I’m thankful for Chip Stam’s Spurgeon quote on Christmas I received today — as I’m sure many of you did as part of his Worship Quote of the Week service. He reminded me of something that I’ve certainly noticed as I’ve been pouring through nineteenth century newspapers. Baptists in the early to mid-nineteenth century did not celebrate Christmas. Though Christians had been celebrating the Incarnation for centuries on December 25, Baptists–and other Protestants–seeing no warrant in Scripture to set aside a single day to celebrate the Incarnation decided it would be best not to. So, every year toward the end of December, the editor of a religious newspaper would write an article explaining why Christians ought not to celebrate Christmas.
By the mid-19th century, the anti-Christmas frost began to melt. Now, instead of editorials against Christmas, one began to see editorials explaining the utility of setting aside a day to remember the Incarnation. It was probably a wise move, at least for the sake of consistency, since the same Protestants in America had been having religious services to commemorate July 4, 1776 for upwards of 75 years! If they could give thanks for religious liberty in July, certainly they could give thanks for the Lord who took on flesh in December (even if no one was quite sure of the exact date of the Incarnation).
In any event, it must be the case that when Spurgeon preached on the matter, his words had quite some influence. Though he preached in London his sermons were soon printed throughout the United States, and, as Stam noted, though Spurgeon saw no clear Biblical warrant for the celebration of Christmas, he considered it a good idea nonetheless. Here is an excerpt from Spurgeons’ sermon. He went on to preach from Luke 2:10:
There are Protestants who have absorbed a great deal besides the Bible into their religion, and among other things they have accepted the authority of what they call “the Church,” and by that door all sorts of superstitions have entered. There is no authority whatever in the word of God for the keeping of Christmas at all, and no reason for keeping it just now except that the most superstitious section of Christendom [he means Catholics] has made a rule that December 25th shall be observed as the birthday of the Lord, and the church by law established in this land (the Church of England] has agreed to follow in the same track. You are under no bondage whatever to regard the regulation. We owe no allegiance to the ecclesiastical powers which have made a decree on this matter, for we belong to an old-fashioned church which does not dare to make laws, but is content to obey them. At the same time the day is no worse than another, and if you choose to observe it, and observe it unto the Lord, I doubt not he will accept your devotion: while if you do not observe it, but unto the Lord observe it not, for fear of encouraging superstition and will-worship, I doubt not but what you shall be as accepted in the non-observance as you could have been in the observance of it. Still, as the thoughts of a great many Christian people will run at this time towards the birth of Christ, and as this cannot be wrong, I judged it meet to avail ourselves of the prevailing current, and float down the stream of thought. Our minds will run that way, because so many around us are following customs suggestive of it, therefore let us get what good we can out of the occasion. There can be no reason why we should not, and it may be helpful that we should, now consider the birth of our Lord Jesus. We will do that voluntarily which we would refuse to do as a matter of obligation: we will do that simply for convenience sake which we should not think of doing because enjoined by authority or demanded by superstition. [Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892). “The Great Birthday” from TWELVE CHRISTMAS SERMONS DELIVERED AT THE METROPOLITAN TABERNACLE. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1976, p. 91, 101. ISBN 0-8010-8081-9.]
I know that I have posted about this before, but today’s Courier Journal has an article about 4th Ave. Baptist Church closing and merging back into Walnut Street. After today’s services with two baptisms and interviews with new members, I am so grateful that God has given us an opportunity to continue to minister through this place. To hear young college-aged adults say that they are glad to be part of a church where they are learning and growing as Christians — and learning what the church is supposed to be — has to be the most encouraging moment of the year. Sola Deo gloria.
Greg made the point in last Sunday’s sermon at Third Avenue that the church is not a day spa, catering to the needs of her members as if they were clients. This means that pastors, especially those who preach, have a great responsibility to prepare themselves before God to give the congregation what she truly needs: the Word! This was a point made by a Baptist, Isaac Backus, way back in 1789. He encouraged congregations to support their pastors adequately so those ministers of the gospel had the time to devote to study. Backus knew time in the study would bear fruit in the pulpit:
I confess, a little Learning, and less Study, may furnish a Man with such discourse as may please some weak Persons, ‘that judge of a Sermon by the loudness of the Voice, and affectionate Sentences, or can fancy themselves to be fed with the Ashes of jingling Words, and Cadency of Terms in a Discourse. But Alas! The seeming Warmth of Affection that is stirred by such Means, is as short-liv’d as a Land-flood that [hath] no Spring to feed it. He that will do the Souls of his People good, and approve himself a Pastor after God’s own Heart, must feed them with Knowledge and Understanding, and endeavour to maintain a constant Zeal and Affection in them, by well informing their Judgments, and such an opening of the Mind of God from the Scriptures, as may command their Consciences: And this is not to be expected, but from him that labours in his Study, as well as in the Pulpit. Mistake me not; I know the the Success and Fruit of all the Studies and Labours of Men that preach in the Gospel, is from the Grace and Power of the Holy Ghost; but the Assistance of the Spirit is to be expected by us in the way of our Duty.
Those of you preparing for pastoral ministry in seminary–be encouraged, your time is time well spent. Those of you preaching, make sure to spend quality time in the study beforehand, lest you give the people “Ashes of jingling words” and rely simply upon “Cadency of Terms in a Discourse.” That may be pleasing to the ear, but it leaves congregations wishing for something more substantial.
I recently read a blog asking if SBC folk can be evangelicals at www.sbcwitness.com. (of course I had to respond and give my two cents). The blogger said we are not evangelicals, but was a little fuzzy when it comes to how so many SBC theologians and pastors are leaders in what he calls the “right” of evangelicals. What do our evangelical elders think of this proposal?
I will quickly state that we should keep close ties with other believers and organizations who are in agreement with what we proclaim is the gospel and how we proclaim it. Yes, there are distinctives that we must hold to–not because that is how my grandpappi did it, but because of what we learn from the scriptures.
Does anyone even know what an evangelical is these days? Maybe we should ask the postevangelicals or the Neo-evangelicals to find out what they are improving on or moving beyond. As a systematic theologian I constantly think in categories, but man, it is getting ridiculous with the evangelical world.
Aaron is going to give the four of us who read this blog whip lash from his diversions. First we go to the penguins, then Wednesday nights, and now 19th century Baptists. Who can keep up? If he weren’t going to be unavailable for a couple days, I would upbraid him. Instead, I will follow his diversion and bring it to our neighborhood.
When Southern Seminary moved to Louisville in 1879 it was located near 5th and 6th Streets and Broadway. Basically, very near the current main branch of Louisville Free Public and Brown Cadillac. One of John Broadus’ daughters married one of his students, a man named A. T. Robertson. Robertson became well known for his accomplishments in NT studies. The Robertsons lived in a house on Third Street. They were members of Fourth Ave. Baptist Church, which is at the corner of Fourth and Oak and is still active but in decline.
Their children would walk down to the Seminary and one of their daughters even learned Greek at an early age. I was interested to read one day how Robertson’s children played in Central Park where my children now often go to play. I have often wondered if those children played under some of the same trees that I walk under and my children play under. Robertson’s daughter (Broadus’ granddaughter) who learned Greek was named Charlotte. Charlotte also took part in some of the mission work of the Seminary that met the needs of folks in this part of Louisville. When she was a teenager, Charlotte became ill and died after a few months. The Seminary community was stricken by her death.
As I walk in Central Park, I often think of Charlotte who played there and of the parents and grandparents who loved her. But even her brothers and sisters who lived to adulthood are now dead. All flesh is like grass. We would all do well to remember, as one preacher said in a sermon that I’ll never forget, “We are free falling into eternity.”
Jeremiah Jeter (1802-1880) was a Baptist pastor and newspaper editor from Virginia and one of the key founders of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1845, serving as the first president of the Foreign Mission Board. John Broadus (1827-1895), also from Virginia, may be more well known to our community because of his appointment as professor of New Testament and homiletics at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1859. Broadus’s influence went beyond the convention–and the South. In 1889 he delivered the Lyman Beecher lectures at Yale University. That same year he became president of Southern Seminary.
In 1857, long before Broadus was famous, his young wife, Maria, died. He kept a letter that his friend, Jeremiah Jeter had written to him. I’ve looked at this letter many times. I’m struck both by the words of comfort found here and the words of exhortation. We are called, whatever our circumstances may be, “To be still, and know that the Lord is God.” That is true wisdom. Here’s the letter:
October 22, 1857
Dear Bro. Broaddus,
Before I received your favor of the 20th, inst, I had heard the sad intelligence that the apprehension concerning your wife which you expressed in your letter had been quickly and overwhelmingly realized. I now write to assure, my dear brother, of my sincere sympathy in your deep affliction. Experience has taught me how to sympathize with you. Twice has the bitter cup which you have been called to drink been pressed to my own lips; and those, and only those, who have tasted it know its bitterness. To lose a good wife, at any time, and under any circumstances, is a severe trial; but to lose one so young, so accomplished, so amiable and so beloved as was yours, and almost without preparation for the stroke, is one of the sorest afflictions which can overtake the poor, suffering man. It is a bereavement that falls with crushing weight on the heart. It makes home a desolation, and inverts with gloom all that is beautiful and interesting on earth. Afficious memory, too, as if to torture the soul, will bring up a thousand departed joys, never to return again. Alas, my brother, I mourn with you. If a great loss can justify great grief, you can find a plea for your tears. But has not this affliction its sweetness too? It is bitter, very bitter, but the bitterness is not unmixed. The loved one – where is she? She is not lost, but saved. Would you, could you, recall her from the realms of light and blessedness? She cannot come to you; but you may go to her. And has not chastisement an instructive voice? Is it not teaching you lessons, important lessons – hard to learn but which can be learned nowhere so well as in the school of affliction. “Vanity of vanities; all is vanity.” Never did I truly believe this … until I stood beside the cold, pallied, lifeless body of the idolized wife of my youth; and then I know it was true. I need not point you to sources of consolation – you know them – you have directed others to them – receive instruction from your own lips – show how well you can practice the precepts you have so earnestly enforced on others. Be still; and know that the Lord is God. Kiss the rod that smites you. “It is the Lord; let me do what seemeth good.”
By now all of our faithful readers will think that this is certainly a lifeless blog — and tradition — that we are discussing. I thought that by this time one of our errant elders would have posted something to jump start this blog. Keith was last talking about how his theological language was formed in part by tradition. For most of our members who are not Ph.D. students in theology, they may be interested to know how tradition shapes, for good and ill, our practice. For the average church-goer in all denominations, traditional practices are one of the strongest forms of transmitting the theological concepts Keith was talking about. Even those who claim not to rely on tradition do. We, for example, always collect an offering in the course of our Sunday morning service. Why? I could give other examples, but the real question is: what are the “rules” for relying on traditional practices? Are there any?
