Calvinism: A Southern Baptist Dialogue: A Brief Critique: Dr. David Dockery

    In continuing with the series on the papers for the Building Bridges Conference, collected together by LifeWay and published as Calvinism: A Southern Baptist Dialogue, I want to summarize Dr. David Dockery's contribution entitled "Southern Baptists and Calvinism:  A Historical Look" (pp. 29-46), followed by a brief response. Dr. Dockery is President of Union University, Jackson, Tennessee.  He is a prolific author and accomplished historical theologian.   

Dockery opens his essay offering the perspectives of two polarizing views from prominent Southern Baptist theologians:  Fisher Humphreys, professor of Divinity at Beeson Divinity School in Birmingham, Alabama and Tom Nettles, professor of historical theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky, the former arguing for "minimal influence" of Calvinism and the latter arguing that Calvinism shaped "almost every aspect of Southern Baptist life" (p.29).  Dockery answers the question, then, Are Baptists Calvinists?, with a predictable "yes" and "no". 

Dockery moves on to the body of the paper which is divided into three sections.  First, Dockery takes the reader on an "Historical Overview" (pp. 30-33), looking at Calvinism beginning with the early church and continuing through the Reformation period.  Dockery only highlights this period in the most sketchy format, given the obvious space restraints.

One important point he notes in the early church period, prior to Augustine, is that the "early church fathers generally adhered to a belief in which the role and activity of the human will were deemed highly significant in the process of bringing about salvation" (p.30);  a point, I might add, I will return to during the response.

Post-Augustine and through the Medieval years, there was a shift to a more reserved view of human will due primarily to the Pelagian controversy and the subsequent councils which pronounced Pelagius a heretic.  Indeed, the Council of Orange (529 A.D.) even pronounced semi-pelagianism a heresy (p.31). 

The Reformation saw the liveliest rejuvenation of Augustinian focus on unconditional election and total depravity through the obvious channels--Luther and Zwingli,  but most of all Calvin (pp. 31-33).  Post-Calvin, the Synod of Dort carried on the teachings of the magisterial Reformers, contra a significant uprising by the followers of Jacob Arminius (p. 33; Arminius died before the council took place). 

Dockery's second section pertains to Baptist Life and Thought (pp. 33-41).  This is understandably the lengthiest section.  Beginning in 1609, Baptists were birthed, the first Baptists being General Baptists.  Indeed a full generation would pass before the Particular Baptists would appear (p. 34).  But while the General Baptists were first in Europe, Particular Baptists were first in America, 

Southern Baptists were late comers, not officially appearing for almost a century and a half after Baptists first came to the new land.  Dockery asserts two particular streams flowed to ultimately form the Southern Baptist Convention--The Charleston Tradition (Confessional) and the Sandy Creek Tradition (Revivalist)  (p. 35).  Dockery appears to lean toward neither tradition being the most dominant.

What was evident, it seems from Dockery's next sub-section, is that Southern Baptist writing theologians were Calvinist and Confessional.  Dockery offers commentary on several luminaries:  J.L. Dagg, J.P. Boyce, J.M. Frost, B.H. Carroll, E.Y. Mullins, W.T. Conner, Herschel H. Hobbs, W.A. Criswell, and some lessor influences like Frank Stagg and Dale Moody.  It was Hobbs, Moody and Stagg who, according to Dockery, led to the "Arminianizing of the SBC" in the middle of the twentieth century (p.39). 

Furthermore, not only did Moody and Stagg reject the tenets of Calvinism, they also rejected the tenets of evangelicalism as well (Ibid). Dockery's summary is telling. 

He writes:

"We now find various groups represented in the Southern Baptist Convention, including fundamentalists, revivalists, evangelicals and Calvinists.  Many people continue to misunderstand the differences among these groups, seeing all Southern Baptist conservatives as the same or wanting to find just one tradition that has shaped us; but that is a misreading of who Southern Baptists are now and who Southern Baptists have been" (p. 40).

He goes on to exhort that the "ultimate danger to the gospel lies not in the nuances of our differences but in the rising tides of liberalism, neo-paganism, and postmodernism that threaten to swamp Southern Baptist identity in cultural accommodation" (Ibid). 

The final section appeals for a Southern Baptist Consensus (pp.41- 43).  Here Dockery concludes that "Calvinism is not necessarily a key Baptist distinctive; it is not a primary doctrine" (p. 42).  Consequently, there's no need to get "sidetracked by secondary or tertiary matters where we might have diagreements" (Ibid).  Dockery ends with a call for a "Great Commission resurgence", praying for God's guidance as we build a theological consensus (p. 43). 

Dockery's essay is a good specimen of sweeping assessments of historical significance.  He obviously is familiar with church history in general.   Nor is he at a disadvantage with Baptist history particularly.  Were I to offer a guess, out of the four different groups Dockery mentions that are prominent among Southern Baptists (p. 40), Dockery would fall into the evangelical camp.  He seems to call for general agreement on matters of theological import, not desiring to get "sidetracked by secondary or tertiary matters."

While this is a worthy goal and not at all an unreasonable expectation, the difficulty for Dockery will be getting all four "traditions" to precisely define what constitutes "secondary or tertiary matters". In fact, concerning the very discussion under consideration--Calvinism vs. NonCalvinism--Dockery seems to offer a much too conciliatory position for our Calvinist brothers, especially our Founders advocates. 

Dockery writes:  "Calvinism is not necessarily a key Baptist distinctive; it is not a primary doctrine" (p. 42, bold italics mine).  My question to Dockery is, Have you asked Founders if Calvinism is a primary doctrine?  With their perpetual lament concerning the "loss of the Gospel" and that loss they lament intrinsically wed to the historic five points of Calvinism, how could Calvinism not be a "primary doctrine" for them?

I have a few more brief responses I'd like to offer.

First, Dr. Dockery mentions in section one that the early church fathers viewed the activity of the human will "highly significant in the process of bringing about salvation" (p. 30).  However, this may be a gross understatement.  According to historical theologians, Paul Marston and Roger Forster, it was the early church fathers who actually coined the term "freewill" (God's Strategy in Human History, p. 131.). 

In addition, theologian Alister McGrath writes:  "The pre-Augustinian theological tradition is practically of one voice in asserting the freedom of the human will" (Ibid, p.296). 

Secondly, while it is true that the magisterial Reformers all emphasized the bondage of the human will, there were significant exceptions to such.  The Radical Reformers like Hubmaier and Simons, for example, did not follow Calvin nor Luther in Augustinianism.  And, pertaining to Luther, even Luther's own community dissented from the great Reformer's understanding of the human will, including Luther's closest colleague, Melanchthon.

Finally, Dockery appears to place the "Arminianizing of the SBC" in the mid-twentieth century (p. 39).  The theologians chiefly responsible for this, according to Dockery, are Hobbs, Moody and Stagg, Hobbs doing on a popular level what Stagg and Moody did on an academic level. 

Dating the loosening of Calvinism's grip on Baptists in the last 50-60 years seems incredible.  The Founders movement didn't begin until 1982 and, as we shall see in a later essay, even they do not suggest such a late date for "Arminianizing" the SBC.  Rather, for them, the most influential theologians that steered Southern Baptists away from Calvinism were E.Y. Mullins and L.R. Scarborough during the first quarter of the twentieth century.

Both Founders and Dockery are well off the mark, however. In fact, arguably Calvinism never had a firm grip on Baptists--even in the south--for any significant part of the nineteenth or twentieth century. 

For example,Wayne Flynt, Professor Emeritus at Auburn University, is Editor-in-Chief of the new Online Encyclopedia of Alabama, a partnership project between the Alabama Humanities Foundation and Auburn University.  It is a leading authority on Alabama history and Baptist history in Alabama.  Published in 1998 by the University of Alabama Press, Alabama Baptists: Southern Baptists in the Heart of Dixie, written by Professor Flynt, stands as the most recent definitive study of Baptist origins in Alabama. 

Of Alabama Baptists' historical roots and conflicts they endured, Flynt writes:

"No Biblical dispute shaped early Alabama Baptists so profoundly as Calvinism...Although Baptists were Calvinists in the general sense of that term, they modified the doctrine" (p.26, bold italics mine)

"Some tensions over missions and benevolence existed between Calvinists, Arminians, and hyper-Calvinists from the formation of the first Baptist churches in Alabama" (p.32, bold italics mine)

[After rehearsing numerous disputes that plagued Baptists in the first part of the 19th century (p.76-80), Professor Flynt concludes] "All these debates remained secondary to the dispute over Calvinism" (p.80, bold italics mine).

In addition, Z.T. Cody, served Southern Baptists in the South, being appointed to various significant committees at all levels of denominational life.  He served as Vice President of the Home Mission Board in 1898 and was Pastor of several churches in the South, not the least of which was the historic First Baptist Church, Greenville, SC (1901-1911), where he gained wide popularity and earned deep respect from not only South Carolina Baptists but Baptists all over the south.

At the turn of the century, Dr. Cody wrote an essay entitled "Are Baptists Calvinists?" (full text can be found here).  Here is part of his answer:

The answer to this question depends on what is meant by Calvinism...The so-called "five points of Calvinism" are the essential doctrines of the system.  Men have forgotten them now but they were once as familiar as the letters of the alphabet.  They are, particular predestination, limited atonement, natural inability, irresistible grace and the perseverance of the saints.  Now if this is the system that constitutes Calvinism it is again very certain that Baptists are not Calvinists.

This system can be, it is true, found in some of the older confessions of faith and it was at that time held by some Baptist churches.  It is also true that there are now many of our churches which hold some of the doctrines of this system.  All Baptist churches, so far as we know, hold to the perseverance of the saints.  But it can be very confidently affirmed that there is now no Baptist church that holds or defends the five points of Calvinism.  Some of the doctrines are repugnant to our people.  Could there be found a minister in our communion who believes in the theory of a limited atonement?" (bold italics mine).

In light of such, I fear both Dockery and Nettles may be overlooking some significant evidence in insisting Calvinism ruled Baptists in the south for the greater part of our history. 

I close with these words of Baptist historical theologian, W. Wiley Richards:

The years 1800 until 1845 were years of turmoil and serenity, of outreach and opposition, of union and division for the Baptist churches which eventually give birth to the Southern Baptist Convention.  On basic doctrines such as the Trinity and biblical inspiration, they remained unmoved.  However, major changes began to be felt. 

Calvinism peaked and began to retreat as two of its major tenets came under fire. The doctrine of the atonement took on Arminian overtones...[and] the doctrine of total depravity suffered assaults at the hands of those who believed that the lost could repent and believe prior to being born again" (Winds of Doctrines:  The Origin and Development of Southern Baptist Theology, p. 81, bold italics mine).

With that, I am...
Peter
 

Comments

[volfan007]

Peter, once again, you've outdone yourself. This was very good, and it helped me understand much. I guess the natural question is...why do the Founders crowd insist on the SBC being founded on the five points when there's so much evidence to the contrary? And, why cant they see it? Or, why wont they give any significance to some of the writings and quotes that you have pulled out from history? I think I know the answer, but I'd like to hear what you think.

David

[Byron]

I guess that those believers who are genuine Calvinists have always been in the minority, even in SBC history. I need to research Baptist history and see, though. As a Calvinist, however, I would not be threatened to find out this was the case. This would simply serve reminder as to the necessity of brotherly love and humility among all true believers. The same Paul, who in my personal opinion was a Calvinist, wrote the famous chapter on genuine love in 1 Corinthians 13, which we would all do well to heed (especially me).

[peter lumpkins]

David,

Thanks. Arguing that Five Point Calvinism was virtually universal among Baptists of the 19th century is the proverbial Achilles heel which questions Founders claims to the "historic" Baptist position.

It is true that Calvinism was a pervasive presence among early Baptists. It is also true that the writing theologians leaned heavily in the Calvinist direction.

Furthermore, it is true that many, many--perhaps most--churches utilized The Philadelphia Confession of Faith as their founding document.

What Founders seem to overlook is:

a) While Calvinism was a pervasive force, Calvinism was neither universal nor stable. Calvinism was never entirely embraced and Calvinism continually waned in influence, similar to an inflated tire with a slow leak. It continues to bleed out.

b) While the writing theologians like Dagg and Boyce were decidedly Calvinist, they failed often to convince seminary students that Calvinism rules. Z.T. Cody studied under Boyce. He came away a NonCalvinist. Kerfoot and Dargan softened Calvinism after Boyce died.

E.C. Dargan, who went to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary as Professor of Theology in 1892, wrote what may even embarrass some NonCalvinists (I wouldn't say it like this!):

"It does not put the matter too strongly to say that man's part is necessary. If he is to be saved he must have a hand in the work" (quoted in Wiley, p.97).

As for why Founders do not account for these evidences, I can only imagine. My own guess is, if it can be shown that Five Point Calvinism possessed a lessor role in the formation of the SBC than virtually universal--which is what Founders insist--the entire focus on "getting back to our historical roots" is moot. What historical roots? Calvinism and NonCalvinism? That's what we have in our convention now.

c) Just because a church has a particular confession or covenant, does not mean the particular confession or covenant is applicable to who or what the church is later or even if they ever utilized it after the initial adoption.

It's soft evidence to argue from a Church's "founding document" to the church's functional existence, which, unfortunately is what many Founders do who suggest we just take a look at all the churches that had The Philadelphia Confession as their theological document. This proves nothing about the life of the church itself.

Grace. With that, I am...

Peter

[peter lumpkins]

Byron,

Thanks. Sorry for not responding sooner. Strangely, your comment never comes to my email as do all other comments on my site. I know without checking the site when others comment but not you. For some reason, Typepad does not like your email address :^(

Anyway, I think you'll find that Baptist history will produce not a few of your genetic pool, including Southern Baptists specifically. I did not mean to imply that Calvinists were few and far between. Rather,

a) Calvinists weren't ubiquitous as our Founders brothers imply

b) Calvinism possessed a "slow leak" the entirety of the 19th century, so much so, that Cody, for example, could write, without rebuke (at least, not in print at that time; I looked!), at the crossing into the 20 century, he knew of no Baptist church that held to 5P Calvinism.

With that, I am...

Peter