Review of A Piety above the Common Standard, by Tony Chute

Anthony L. Chute, A Piety above the Common Standard: Jesse Mercer and Evangelistic Calvinism. Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 2004, first paperback ed., 2005. 238pp. $25.00, paper.

The concerns of the day could be summarized as follows: disputes over Calvinism, with anti-Calvinists pursuing a divisively vocal course; earnest desire for “a revival that will last all winter;” intense debates about world missions and new methods being used to reach the lost; conflicting opinions on the question of whether persons baptized by others need to be re-baptized; debates over whether theological education breeds pride and liberalism; and divided opinions on the possibility of cooperation with those who disagree. 

As much as this may sound like a description of the contemporary scene, it is a description of the issues of Jesse Mercer’s day. Anthony Chute, who now teaches at California Baptist University, has given us a valuable window into the life and times of Jesse Mercer (1769–1841). This is a book from which every Baptist pastor would benefit and which every seminary student at a Southern Baptist school should be required to read. As will become plain below, this book is a short course on soteriology, missiology, ecclesiology, denominational and associational cooperation, and, of course, history. 

Chute opens his treatment of “Father Mercer” with a preface that whets the reader’s appetite for the rest of the study. He clearly states “The central question” of his book: “In what ways did Jesse Mercer defend missions, education, and cooperative efforts on the basis of a Calvinistic theology” (xi). The first chapter sets the stage with a consideration of pioneer Georgia, the influence of George Whitefield, and Georgia Baptists’ pursuit of religious liberty, in which Silas Mercer, Jesse’s father, played an important role. Chapter two overviews the life and times of Jesse Mercer. Perhaps the most influential Baptist in Georgia at the time, Jesse Mercer owned and edited the The Christian Index, “the oldest continuing weekly religious periodical in the nation” (and which Al Mohler edited before becoming president at SBTS). Mercer was also a major impetus behind ministerial education, with the result that Mercer University was named in his honor, and he was the key figure in the founding of the Georgia Baptist Convention. In addition, Mercer made a significant contribution to worship and Christian devotion through his widely used hymnal, The Cluster of Spiritual Songs, Divine Hymns, and Sacred Poems. 

Jesse Mercer’s Calvinism is presented in chapter 3. Like all who identify with Calvinism, Mercer was led to his theological position by the Bible, not by any special allegiance to John Calvin. Interestingly, Mercer identified himself more with John Gill than Andrew Fuller. Those who severed the sovereignty of God from human responsibility were doubtful of Mercer’s commitments to his theology because he was so zealous for missions, but the problem was with their refusal to embrace the tension between sovereignty and responsibility, not with any position Mercer held. This chapter is a masterpiece of historical theology. Chute ably summarizes theological positions and persons, showing how the theological contributions of Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and Edwards were the lifeblood of the early Baptists in America. Mercer was not one of those theologians who think that God revealed the truths of election and effectual calling for ministers to hide them. Mercer published on these doctrines and insisted repeatedly on his faithful adherence to them. As Chute puts it, “He took sides, and people noticed” (81). 

One of the most helpful features of Chute’s account is the way that he adeptly summarizes the dispute between Primitive Baptists and the Missionary Baptist party led by Jesse Mercer. Both Primitive and Missionary Baptists were Calvinists. Primitive Baptists opposed missionary efforts on the basis of their ecclesiology, arguing that cooperation between churches was unbiblical. Only individual churches should send out missionaries. So, for instance, John Leland, who is well known for his labors for religious liberty (see the recent volume edited by Thomas White, Jason G. Duesing, and Malcolm Yarnell, First Freedom) was “opposed to missions not because of a concern for Calvinistic theology being disregarded but out of [a] desire for simplicity and freedom in both government and religion” (134, Chute cites Tom Nettles, By His Grace and For His Glory, who has shown that Leland did not oppose missions because of his Calvinism). What’s more, Primitive Baptists thought that men such as Luther Rice, who handled the large sums of money gathered from cooperating churches, were corrupt and untrustworthy. Rice, who was friends with Mercer, did have financial troubles, and one committee concluded that he had acted “injudiciously” and wrote: “From various developments it appears that Mr. Rice is a very loose accountant and has imperfect talents for the disbursement of money” (165 n. 10).  

Chute models scholarly humility and fairness as he faithfully presents the arguments of Cyrus White, who—in the face of pleas from Mercer and others that he not pursue a divisive course—published his argument for a general view of the atonement in 1830. Chute summarizes White’s argument, showing it to be a powerful case for the view that “limited atonement was unscriptural and a deterrent to evangelism” (83). Many of White’s points are still heard among us today. In making his argument, however, White contended for the moral government theory of the atonement and opposed the idea of a substitutionary atonement. In response, for the health of the churches, Jesse Mercer published ten letters defending limited atonement in The Christian Index. Mercer’s arguments were welcomed by Calvinistic Missionary Baptists as they proved that the Calvinistic heritage was not being abandoned, and the Georgia Baptist Convention distanced themselves from White’s views by “censuring him in the convention minutes” (90). This account of the dispute between Mercer and White is an excellent summary of the general and limited views of the atonement. Any soteriology class would benefit from reading of the clash of these “two views” in historical context. 

Jesse Mercer believed that revival would arise from pure churches. Thus, church discipline was very important to him. His churches held monthly meetings to address instances of behavioral disorder in the flock (see further Gregory A. Wills, Democratic Religion). Contemporary SBC churches have much to learn from Jesse Mercer on this point, and Chute’s chapter on Mercer and revival is important reading for anyone thinking about ecclesiology. 

Mercer was nothing less than tenacious in his support of missions. Anyone training for pastoral ministry should be required to read Chute’s fifth chapter, which details the way that Jesse Mercer led Baptists to cooperate together to reach the “heathen” with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Those who think that Calvinism is a threat to missions and evangelism should consider this chapter, for “Jesse Mercer steadfastly asserted his fidelity to the Calvinistic perspective of John Gill and still found scriptural warrant to justify his participation in the missionary movement” (158). 

Jesse Mercer believed in theological education, and his humility is a model for all who follow Christ. Mercer, one of the most respected and articulate communicators of Scriptural truth in his generation, wrote, “The Bible is a learned book, and cannot be understood well without much pious knowledge and learning. He who now addresses you regrets that he knows so little of the Bible. After reading and studying it for nearly half a century in some sort, he has to make this humbling confession, that he knows, to his shame, comparatively but little of the Bible” (188, emphasis original). 

Mercer held firmly to his theological positions, and he sought earnestly to promote cooperation and agreement among his fellow Baptists. Seeking cooperation among Primitive and Missionary Baptists, Mercer opposed the decision of Primitive Baptists to require re-baptism of those who came to them from Missionary Baptist Churches (206). His goals were the glory of God, the good of the churches, and the propagation of the gospel.

Every Baptist owes a debt of gratitude to Anthony Chute, a debt we should seek to pay by reading this book. Anthony Chute’s A Piety above the Common Standard belongs on the short list, with Wills’ Democratic Religion and Nettles’ three volumes on The Baptists, of recent books that any student of Baptist history must read. Father Mercer has much to say to his progeny, who would do well to learn from his writings and follow his example in theology, ecclesiology, missiology, and cooperation.

Summer issue of SBJT on its way

I just received this notice from The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology:

The Summer issue of The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology has just been mailed to subscribers. The title is “The Atonement in Focus.” A list of the article titles and authors is available here:. We have provided online access to the editorial by Stephen Wellum and the article by Simon Gathercole (”The Cross and Substitutionary Atonement”). In addition to the authors listed on the above page, The SBJT Forum includes essays by D. A. Carson, Thomas R. Schreiner, Bruce A. Ware, and Jim Hamilton.

I highly recommend a subscription to SBJT, which you can pursue here.

My contribution is available by permission here.

Does the ETS have as much backbone as the Tyndale Fellowship?

The issue is not exactly as posed in the heading of this blog, but surely the members of the Evangelical Theological Society can stomach the doctrinal basis of the Tyndale Fellowship.

Denny Burk and Ray Van Neste are trying to make the boundaries of the Evangelical Theological Society more clear, and they’re adapting the doctrinal basis of the Tyndale Fellowship for the purpose. You can read all about it here.

An Interview with the Editors of A THEOLOGY FOR THE CHURCH, Part 2

Part 1 is here.

Part Two

Is there a “reading strategy” that works best for a book like this? Should we try to read straight through it? Or, should we read the parts of it that are relevant to the texts we’re teaching or preaching? Or, should we read a chapter of this Theology then compare it to the same chapter in another Theology? What do you recommend?

 

DPN: Both strategies have merit, though I think many people are more likely to read “straight through” if they are reading in a group or a class. I like the idea of reading it in parts and comparing it to other sources – that might be a good way for people to develop the habit of consulting good resources when theological questions arise. Or perhaps a pastor could do a series of sermons that treats key texts for major doctrines and then congregants could pursue further study with TFC as the preacher works from doctrine to doctrine.

PRS: Reading strategy probably depends on the context of the reader. If one is reading it by himself, I would recommend moving around based on present interest. One might even coordinate it with an existing church study or personal Bible reading schedule (e.g., read Mark Dever’s chapter on ecclesiology while reading through the book of Acts or the Pastoral Epistles). If one is reading it with a group (I know several pastors who lead large and small groups through theology texts on a regular basis), it seems to make more sense to move through it from beginning to end.

Dr. Akin mentions in the preface that if we can teach children and teens science and math, we can teach them Bible and Theology. Do you see this book as one that teens will read or is it more for those who will teach the teens? How should we pass this information on to the next generation?

DPN: That probably depends on the child or teen, and their parents. I don’t think the book is over the head of students who apply themselves. I would hope that parents and others who teach our children would make use of a book like TFC. I spend a good bit of time with teenagers, since I have two of them, and I find that they and their friends are quite interested in matters theological, and they aren’t afraid to ask serious questions as they study the Scriptures. I think one of the strengths of TFC is that it is written with sufficient clarity to be accessible to teenagers who want to study hard. I hope we are building churches that cultivate such a desire among young people to feed on God’s Word, and to use resources like TFC to aid them.

PRS: I am planning to make the text required reading for each member of the Schemm tribe before they leave home—if for no other reason than to boost book sales. On a more serious note, I think Dr. Akin is exactly right about this. Most of the chapters in TFC are accessible to a thoughtful 15 or 16 year old. To be sure, teens will not get it all the first time through. But will the more mature reader even get it all on a first pass? Of course not. Learning theology—knowing God—is a lifelong pursuit and should begin as early as possible.

I think the best way to pass down the great theological traditions of the church to the next generation is to personally embody a soul-satisfying love for God and his church. Once that fire is kindled, the main work is done.

We hear a lot about expositional preaching these days. How will A Theology for the Church help us do exposition? Related to this, how do we balance proclaiming the message of the passage at hand with the more systematic concerns this book addresses?

PRS: I think the short answer is that TFC should assist pastors in doing what we call “theological exposition.” Good expository preaching always situates a biblical text in its larger theological context. TFC helps by identifying the primary biblical texts for each doctrine and then connects them directly to the grand redemptive theme of Scripture (see part 3 of each chapter, “How Does It All Fit Together?”). In the past, I have consistently turned to Erickson and Grudem in the midst of my own sermon preparation. Now I will add TFC to that list—it is loaded with exegetical and theological insights from very capable men who have been doing theology for a long time.

DPN: TFC should help preachers to grasp the central themes in the grand redemptive narrative of the Bible, and it points to some of the most important texts related to each central biblical teaching. Good exposition of texts, even of a single verse, always involves an understanding of the text in the larger context, including the larger canonical context. TFC offers real help along these lines, I think.

Every contributor to A Theology for the Church is a Baptist, Southern Baptist, no less! Aside from Mark Dever’s chapter on “The Doctrine of the Church,” does the fact that the contributors are all Baptists affect the book’s content?

DPN: While all of the authors write as Baptists, we write as Baptists who adhere to the “great tradition” of Christian orthodoxy. So, in one sense the book, we hope, is consistent with biblical orthodoxy and the content isn’t particularly different than it might be were it written by other non-baptist evangelicals. Still, because we are Baptists it is most natural for us to write a theology text in service to the church, as the title A Theology for the Church indicates. As a theology text, the book is concerned with the triune God and gospel of Christ, which is typical of any theology that is orthodox, but we pursue our theology is a distinctively Baptist context.

PRS: No and yes.

No because we write first as Christians who believe what the great creeds of the church have affirmed for almost two millennia. This is seen in our clear affirmation and explanation of first order things (doctrine of the trinity, authority of Scripture, the gospel of Christ, etc.). In this sense, we hope to be anything but distinctive.

On the other hand, the answer is yes since we write as Baptists who believe in certain distinctives which are seen clearly in the doctrine of the church. Hopefully this demonstrates to non-baptists that we are committed to conciliar orthodoxy as well as our own confessional distinctives.

Martin Luther once commented on theological controversy, “Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved; and to be steady on all the battle front besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.” In your opinion, where does the battle rage hottest today?

PRS: This is a difficult answer since I do not think we can say that we have any of the recent theological “battle fronts” completely under control (e.g., the nature of Scripture, the doctrine of the Trinity, or the exclusivity of the gospel of Christ). I do know of one front, though, where the battle is raging for evangelicals. It concerns the nature and ministry of the church. What I have in mind is everything from mega-church pragmatism to Emergent eccentricity. Nothing less than the gospel is at stake here. I think I am most concerned about the pervasive consumerism and pragmatism that David Wells and others have been warning us about for some time. It disturbs me that we cannot see when the church is undermining the very gospel of which it is the guardian.

DPN: In recent years we have seen battles about the doctrine of God, the nature of Scripture, and salvation. We see a fair bit of discussion and argument today about the nature of the church and how the church’s mission is carried out. But as in all battles, sometimes it is what happens away from the “front” that is crucial, as any student of warfare can attest. While current debates about the church are important, we find that there are other issues behind those arguments that we must not fail to consider. For example, I think that our ecclesiology is often weak due an insufficient understanding of the sufficiency and clarity of Scripture and the implications of those doctrines for life in the church. As well, our ecclesiology sometimes suffers from a failure to form our doctrine and practice of the church in the context of a rich Trinitarian theology that sets Christology at its center.

If you had to choose just one thing a reader would gain from A Theology for the Church, what would that be?

PRS: I would like our readers to gain a renewed appreciation for how life and doctrine relate. I hope that they will live better before God having contemplated such important thoughts about God. In the words of the Puritan William Ames, what we are after is “living to God.” I think the contributors to TFC have done well in writing to this end.

DPN: I hope the reader will move from theology to doxology since that is the ultimate purpose of the knowledge of God: to bring people to a life with God that is constituted by genuine worship, for the glory of Christ.

——————

Many thanks to Drs. Nelson and Schemm for taking the time to participate in this interview. I would also like to express my gratitude to Malcolm Yarnell, who suggested that I do this interview after he participated in the interview on First Freedom.

An Interview with the Editors of A THEOLOGY FOR THE CHURCH, Part 1

Broadman and Holman has recently released a new systematic theology titled, A Theology for the Church. The chapters were written by (in alphabetical order):

Daniel Akin                     Russell D. Moore

Mark Dever                    David P. Nelson

David Dockery                R. Stanton Norman

Timothy George             Paige Patterson

John Hammett               Peter R. Schemm

Kenneth Keathley          Gregory A. Thornbury

R. Albert Mohler Jr.       Malcolm B. Yarnell III

That’s quite a lineup of Baptists! The associate editors of the volume, Peter R. Schemm (PRS) and David P. Nelson (DPN), graciously agreed to answer some questions about this new theology and how it can best be used for the good of the church to the glory of God. This interview will be posted in two parts.

Part One

We are agreed that theology is vital to the health of the local church, but from our experiences in various churches, we know that not all agree with us on that point. What is the most compelling reason that a pastor should continue to read theology—even if, as he sees it, he already suffered through one of these books in seminary?

DPN: I am tempted to answer, Because we know that “suffering produces endurance”, but I hope this text won’t actually cause too much suffering. Pastors should read theology because the ministry of the pastor, from preaching to any number of pastoral acts, is inherently theological. So, the most faithful pastors will be good theologians, and good theologians are made through years of continuous reflection of the teachings of Scripture. I think it is important, as a professor of theology in a seminary, to pursue a lifelong study of theology. How much more important, then, for a pastor, who has the responsibility to feed God’s sheep, to study theology continually. We hope A Theology for the Church will aid and enrich such study of the Scriptures.

PRS: The most compelling reason that a pastor ought to read/study theology is that it is the essence of his vocation to do so. The nature of pastoral ministry is so directly rooted in truth and doctrine that the Apostle Paul can hardly write a paragraph of the so called Pastoral Epistles without referring to something like “the faith of God’s elect and their knowledge of the truth” (Titus 1:1; cf. 1 Tim 1:3; 2 Tim 1:13). This makes sense since the church itself is “the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of truth” (1 Tim 3:15). And, it is also why so many of the great pastors throughout the history of the church were theologians—from Paul to Augustine to Luther to Fuller. It is our hope, then, that TFC will assist in forming the next generation of pastor-theologians.

So pastors should read theology, should they encourage lay people to read a book like this, or should the lay folks stick with Max Lucado and Rick Warren?

PRS: Now that is a loaded question. No, it is not enough for “lay people” to read only popular works such as Lucado’s and Warren’s. However, one of the first Christian authors I ever read was Max Lucado. So I appreciate what I think he is attempting to do in his writing. I would hasten to add, however, that it was theology books much like TFC that helped me to see where the popular works are often lacking. Sometimes they lack theological precision and sometimes they lack theological substance. Sometimes they say more than the biblical text allows. Sometimes they are so concerned about being “practical” or “connecting” with people that, ironically, they undermine the gospel itself. I suggest challenging all believers to read more and to read better. Most of the thoughtful laymen I know want to read substantive, time-tested works.

DPN: I encourage my children to have a balanced diet – we don’t eat only from one food group. Christ’s disciples will do well to eat a “balanced diet” in their reading. While the kind of literature you mention may serve a purpose, any lay person will benefit much from reading good theology. I think we underestimate the desire and ability of congregants to think hard theologically. I have served in local churches for over 20 years and I recall very few occasions where lay persons did not readily engage in serious theological reflection. To be blunt, I think that often when in the church there is little theological interest among the people we likely will find that this is because we pastors have ourselves become theologically lazy.

 

Let’s say a pastor makes copies of A Theology for the Church available in the church book stall. How should he go about cultivating an atmosphere at church where people will want to buy this book and then spend their free time reading it?

DPN: Let me suggest a couple of strategies for cultivating interest in reading a book like this. First, in general, biblical preaching will create an appetite for theology. A pastor should point the congregation to good biblical and theological resources routinely. Second, as particular sermons raise certain theological questions, a pastor could point out how a book like TFC helps to answer such questions.

PRS: The primary means for cultivating a theological atmosphere at church, seems to me, to be the ministry of example. What the pastor loves his people will soon love. His love for the deep things of God will show up in everything from his preaching to the way he leads his family. As to his preaching, it will be characterized by a theological mindset that is willing to employ biblical language. He is not the pastor who substitutes “permissiveness” for “lewdness” because no one understands what lewdness means, or worse, because someone might be offended by the term. He employs particular biblical and theological language in his messages and explains what it means. In this way he cultivates a mind for God among his people.

As to family life, if a pastor is in the habit of training individual men in the church to think theologically—to think, say, about the glory of the Triune God—and if he personally models how to take this thinking home to the dinner table or to the workbench, then it will not be long before he forms a deep appreciation for theology in the life of the church. In the end, I believe it is the responsibility of the pastor to personally embody a love for all things theological.

Finally, a pastor ought to consider leading a small or large group through TFC as a systematic study. He need not choose every chapter to do this but he should certainly include the chapters by the editors!

———————-

Hearty thanks to Drs. Nelson and Schemm! Part 2 will, Lord willing, be up tomorrow.

Need a Gift for Your Busy Wife?

This is what I’m giving mine.

Shhhh.

Don’t tell her.

It’s a surprise.

Matt Schmucker’s Story

If you appreciate Mark Dever, Capitol Hill Baptist Church, and 9Marks ministries, you owe a debt of gratitude to Matt Schmucker. He tells a little bit of his story here.

May his tribe increase, and may more and more churches see the turnaround that has taken place at CHBC.

Atheistic Inconsistency

Tim Challies (DR for Discerning Reader) interviews Douglas Wilson (DW), and here’s a profound question and answer:

DR: In Letter from a Christian Citizen you continually show where Harris is inconsistent with his own ideology. Is there any such thing as a completely consistent atheist?

DW: That’s the fun thing. No, there is no such thing as a consistent atheist. I believe there are degrees of attempted consistency—radical relativism is more consistent than the atheistic moralism represented by men like Harris, and nihilism is more consistent than radical relativism. But once you get to nihilism, and attempt to embrace full consistency (via suicide, say), you have thereby admitted that consistency is a virtue. But there are no virtues. Why be consistent? And to grasp that principle and lurch into attempts at random inconsistency is just another disguised attempt at consistency again. You can run but you can’t hide. Consistency is inconsistent. And inconsistency for the sake of consistency is also inconsistent.

The whole thing is here.

Why Care about the CBF?

Anyone wondering what the CBF (Cooperative Baptist Fellowship) is and why we should bother to know anything about it should check out this good word from David Roach.

Preaching the Cross

I recently interviewed Mark Dever on his new book, What Is a Healthy Church, and if you’re interested in another interview with Dever, who is always worth listening to, see the latest issue of “The Book Report” from Crossway, where they interview Dever on the book he edited with J. Ligon Duncan III, R. Albert Mohler Jr., and C. J. Mahaney.

The interview focuses on their new book, Preaching the Cross, which originated as the sermons preached at the first Together for the Gospel conference in April of 2006.

If you were at the conference, you know the value of this book, and these messages only get better as they are re-read. If you weren’t at the conference, you need to get this book. The table of contents is here.

This book should be required reading for every preaching and/or pastoral ministries class in the country, and let’s hope they get it translated into a batch of languages so the non-English speakers can benefit from it as well.