Our Friends the Baptists *

* This is the second article of a series designed to acquaint our workers with ways that will bring better understanding between Seventh-day Adventists and their fellow Christians. Ministers and their associate personal workers, however, should first become conscious of this need. Without minimiz­ing the importance of our timely message itself, the achieve­ment of breaking down reserve between us and other denom­inational believers in Christ is far more effective than blatant attacks on our part. Kenneth Holland's booklet Great Churches of America, which is concise and well-applied in­struction in tact and good will, helps point the way.

SEVENTH-DAY ADVENT­ISTS have experienced little difficulty in fellowshiping with Baptists. At the dawn of Adventism, Seventh Day Baptists first pointed out to us the sev­enth-day Sabbath. We have seen eye to eye with them on many important theological facts and practices, and with them we are "evangelical Christians."

While the Baptist Church is in the category of "main-line" Protestants, many wonder at the great variety of churches in their faith—about twenty-seven. When we consider seriously that some of these groups are definitely fundamen­talist and others positively liberalist, some strictly Arminian and others radically Calvinis-tic, we must admit that the Baptist Church has much adaptability for assimilating, without uni­fying. It is to their credit, however, that they have become tolerant on some of these points, perhaps because of the persecution their ances­tors suffered for conscience' sake.

While Adventists share some common teach­ings with the Baptists, Adventist teachings came from their own study of Bible truth, and their convictions were put into practice. But the Baptists are indeed our friends, and today there are occasional issues that draw us together in presenting a united witness to the less informed. As an example, we would refer to the problem of the separation of church and state, now of lively interest. On the doctrine of the seventh-day Sabbath we are indebted to the Seventh Day Baptists for their noble indoctrination and their fine example. It was Rachel Preston who in 1844 directed the Adventists to the Sabbath. We then sensed their persuasive logic. Follow­ing the Bible on the matter of Sabbathkeeping was as necessary as following it on the doctrine of adult baptism by immersion. All Baptists claim to be New Testament Christians. We might invite our Baptist friends to restudy this important principle in the light of the Sabbath truth in both the Old and New Testaments.

Baptists, like Adventists, are not creedal. The nearest statement of a formal creed is their so-called Grand Rapids Affirmation, adopted in 1946 by the Northern Baptist Convention.

Adventists heartily agree with Baptists that adult baptism by immersion is a symbol of the burial and resurrection of Christ and a witness to a new life in Christ. The Baptist position on sin, salvation, confession, and the need for a deep Christian experience is also acceptable to us.

Quite generally we are in harmony with Bap­tist teachings on the Lord's Supper—that it is a memorial service, a symbol with no super­natural significance and no sacramental value. However, on the time and frequency of its celebration, and the importance of the prepara­tory service, including the ordinance of foot washing, we must differ. We would be reluc­tant to change from the direct command of Christ in John 13. Participation in the ordi­nance of humility associated with the Supper has brought great spiritual strength to Advent-ism. We humbly wish that all our Baptist friends could share the beauty and significance of this ordinance.

There is another Baptist conviction that Adventists share: "Every church member, and every professing Christian, is an evangelist. By word, deed, and character, he is committed to proclaim his Christian faith and to seek to win others to its acceptance." ¹ Adventists have admired the strong emphasis of the Southern Baptist evangelist on the imminent return of Christ to the world.

Liberal Elements in Baptist Ranks

We note with gladness the Baptists' belief in the Trinity, the deity and divinity of Christ, the virgin birth, and the Holy Spirit. These are generally accepted doctrines. Says William B. Lipphard, a Baptist leader and writer of ex­perience, "The sublime mystery of the Trinity, of the eternal and infinite essence of God man­ifested in three persons, the Baptist leaves to the theologians to interpret. He simply accepts it." ²

The Baptist position on heaven and hell re­veals the accepted liberalism of our Baptist friends: "Baptists cherish a vast range of ideas, from some nebulous, indefinable existence to some definite place, like a city of golden streets or a region of everlasting torment as envisioned by the extreme liberalists. Some Baptists find it difficult to reconcile the fact of an all-merciful God with endless punishment for sins commit­ted within the short span of a lifetime on earth. Still others, with sublime confidence and trust, simply accept the assurance of Christ: Where I am, there ye may be also.' " ³

Relative to church government our Baptist friends have no hierarchal or central control and no headquarters. "The local parish church is the sovereign, all-powerful ecclesiastical unit." ⁴ They also prefer to be called a denomi­nation rather than a church. Adventists, how­ever, were a unified fellowship from the begin­ning. With us God is not leading individuals or a single church only, but a movement based on Bible instruction. In practice it means that Adventists prepare for their entire membership, at home and abroad, the same type of Sabbath school lessons. And this applies generally to other literature and organizational plans, the need for adaptations being recognized. How­ever, Adventism would not think of itself as hierarchal. Another point: We have no col­leges for training liberalists; our teachings are fundamental in the letter as well as in spirit. Although we do not change our doctrines to fit into the times, it is generally admitted by fellow Christians that we are a progressive peo­ple. The history of our advance speaks for itself.

Origin of the Baptists

For an understanding of the rise of the Bap tists as a group, we have found that William Warren Sweet in his Religion in Colonial Amer­ica (Charles Scribner's Sons, New York) is an excellent authority. In the latter part of the six­teenth century and the early part of the seven-teenth, large bodies of the Anglicans and Pres­byterians shook out English religious radicals. Although these so-called independents soon found themselves in Baptist affiliations, they later became Quakers, Levelers, and Seekers. However, the Baptists gathered to themselves some who had given up all their former reli­gious affiliations. In addition to calling atten­tion to those Baptists who claimed to date back to John the Baptist (similar claims having been made also by other groups), we should here catch the significance of Anabaptist, Mennonite, Moravian, and Huguenot influences.

The father of the English Baptists was John Smith, a student at Cambridge and influenced by Puritan teachings. He soon adopted Brown­ish and Separatist views, however. Convinced that infant baptism was not scriptural, he bap­tized himself by affusion, but was later bap­tized by the Mennonites of Amsterdam. It was not long before most of the Separatists returned to England and propagated Baptist views, so that by 1644 about 20,000 members could be accounted for. Smith defended the attacks on his changeable type of religion by claiming it to be the right of every sincere Christian to follow "light" as it is revealed to him. Influ­enced at that time by the Dutch Mennonites, these first Baptist congregations took a decided stand on liberty of conscience. Further Men­nonite influences may be traced to the Bap­tists' acceptance of the doctrine of a "general atonement"—that Christ died for all, not just for the "elect" as was then emphasized by the Calvinists. By 1644 the number of "Particular Baptist" churches in England numbered seven.

Baptists in America

The same Baptist fervor was characterized in the American colonies. Influenced from abroad, settlements sprang up as a result of intolerance in the Narragansett Bay area of Massachusetts. Settlers there turned to Roger Williams, who was said to have harnessed every wind of doc­trine whether religious or political. He denied the supernatural origin of civil government and developed a religious conscience, later well em­bedded in the American Constitution. As to which one of the two—Providence or Newport, Rhode Island—could claim the honor of being the first Baptist Church in America we will not try to settle. It is more important to catch an­other note that the Quakers had injected—their Antinomian views. By 1671 we find that a Sev­enth Day Baptist Church had been organized. Sweet reports: "Plymouth Colony seems to have been a veritable hotbed of incipient Baptists." ⁵ History reveals some conflicts when one John Clarke,-an important Baptist figure of that day, defended his stand as being "neither Anabap­tist, Pedobaptist, nor a Catabaptist." ⁶ Baptist individualism, and tolerance for various types of believers on virgin American soil, had al­ready developed roots. This again explains why there are so many types of Baptists in America today.

"The new charter of 1691 granted liberty of conscience to all Christians, except Papists." ⁷ Gradually, and around the ordination of Elisha Callender as the minister of the Boston Baptist Church, Harvard College trustees in the train­ing of ministers accepted Baptists for professor­ships based on the "belief that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the only per­fect rule of faith and manners."  ⁸ Here was little room for liberal theology. By the opening of the eighteenth century Philadelphia had become the strongest Baptist center in the colonies. In 1709 the Philadelphia Association had devel­oped. Sweet points out: "Up to this time the American Baptists had been chiefly Arminian in their doctrinal position, but the growing im­portance of the Philadelphia group of churches, largely influenced by the Calvinist emphasis, gradually displaced the Arminianism of the earlier New England churches." ⁹

Owing to the preaching of Whitefield in the American awakening, a message that moderated the extreme Calvinistic views of Jonathan Ed­wards' theology, Baptists developed a unique grace for tolerating doctrinal views resulting from sincere conviction. While to date Baptists have generally maintained their Calvinism, the importance of theology per se has been mini­mized.

Gathering our facts from an authority of Lutheran origin, we call attention to a signif­icant observation: "It is therefore not surpris­ing that widely divergent theological views are current among the various Baptist groups, among the individual local churches, and logi­cally also among the members of the local church. Calvinism and Arminianism, Funda­mentalism and Liberalism, separatism and un­ionism, flourish side by side. No other religious body seems to be so hopelessly divided into parties and schisms as the Baptists. And yet few religious bodies have so tenaciously, consistently, and loyally held to their basic princi­ples as the Baptists. The Baptist emphasis on the sovereignty of the individual has made a strong appeal to the 'common man,' to the socially and economically 'disinherited,' and has been an important factor in making the Bap­tists, originally a despised sect, one of the larg­est religious bodies in America." ¹⁰

Mayer, who is generally a careful historian, makes another observation: "Among many of the Baptist churches, for instance, a false emo­tionalism and 'enthusiasm' similar to that found among the Mennonites and the Quakers is ram­pant. The majority of the Baptists believe in the immediacy of the Spirit's operation, and some come close to the theory of the 'inner light.'" ¹¹  "This 'enthusiasm' has become evi­dent particularly in the Pentecostal movement. While the emphasis on perfectionism is attrib­utable to Methodist influence, the highly emo­tional type of religion in the Pentecostal groups stems from Baptist elements." ¹²

Mayer next quotes from the Watchman-Ex­aminer, September 5, 1940, page 956, an es­teemed and reputable journal: "When a Bap­tist Church exchanges its flaming prophet and evangelist for a polished performer [question of pulpit-centered vs chancel-centered churches], the days of decay and decline are at hand. An American will freeze to death more quickly in the Arctic Circle than an Eskimo. Baptists will not survive long in the Arctic winters of ritual­ism, sacramentalism, and sacerdotalism. The chancel type of church has developed in this spiritual atmosphere and is an architectural ex­pression of it. Baptists may find that it is a 'spiritual igloo.' "¹³

As we close our discussion of the Baptists as-a denomination we are reminded that they have produced some wonderful missionaries, such as William Carey, an English Baptist called the father of modern missions. And the first Amer­ican missionaries, Judson and Rice, became Baptists on the way to India. Baptists have had a part in the translation of the Bible into na­tive tongues. They have established hospitals, orphanages, and homes for the aged. They have produced great preachers and evangelists. Some of our best-loved hymns were authored by Bap­tists. They are active in evangelizing and have many missionaries in the far-flung fields of the world. And in the realm of literature we have two Baptists—Milton and Bunyan.

The Seventh-day Adventist minister and gos­pel worker should seek acquaintance with the Baptists in his community. Adventist literature may often open the way for happy relationships between Baptists and Adventists. As time allows and wisdom suggests, some participation in lo­cal ministerial groups may ease tensions. In­vitations to the attractive temperance programs conducted by our Missionary Volunteers are gestures of good will and mutual helpfulness.

1 William B. Lipphard, A Guide to Religions of America (New York: Simon and Schuster, Copyright 1955 by Cowles Magazines, Inc., Des Moines, Iowa), p. 6.

2 Ibid., p. 5.

3 Ibid., pp. 5, 6.

4 Ibid., p. 3.

5 William W. Sweet, Religions in Colonial America (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1942). p. 131.

6 Ibid., p. 132. 

7 Ibid., p. 138. 

8 Ibid., p. 139. 

9 Ibid., p. 141.

10 F. E. Mayer, The Religious Bodies of America (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House), pp. 257, 258.

11 Ibid., p. 262.

12 Ibid., footnote.

13 Ibid.