The origins of the Southern Baptist Convention: a historiographical study: the purpose of this paper is to describe how white Baptist church historians of the South have interpreted the founding of the Southern Baptist Convention since 1845

Baptist History and Heritage, Wntr, 2002 by Walter B. Shurden, Lori Redwine Varnadoe

It is, therefore, an exercise in historiography. Most non-Southern Baptist church historians would doubtless ask, "Is it not obvious that slavery was the decisive factor in the formation of the SBC?" The answer: "No, it has not been obvious to white Southern Baptist church historians that slavery was the primary issue in the formation of the SBC." Indeed, not until the last quarter of the twentieth century have these Baptist historians said without qualification that slavery was the fundamental cause of the SBC.

This investigation is limited to white Baptist church historians of the South in order to demonstrate changing patterns of interpretation by this group since 1845. One could easily broaden this research, and with great profit, by adding the interpretations of African American Baptist church historians, white Baptist church historians of the North, and secular historians of all kinds. But that is a more extensive and comprehensive work, waiting probably on the careful and diligent hand of some energetic Ph.D. student in search of an excellent dissertation topic.

We have taken a "somewhat strict" chronological approach, though the reader will see, and for obvious reasons we hope, some elasticity in the chronology. For the 155-year history of the SBC, three patterns of interpretation emerged, each relating generally to a fifty-year period.

During the first period of 1845-1900, white Baptist denominational historians of the South wrote defensively about the formation of the SBC, ignoring slavery as the causative factor in the formation of the Southern Baptist Convention. They rarely mentioned the word slavery, much less pointed to it as the primary cause of the SBC.

From 1900 to 1950, historians clearly identified slavery as a factor in the formation of the SBC, but some tended to obscure its impact by pointing to, sometimes even highlighting, other factors.

In the last half of the twentieth century, 1950-2000, Southern Baptist church historians have been more blunt in identifying slavery as the causative factor in the formation of the SBC.

The facts of the division between Baptists north and south are an oft-told story and need not be repeated here. While the facts are generally undisputed, the interpretation of those facts has been greatly debated. Under the leadership of Luther Rice in 1814, Baptists organized their foreign mission society known as the Triennial Convention.

In 1832, the denomination formed the American Baptist Home Mission Society. In the 1840s, in an effort to avoid division, the societies adopted resolutions of neutrality regarding the slavery issue. Partisan sentiments on such a momentous issue, however, simply could not be suppressed.

The schism occurred, therefore, among Baptists in the mid-nineteenth century in their national mission societies. As Robert A. Baker said, "The pertinent question in each case was, will the Society appoint a slaveholder as missionary?" (1) By 1845, Baptists of the South believed, and with good reason, that the answer to that question was no. They, therefore, assembled at Augusta, Georgia, in May 1845 to form a new convention, not, according to them, because of slavery but because their "rights" had been violated.

Slavery: An Ignored Factor, 1845-1900

Four major historical interpretations of the origins of the SBC appeared during the first fifty years of the convention. These documents came from William B. Johnson (1845), William Williams (1871), Lansing Burrows (1881), and William H. Whitsitt (1895). These four essays contained several common features. The most important of the documents, in terms of Southern Baptist origins, was Johnson's.

William 13. Johnson, 1845

White Baptists of the South gave their earliest and most official statement of the reasons for the formation of the SBC at the organizational meeting of the SBC in 1845. This document, awkwardly titled: "The Southern Baptist Convention, To the Brethren in the United States; to the congregations connected with the respective Churches; and to all candid men," is referred to, thankfully, as the "Address to the Public." (2) While the SBC charged a committee with the responsibility of writing the document, most historians have assumed that W. B. Johnson had a major hand in the document. His name was attached to the document in the 1845 SBC Annual. If not the most influential Baptist of the South in the mid-nineteenth century, W. B. Johnson was surely one of the two or three most significant Southern Baptist statesmen of the era. Elected as the first SBC president and author of the convention's most important founding documents, Johnson also served as president of the South Carolina Baptist Convention in 1845. Moreover, he was the only person at the 1845 SBC meeting also present at the formation of the Triennial Convention in 1814. He had served on the committee to draw up the constitution of the Triennial Convention, and he had served as president of the Triennial Convention in 1841-44. Johnson declined to serve as president of the Triennial Convention in 1844 at the apex of the slavery controversy, allegedly for "health" reasons. (3) He was not too sick the next year to take the leadership of the SBC, however.