpit orator of his time; Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892), minister of the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London; and Alexander Maclaren (1825-1910), who preached to large crowds in Manchester. His sermons have served as models of style and content. Among others, in the USA, were Russell Conwell (1843-1924); A.J. Gordon (1836-1895); John Broadus (1827-1895); and Harry Emerson Fosdick (1878-1969). The black tradition has produced many outstanding preachers from John Jasper (1812-1901) in the nineteenth century, to contemporaries such as Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1969), and Gardner Taylor, pastor of the Concord Baptist Church of Christ in Brooklyn, New York. The priority of preaching has long been a Baptist heritage. It needs to be recaptured in our day. Preaching that is effective appeals to the whole person. Intellect, imagination, emotion and volition need all to be appealed to when the Word of God is proclaimed from the pulpit.
When we say that the words of the preacher become, by God’s grace, the Word itself we mean that God’s message is heard through and by means of the human words. The concept of the Word of God is Scripture is a rich one. First of all, Jesus is the Word (John 1:1, 14), secondly, the Scriptures are the Word of God (II Timothy 2:15), thirdly, preaching can become the Word (II Timothy 4:2).
Report: Commission on Denominational Identity – February, 1987
Click here to download PDF Version.