“Where have all the Baptists Gone?” (Matt. 22.15-21; Gal. 5.1)
By Brent Walker

Editor’s note: The following was presented at Texas Baptists Committed Convocation, San Antonio, Texas, July 11, 2003

Paraphrasing Pete Seeger’s famous folk tune from the ’60s, I want to pose the question: “Where have all the Baptists gone?” Baptists helped forge the American experiment in religious liberty that has shown the world the value of the separation of church and state. But today, Baptist ranks are clogged with many who are more than tempted by Caesar’s coins and believe that the gospel can best be advanced with the help of Herod!

Now, Baptists have never been quite as monolithic in their views about anything as some would imagine. Buddy Shurden, in his landmark work a quarter century ago, Not a Silent People, highlights those “battling Baptists” and catalogues the controversies that shaped our heritage. The old saw is true: “Where you get two or three Baptists together, there you will have four or five opinions.”

Bill Moyers, in his own inimitable way, paints a portrait of Baptists in history and contemporary culture:

Baptists have been to the left of the American establishment — and to the right. Jesse Jackson is a Baptist, so is Jesse Helms. Baptists defended slavery, and Baptists agitated to end it. Some black Baptist churches are precincts of the Democratic Party, while in some white churches GOP stands for God’s Own Preserve. Some Baptists read the Bible as if it were an AAA road map to Armageddon; others find it a spiritual codebook to the mysteries and miracles of the Kingdom within. Millions of Baptists see American culture as the enemy. Millions of others proclaim that we are part of the show. Onlookers shake their heads at how people so disputatious could be defined by a common name; those of us who wear it shrug our shoulders at the anomalies and schisms and go on punching (usually each other).

I. Despite this heritage of fussin’, feudin’ and just foolin’ around, Baptists, historically, have been unified in their pursuit of religious liberty and defense of the separation of church and state. In fact, E. Y. Mullins calls church-state separation an “axiom” of Baptists in his landmark work on the group’s distinctives. Religious freedom and church-state separation have always been at the very core of what it means to be a Baptist.

For Baptists, liberty is grounded in scripture. Its taproot runs deep into the creation accounts in Genesis. God’s decision to make human beings in God’s image necessarily implies a freedom on our part to say yes or no — to choose for or against a relationship with God, freely and voluntarily. Jesus foreshadowed the modern doctrine the separation of church and state when he said, “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21) And who is not thrilled by Paul’s bold declaration that “for freedom Christ has set us free. Stand fast therefore and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Gal 5.1). We became champions of religious liberty because we are people of the book.

Baptists value religious freedom also because they suffered the hard lessons of history. We quickly learned that when religious zeal combines with the coercive state power, persecution results and consciences are ravaged. Simply stated, compelled conscience is an oxymoron.

From jail cells in England, to stockades in Massachusetts Bay, to whipping posts in Virginia, the names and words ring out over the centuries!

After establishing the first Baptist church on English soil, Thomas Helwys penned a groundbreaking treatise on religious liberty, A Short Declaration of the Mystery of Iniquity (1612), and sent a copy to King James I. In his inscription, he wrote the audacious words that the king was a mortal man, not God, and had no power over the immortal souls of his subjects. For his trouble, Helwys and his wife Joan were severely persecuted. He later died in Newgate Prison.

Called the apostle of religious liberty, Roger Williams came from England to Massachusetts Bay in 1631 preaching and teaching “soul freedom” – a God-infused liberty of conscience. Believing that faith could not be dictated by any government authority, but must be nurtured freely and expressed directly to God, Williams advocated a “hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world.” The theocrats in Massachusetts were so outraged that they kicked Williams out of the colony. He trekked to what would become Rhode Island, began that “lively experiment” in religious liberty, and founded the first Baptist church on North American soil.

John Leland, an evangelist preaching in Virginia during the heady 1780s, boldly advocated religious liberty and the separation of church and state as other Baptists (Ireland/Wallis) were being jailed for preaching without a license from the state. He played a pivotal role in convincing our nation’s founders of the need for specific guarantees of religious freedom in the Bill of Rights. He stood toe-to-toe with the likes of Madison, Jefferson and Mason and never backed down on the way to the Bill of Rights, including the first sixteen words:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

Years later, George W. Truett, standing in the tradition of Helwys, Williams and Leland, spoke these words — along with 10,000 more — in a sermon preached on the East Steps of the U.S. Capitol in 1920:

Baptists have one consistent record concerning liberty throughout their long and eventful history. They have never been a party to oppression of conscience. They have forever been the unwavering champions of liberty, both religious and civil. ... [I]t is the natural and fundamental right of every human being to worship God or not, according to the dictates of conscience, and, as long as this does not infringe upon the rights of others, they are to be held accountable alone to God for all religious beliefs and practices. ... That utterance of Jesus, “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s,” is one of the most revolutionary utterances that ever fell from those lips. That utterance, once and for all, marked the divorcement of church and state. It marked a new era for creeds and deeds. It was the sunrise gun of the new day, the echoes of which are to go on and on until in every land, whether great or small, the doctrine shall have absolute supremacy everywhere of a free church in a free state.

II. The Baptist heritage of standing firm, together, for religious liberty and the separation of church and state in the context of theological and social diversity cannot be denied.

For the past seven decades, the Baptist commitment to church-state separation has been embodied in the Baptist Joint Committee, providing a united Baptist voice for religious liberty in the nation’s capital.

The Committee continues to hoist the banner of religious liberty, bringing together 14 different Baptist groups, hundreds of Baptist churches and thousands of individual Baptists — all cooperating in this common enterprise of defending and extending religious liberty for all. It is the only religious group in Washington that focuses only on religious liberty and church/ state separation. And as some Baptists began to abandon or neglect church-state separation as a core concern during the last 25 years, the BJC stood its ground, even when Baptists South of God pulled their support.

Religious liberty is a gift from God; it does not result from of any “toleration” on the part of the state. The architects of our nation fashioned political institutions to help protect that God-given religious freedom. The theological principle of “soul freedom” and its ethical expression in society – “religious religious liberty for all” — are protected by the constitutional constructs of “no establishment and free exercise.” Indeed, they form the twin pillars of our constitutional architecture.

We understand that government must not be allowed to either advance or inhibit religion. It must be neutral toward religion, turning it loose to flourish or flounder on its own. Government should accommodate religion without advancing it; protect religion without promoting it; lift burdens on religion, without extending religion a benefit. Our three-fold battle cry rings forth from the corner of Maryland Ave. and Second Street, across from the U.S. Supreme Court: Soul freedom is universal. Religious liberty is non-negotiable. Church-state separation is indispensable.

But—as this group well knows—not all Baptists share this commitment. The grand consensus on religious liberty has come apart as many Baptists have forgotten or ignored their heritage. The persecuted minority now flexes the muscles of its newfound majority status. The ability to control the reigns of government power leads many Baptists to want to use government to promote their mission and message.

Fisher Humphreys, in his book, The Way We Were, declares that the “loss of the principle of the separation of church and state is the greatest tragedy in the history of the Southern Baptist Convention.” With one early leader of the SBC proclaiming that the separation of church and state is the figment of the imagination of some infidel and others taking great delight in ignoring the principle, who can disagree with Humphreys’ assessment?

Many claim that the United States is a “Christian nation,” in which Christianity (their narrow version of it) is given a leg up, while others are at best tolerated in our increasingly pluralistic society. Yes, biblical values informed the development of American culture. Yes, Americans are a very religious people. But this country is not, and should never be, anything approaching a theocracy. We have a constitutional democracy in which all religions are welcomed and afforded real religious liberty, not merely tolerated.

Others argue that it is all right for government to promote religion as long as it does not prefer one tradition or religion to another. This is not what our framers intended. They considered three different amendments (1789) that would have made this idea of non-preferential support for religion a part of the Bill of Rights, but they rejected them time after time after time after time. They settled on the language we now have preventing laws even “respecting the establishment of religion.” And when government becomes involved in religion, it never does it evenhandedly; it always prefers one to another, usually the majority. This so-called “nonpreferentialism” is not only wrong, but as a practical matter, it cannot be done.

Some say we have freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. This sounds nice, but it is not true. Without freedom from religion — that is, freedom from state-sponsored religion — we can never have freedom of religion in the full sense of the word. If anyone’s religion is promoted by government, everyone else’s religion is disparaged and therefore threatened.

In light of these disagreements, it’s not surprise that Baptists are on both sides of many of our contemporary church-state issues. Although the Southern Baptist Convention did not change the article on religious liberty in the Baptist Faith and Message (2000), many Southern Baptists act as if they did.

Article XVII says: “Church and state should be separate. ... The church should not resort to civil power to carry on its work.” But some Southern Baptists — including the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission — supported a constitutional amendment in 1998 providing for some forms of state-sanctioned school prayer. The Baptist Joint Committee opposed that amendment. Many Baptists support prayer at football games, as long as every religion gets an opportunity to pray. How exactly do public schools achieve that when in most areas of our country they reflect an astonishing religious pluralism? How can they ever be evenhanded? In (Santa Fe School District) Birmingham, Alabama, who do you think will pray at the homecoming football game, the Baptist or the Buddhist? Who will be relegated to praying over the junior varsity baseball game in the spring?

The Baptist Faith and Message goes on to say: “The state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion.” But, many Southern Baptists support school vouchers and tax money to finance their social service ministries. No, for the government to take my tax money to pay for your religion or to take yours to pay for mine is, in Thomas Jefferson’s words, “sinful and tyrannical.” It was 200 years ago, and it still is today.

Article XVII also provides: “The gospel of Christ contemplates spiritual means for the pursuit of its ends.” But many Baptists approve of efforts to legislate the posting of the Ten Commandments as if Moses (or Almighty God for that matter) needs or wants the help of American politicians to defend the Decalogue. I can think of nothing better than for everyone to read and obey the Ten Commandments, but I can think of little worse than for government to tell them to do it.

Many Baptists support the HWPSPA— that would allow (indeed encourage) churches to endorse candidates for office— even from the pulpit! What a terrible idea! It would be more divisive than anything I could possible think of. It would be dismissive of our charge to rebuke the “principalities and powers” of our age. It would be corrosive of our prophetic edge and turn the prophets of our pulpits into puppets of politicians!

[In the interest of fairness and full disclosure, Baptists have come together and agreed on issues dealing mainly with the free exercise of religion. For example, the Baptist Joint Committee helped lead the broad coalition that worked for passage of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (2000). This much-needed legislation gives churches increased protection against the heavy hand of zoning officials and other land-use regulators when they impede the church’s ability to worship, proclaim the gospel and minister in our increasingly crowded and urbanized country. Baptists across our land, including the ERLC, rallied behind this legislation.] The mottled mindset of Baptist life, even about religious liberty and the separation of church and state, is unfortunate; but it is a fact of life that we must recognize and respond to.

III. So, what is our future? Will these principles survive in Baptist life and in this country during the next decade, the next century? The answers depend on how whether those committed to religious liberty will take up the fight in the marketplace of ideas. Our challenge is doubled by the recognition that it is not just some Baptists who disagree with our heritage, but other persons of faith, as well.

Several things can be done to ensure that our heritage is preserved as a legacy for the years to come.

First, reread the words of Scripture and heed the witness of Jesus. Jesus never took a coin from Caesar or accepted help from Herod in proclaiming the gospel and advancing his mission. The words: “Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13) — responding to the witness of a loving, evangelistic church — captures the essence of our biblical mission. This is something that no government can compel or even promote.

Second, recover our heritage — to recall the names of the heroes of our faith and their stories. The prophet Isaiah urges us to “look to the rock from which you are hewn, and to the quarry from which you were digged.” The writer of Hebrews calls them a “cloud of witnesses.” Carlyle Marney spoke of those “balcony people” — exemplars, role models, heroes who, from their lofty perch on the balcony of our lives, continue to encourage and inspire and lift us up to greater heights. George Truett wisely counseled that these “occasional backward looks” would give us “poise and patience and courage and fearlessness in faith.”

Third, remember what it’s like to be in the minority. Retelling the stories from the past will help. But we do not have to look to the past to learn a lesson here. We need only talk to Baptists in Russia who feel the heavy hand of the Russian Orthodox Church. And even closer to home, ask Baptists in Salt Lake City or New York City. Yes, we need to remember and know what it feels like to be a put-upon minority.

Fourth, resist triumphalism. This brash attitude—often seen behind an arrogant evangelism and the use of secular political power to advance the spiritual gospel— needs to be held in check. This “soul freedom for me but not for thee” is not only wrong, but also counterproductive. We need a spirit of humility and servanthood as we minister to the world and are tempted to form alliances with government.

And finally, redouble efforts to educate Baptists and all Americans. As I travel around the country, speaking and listening to people, I find most of them want to learn more about church-state issues. Yes, many ideologues have already made up their minds. But a large number of Baptists and other Americans — when they get past the facile bumper stickers and slick sound bites and think about these issues – are open to reasonable explanations. The BJC is here to help—not to do it alone—but to lead the way, by filing briefs in the USSC, lobbying Congress, launching education efforts (video, books, pamphlets, website and other resources), and speaking out in the national media.

So our destiny as freedom-loving Baptists and Americans depends on all of us coming together, to Reread Scripture, to Recover our heritage, to Remember what it was like to be a minority, to Resist a spirit of triumphalism and to Redouble our efforts to educate a denomination and a country that have lost their way.

Where have all the Baptists gone? Just like the flowers—they are right where they have always been. They can still be found in large numbers laboring at the intersection of church and state to preserve the heritage of Helwys, Williams, Leland and Truett. They can still be found at the intersection of Maryland Ave. & Second Street working everyday to be faithful to the example set by J.M. Dawson, James E. Wood and James M. Dunn (Texans all three). And they are right here in this room! Our challenge today is no more hopeless than the battles our forebears fought and won! We can do it too!

October 2003