1807 Abington Baptist Association Confession of Faith: Will history finally vindicate Southern Baptist Traditionalists?

After frequently corresponding with one another, a convention of messengers from three Pennsylvania Baptist churches was held on Saturday, December 26, 1807, at the Abington log cabin home of Rev. John Miller for the purpose of forming a new Baptist association.¹ Quite interesting to us is the confession of faith the Abington churches chose as their charter document of belief. The churches oddly but apparently sought little, if any, assistance in forming their association from what's now the oldest Baptist association in America, The Philadelphia Baptist Association, an association a full century in existence when the churches came together in 1807 to form the Abington Baptist Association.²

One reason which seems to support the claim that Abington messengers, or "delegates" as they were then called, overlooked, at least in some way, the assistance of Philadelphia rests in the confession of faith Abington churches chose. Rather than the sophisticated, high Calvinism of The Philadelphia Confession of Faith adopted by the Philadelphia churches in 1742 (almost identical to the 1689 London Baptist Confession), Abington unanimously adopted the brief statement below to serve as their confessional identity.

"Holding the doctrines of three persons in one Godhead, the same in essence, equal in power, but different in office — the total depravity of mankind in their fallen estate — the free grace of God manifested in the recovery of those that believe in Christ — final perseverance of saints from grace to glory — baptism by immersion — the resurrection of the dead — final judgment and the condemnation of the finally impenitent to as long duration as the happiness of the righteous."³

If Baptist historian, W.J. McGlothlin, is correct, and the later New Hampshire Declaration of Faith (1833) may be accurately described as "doubtful if it ought to be called Calvinistic, since it is non-committal on every point of difference" between Calvinism and non-Calvinism, what might we with warrant conclude about the charter confession adopted by Abington Baptists in 1807? Indeed what "Traditional Baptist" could not, if he or she chose, attach, without reservation, his or her name to the Abington faith statement?   

The historical thesis Baptist Calvinists routinely put forth that strict Calvinism absolutely ruled 19^th century Baptist life cannot survive the devastating assault the historical record delivers.

"Truth is unkillable" --Balthasar Hubmaier

 

¹The History of Abington Baptist Association from: 1807-1857. Edward L. Bailey, 1863. Preface

²The website appears to be in error by claiming the "American Baptist Churches of Pennsylvania became a part of America's oldest American Baptist organization, the Philadelphia Baptist Association in 1703." According to accounts I've consulted, the Philadelphia association formed in 1707.

³History, p. 15

Comments

[Max]

A concise statement of the only Baptist belief I have known for 60 years. Would make a great replacement for BFM2000 ;^)

Thank you Peter for your diligence to retrieve these items from the archives. I look for the "Yeah-Buts" to come out of the woodwork on this one!

[peter lumpkins]

Max,

Thanks. While I'm reluctant myself to sign any petition--including doctrinal petitions--this confession bears the least resistance to me than any confession I recall I've ever read. I'm with you. I like it!

[Lydia]

It would be so interesting to chart these deviations however bold from a geographical perspective. Were they concentrated in the North early on? One has to wonder because of the weariness and pushback with Puritan practices we read about in other aspects of history. We can say with all confidence our Founding Fathers certainly were not mapping religious freedom to the policies and practices of the Puritans.

The most interesting aspect to me is that any deviation from the Calvinist position existed at all. Not in PA, but in many Colonies there was still some aspects of a state religion with whuch Baptists had to contend. So sticking together in number would have been politically expedient.

But you cannot get to "man has the ability to govern himself" with Calvinism as your foundation.

[peter lumpkins]

I think you are essentially correct, Lydia. It's intellectually difficult for the purest Calvinists to separate church and state. One need only consider Geneva to see this truth...

[peter lumpkins]

BTW, Lydia, as I understand, you wonder if the conflicts over Calvinism were concentrated mainly in the north. The answer is no they were not. I will post when I can some of the same divisive issues over Calvinism happening in the north inflamed North Carolina Baptists early on.

[Scott Shaver]

Consider Geneva only? Let's try a little closer to home i.e. Quakers locked in the stocks of New England?

Where do I sign?

[Bill Mac]

Peter: I like the little confession too, which brings up a question. While I don't consider myself a full blown Calvinist I certainly lean in that direction, and I find nothing objectionable in the Abington confession. Was the confession written so as to prevent affirmation by Calvinists?

[Lydia]

"the free grace of God manifested in the recovery of those that believe in Christ"

That part might be one clue. It seems they were affirming human volition in the matter of salvation. Calvinists seems to operate under a sort of cognitive dissonance when this is brought up. As in, " The human can but really can't" seems to be the message we are to accept.

[Bill Mac]

Lydia: I see your point in the first part of the sentence but then the latter part seems to draw it back in to an area where both sides could affirm.

[Max]

"the free grace of God manifested in the recovery of those that believe in Christ"

Lydia, reckon this is what Jesus meant in John 3:16 when He said "whosoever believeth in him should not perish" ... that whosoever means whosoever? Could it also be that when Jesus said "whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely" in Rev. 22:17 that whosoever means whosoever? The Gospel is really simple enough that a child can understand. Exposure to complex systematic theology and debating the teachings of men clutter the mind to distract from this simple truth. A sad day we live in ... that the Cross and the work of Christ have such little place in 21st century preaching.

[peter lumpkins]

Thanks for the question Bill. The contextual material doesn't seem to give any clues about whether Abington penned the confession with any sort of preclusion that strong Calvinists could or would not adhere to it. What we may could reasonably maintain is, given the profound influence of Philadelphia and its unwavering support and promotion of the Phil. Confession, the Abington churches wanted to muffle the debate over the more objectionable parts of high Calvinism upon which Phil insisted.

Whatever the case, given the proximity of the upstart association's location to Philly, and a confession spayed of almost any Calvinistic earmarks, I personally think Abington must be an "embarrassment," so to speak, to our more strict confessional Calvinistic brothers.

[Lydia]

Lydia: I see your point in the first part of the sentence but then the latter part seems to draw it back in to an area where both sides could affirm."

Peter pointed out that it seems to be more about what they left out. Better than the constant parsing of definitions and concepts.

Max, I will take simple any day!

[Scott Shaver]

Bill Mac:

I don't think any whose orientation is historically "Southern Baptist" would be honest if we denied those aspects of the thoughts systematized by Calvin from which we've been influenced.

Like any other "theology" which awards the keys of the kingdom "communally" to the dogma of a few, (i.e. hyper and neocalvinism).... need to be rejected outright if the historical trajectory guys like Pete are proving were influential on Southern Baptists is to be retained.

Again, such a retention may not be the goal of everybody with a hand on the current reigns of the denominational apparatus.

Looks like several of our seminaries would rather turn out Presbyterians as opposed to historic Southern Baptists.

You would think Patterson and Kelley might have been more vocal but Mohler knows where the proverbial "bodies" are buried.

Even if academic monopoly within the SBC decides to turn out Presbyterian pastors for local church leadership, historically "Baptist" churches and individuals still active will have them for lunch, dinner and breakfast. I think we're seeing a lot of that already.

A genuine spiritual conviction disposed toward free will is something that cannot be cured, reformed, or rehabilitated.

The denomination's response to neocalvinsim appears to be blitzkrieg .....send more and more along with Lifeway literature until those in established churches quit resisting or we can generate enough church starts and short-lived megas to redefine "Cooperative" and "Southern Baptist" entirely.

[Max]

Peter, speaking of confessions of faith, are you familiar with the "The Schleitheim Confession of Faith, 1527"? The Seven Articles of this confession clearly stated where the Anabaptist Swiss Brethren stood in belief and practice. Many gave their lives under this confession, suffering tremendous persecution by the church of Rome and the Reformers.

If you want to get some young folks excited about Baptist roots, they should study our Anabaptist forefathers and stop hanging out with Piper et al.