Baptists and the Christian Tradition (Emerson) Review

There was much discussion in the 20th century on the question of Baptist origins and the interplay of Baptist theology and practice with historic Christianity. In the last generation, this discussion has to some extent merged with a more general Protestant ressourcement and self-appropriation of “catholic” Protestant identity.

This is no doubt partly due to the squeezing together of the various denominational traditions due to the pressures of modernity and totalizing secularism, however it is clear that there are good reasons from within the Protestant, including Baptist, tradition itself to rediscover the (Western) catholic elements which shaped the traditions in the 16th and 17th centuries, and use these insights to inform worship and theological inquiry today.

In light of this general movement, the book “Baptists and the Christian Tradition” (ed. Emerson, Morgan, Stamps) is a compendium of essays which broadly seek to move the discussion in specifically Southern Baptist circles forward. Each essay focuses on a different theological locus and the editors have done well to steer each author to keep on topic to ensure the titular theme is (for the most part) supported within each chapter. Due to the narrowness of the two Baptist traditions, there is considerable overlap in terms of the historical Baptist material presented.

General Baptists especially can, of course, be some of the most severe critics of historic practices and beliefs largely on the basis of their minimalist practice of ad fontes, leapfrogging all post-apostolic literature, reducing the principle to ad Fontem sōlum. Thus it is unsurprising that the (Southern Baptist) authors have more to say regarding reformation for the General Baptists than the Reformed Baptists who had a stronger chain of ancestry through to the mediæval (Western) Church. Of the historical profile of the Southern Baptists with respect to representation of these two groups I am basically ignorant, though it seems the latter are in the distinct minority today.

I’ve read the compendium with a somewhat critical eye and noted some observations for a selection of the essays. My interest is primarily in the Particular Baptists, though it is interesting by contrast to observe the diminution in theological accuracy which obtained in the case of the General Baptists, whose connexion to the broader Christian tradition has always been more tenuous. Whether or not this is causal is taken up in some of the essays.

Further reviews will appear with the liberty to format and publish them.

Baptists, Corporate Worship, and the Christian Tradition

T. Worley

Worley’s design in his essay is to argue theologically for a “recovery of historic Christian worship practices for Baptists today” (p156). This includes (i) an historical account of Baptist worship, (ii) a biblical theology of worship, and (iii) proposals for implementation.

Worley fulfills his first point by analyzing the worship of the earliest Christians as a replacement cultus whose acts were “simultaneously of obedience to Christ and of disobedience to one’s own state” (p161). That is, early worship was a replacement for a totalizing Roman religion with more simple forms inherited from Judaism, and the handing on of these specific forms may lose meaning when the religious milieu in which that worship was forged no longer obtains. Worley naturally seeks to apply his replacement cultus motif to the Reformers and most especially to the Baptists in their rejection of the late-mediæval Roman religion.

Worley, aided by N.T. Wright, then takes us on a journey through several Psalms to demonstrate the embedded deeply experiential aspect of our communinion with God. It is within the rhythm of life, which the Psalms excellently embody for us, that our temporal worship and the eternal heaven join one another in a union which Worley terms “liturgical time”. In the Psalms, as exemplary for our own worship, we also explore the transformation of place and the discovery of a true home of belonging. Finally, we experience during our worship an inner transformation of heart which is found in the progression of a great many of the Psalms.

It is no new observation that “all churches have liturgy” (p170), nor is it arguable that over the centuries Baptists have been amongst the least embracing of a more historic liturgy. Whilst there may have been good reasons for emphasizing this “freedom from” in the crucible of the 17th and 18th centries, Worley argues that today we should make use of a “freedom for” a more “reflective, theological, and missional engagement with the latent litrugical character of our worship” (p171). The design should not be “conformity” with establish traditions,He lists Steven Harmon, Anthony Cross, Philip Thompson, Stanley Fowler, and others whom he assesses to be pushing this goal. but “consistency” with our own theological conclusions (p171).

Specifically, Worley contends that:

  • Extended Scripture readings should be given
  • Call and response should more liberally be used (e.g. “This is the Word of the Lord — Thanks be to God” after a Scripture reading)
  • Planned movement between Invocation & Adoration, Confession & Assurance, Word & Table, Affirmation of Faith, and Commission and Blessing.
  • Weekly observance of the Supper

I find all of these suggestions to be excellent.

I am unconvinced by the totality of his essay, however. In my view, the application of the replacement cultus motif to Reformation religion in general, and to their worship in particular, is an error, though for some of the more radical elements which contributed to the General Baptist lineage it may be applicable. For instance, the inference that “[f]rom its genesis, then, Baptist worship has been defined principally by that from which it abstains” (p163) is shown to be contradicted by the principally positive statements defining worship in chapter 22 of the Confession of the Particular Baptists, especially paragraph 5. Part of the confusion appears to be the lack of distinction between the General and Particular traditions, the former of which, with its less vital connexion to the Reformation, appears to have been Worley’s primary interest.

Likewise, his reasons for rejecting conformity to historic practices were somewhat jarring compared with other contributions in this volume. His first reason was that there is nothing to which one can conform, as the “image of the Catholic or historic church is something of a fabrication” (p172). The very existence of this volume suggests there indeed is an identifiable tradition. The second reason is that it may open Baptists up to “theological or historical idolatry”, “[c]onformity is not the Baptist way”, and “conformity would never make sense” in a “nonconformist model”. Leaving aside whether or not a nonconformist ought to conform to a “nonconformist model”, the author is merely asserting that the distinctive Baptist tradition as he sees it should box in (read: conform) possible liturgical development rather than engaging substantively with the points raised by his Baptist brothers as to the deficiencies of that tradition. He may be correct to reject conformity in principle, but I am not convinced the reasons he gives make the case. In fact, given his stated reasons, I am all the more interested in his opponents’ view.

However, Worley’s biblical argumentation regarding the rhythm of life as found in the Psalms, and a call to a renewed interest in the hymnbook of the Church, is certainly excellent and has moved at least one reader. An embracing of these understandings regarding worship will certainly provide ample justification for moving to forms which are closer aligned to those of the historic Church—not necessarily because historical conformity is per se desirable, but because those historic practices themselves were largely informed by the selfsame theological conclusions. To that extent, he has achieved his aims.