The Mission of the General Baptists

A SERMON BY DR. WILLIAMS

Introductory sermon at General Association, New Bethel church, Missouri, Nov. 10, 1892, by Dr. A. D. Williams, President Oakland City College.

The Savior also assumes that, as men may, and do, "discern" these natural "signs," so may they discern signs of the moral world. The Jews did not discern the signs—the prophecies and miracles, and his own "mighty works" and divine teachings—which proclaimed him the world's Messiah. But, it was only because of their own moral blindness. Having eyes, they still did not see. Had their minds and hearts been right, they would have recognized him, as did Simeon and John the Baptist. Right hearts and heads may therefore discern the moral signs of the times, and know what God is teaching by them.

It becomes therefore an important question: "Can General Baptists so correctly and clearly "discern" the moral signs of our times, as to foresee, or know, what God would have us do? Undoubtedly it can be done, if only our eyes are clear and strong enough. Are theyt Let us make an effort to "discern" the "Signs of the Times" for us. What has God for us to do in these times of ours?

1. There is now a clear and strong demand for a Christianity that will reach the masses. On every hand is the inquiry—"What shall we do to reach the masses?" The anarchy, for which we hang men, exists only because Christians do not reach that class of the masses. Put into them the spirit of The Nazarene, and they are anarchists no longer. Put into all men that spirit, and there is no longer any excuse for anarchy. Moreover, what is sometimes called the higher classes are constantly coming up from the so-called middle classes—and they in turn from the lower—from the masses—from the common people. To Christianize the common people, the masses, is to get down to the very origin and foundation of power; is to invigorate and heal the very fountain of lifers stream. It is the best and most important thing of all.

Many churches of Christendom are conscious that they have little power with the masses. They have splendid churches. But the common people do not attend them. They have learned and eloquent preachers. But the masses do not listen to them. They have much of the spirit of the Master, but they cannot get the multitudes within its reach. We sometimes misunderstand and denounce such. This is a mistake. They have their place and their mission. But it is not to reach the masses. They often long for it; but it is not for them.

But, what they long for and cannot get, is ours without effort. We can and do reach the ears and the hearts of the common people. They hear us gladly— as they did the Great Master himself. We are even in danger of undervaluing our high mission in this respect, because it is so natural and easy to us. Yet, we may rightfully claim and cherish it as a jewel without price. We may and ought to reach out for other things that we do not possess. But never at the expense of our power with the common people.

Our northern brethren saw the need of culture and progress. But they sought them and gained them, at the expense of their power with the masses, and have not doubled in fifty years. Let us not imitate that example, but cling tenaciously to that most precious gift—-power among the common people.

2. People of all churches are crying out for more spirituality—more of that power that came down in unmeasured power on that memorable "Day of Pentecost." Christianity has doctrine—truth—just as a man has a body. But, as even a human body without life, is dead, so even Christian doctrine without the New Birth and the New Life is dead, being alone. If the doctrine of the New Birth, "from above"—from God, and the consequent new and higher Divine Life is true, then nothing but an experience of that new and higher Life will avail anything.

And it is significant that the most signal victories of the Cross over sin are won by this more vital and spiritual form of Christianity. Men baptized with the Spirit from on high, make the tall cedars to bow, where argument and eloquence are unavailing. Even many of the accessions to less spiritual churches are persons converted under more spiritual influences, and joined them for the sake of other desirable things, which, unfortunately, some spiritual Christians do not have.

And this is what might be expected. Men; hardened by sin and enchained by its habits, are not easily nor frequently won by words. "Convinced against their will, they are of the same opinion still." That is, sin and sinful habits are too strong for argument and logic. But, make a man feel that his Christian neighbor has some vital inner power which be has not, to help him in the battle of life, and he cries out like a hungry man for bread, or a drowning man for help. Go to him with words, go to him with arguments and logic. But, be sure your words and arguments are but the medium for conveying to him the divine life and power.

Fortunately, General Baptists have, from the first, given prominence to this new, spiritual birth and life, that is vitally and fundamentally more than an assent to doctrine or a determination of the will. As conditions these are important; but, at best, they can only lead to the Fountain, which alone has cleansing and spiritual life-giving power.

"What can wash away my sin? Nothing but the blood of Jesus."

It will be a sad day for General Baptists when they cease to have revivals—when their ministers are satisfied without them—and when they think of receiving members into the church without a genuine and sound conversion—the reception of a new and spiritual life. It is not well to insist on exactly the same pattern of spiritual operations. There are '"diversities of operations"—1 Cor. 12:6. But whatever is accepted must be an operation of the Spirit.

Nor will it be well to attempt to repress expressions of that "joy that is like an overflowing stream." Let it overflow. There is no need that those, having such experiences, if real, should "hold their peace." It is not due anywhere else in human life. Joy, as well as sorrow, everywhere, make more or less audible expression. Only those object to it who are strangers to it themselves.

3. Nor does there appear need of change in doctrine or usages.

In doctrine, especially, the world is fast coming to us. Calvinism is melting away, and all the Calvinistic bodies are wrestling with the question of "revision." They are not satisfied with the old hard doctrine. It is a mercy that we are free from it. Close communion is fast becoming an unbearable burden to the mass of the Baptist membership. They are growing restless under the assumption and arrogance of running a line ot division through the body of Christ. The world, outside, as well as those inside the churches, is feeling that "all we are brethren," and should act as brethren, in spite of our differences. The companies of an army may have their different messes. But they do not refuse to share a meal with a comrade from another company, nor kick him away from their camp fire.

Half century ago it was denied that immersion was the necessary meaning of "baptizo," or that it was the practice of the primitive church. Now, no one pretends to find any primary or literal meaning of the word but "to dip, to plunge, to immerse," and no accepted authority in ecclesiastical history: questions that immersion was the ancient practice. Pedobaptists are now compelled to fall back on the doctrine of the Catholics, that the (Catholic) church may change the mode, or on the Andover doctrine that "the church has a consciousness of liberty"—whatever that may mean—"as to mode of baptism," or to the more general assertion that the mode is of no material consequence. We may well be content to follow the way of the Master confessedly went, and let those who dare depart from it.

Our usages are eminently satisfactory. Too much centripetal power would draw all bodies of the universe into some central sun. Too much centrifugal power would send them into independent chaos. Episcopal bodies have too much of the centripetal. So called independent bodies may have too much of the centrifugal, and fly off into confusion. The Close Baptists, if they carried out their theory—as in various respects they do not—would speedily divide into warring factions. By an unwritten, but rigorous law, they hold their churches, and associations even, to a very thorough and often tyrannical denominationalism. But we prefer to be under a written rather than an unwritten law. Majorities and ambitious leaders are more tyrannical without constitutional provisions and laws than with them. With them, I can defend myself; without them, I have no protection against injustice and tyranny.

No one believing in the associational principal can logically or consistently object to it as to associations. If churches may properly unite in an association, on •the same ground associations may unite in a General Association. There are also needed general Christian works, of a wider nature that can be better carried on • by a central organization. Indeed, there are some that cannot well be carried on without one. So, our central organization is a manifest improvement on the old Baptist theory.

Our Presbytery, too, both throws more protection over our ministers against assaults from without, and manifestly more against unworthiness within. All independent bodies who are without something like our Presbytery, suffer immensely from the irresponsibility and unworthiness of so called ministers, who cannot be brought to justice. Such men, of course, are always forward to fight for this irresponsibility, and against any control whatever; while men acting justly and needing no control, never fight against it, nor feel any evil effects from it. 0 how we have suffered from irresponsible and unworthy men—tearing and dividing the flock, with so little protection against them.

It is worthy of note that all Liberal Baptists of the country have the Presbytery—not all in name, but in principal and in fact. The Southern Freewill Baptists have it just as we do. The northern Freewill Baptists have essentially the same in their Ministers' Conference, or the Quarterly Meeting. The Christians, (New Lights,) have it in their Conference, and "The Church of God" a still mare rigorous one in their "Eldership "

4. Of the points thus far considered, we may congratulate ourselves. We are in the right road and in advance of most others. But there may be other things, in which we are not so fortunate.

Our fathers were progressives. They were in advance of their times. But are we of ours? Have we not comparatively lost ground? The world is moving—moving as never before, and the man who will not move with it will simply "get left." Farmers will pot use such machines as they used fifty years ago. School districts will not employ such teachers as they did half a century ago. Lawyers and doctors that had plenty pf practice two generations ago would have none now. Is it reasonable to expect that ministers will form an exception? If we do expect any such thing, we will certainly be disappointed. The people demand progress in the ministry, as in other things.

Old men may use the good old sing song style, and say "ah" and "ama" every few words, or may run along through a sentence on a monotone, like an Indian, to come up with a jerk, something like a yell, at the end, or may scream until you can hardly tell what they are trying to say, and thus ruin their vocal organs, and give out with "throat ail." People will pardon them. They will soon die and be gone. But such things will be pardoned in young men only in the back districts,—and not much longer there. Such outlandish habits of speech must be broken up or they will break up their congregations, sooner or later, and compel them to give up the business. It is only a »—-• question of time.

Some have the idea that such things are necessary, to reach and please the masses. But listen to the labor speakers. They reach and move the masses. Do they resort to such habits of speech? By no means. Would they not certainly fail, if they did? Let preachers take lessons of them—especially General Baptist preachers, who would reach the masses.

Then ministers must "study." How many ministers can tell how many books there are in the Bible, or how many men wrote those books? How many can give anything like an intelligent analysis of their contents? How many can give intelligent proofs of the Divine Existence, the Inspiration of the Bible, or successfully defend the doctrines they profess to believe. In many matters, our Sunday-school scholars-will put to shame but too many of our ministers. If they cannot do these things how can they make "'full proof of their ministry" on more important things.

Not only does a minister need to study the Bible, but other books, that will help in the understanding and defense of it—-of which there are a goodly number. Do you think a lawyer, or a doctor could succeed, who gave as little attention to the books of his trade, as many ministers do to theirs? How many know, much less have studied, the coarse of reading, some time since laid down for our ministers.

Most of all, ministers must be thinkers, able to grasp the great thoughts of the gospel and the times. Does any one fail to see that even the common people '-are most attracted to the preacher who deals in the greatest thoughts, especially if they are clothed in simple language—and it is upstarts who use "big words," while great men clothe great thoughts in the simplest language, easily understood. Men can study outside the schools, but it is seldom done. The young minister, therefore, who neglects the advantages of the school is simply rolling up his talent In a napkin. Churches sometimes flatter them, that theydo not »^o?such study. But it is the worst kind of flattery to result in untold mischief in the end.

Please do not mistake. Education is not to preach science, or anything whatever, save the gospel, It is only to help preach the gospel better. It is not to make the preacher use speech the people do not understand, but to put greater thought into speech that they will understand better. This does not mean that the minister shall use slang, or improper language, eyen where the people do. He is not to say "you uns" and, "we uns" or "keer" and "whar," but while using the vernacular of the people use it correctly, -that his speech be not a stumbling block in the way of the better informed.

Another need of progress is in the better support of the ministry. Ministers are told by Paul to give themselves "wholly" to the ministry. But how can they, unless the churches will support them? Paul also says—"Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they which preach the gospel shall live of the gospel."—1 Cor. 9; i4. But you say:—"How can we? We are not able.' This is a mistake, and a self-deception. It is not so much ability as disposition that is wanting. Were a child to become unfortunate, and need it, there are few families that could not, and would not, support such an one all alone—without the help of other families. Now hear the Savior say:—"He that loveth son or daughter more than Me, is not worthy of Me." Besides, if you will give me all that General Baptists spend for tobacco, I will support all their ministers - much better than they are now supported. I do not say you shall give up your tobacco —though that may be a good deed. But I do say that a people that can afford so much for tobacco can support their ministry, if their hearts are in it, and they try hard enough. One tenth is the old Jewish law. We could, even do that. But it is not necessary. Much less than that will do.

More interest needs be taken in gospel work— in foreign missions, and especially in home missions. Every association ought to have, and may have, a successful home mission station growing in some town within its borders. Our publishing interests ought to be pushed by every one of us. Put the Messenger into every one of our families, and see that every one of our publications is sold to every one we can induce to buy it. The College, too, just now needs especial aid. It is within reach of success. But it is not beyond failure. Apathy is its worst enemy. You can kill it by simply doing nothing for it. It will not die from active opposition. If it dies at all, it will only be because you do not do in time what you intend to do some time. Make that some time now, and the College is safe.

We need it, and at once, for our young ministers. They need an education, and many of them will have it. The question is, shall we give it to them, or shall they go elsewhere for it? If they go elsewhere, there is danger that they will stay elsewhere. Or, if they come back, they will have caught more or less foreign infection. We do not want any of these results. We want—we need—the trained men, and we must train them ourselves. We must have the College. We must endow it. We must make it a grand success.

When our northern brethren started their educational work, they did not make it go, until their ministers, the leaders of the flock, some of whom had nothing but their families—and debts—gave notes for JSipo each, paid the interest for a while, and finally paid the principal. Are we not as enterprising and devoted as they? It might cost some sacrifice, But will it not pay? It is one of the grandest of ideas, that we can thus, even by sacrifice, put money where it will be doing good for all coming time when we are at rest, and can do no more earthly work? Thus we shall not only speak, but work also, when we are dead. It is a question whether some of us, instead of preaching for parsimonious churches that will not support the gospel, had not better go to work to earn money to preach through others long after we are dead,

5, Another thing demanding attention is the proper balancing of our conservative and progressive elements. The young and progressive must not go so fast, and especially so injudiciously, as to break sympathy with old veterans. Young men must heed the wisdom of age, and even bear with its infirmities. Old men must encourage the young, bear with their indiscretions, and be glad to see them in the fore front of the battle. The young men must not try to "put the old men in the shade." Old men must not "rap the young on the nose." Neither age is superfluous. Both are useful and necessary.

Especially do associations and presbyteries need to exercise the utmost caution and forbearance in this matter. The young men better wait. The old better gracefully yield. If either party is obstinate, let the other party show its superior wisdom and greater grace, by withholding and biding its time. The Indian family had more good sense than others sometimes manifest. When the Indian got drunk, the squaw kept sober, and when the squaw got drunk, the Indian kept sober. By all means, let one party keep sober, even if the other does not. Let at least one party have grace enough to forbear—and it always takes two parties to make a fight. Let us have no fights in the family. It is altogether unseemly and wicked.

6. Last, and most important of all, is entire consecration of ourselves to God.

First of all, the Divine Life must be in us. "Know ye not," says Paul, "that Jesus Christ is in you, except you be reprobates." What is it for Christ to be "in" us? —except it be that he is to be to us what the mind that is "in" the body is to the body. The mind is the essential part of us. The body is nothing, except as the house for the mind. The mind rules. The body serves it at Us bidding, in like manner, let Christ be in us—w the oKw/er, teadet, guide,—we only ready to do his will—as implicitly as the body serves (he mind and does its will,

Not that, as is sometimes said, we shall give up our will—that would make us less than men—only 'moral machines. But it means that we shall come so into harmony with the true and the best—which is the same thing as harmony with God—that we will the same thing God wills, and so be at one with God. I don't want God to will for me. That would be God's will—not mine, I don't want him to do anything for me that I can do for myself. That would take away my moral freedom, and make me a slave. God does not want me to be a slave, but a free-man.—"Whom the Son makes free, shall be Free indeed,"—not a slave. Here is one of the mistakes of our Calvinist friends. Their theory deprives the Christian of his will—his freedom, after conversion, and makes him the Lord's slave, not his "free indeed" child.

"They that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts thereof." What is it to be "crucified," but to be dead, insensible—in the case of the Christian, to be insensible to the affections and lusts—the desires, vanities, follies, aspirations, ambitions—of the world? On the other hand. we are to be "alive" to God—to be sensible, mindful, longing after, and fulfilling all the mind that was in Christ Jesus, the Lord! "Let the mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus." Now, are we enjoying, doing, fulfilling, manifesting the "mind" of Christ, and that only? Remember it is a life of enjoying as well as doing and of enjoying in doing. If we are not enjoying, it is because we are not consecrated to God as we should be.

Let us reach out after God. Let us cry out after all communicable fullness of God, until we can shout 'forth his praises, and gladly do all His will.