Baptist history in the twenty-first century: dreams and visions

Baptist History and Heritage, Summer-Fall, 1999 by Slayden A. Yarbrough

By first exposure to Baptist history came as a student under H. K. Neely at Southwest Baptist College in Bolivar, Missouri, in the Spring semester of 1967 in a course entitled the "Baptist Denomination." My appetite was whetted, and I went on to earn a Ph.D. in religion with an emphasis in the history of Christianity under the tutelage of Glenn O. Hilburn at Baylor University. I went back to Southwest Baptist College and among my responsibilities was the teaching of the "Baptist Denomination," a course that looked a great deal like the one that I had taken under H. K. Neely. I've been teaching Baptist history for twenty-seven years now.

During this time I became involved in the work of the Southern Baptist Historical Society (SBHS), became a trustee of Baptist historical commissions at both the state and national levels of the denomination, and developed a pretty good track record of publishing in the field of Baptist history. The friendship of J. M. Gaskin, director of history of the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma, contributed to my early involvement with Baptist history organizations. In the area of publishing, I join many others in expressing my gratitude to Charles Deweese who always seemed to find a way for the younger historians to get original or assigned articles published. I paid a part of that debt to Charles by asking Carol Holcomb and Jerry Faught to make presentations on the 1999 program. Each responded by doing a wonderful job.

Beginning in 1995, I began to make a little Baptist history myself through my role with the Historical Commission, SBC. My experience as a teacher, researcher, and writer of Baptist history, as a trustee of state and national historical commissions, as executive director of both the Historical Commission of the SBC and the SBHS, and as a determined denominational agitator for the cause of Baptist history, teachings, principles, and practices has influenced me to give much thought not only to where we have been but where we should consider going in the work of Baptist history. What follows are comments and suggestions of a committed Baptist historian who has worn a lot of hats that symbolize what I believe should be the state of our discipline and ministry in the twenty-first century.

Those who know me will agree that my views are nowhere close to being inerrant and infallible. But I do believe that they are worth considering and possibly pursuing aggressively. At the same time, they are open for examination, criticism, and revision. I anticipate that the panel will be kindly critical of my flaws, constructive in suggesting improvements, and creative in contributing additional ideas that will make our work relevant in the twenty-first century.

The Rationale for Southern Baptist History in the Twenty-first Century

With the recommendation of the Program and Structure Study Committee in February 1995, the world of Southern Baptist history faced its most serious challenge since the organization of the SBHS in 1938. The situation had been aggravated because of the loss of some Southern Baptist historians who had chosen to simply walk away from Southern Baptist life and its official historical work as the "Controversy" in the convention progressed over two decades.

Many of us chose to remain and work in a world in which every action was interpreted in light of the Controversy. We tried to do Baptist history with integrity during such a time, and I believe that we did so effectively through the Historical Commission and the SBHS. A good example of our efforts was the publication of the October 1993 issue of Baptist History and Heritage. The journal theme was "The Southern Baptist Convention, 1979-1993: What Happened and Why?" Lynn May did an excellent and courageous job in selecting writers for this issue. Richard Land, executive director of the Christian Life Commission, wrote an interpretation of the Controversy from the fundamentalist perspective. Bill Leonard, the moderate Baptist historian at Samford University at the time, responded to Land's article. Stan Hastey, executive director of the Alliance of Baptists, defended the moderate interpretation, to which fundamentalist free-lance writer James C. Hefty responded. Baptist diversity has never been more evident than in the selection of writers for this issue of the journal. The commission never received a complaint about the volume. In fact, the issue was reprinted twice! Furthermore, both Land and Hastey used this issue as a text in classes on Baptist history.

As the restructured SBHS has advanced, this same approach is being followed to do Baptist history with integrity by facing squarely all issues and using qualified writers who reflect diverse positions in Baptist life worldwide. The winter 1998 issue on "The Changing State of Church and State" is a prime example of this approach.

The question, "Where will the Southern Baptist Historical society's relationship to Baptist history go from here?" is relevant in light of the last two decades and in anticipation of a new century. Several factors must be considered. The relation to Southern Baptists churches will be strong, but the relationship to the Southern Baptist Convention may be tenuous. The SBC in the restructuring severed all official relationships with the society, although I am not sure that the SBC leadership involved in the restructuring was really aware of the role or history of the society. It is not inconceivable that at some time in the future the convention will establish a new historical agency. I hope that this does not happen, but this possibility certainly must not be ignored as the SBHS continues its work.