Southern Baptists and Slavery, Part 2

[Sandy]

I'll start this thread again, here, where it should be, and with the post that I wrote, based on Leon McBeth's The Baptist Heritage and which Ed questioned.

Actually, Haruo, you are not really that far off. Baptists were not the most numerous Christian denomination in the South prior to the Civil War. They were neglected by the Baptist denominational structure that was far off in the North, and divided by traditions that did not contribute to their working together or seeing each other as having a common cause. The places where they were most numerous, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, all represented different traditions that turned out to be divisive and counterproductive to both unity and expansion. The convention formed in 1845 because of a break precipitated by a restriction on slave owners serving as missionaries, a proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back" issue, but because of the strong traditions and because the Baptist churches in the South tended to consist of more rural, uneducated, and less sophisticated people, it struggled tremendously right up to the war.

The Civil War could easily have been the nail in the coffin. But their leaders took up the cause of secession and "Southern" identity during the war. They were not the only denomination to do this, but they were able to coalesce around those things, including support for states' rights and slavery. During Reconstruction, when so much went so badly for so many in the South, Southern Baptists united around the preservation of Southern culture, "Southern-ness", enabling the denomination to centralize resources and organizational structure, and build a loyal core of independent, autonomous, congregational governed churches that soon became the predominant Christian expression of the South. Some of the strains of the differences have created division and controversy within the convention, but there's really been nothing to pull it apart to the point where it split, or where there was a departure of large numbers of people.

[TrudyU]

[Stephen Fox]

Sandy, our energies could be better spent on this board looking at the Jim Crow mentality of SBC Takeover leadership.

The core group of Jesse Helms, Albert Lee Smith and Judge Pressler and their shadowy connections to White Citizen councils, Birch Society and the Texas Regulars all came from the worst of the Baptist legacy re Civil Right. From those three to Adrian Rogers, Jerry Vines and many of the folks Pressler saluted in Hill on Which to Die came from churches where the majority of folks were convinced Martin Luther King was a rabble rouser, a Communist and worst.

No strainof Baptists were pure in that era, but you look where the guts of Baptist resistance to King camefrom and you will find it in cells that mushroomed into the takeover leadership.

Tell me that is not the case

[Sandy]

[Haruo]

[Stephen Fox]

About how all this gerrymandered down to Helm and Pressler. Tim Tyson understands and writes about what Sandy will not go near!

[Sandy]

[Ed Pettibone]

Sandy, back up the line 4 or so post You quoted me as writing Ed Pettibone wrote:"Note that page 384 in the first full paragraph your authority (McBeth) says "In the Carolinas and Georgia, no significant anti slavery movement developed among Baptist; In South Carolina for example, such outstanding Baptist preachers as Richard Furman, Peter Bainbridge, and Edmund Bodsford where among the larger slaveholders."

And then you wrote w/o citation of McBeth or any one else "I don't believe I said anything contrary to that. I believe the conclusions I drew, around Haruo's original comments were that, 1) Baptists in the South prior to the Civil War supported slavery. 2) The SBC formed in 1845 after the Triennial Convention determined that slave owners could not be appointed by the missionary society. 3) Prior to the Civil War, Baptists were not a predominant denomination in the South. There were several reasons for this, one being the different theological and social strains that existed in the states where most of the churches were located, two being that home missionary work and denominational support was lacking because the Triennial Convention was located in the North, and generally ignored the Southern churches, and three, Baptist church members were generally drawn from less educated, poorer, less influential segments of society. 4) During the Civil War, Baptists in the south coalesced around the core issues of the Confederacy, including the preservation of slavery and the fight against strong federalism. 5) During Reconstruction, Southern Baptists tied themselves to the social and cultural fabric of the old Confederacy, adopting the promotion of a uniquely Southern culture. They were able to blend that into church life by a more centralized denominational structure, and that solidified loyalty to the denomination from the churches. That was the bridge Southern Baptists crossed to becoming the predominant Christian denomination in the South, and the largest Protestant denomination in the US". Saying they are conclusions that you had drawn around Haruo's original comments

When I questioned the over all validity of that material you said McBeth's The Bapist Heritage was your source. And when I asked for citations from that source, you say " It isn't a direct quote from a specific location. So where did I blend in fiction?

1. Indeed the majoity of Baptist in the south prior to the civil war supported Slavery. As I quoted McBeth giving the esample of 3 of the most prominent Baptist pastors in South Carolina being slave owners. Including the name sake of Foxy's most beloved Furman University.

2. The banning of slave owners as missionaries whom they would support was not new in1845. What was new was a small delegation accepting slavery had the temerity to present a slave holder as a missionary candidate.

3. I am not real sure which denomination was predominant in the south up to the Civil War. And a good deal of searching over the past week has not solved that question for me. While I am persuaded that by definition only one could have been "predominant", I agree that it was probably not Baptist. Most of the Historians that I find writing on the religon in that period including our own Bruce Gourley, simply refer to "protestants", occasionally adding a phrase that reads "such as Methodist, Presbyterians and Baptist". I would settle for third. Keep in mind Alabama prior to the war had a total population (Black & White) of less than 100,000.

4. Yes during the war Baptist like almost everyone else with the exception of a few small sects that are now extinct, "coalesced around the core issues of the Confederacy, including the preservation of slavery and the fight against strong federalism."

5. Ditto 4. But Sandy the Methodist and Presbyterians had even longer experience with centralized denominational structure, than did the Baptist of the era.

So Sandy I am still looking for evidence that where he still alive that McBeth would accept the conclusions you drew "around" Haruo's statements.

Ed, still typing with my left hand and now and then one finger on the right. Had the stitches out yesterday. Also have a new cast. Found that two fingers have temporary pins that will stay in for two more weeks.

[Sandy]

[Stephen Fox]