Charles Marsh in Dec Baps Today

[Stephen Fox]

Let the Word go Forth.

I just got a comment on my blog, a tip I feel compelled to share.
Johnny Pierce spent the day with Charles Marsh at UVA couple days ago and his interview will be in the December Issue.
If your church does not have a group subscription, there could be no better stewardship of your money even in these hard economic times than to get on board.

Marsh is lifelonng friend of Bush Judicial Nominee Charles Pickering of Laurel, Mississippi and had a chilling interview with SamBowers, the protege for the Klan mastermind in Mississippi Burning,and the man Will Campbell has preached about as well asFlemingRutledge.
Interview in Marsh's God's LongSummer.
I don't speak for Johnny Pierce,much less AaronWeaver; but from the Atlanta staff of CBF on down, in these historic times, a close reading of Marsh's book will be plumbline on your credentials.
I hope there are more than five folks who have read not only Marsh, but Tim Tyson 's Blood DoneSign My Name when the Bham Regional Covenant meets Jan 31 at 16 th Street in January, a couple blocks from where I almost got cut after a City Stages Fest about 1 am in 95.

But that is not the News.
News is get that subscription and let's all get a little more enlightened Dec. 1

Congrats to Johnny Pierce and Baps Today for a Most Timely interview.

[Big Daddy Weaver]

What's so great about Marsh's book again? I enjoyed reading it. But his attack on soul freedom wasn't exactly Baptist-friendly, at least not friendly to the theology of most moderate and progressive Baptists.

[Stephen Fox]

Bdid:

You know I'm on your side, but not sure you know what you are talking about.
Please give me a page number or some online example where Charles Marsh attacks soul freedom.
All I know is he was the subject of mostly praise in an exhaustive review of his latest book in of All Places the New Republic.
I haven't seen any Baylor proff make such strides lately; let me know where I am missing the point.
Here is some common ground. You will love John Pierce tribute to John Lewis in his blog of today.
Pierce is celebrating Marsh from everything I can tell in the upcoming interview.
Love to know what you think of it when it appears. In the meantime check out the Lewis blog today just a few clicks away.

http://bteditor.blogspot.com/2008/11/lasting-image.html

[Big Daddy Weaver]

[Stephen Fox]

I think your take on what Marsh was gettin at in his critique of Hudgins is a little sophomoric andover reaching.
I think you more thanlikely missed the point.
At the moment however, I will have to concede I don't have the street cred to make the definitive statement.
Would like to be present to hear Bill Leonard, maybe Glenn Jonas pursue your assertions; and whatever interest Mark Noll may have.
I think Martha Nussbaum, were she to weigh in, would dismiss your dismissal of Harold Bloom as littlelightweight,andmore consumed by brand name loyalty to Mullins and the like than broader approach Bloom was trying to get at.
He most likely had a better aesthetic than you have thus far acquired.
Then again I may be wrong; but I need to hear some others like Bill Leonard confirm your assertions on Hudgins as Marsh framed him before I'm convinced.

But I do appreciate you engaging the matter; and I think, with you, look forward to Pierce's interview in Baps Today.
Have you seen Pierce tribute to John Lewis? What did you think?

[Big Daddy Weaver]

[Big Daddy Weaver]

A comment about John Lewis:

On the days that I get tired of reading, writing and studying and I see Lewis on TV like on Election Night, I strongly wish I was in Atlanta writing for Lewis and sharing the occasional Subway 6-incher and hanging out with all of the interesting celebrity types that drop by his office.

When Lewis is in Washington, he's a politician. When he comes home to Atlanta on Thursday afternoon, he becomes a statesman. But when he's not politicking on Capitol Hill or paling around with the liberal elite, he's John The Baptist Minister. He spends much of his time while in Atlanta just ministering, listening to the needs and struggles of some of the poorest and just flat-out unlucky people in Atlanta. Most politicians have a staff that takes care of their constituent's needs. Lewis does too. But he also like to get one-on-one and talk to the people that visit the office and the folks he meets on the street about their problems and genuinely tries to help them. There are alot of clowns in Congress, Democrat and Republican. Lewis is no clown. He's serious about helping the least of these. And about doing his part in The Beloved Community.

[KeithE]

[Stephen Fox]

If we could attract Bruce Gourley to this topic, especially if he could make time immediately to read the Hudgins chapter in God's Long Summer.
BTW, KeithE,I think you are gonna find it fascinating for sure. I would encourage you to find a reasonable copy at Used Books and put it in your church library there at Weatherly Heights. Only problem there is once you get the first Fox suggestion, the avalanche of suggestions and Must acquisitions begins in earnest

Back to Bdid. I think you are entering into dangerous territory, Bdid. Cause my reading of Marsh on Hudgins saysHudgins uses Mullins as an out to dodge, to be complacent about the biggest Social Wrong ofhis time, Jim Crow.

If you come down with Hudgins, against Marsh, using what you say is a pure reading of Mullins as an excuse; well I just don't see how there is any foundation on Baptist biblical terms to support your political and biblical justice affection for John Lewis.

Who was the better Baptist? Martin King or Doug Hudgins?

Seems to me that is a no brainer, even for Barry Hankins.

Wherever Marsh may come down with Curtis Freeman and his Manifesto is beside the point seems to me in The Point Marsh was making about Hudgins using Mullins as an out to be silent, to sit out the biggest Moral crisis of his time, while Jewish synagogues were being bombed, and Sam Bowers was planning the assassination of Goodman, Schwerner and Cheney; and Vernon Dahlmer.

If you are telling me that was the legacy of Mullins and we can be proud of it; then Baylor has a new problem on its hands.

I confess I may not be worthy, credentialed to make such assertions; but if you are reading Barry Hankins correctly, I'm sure glad there was a Baptist Preacher's son out there, Marshall Frady,who showed me another way.

Shortly I hope to get this to Curtis Freeman; not to one up you, but to see if the bothof us are doing this matter any justice at all.
At same time would be much obliged if you would bring it to Bill Leonard's attention, cause I think we have stumbled into a timely and interesting exchange on some vital aspects and interpretations of the Legacy of EY Mullins applied in real political and societal time.

[Stephen Fox]

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Fox,

My original comment was that Charles Marsh offers a critique of soul freedom and puts E.Y. Mullins in a terrible light by emphasizing the quotes from Winthrop Hudson.

To support that point, I noted that the critique can be found in the chapter on Douglas Hudgins, beginning on page 110, I believe.

The fact that Marsh critiques Mullins in that chapter is beyond dispute. If a person has the ability to READ, they'll understand that point.

There have been multiple, read: MULTIPLE, distinguished historians who have cited Marsh's critique of Mullins found in God's Long Summer. These multiple historians fall on both sides of the "soul freedom" aisle, pro-Mullins and not-so-pro-Mullins. That was my second or third point.

I personally cited Marsh's critique in my thesis, a thesis which was approved by three distinguished historians and read by several other historians/theologian before my defense. My citation of Marsh was not incorrect. The historians who are much much much more knowledgable in this area affirmed my mention of Marsh's critique. Marsh's chapter on Hudgins was only a few sentences in my thesis. Most of the Mullins criticism that I cited came straight from Curtis Freeman - someone who took a rather famous quote from James Dunn out of context and ran with it. When I write history, I tried to present a full, fair and balanced picture of the individual that I'm studying. I don't do the out-of-context thing.

I'm not going to tell you however who was on my thesis committee because you'll probably contact all of them....

I can't lose this round because there really is nothing to lose. A critique of Mullins is a critique. That's what I said from the get-go.

Back to Marsh: As I said, I have enjoyed his books on Civil Rights. I affirm most of what he has written - although I'm not a fan of how he presents Mullins. And yes, Fox, Hudgins hid behind the doctrine of soul freedom to avoid speaking out against the horrors of Jim Crow and the KKK. That was the thesis of the Hudgins chapter.

But just because Douglas Hudgins misused soul freedom doesn't mean we should abandon the entire doctrine. More or less, Freeman and Marsh would have us abandon soul freedom as reinterpreted by E.Y. Mullins in The Axioms of Religion. Individualism CAN be abused. Baptists can stay silent like Hudgins or they can use soul freedom to justify theological positions that can't be biblically justified.

However, there is no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Remember that. Soul freedom is the foundation of our distinctly Baptist faith. It is the cornerstone from which all other Baptist principles emerge. From soul freedom emerges great principles such as religious liberty and the separation of church and state. The right to private judgment is essential. Can it be misused, yes! Marsh's does a fine job of pointing out such an example. But Marsh has no use for soul freedom. He only sees the abuses.

At the end of the day, we're still responsible as individuals to our faith community. I think we Baptists have done a pretty decent job of balancing our focus on individualism with our focus on community. Clearly, Marsh does not recognize that balance. Again, what usefulness does Marsh find for the focus on the individual conscience? None.

Funny thing is that Marsh's critique of Mullins and soul freedom is ABSOLUTELY NOT COMPATIBLE with the heavy emphasis of your friend Randall Balmer on liberty of conscience. As a historian, Balmer understands that any doctrine can be misused or abused. But, Balmer also recognizes that the Baptist commitment to the unfettered conscience is an essential part of Who We Are and Who We Have Been.

Now, I don't know what Curtis Freeman said to you. Perhaps you have now embraced his take on Mullins and his take on soul freedom. Surely you understand that there are big differences between Mullins, Dunn, and Shurden on the one side and Freeman and the Baptist Manifesto folks on the other side when it comes to soul competency?

I need to go finish my paper on a truly great Baptist hero, Charles Evans Hughes. Meanwhile, go recite a creed or something

[Stephen Fox]

[Curtis Freeman]

Thanks Steve and Aaron for the notes. I will say that I think I heard James Dunn make his famous quote that "ain't nobody but Jesus gonna tell me what to believe" when he first gave it. And I don't think I got it out of context, historically or theologically. I've known James a long time. I respect his work and his convictions. We disagree. But I didn't miss his point.

The other thing I don't want to let you slide on, is that soul competency is NOT the same thing as soul freedom or soul liberty. I'm all for soul freedom/liberty. I worry about "competency." One is a delimiting notion, preserving and protecting the conscience. The other is a more robust notion of moral agency about which I'm suspicious. And I worry about the "soul" in soul competency sometimes, in that it isn't embodied enough, but functions as an ephemeral notion, much as those who "win" souls in evangelism, a subject Mullins also wrote about. (See his little book on soulwinning.)

But some of these matters as I've stated are disputed. I agree with that, and I want to acknowledge that reasonable scholars--historians and theologians--disagree. Mullins' account isn't the basis of Baptist life. Hudson was one of the best historians Baptists produced in the 20th century. He disputed it. Marney was one of the most persistent prophets. He disputed it. So to say it's foundational or axiomatic or even a consensus seems to be over-reaching. It is, to be sure, disputed.

[Stephen Fox]

Thank you Curtis for adding a little perspective here, much needed larger framework.
I think it safe to say we are great admirers of Stewart Newman. Newman loved to talk about the good hardscrabble Baptist who kept his Baptist Sunday School quarterly folded in his back pocket, almost like his second edition of the wordagod.

But like you imply, to put these folks who Newman and my Dad, one of his C students loved with all their heart; to put them and their simple piety synonymous with Marney's insights for prophetic word in his time is Mullins run amuck.

I think we are getting somewhere here now. I guess the next step is to see just in fact how Balmer comes down, as Weaver broached his name above. My instinct is he is with you and Marney and Hudson.

Thanks for gracing us with your presence on this matter.

[Big Daddy Weaver]

[Stephen Fox]

Good work.
Dunn is a great man worthy of this Royal treatment you have dissertated on him.

I especially like the tribute on Page 128: Dunn learned about historic Baptist ideals of soul freedom and LIberty of Conscience from his
Seminary Proff Stewart Newman.

I saw your comments at Mark's new thread.

Am pursuing the esoterics with Balmer as I try to make sense of your reservations.

My bottom line is something seems greatly amiss when you would fog a discussion about the Pontius Pilate washing of hands by the likes of Doug Hudgins hiding what I still think is a misappropriated use of Mullins and Soul competency; defend Hudgins against Marsh and Freeman on some esoteric academic language.

Did Hudgins abuse Mullins as Marsh says he did.

I think Marsh is sublime on that point.

That is my Dog in this Hunt.

I'm enjoying the rest of the conversation, but let's be clear about the Main thing here and not fog it up for academic points.

[Mark]

[Stephen Fox]

Mark: Click on BDidd's link about three post up. Pretty much his whole dissertation is there for the reading online.

[Stephen Fox]

Good bit of the heart of Marsh's take on Hudgins and soul competency is online.

Scrolll around for page 107-109 at the following site, and go over to strong parargraph before the Interior Bible on 111.
Scroll around there for other context.
I hope many of you will get this great work of Marsh in your church library by the end of the year as we pursue this significant discussion.
Marsh's chapter on Hudgins is one of the strongest about Baptist thought in the real world I have read anywhere.

http://books.google.com/books?id=irtv7c ... #PPA112,M1

And a 2006 Walter Shurden Refresher course for some of you like me who are lost in the Fog of all this:

http://www.centerforbaptiststudies.org/ ... ifesto.htm

[Big Daddy Weaver]

[Hal Eaton]

Musing: The Baptist Box is bulging at the seams, but it's still a Baptist Box. (For Better or for Worse!)

[Stephen Fox]

I wish you would read the available online pages 110 or so in the link above.
Just diminish the screen and go to something else while the site gets loaded.
Bdid is barking up the wrong tree here, missing the point.
Wish you would take a look.
His whole distraction to the Baptist Manifesto debate screws up Marsh's momentous point on Hudgins and Mullins in historical time, case study implementation is unnecessary to the prelude of this upcoming interview.

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Fox,

If you want people to take you seriously here, it's probably wise to refrain from dissing a person's argument without first responding to the actual argument.

Perhaps old age is playing tricks with your mind. I don't know. But, let me remind the readers here that you cited Walter Shurden's analysis of the Baptist Manifesto just a post or two above. No leg to stand on, dude.

As a side note, all of the professors whose books you love (read: Balmer) would take you to task in the classroom, in the real world, for continuing to side-step arguments.

[David Flick]

[Stephen Fox]

I wish we were younger and I had bigger knuckles so you and Jonathan and BDid could have a big brawl and work this out of our system.
Aaron and you haven't won anything, only a debate in your own mind.
My dog in this hunt is Charles Marsh's chapter on Doug Hudgins, which I have no indication you have read yet; you probably never will unless Anthony Jordan takes you to task on it.
You Golden Spur all you want to, whatever it takes to give you your daily dose of Jollies, I'm all for it

We have had two substantive replies in this discussion, one from Curtis Freeman; and another in Mark's thread from Scott Erwin about his CNN building discussion with James Dunn.
If you and BDidd Aaron Weaver want to talk about Marsh's indictment of Doug Hudgins--good bit of it online in a link I have provided for you--then let's talk. I imagine you and Aaron will be in a small room talking to each other trying to defend yourselves against Marsh's analysis of Hudgins.
Flick, you old Golden Spur of a fellow you; what in that chapter do you have a problem with???

In the meantime for you and Bdid to chew on Charles Marsh's GREAT Friend and fellow Mississippian Kate Campbell has a new album. Kate the daugther of SBC Prez Jim Henry.

http://www.ethicsdaily.com/article_detail.cfm?AID=11338

Hold your water. The interview will be out in about 15 days. Call Anthony Jordan and let him know about it; and we'll take it from there.

It will be a cold day in Hades and will be a great surprise for me if Kate Campbell and Fisher Humphreys--Marsh's Uncle by Marriage--say you and Bdid have the high road on this one( again, this one being Marsh's take on Hudgin's application of Mullins in 60's Mississippi.)