
It is rare to find conservative and/or fundamentalist Baptists within ministerial associations. I have decided this is both
biblically unwarranted, and perhaps even a violation of biblical teachings.
In part 1, I shall give what I believe are the reasons for the "Great Baptist Withdrawal", some of which are understandable and even praiseworthy.
In part 2, I will defend why I believe--at least in some cases--such participation is both important and essential for following Christ. It's possible I may even turn this into several posts.
PART 1: A BRIEF HISTORY OF BAPTIST SEPARATION:It should be noted that separatism predates the Baptist movement (sorry you Landmark Baptist types, the Baptist movement does not go back past the 1600's--the "Trail of Blood" theory is nonsense). It was the Congregational churches--influenced heavily by the Puritans--who believed in the necessity of separating themselves from apostate churches and persons. The chief enemy at this time was the Anglican church. However, the separatists themselves disagreed over their view of the Anglican church. Some saw this church as completely apostate, others saw it as a true--though seriously defective--church. I mention this merely to underscore the point that since the beginning of separatism there were many who still held a partially positive view of the churches from which they separated. The Baptist church rose out of this larger separatist/puritan movement, and was likewise marked by the differing veins of separatism.
In antebellum American, Baptist churches regularly opened their pulpit to visiting Presbyterian and Congregational ministers. Even until the early 1900's this was still a common practice. The early years of the Fundamentalist movement carried on this practice. Our Baptist forefathers did not separate from
different denominations, but rather from individual churches and persons who denied the core doctrines of the Christian faith. As such, most Baptist ministers saw no problem with inviting
padeobaptist Presbyterians (among others) to their pulpits.
However, there arose in the south a movement within Baptist churches known as
Landmarkism. Though plagued by many strange and extreme beliefs, for our purposes today we will focus only on their extreme view of separatism. To
Landmarkers, even other Baptist churches that were not part of their movement were viewed as apostate. For a large period, it looked as if this newcomer to the Baptist world would take over the entire
Southern Baptist Convention. Though they failed, their influence was massive and continues to this day.
Added to this was the onset of the Charismatic movement in the early years of Fundamentalism. Though Fundamentalist on virtually every issue, the Baptist and Presbyterian (and others) within the Fundamentalist movement were embarrassed by the Charismatics and sought to distance themselves from them. The more extreme separatist--apart from any logic or biblical foundation--demonized the charismatics and viewed them as apostates (even though
Pentecostals were almost identical in belief with baptists on every issue except the spiritual gifts).
In time, Fundamentalism itself came to be associated with the more extreme separatists alone. Any difference, no matter how minor, came to be seen as blatant apostasy.
But it is also important to understand how the fundamentalist movement was birthed, and what continued to fuel it. A movement, brought to the American shores from European intellectuals, known as "Classical Liberalism" swept through the American churches. Though the word "liberal" today is used by fundamentalist to disparage anyone who disagrees with them on minor issues, such was not the case in our early days. A true Liberal was someone who denied the core doctrines of the faith: such as the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the
inerrancy of Scripture, the miraculous works of Christ, etc. The Liberals had a very clear--and vocal--agenda: take over the American denominations, Seminaries, and Bible school. Denomination after denomination fell to their grip. Over time, the Fundamentalists developed a combative and suspicious mindset--brought about by the reality of a very real threat.
In the end, what started as a noble stand against the forces of unbelief degenerated into refusal to fellowship with any who differed ever so slightly from one's own theological position. Also, since the educational institutions were viewed as suspect, entire generations of fundamentalists refused rigorous theological training. In time, this condemned our movement to be led by intellectual lightweights who couldn't comprehend the nuances of theological discussion/debate--and thus separated from anything which they lack the skill set to understand.
Sadly, it also condemned us to an inability to sense the legalistic and theological heresy that arose from within (
KJV-
onlyism, simplistic and anti-biblical easy-
believism,
pelagianism, gnosticism, and platonic-dualism).
Instead of separating from other ministers, perhaps fundamentalist baptists need to separate from themselves.