Always great to hear a pastor give his parishioners a lesson or two on the doctrine of incorporation!

Mr. Rogers would have his listeners believe that he himself has discovered the “original intent” of the founding fathers – as if they spoke in unison. Most scholars haven’t bought the highly revisionist history that David Barton has been peddling for years. Unfortunately, I think Ronnie Rogers is sold – hook, line, and sinker.

His interpretation of those precious 16 words of the First Amendment would create 50 chaotic religion laboratories across America where each state is allowed to “establish” her own religion. Such an experiment wouldn’t bode well for Baptists. In fact, the conscience of Baptist children in states like Utah would suffer great harm indeed under Roger’s states-rights system….

As a side note, Hugo Black was a faithful Southern Baptist who taught a Sunday School class for years in Alabama. I know little about his theology but legal scholars consider him an absolutist or “literalist” when it comes to constitutional interpretation.

Thanks for your willingness to dialog.

I think it’s a mistake to blatantly dismiss history when coming to theological conclusions about doctrine. Our very humanity automatically requires that history be employed in these decisions. By you dismissing history, you actually used it in coming to a decision to not utilize it.

Pastors have a responsiblity to shepherd the church and Christians are to have their faith affect all areas of their life, including their culture, their environment, even their politics. Their faith should inform their positions in these areas and others. The pastor then has the responsibility to equip them theologically for making the right decisions to live worthy of our Lord, to be a positive witness to their family and their community. This does not mean he stand in the pulpit and tell them who to vote for. He is to equip them to make a decision that is glorifying to God.

As for the role of the Anabaptists, I can’t speak much to this because I know so little about it. But what I got from the sermon was not so much the connection of the Anabaptists to the Baptists, as the Anabaptists to the principle behind the separation of church and state.

Where Ronnie is taking this series and how it relates to those darn Baptists is something I don’t know and maybe you do since you obviously have knowledge and history in this area. Maybe he is going to bring together a Baptist/Anabaptist connection and that is what you object to. Again, I don’t know. Without having the knowledge you have, I can’t look ahead to see where he is taking this and why it may be a problem for the Baptist church today.

Thanks again for engaging with me. I do appreciate it. I need to let you know that I have Greek (argh!) in the morning and work to do in it tonight, so I really need to stay away from the blogs or I won’t get things done. I’ll check on them to read them, but won’t be able take time to respond until tomorrow.

Blessings,
Trish

Ya Think?

I appreciate the additional insight and comments you bring to this discussion. I will process yours also as I try to understand the issues surrounding this topic.

My reason for wanting to learn is that I was not raised Baptist and have only been a Baptist for the last 2 yrs.

It’s one of the reasons I think God’s the best comedian around because I was raised a NY Catholic in the 60′s & 70′s and never heard of a Baptist until I lived in Texas the for the first time in 1979.

My first lesson about the Baptist faith was that Catholic’s were idol worshippers. I spent the next 25 yrs or so not having a very high opinion of Baptists!

But God, possibly needing a good laugh, used a Baptist pastor to convince this Catholic girl she wasn’t saved. Then He sent her to a Baptist Seminary, then He had her join a Baptist church, and now He has me hungry to learn about my Baptist history.

Yeah, God’s enjoying Himself up there, but that’s ok, He’s allowed to since He’s done so much for me down here.

Blessings to all and thanks for your patience as I ask questions that may seem basic to some of you,
Trish

Thanks for your answer, I will think through what you have said. I have class this morning, it may be this afternoon or tonight before I get back to this.

Trish

Oh my…I need another cup of coffee!

The second paragraph above containing: “…even among those who do not embrace, in wholesale fashion, an alternate theory of Baptist origins….” should read: “even among those who embrace, in wholesale fashion, an alternate theory of Baptist origins.

Sorry. With that, I am…

Peter

The second paragraph above containing: “…even among those who do not embrace, in wholesale fashion, an alternate theory of Baptist origins….” should read: “even among those who do not embrace, in wholesale fashion, an alternate theory of Baptist origins.

Sorry. With that, I am…

Peter

My sister, one of the first statements Ronnie Rogers makes is that the 1st amendment prohibits interference with and forbids the Federal government from messing around with religion period. That is, the Church is protected from Federal government interference.

Yet you write: “The purpose of church and state was to protect the people from the government and not vice versa.” as if Rogers questions that. He does not.

Secondly, Debbie, to wash the sink of Anabaptist influence on the Baptist movement is historically suspect and you’d be hard pressed to offer a modern day Baptist historian who validates what you write–even among those who do not embrace, in wholesale fashion, an alternate theory of Baptist origins. As scholars, they attempt to deal with the evidence and rightly concede ground in doing so. You, however, seem to just wash it all down the drain. Interesting.

Finally, to suggest that pastors cannot/should not deal with politics in pulpit ministry is a curious statement coming from a Calvinist such as yourself whose historic position has been, in many ways, joined at the hip at Church and State. That’s the very genius of the Baptist distinctive Rogers is addressing: against the magisterial Reformers, the Baptists argued a hard, bold line between Church and State.

If pastors cannot deal with such issues, our roots as Baptists are themselves corrupt and illegitimate. Why? Neither should they have dealt with such issues. Consequently, our beginnings are suspect.

Grace, Debbie. With that, I am…

Peter