Christian Book Notes

Profiles in Reformed Spirituality - Venture all for God: Piety in the Writings of John Bunyan.  Edited by Roger D. Duke and Phil A. Newton.  Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011.  196 pp.  $10.00.  Purchase at Westminster Books for less.

Introduction

I have interviewed and reviewed books by Dr. Roger Duke in the past as well as having had the pleasure of meeting him in person at a recent conference.  You can read the reviews, the interview and even a couple papers he presented here.  Phil Newton is heavily involved in the Founder’s Conference as well as the serving as the Pastor of South Woods Baptist Church.  He has written a number of helpful books of which a couple can be found here.

The Profiles in Reformed Spirituality series is personally one of my favorite series of books and Bunyan is one of those authors that has resonated with me through the years.

Summary

Divided into a life introduction followed by seven sections of sermon snippets, one could spend weeks digesting the thoughts of Bunyan from subjects such as Christ our Advocate and Him as the merciful Savior.  The third section offers much hope for the sinners while sections four through seven contain more practical (not that the gospel is not practical!!!) to living the Christian life.  In section four, the reader is exposed to what true humility looks like while section five is about Christian ethics.  The seventh section offers warnings.

I saved sections six for last because I believe it to best sum up the entire book and thus the life of John Bunyan.  Section six is aptly entitled the Gospel Applied.  Here we have the shortest of all sections in terms of only two selections, but much to chew on and guide one’s reading of the works of the great Dreamer.

Review

I enjoyed reading snippets from some of Bunyan’s lesser known works though I found the number of selections from The Jerusalem Sinner Saved to be just as appropriate.  The biographical sketch at the beginning of the book is an extremely helpful, albeit short, introduction to the life of John Bunyan.  Many know the highlights due in large part to his Pilgrim’s Progress.  Sadly, many do not know much, if anything at all, about the rest of his life, writings, and ministry.  Venture all for God will go a long way to rectify that problem.

Another helpful section in this small work is found at the end.  The two editors offer a guide to various books in print that can be purchased in order to read more of John Bunyan.

Recommendation

If you have ever read or even heard of Pilgrim’s Progress then I highly recommend that you pick up this introduction to John Bunyan and his life.  For less than $10 you can add a book to your library that you are sure to read time and again.  What is more, you will find that this book will somehow multiply the books on your shelf as you will want to begin reading more and more of John Bunyan.  You will not be sorry once you read this book.  In fact, I dare you say, the Lord would use this work to help your walk with Christ.

Dr. Duke has been gracious to give me the paper he prepared for this session.  What follows is Dr. Duke’s paper presented at the Founders’ Conference Midwest 2012.  (note: This is copyright and should not be duplicated without consent from Dr. Roger Duke.)

He has also informed me that he is open to speaking at more conferences.  He speaks on Philippians as well biographical sketches.  As a reviewer of his past works and a listener of him at this conference, I would highly recommend him for his knowledge is vast on the subjects on which he speaks.

“How the Doctrine of Election Affected the Pastoral Ministry of John A. Broadus”

By

Dr. Roger D. Duke

Assistant Professor of Religion & Communication

Baptist College of Health Science

Memphis, TN

A Lecture (or Sermon)

Delivered at the Annual Founders Conference Mid-West

Given February 27 & 28, 2012

In St. Louis, Missouri

At the Invitation of Dr. Curtis McClain

Of the Missouri Baptist University

Introduction

There is a vast amount of difference that exists between “the dreamer of dreams” and the “builder of dreams.” [1] My colleague Craig Christina observes that “John Albert Broadus was much more than a dreamer; he was a man who gave his life for the edification of the church, the Southern Baptist denomination, and her founding seminary. Yet it was the establishment and continuance of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary that became his all-consuming passion later in life, and it is in the building of the Seminary that one finds the heartbeat of this dream builder.” [2]

“The seminary,” to which Broadus would give the major energies of his life, “opened its doors in Greenville, South Carolina, on October 1, 1859.” [3] In its beginnings it had an enrollment of 26 students. “The largest number of students in each of the first three sessions was from Virginia, in large part because of the efforts and influence of Broadus.” [4] But, “a disruption . . . waited on the horizon; one which would preclude all studies and threatened the [very] existence of the seminary itself” [5] and with it, Broadus’s dream. This “disruption” of course was the Civil War. This disruption will act as a case-study to consider how “the doctrine of election affected Broadus’s pastoral ministry.”

A Call for Chaplains

In an article that ran in the Religious Herald by Rev. J. Wm. Jones, Chaplain to the Thirteenth [13^th] Virginia Infantry, there went out a call for military Chaplains. With poignancy, urgency, and passion—Jones begs for Southern preachers to see their duty:

“Send us the names of good men;” and I here repeat, we want none others—our object [is] not merely to fill up the regiments with nominal Chaplains, but to fill the vacancies with efficient, working men. We want effective Gospel preachers, whose burden shall be Christ and him crucified. . . . We want men who will stick to their posts. . . . The great business of the Chaplain is to preach Christ publicly, and from tent to tent, and the temporal welfare of the soldiers should be made subordinate to this. We want men physically able as well as willing to endure hardships and privations. If a Chaplain would live up to the full measure of his usefulness, he must be with his regiment on the weary march (frequently resigning his horse to some foot-sore soldier), lie with them around the bivouac-fire after evening prayers are over; be drenched on the outposts, or face the pelting snowstorm; divide with some hungry soldier his last hard cracker, and in a word, share with his regiment whatever hardships they may be called to endure. Now if a brother is physically unable to endure these hardships, he had best not enter the work, but there is no question that many a delicate brother would have his health permanently improved, if he would thus learn to “endure hardness as a good soldier.” [6]

 

Whether or not Broadus read or heard this from the Religious Herald is unknown. Nevertheless, Broadus felt compelled to answer the call!

Broadus’s Response to the Call for Chaplains

For Broadus to respond to “The Call” and service as Chaplain was a natural thing for him as a Gospel minister. He had, since his conversion, always been “involved in seeking to bring other[s] to Christian belief.” [7] “This practice had begun a few months after his conversion and continued throughout his lifetime.” [8] His son-in-law, A.T. Robertson, relates an early experience that seems to set a pattern for Broadus being a life-long personal worker and “soul winner”:

In a meeting a few months after John’s conversion, the preacher urged all Christians at the close of the service to move about and talk to the unconverted. John looked anxiously around to see if there was anybody present he could talk to about his soul’s salvation. He had never done anything of the kind before. Finally he saw a man . . . named Sandy. He thought he might venture to speak to him . . . and Sandy was converted. [9]

 

Even after Broadus would go away to school and come home, “Sandy . . . would run across the street to meet him and say: ‘Howdy, John! thankee, John. Howdy, John, thankee, John.’” [10] Broadus would later retell the story and adds: “And if I ever reach the heavenly home and walk the golden streets, I know the first person to meet me will be Sandy, coming and saying again: ‘Howdy, John! thankee, John.’” [11]

Dr. Broadus possessed a true love and zeal for lost souls. This is clearly seen in his tract written for the soldiers in the field—“We Pray for You at Home.” Please consider an excerpt:

We pray for your soul. Ah! What shall it comfort us, and what shall it profit you, if you gain the noblest earthly triumphs, the most abiding earthly fame, yea, every good that earth can give, and lose your soul! If we continually beseech the Lord that your mortal life may be preserved and made happy, with what absorbing, agonizing earnestness must we pray for your immortal soul, that it may be delivered from eternal degradation and wretchedness which are the wages of sin, and be brought to know the sweetness of God’s service here, the rapture of his presence hereafter. We know it must be hard for you, amid the distractions of camp life, the alternative excitement and ennui [12] [boredom], the absences of home influences and the associations of the sanctuary, to fix mind and heart on things above. . . . We pray that you may be inclined and enabled to commit your soul to the divine Saviour, who died to redeem us, and ever lives to intercede for us, and who with yearning love is ever saying, “Come unto me.” We pray that the Holy Spirit may thoroughly change your heart, bringing you truly to hate sin, and love holiness, and may graciously strengthen you to withstand temptation, and give you more and more the mastery over yourself, and the victory over every enemy of your soul. Whether it be appointed [for] you to fall soon in battle, or years hence to die at home, may God in mercy forbid that you should live in impenitence and die in your sins. Whether we are to sit with you again around our own fireside, and “take sweet counsel together as we walk to the house of God in company,” or are to meet you no more on earth, oh, may God in his mercy save us from eternal separation [emphasis added]! [13]

 

This entire tract sounds like an “Invitation” without an “Altar Call” to me!

 

Dr. Jones wrote to Broadus on March 30, 1863 from Camp Thirteenth [13^th] Virginia Infantry located at Hamilton’s Crossing to inquire;

By the way—what think you of the proposition I made in my last [letter] that you spend the summer as an army missionary? Or, if you would like it, I could get you a commission as Chaplain to labor in A. P. Hill’s Division, where you would be very comfortably quartered with brethren Ned Hill and Jim Field, or in a good artillery regiment. I am very sure you would find it a wide field of usefulness and it may be that your health would be materially improved by it. Think about it and if you should decide to take the Chaplaincy write me to that effect at once. [14]

 

Later in the war a special invitation was extended to Broadus: “Stonewall Jackson urged Doctor Broadus” through their mutual friend—J. William Jones saying; “Write to him by all means and beg him to come. Tell him that he never had a better opportunity of preaching the Gospel than he would have right now in these camps.” [15]

Jones related Broadus’s response of the personal invitation from Gen. Jackson:

[Broadus] . . . promptly replied that he would be glad to come; that he had seriously and prayerfully considered the question; and that he had only been prevented from entering the army before by a doubt as to whether his feeble health could stand the exposure of camp life; but that he would at least try it as soon as he could make his arrangements. When . . . [Jones] met General Jackson a few days after the reception of Doctor Broadus’s letter, and told him that he would come the great soldier said in his characteristic phrase: “That is good; very good, I am so glad of that. And when Doctor Broadus comes you must bring him to see me. I want him to preach at my headquarters, and I wish to help him in his work all I can.” [16]

 

This was just a few days before the Battle of Chancellorsville that would prove providentially untimely for General Jackson and the South. Before the great soldier could meet the great preacher he had already “crossed over the river to rest under the shade of the trees.” [17]

“July and August and half of September [1863] were spent in daily preaching to Lee’s Army, now in the churches at Winchester, now at the convalescent camp, now to Corse’s Brigade, [and at] the hospital at Charlottesville” [18] and to sundry of the Army of Northern Virginia’s foot soldiers, Calvary, and artillery battalions. Broadus reflected that, “For three months of that summer I preached as a missionary in General Lee’s army. It was the most interesting and thoroughly delightful preaching I was ever engaged in.” [19] And “Besides the preaching Doctor Broadus was [also a] war correspondent for the Charleston News and Courier.” [20]

Low Moments in Broadus’s Reflections

There were, however, some very low moments emotionally for Broadus. At one point he confessed, “What can I do preaching? I fear not much.” [21] At the time he was assigned an out-of-the-way place where only twenty men were stationed, with “picket and provost” [22] duty. In a letter he seems to yearn to be “Five miles off, at Jordan’s Springs . . . [at] a hospital of a thousand sick and wounded” [23] who needed the Gospel.

One particularly poignant scene of Broadus is given us by Robertson. “I am to preach to-morrow morning at the Presbyterian church, and in the afternoon or evening at some other, and then to try an afternoon service next week and see if we can do anything.” [24] This was Saturday July 4^th. As he reflected on the opportunity to preach in the Presbyterian Church and at the Lutheran Church on Ephesians 3:14 and Proverbs 3:17 respectively; he confesses to his wife Charlotte;

You perceive that I am taking my old sermons. It is very difficult here to think up an unfamiliar discourse. I haven’t got used to the tent, and am constantly making acquaintances. A good many soldiers [were] in attendance both times yesterday. The sermons are not particularly good or particularly bad. God grant that they may do some good. Oh, it is so hard to preach as one ought to do! I long for the opportunity, yet do not rise to meet it with the whole-souled earnestness and living faith, and afterwards I feel sad and ashamed. [25]

 

This is one moving insight into Broadus’s heart just after the Battle of Gettysburg—before all the awful results were known.

He continued to his dear Charlotte: “But I fear nothing can be done, as the whole community, citizens and soldiers, is astir about the late battle near Gettysburg, of which we have very conflicting and very exciting accounts, and there will probably be wounded men here to-day or tomorrow, requiring attention.” [26] In the aftermath of the battle Broadus was unable to evacuate the area because all the conveyances were employed for the wounded. He told Charlotte, “So I mean to wait, and meantime to do all I can in the hospitals.” He felt it his call and duty to stay. “I am very well satisfied, because it is so clear that I must remain” [27] and serve those wounded and dying. Closing his letter he confides; “The late battles were at first a success, and afterwards a reverse, nothing to boast of on either side, and dreadful losses on both.” [28]

Around July 24 Broadus tells us that he “worked awhile with [Rev.] Taylor this morning distributing newspapers and tracts in the hospitals, and afterwards rode to see the graveyard, where the graves of twelve hundred soldiers lie in long rows and squares, and ten or a dozen are regularly dug beforehand and kept waiting.” [29] This sight causes a deep groan in his spirit—“Oh, this dreadful war!” [30]

Glimpses of Broadus’s Personal Work

Jones again testifies concerning Broadus’s work; “We were exceedingly fortunate in having as preachers in our meetings and workers among the soldiers at Winchester, besides our Chaplains, such men as . . . J.A. Broadus.” [31] This was a wonderful time in Broadus’s mind because “He had never enjoyed the sense of God’s presence in preaching as here.” [32] Many were requesting prayer for their soul’s needs. He had been led to believe that the need for the Gospel was not so great. His retort was, “[I] had been deceived as to the preaching among the soldiers; for not half had been told to him. He had no idea of the state of religious feeling here, though he had had more opportunities that many out of the army to know the truth of the matter.” [33] He rejoiced that “He had never enjoyed preaching so much”! [34] One main reason he rejoiced in it so—“They come because they choose to come.” [35] During this time “Many were converted” [36] and the preachers, Chaplains, missionaries, and colporteurs were “never met with a repulse in presenting Christ.” [37]

“A few days after . . .  [Broadus’s] arrival in Winchester [Virginia, he] . . . wrote to Superintendent Dickinson” [38] saying:

I am very glad I came to Virginia and came to Winchester. Though there are not such opportunities for preaching as there were some months ago at Fredericksburg, yet I meet a hearty welcome and rejoice in the work. My heart warms towards the soldiers. How they do listen to preaching. The Lord be thanked for the privilege of telling them about Jesus; the Lord prosper all who labor to save them. [39]

 

But his opportunity to minister would soon change—providentially!

 

Jones relates a testimonial of Broadus’s personal work. He queried one soldier in a field hospital about his soul’s need.

In response to my inquiry, he said he was not a Christian, but wished he was. . . . I sought to explain to him the way of salvation, and he listened earnestly. . . . I gave him my hand to take leave. But he held my hand hard, and said: ‘Stop a little, Pray for me won’t you? I want to be a Christian. . . . I’m very wicked, and deserve God’s wrath. You seem to care something for me—now pray for me, won’t you?’ . . . And when I arose, [after praying] he took my hand himself, and said, ‘Now you have prayed for me once—won’t you remember me and pray for me still?’ [40]

 

Later he would reflect on his opportunity to minister: “The . . . [soldier] mentioned I simply happened . . . to pass by and notice. . . . There had been nothing remarkable in this man’s appearance; he was a hale, hearty looking soldier; and I walked away thinking how many there doubtless are of these poor fellows whom one sees everywhere by hundreds, that would in like manner reveal to an enquirer an anxious concern for their salvation.” The deep pathos of Broadus’s heart is evident when he says that; “There is no mistake about it that a large portion of these soldiers are deeply interested in religion. Any experienced preacher would see it, from the way they listen to preaching; and in private, not only are all respectful, but many cordially welcome religious conversation, and avow, without the slightest hesitation, their desire to be Christians.” [41]

Another time Broadus related to the superintendent one particular preaching appointment. There was “A camp, for convalescent soldiers on their way to the army . . . established near . . . [us] last week, and I went out to preach on Tuesday morning.”  “Some 200 men assembled under the trees in what was . . . [Senator] Mason’s yard, and it was moving to see with what fixed attention . . . [the soldiers] listened.” There were “Men . . . there from almost every State of the Confederacy, but we had common interest in God’s worship and word.”  “At the close of the sermon, some twenty or twenty-five readily knelt for special prayer.” [42]

Please give me leave again to relate how Broadus was also employed, much like Whitefield, as an open air preacher. Jones observed: “On fast day of that autumn . . . Dr. . . . Broadus . . . preach[ed] four times, at different points; and while all of the services were of deep interest, I particularly recall the service at sundown, held at General Gordon’s head-quarters.” Before Broadus arrived “The general had conducted a prayer meeting himself in the morning, and made a stirring address to his brigade, had sent out the notices and exerted himself to have a congregation, and a large crowd, especially of officers, attend. . . .”  I recall [Dr. Broadus’s] text—‘Her ways are ways of pleasantness and all her paths are peace’— . . . At times there was scarcely a dry eye in the vast throng, and the tears of generals, colonels and captains mingled freely with those of the rank and file, I never heard Dr. Broadus preach with more power, and I do not believe that he ever did.” [43]

My assignment has been in this second address to demonstrate, “How the Doctrine of Election Affected the Pastoral Ministry of John A. Broadus”? But frankly, as I pondered my research and considered all the material, I could find no direct tie to the doctrine of election and Broadus’s pastoral ministry. There is no “smoking gun” if you will—demonstrating this? This endeavor has been like many other research projects: It started off in one direction with an assumption and ended up in a completely different place where the facts lead. When he left the pastoral ministry of the Baptist Church at Charlottesville, Chaplain to the University of Virginia, work as a local evangelist, and a myriad of other pastoral ministries—he left the pastoral ministry proper. Upon arrival at this new vocation as seminary professor he poured his sweat, soul, money, energy—yea his very life blood into this endeavor. There would be no long term pastoral ministry again—at least not like in Charlottesville! But we can draw some closing observations from instances of his work as a chaplain, preacher, and minster at-large during the War:

First, early on in his ministry, just after his conversion, he became involved in personal work. It would be safe to call him a “soul winner.” Take the incident with “Sandee” that he left for us to consider. He always had an interest in the destination of the eternal souls of those under his charge. This no doubt was one of the primary motivating factors that drove him all his life and ministry.

Secondly, in his writing we have left for us the “We Pray for You at Home” Gospel tract mentioned earlier. This captures the quintessential ethos of Broadus to be useful in the Master’s Kingdom work. Although during the War he was not leading a particular congregation nor did he know what the state of Southern Seminary might be after the war, he was “always about his Father’s business.”

Third, many requested prayer for their “soul’s need.” The ordinary soldier was acutely aware that each day death stared him in the face and it could possibly be their last day on this earth. Time and again throughout the War there would be impromptu “prayer meetings,”  “special prayer,” Gospel sermons at night, and Gospel sermons in the open air by the preachers, missionaries, pastors, and colporteurs.  Regrettably the next day some of these dear souls would surely stand before their God. And Broadus never missed an opportunity to preach a Gospel sermon. It may have been what he considered to be “warmed over,” but he was up to the task.

Fourth, Broadus sensed a real urgency in the men who came to the open air Gospel preaching or prayer meetings. They came because they wanted to come. They did not come because of anyone was pressuring them. Because of this we can assume that it was a real movement of Revival sent by the Holy Spirit of our Lord Christ. J. William Jones reported in his Christ in the Camp that “Up to January, 1865, it was estimated that nearly one hundred and fifty thousand solders had been converted during the progress of the war, and it was believed that fully one-third of all the soldiers in the field were praying men, and members of some branch of the Christian church.” [44]

Fifth, we have another example of personal work done by Broadus. The soldier who took his hand and asked him to tarry for a while seemed to move Broadus. He stopped, prayed for him, and talked to him of the way of salvation. Then he recalled how so many were in spiritual need and that the need was so very, very great.

Contemporary Implications and Applications for Us as Ministers of the Gospel

First, Broadus was a “life-long learner.” He was a scholar par excel lance. Even during the hard times of bivouac in the field he found time to work on his magnum opus Commentary on Matthew.

Secondly, Broadus was a “soul-winner!” He loved souls. He worked with individuals one-on-one to witness and explain the Gospel. He would “tarry a while” with an inquirer. He made it his business to “be about the Master’s business” of preaching and teaching from “tent to tent” and in the open air.

Third, Broadus went to work—wherever he found himself, whatever the work was. It is easily seen by his lifestyle that he believed the Scriptural admonition, “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do [it] with thy might” (Ecc 9:10) His focus, his drive, his energy, his compassion were all traits that moved him. But at the heart and motivation of all that Broadus did—HE WORKED!!

Fourth, to quote and old Baptist aphorism—HE BLOOMED WHERE HE WAS PLANTED! He did not wait for the war to come to him, but longed to be where he could do the most good preaching the Gospel to the most number of men. He even positioned himself to be used as much as possible. And this focus was not for the laud of men but for the souls of men.

Last, and in no way least, Broadus preached whether he felt up to it or not. In the different documents it can be seen that his health was not the best, his accommodations in the field were not the most comfortable, it was not the easiest place to study or prepare new sermons; but he always was up to the task. It even burdened him a great deal that he had to use sermons more than once.

Broadus at the End of His Life

It was stated earlier that there was no connection found in this inquiry as to Broadus’s pastoral ministry and election. But I did find an account where Broadus was doctrinally at the end of his life. As has been stated, he began the study of the “Doctrines of Grace” on his own and became a Stereological Calvinist by his personal conviction even to the point of signing The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’s Abstract of Principles. His son-in-law A.T. Robertson rehearses an account of Broadus’s trip to Europe with a focus on Geneva. There he related how he had “singularly fine weather” for traveling and “giving the most varied and complete views of Mont Blanc.” [45] He used this vision of Mont Blanc as metaphor to make an application concerning the Doctrines of Grace and observed:

The people who sneer at what is called Calvinism might as well sneer at Mont Blanc. We are not in the least bound to defend all of Calvin’s opinions or actions, but I do not see how any one (sic) who really understands the Greek of the Apostle Paul or the Latin of Calvin and Turretin can fail to see that these latter did but interpret and formulate substantially what the former teachers . . . . Whatever the inspired writers meant to teach is authoritative, the truth of God. [46]

A lifelong motto and fitting epitaph for our founding brother of The Southern Baptist Seminary could be heard in a personal and resounding rhetorical question to us [47]: “What is life for, but to fear God and work hard?” [48]

 

---

I have reviewed a couple of Roger’s books in the past and have been blessed to have interviewed him as well. You can read those here.

Dr. Duke has been gracious to give me the paper he prepared for this session.  What follows is Dr. Duke’s paper presented at the Founders’ Conference Midwest 2012.  (note: This is copyright and should not be duplicated without consent from Dr. Roger Duke.)

He has also informed me that he is open to speaking at more conferences.  He speaks on Philippians as well biographical sketches.  As a reviewer of his past works and a listener of him at this conference, I would highly recommend him for his knowledge is vast on the subjects on which he speaks.

 

“How John A. Broadus Embraced the Doctrine of Election”[1] [2]

By

Dr. Roger D. Duke

Assistant Professor of Religion & Communication

Baptist College of Health Science

Memphis, TN

A Lecture (or Sermon)

Delivered at the Annual Founders Conference Mid-West

Given February 27 & 28, 2012

In St. Louis, Missouri

At the Invitation of Dr. Curtis McClain

Of the Missouri Baptist University

Personal Introduction

Upon reflection of Dr. McClain’s invitation to give these two lectures (or sermons), I was taken back in my mind to a time many years ago when we first met. It was January of 1982. Curtis and his wife Patsy had just arrived in Memphis. I too had just arrived with my little family—consisting of my wife Linda, who was 6 months pregnant at the time, and my nearly 3-year-old daughter Leah. Both Curtis and I had come to Memphis to study at Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary: Curtis with a newly minted Master of Divinity “in hand” to begin work on his PhD degree and me—who had left the construction trades as a Union Steamfitter Journeyman and had never even attended college—AT ALL! It is quite ironic that he would extend to me such an opportunity as this! I confessed to him: “I attend Founders Conferences Curtis—I don’t SPEAK AT THEM!” Needless to say we became fast friends over the years through some very random acts of Providence. Well—at least they seem random to me.

Early Remembrance from Seminary Days

One of the funny issues that stand out in my mind about the academe early in my seminary career was the friendly (and sometimes not so friendly) competition between the language department and the theology department. But these seem to have always been “in house” arguments which go back at least to the days of James P. Boyce and John A. Broadus. In his A Gentleman and a Scholar, Broadus related how that

His colleague [Broadus speaking of himself] who was professor of the New Testament once said to . . . [Boyce], in some pleasantries of conversation, that students of exegesis might have some freedom if it were not for those dreadful theological people, who know beforehand what every passage ought to mean, in order to suit their creeds and systems, and who have not a proper respect for philology and criticism.[3]

 

This remark may have been friendly teasing but might give some insight into the fact of how or why Broadus came to his Reformational understanding of the “doctrine of election” late. This was because he had been a classicist and linguist at the University of Virginia in the earlier days before coming to the new Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. At the University he served as professor and tutor of languages, university chaplain, and pastor of the Baptist church. When the seminary was formed, only two of the original four founding faculty were seminary trained—Basil Manly, Jr. and James Boyce. William Williams was trained in the practice of law. David Dockery observes that “Broadus himself had not attended a seminary.”[4] And he “never really donned the mantle of a Systematic Theologian.”[5] However, “His university education provided him an outstanding background in the classical languages and philosophy, but his theological preparation, like so many other Baptist preachers in the South, came about by self-study.”[6]

There may be one of those quirks or ironies of history working here that is somewhat glaring. Although Boyce and Manly had been trained in the seminaries of the North, they turned to Broadus to set up the program of study for the new seminary. And, “Not surprisingly the new proposal was based largely on the University of Virginia model; one based upon the English Bible, with freedom for the students in their selection of course work.” [7] “The plan emphasized scholarship for the able student with something worthwhile for all.” [8]

As early as 1857 “Broadus undertook a study of Calvinism.” [9] He wrote to Charles Hodge of Princeton University in an effort “to acquire an edition of Calvin’s works.”[10] “[T]he confessional Princeton theology” would come to govern “the thought of . . . the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary” in general. It would also become “incarnated in . . . Broadus” [11] in particular. The Founding President had already embraced these doctrines. Broadus also consulted with his uncle Andrew Broadus and inquired of the veteran Baptist minister asking: “How far should Calvinism be carried”? [12] “His uncle affirmed both that God was completely sovereign and that that humans were fully accountable to repent and believe in Christ” [13] for these doctrines “compatibility was beyond human understanding.” [14] Broadus would confess, “I cannot fathom the mystery connected with God’s sovereignty and man’s accountability.” [15] He “[eventually] concluded that the Calvinist approach was scriptural.”[16] After much consideration “[H]e postulated a distinct line of continuity that ran from Paul through Augustine to Calvin.” [17]

Abstract of Principles [18]

Just a short time later, “[I]n the months of March and April of 1858” [19] Basil Many, Jr., one of the “founding four,” began to draw up the Seminary’s Abstract of Principles. [20]As he wrote, compiled, and edited it, he “produced an abridgement of . . . the 1689 [London Confession] which had been familiar to him from his youth.” [21] Manley’s life had also been immersed in what some call the “Charleston Tradition.” [22] Because of this “The articles [of the Abstract] reflected the wording and order of the Charleston Confession of Faith.” [23]

“Manley’s task . . . involved ‘extreme delicacy and difficulty.’”[24] He “needed to draft a statement that comprehended the affirmations important to virtually all the regular Baptists.” But “The confession needed to be specific and definitive enough to secure the integrity of all the ‘essential doctrines held among . . . [other contemporary Baptists].’” [25] Ironically, then as well as now, “Particular redemption had been a flash point of controversy not only between the Calvinists and Arminians in the nineteenth century, but within the ranks of the Calvinist[ic] Baptists” [26] as well. Manly also had to hold the line for those who, like Boyce, sought “A complete exhibition of the fundamental doctrines of grace” [27] including election, predestination, and particular redemption. “Manly clearly intended that those who held to various perspectives on particular redemption and those who affirmed a general redemption could sign their agreement to . . . [the] statement” [28] of faith.

The Abstract ended up with twenty articles in total. “It contained articles on the Scripture, God, the Trinity, providence, election, [29] the fall of man, the Mediator, regeneration, repentance, faith, justification, sanctification, perseverance of the saints, the church, baptism, the Lord’s Supper, the Lord’s day, liberty of conscience, the resurrection, and judgment.” [30] In it “the doctrine of election [31] was defined as ‘God’s eternal choice of some persons unto everlasting life, not because of foreseen merit, in them, but of His mere mercy in Christ; in consequence of which choice, they are called, justified, and glorified.’” [32]

Although Broadus did not have a direct hand in writing the Abstract, he was no doubt in concert with the end result. The “Prologue” sets forth plainly that

. . . all persons accepting professorships in this seminary shall be considered, by such acceptance, as engaging to teach in accordance with, and not contrary to, the Abstract of Principles hereinafter laid down, a departure from which principles on his part shall be considered grounds for his resignation or removal by the Trustees (emphasis added). [33]

 

And because of “the seminary’s confession of faith . . . and through the determined opposition [to heresy]” and “ forthright teaching and writing,” Boyce and Broadus “established a standard of orthodoxy in the denomination that has endured to the present.” [34]At the end of the day, “The theological tradition reflected in the Abstract is in line with the historic orthodoxy at every point. The soteriology can be called moderately Calvinistic (italics added).” [35] It can be considered moderately Calvinistic because Particular Redemption is not mentioned only implied.

Somewhere between the times when “Broadus undertook . . . [his] study of Calvinism,” [36] Manley’s production of the Abstract of Principles, and when he signed the Abstract; we can be well assured that Broadus had embraced election as set forth in the “softer Calvinism” of the Abstract of Principles.

Election in Selected Broadus Writings

In his early days at Southern Seminary, Broadus did not leave much to posterity in the way of a writing legacy. Even in his preaching, he did not read, memorize, or write-out his sermons as was the custom of the “sacred rhetoricians” of his day. He preached extemporaneously and not from a manuscript, even teaching his students to do so as well. [37] Because of this there are not many of his complete extant sermons available for posterity. It was during those early days however, that he compiled an edited version of his preaching notes for his homiletics classes which became the landmark work—A Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (or the PDS).[38]

After the PDS Broadus went on to publish two important volumes that shed major insights telling how he embraced the doctrine of election. One was his Sermons and Addresses. This was a transcribed compilation of different speeches and sermons delivered to various civic groups and such. Broadus was not only noted to be one of the outstanding pulpit orators of the 19^th century, he was a true “Renaissance Man.” As such, was called upon to speak in a wide circle of influence outside the preaching, teaching, and pastoral ministries venues. He was invited to address such topics as; history, philosophy, classics, and the like by various groups.

The other published work was his monumental tome, the Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew in An American Commentary on the New Testament series edited by Alvah Hovey. This was the fruition of at least 20 years worth of careful study. [39] It set standards for exegetical commentaries that are still usable today. [40] Both works were released c. 1886. Sermons and Addresses gives insight into his developing theological understanding of “election,” while the Matthew Commentary better demonstrates how his exegesis informed this theology. Gleaned and synthesized insights concerning his understanding of election should be considered together. Let us look at each one in turn as Particular, Practical, and Privilege.

The Election of God is a Preference

First, consider Sermons and Addresses: There is no doubt that God had a preference for His people that began with a promise to Abraham. In one address entitled “The Holy Scriptures,” Broadus sees a corporate aspect of the concept of “chosen” or “election.”[41] This is demonstrate when he states that “The Old Testament is a history of redemption.” [42] “It is not merely a history of Israel.” [43] In this history, “God’s mightiness and mercies, and of a chosen (or elect) nation, [is seen] all along toward the promised, long-looking-for time when God’s Son should come to be the Savior of mankind (emphasis added).” [44] Here Broadus employs the term “chosen” corporately for Israel.

Broadus does not only see the doctrine of election as a national enterprise for God concerning Israel. In addition, he understands an individual application of the doctrine. In a sermon entitled an “Intense Concern for the Salvation of Others” [45] he takes for his text Roman 9:3: “For I would wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren.” [46] Broadus observes that, “This is known to students of the Scriptures as one which is commonly . . . difficult—one of the hard places” [47] in the Bible. The text is difficult because Paul bemoans the fact that his brethren—Israel—are lost, his desire is for Israel is to be saved! This verse immediately precedes one of the greatest passages on election in all of Scripture. But Broadus exercises one principle of exegesis and interpretation that superintended all of his biblical and theological work: “[B]e willing to let the Scriptures mean what it wants to mean. . . .” [48] So how does Broadus see the Scriptural conundrum worked out? He lays it out like this:

Concern for the salvation of others is not prevented by a belief in what we call the doctrines of grace; not prevented by believing in the divine sovereignty, and predestination, and election. . . . [Many argue] if predestination be true, then it follows that a man cannot do anything for his own salvation; that if he is to be saved he will be saved, but he has nothing to do with it, and need not care, nor need any one else care. . . . [But] Paul himself, the great oracle of the doctrine in the Scripture, has uttered these words of burning passionate concern for the salvation of others, so close by in the passage in which he has taught the doctrines [of election] in question (emphasis added).[49]

 

Broadus continues his argument that:

 

[W]henever you find your heart or the heart of your friend inclined to shrink away from these great teachings of divine Scriptures concerning sovereignty and predestination, then I pray you make no argument about it, but turn to this language of concern for the salvation of others, so intensely passionate that men wonder and think surely it cannot mean what it says. . . . I say that whatever be true, for or against the apostle’s doctrines of predestination and divine sovereignty in salvation, it is not true that they will make a man careless as to his own salvation or that of others; seeing that they had no such effect on Paul himself (emphasis added). [50]

 

The Election of God is Particular

 

Now consider the Commentary on Matthew. In Jesus’ prayer to the Father just before the “Great Invitation” of Matthew 11:28—“Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest,” there is a pivotal insight on election in verse 27often overlooked: “All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (KJV). Before his plea of invitation, where Christ calls the Jews “to come unto me,” there is a symbiotic concert between the Father and Son concerning election—or to whom salvation will be revealed. Broadus asserts, “Notice, that this is not, as often quoted, an expression of mere resignation. Our Lord acknowledges the propriety of the sovereign Father’s course [of electing] and praises him for it. Whatever pleases God ought to please us.” [51] Concerning the “all things are delivered to me of my (by )[52] my Father[,]” [53] Broadus waxes theological like his colleague Boyce or one of the other Princetonian theologians when he acknowledges the eternal covenant of God the Father with the Son. “At some past time, not specified, say when he [The Son] entered upon earthly mission—or, perhaps, when the covenant of redemption was formed in eternity . . . all things were committed to him.” [54] That is, the things pertaining to the covenant with God the Father, were given to the Son in His Gospel, and then would be revealed to those whom Christ would sovereignty choose.

Concerning this most important clause, “he to whomsoever the Son will (willeth to) [55] reveal him,” [56] Broadus concludes that “All their wisdom and intelligence [i.e., those who want to know God] will not avail to gain a true knowledge of the Father, unless the Son chooses to reveal him to them.” [57] Here he drives home the point: “The son approves the Father’s will as to hiding and revealing, and the Father has authorized him to reveal or not, according to . . . [the Son’s sovereign] will.” [58]

Perhaps the best way to “hear” how Broadus embraced election at this point is found in another place in his Matthew Commentary. He sets forth a balanced theological and exegetical understanding in context when he comments on Matthew 22:14, “For many are called, but few are chosen.” Concerning this passage he observes:

Many are called to share the Messianic benefits, but few are selected [or elected] actually to attain them; a large portion of the called utterly refusing to accept and some even of those who profess acceptance not developing the corresponding character of life. This selection of the actually saved may be looked at from two sides. From the divine side, we can see that the Scriptures teach an eternal election of men to eternal life, simply out of God’s good pleasure. From the human side, we see that those persons attain the blessings of salvation through Christ who accept the gospel invitation and obey the gospel commandments. It is doubtful whether our minds can combine both sides in a single view, but we must not for that reason deny either of them to be true (emphasis added). [59]

 

Here can be heard the wise reverberations of his uncle Broadus from so many years earlier.

He reinforces this when he quotes the “Silver Tongued” orator John Chrysostom: “[R]everence the love of him who called you, and let no one continue to have filthy garments, but let each of you busy himself about the clothing of your soul.” [60] While the dynamics of how election works may be a contemporary issue for us. Broadus does not seem overly concerned with the mechanics of election itself. The more important consideration for Broadus is: Have you repented toward God? Have you placed your faith in His Only Son, Christ Jesus the Lord and Savior? Are you trusting him alone for your eternal salvation (Acts 20:20)?

The Election of God is a Privilege

In Matthew 13:11, concerning the Parable of the Sewer, Jesus’ disciples pose a question to him: “Why speakest thou unto them [the multitudes who followed] in parables?” Broadus observes that his response is most telling, especially when it comes to the doctrine of election. Jesus responds, “Unto you, it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” Broadus declares that “Because it is given you, literally, ‘has been given,’ and so stands as . . . [the Disciples] established privilege. To know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, [61] i.e., of the Messianic reign. . . .” [62] He continues with a description of the disciple’s privileged view of the reign of Messiah. This “mystery” or

[musterion] signifies something hidden or secret, and known only to the initiated, It might be a very simple thing in itself, but it was a secret. Yet some of the doctrines . . . and . . . secret associations of Greek . . . [and] Egypt . . . were really profound, and difficult of comprehension, and so the word has gradually come to suggest the idea of something incomprehensible, though we still sometimes apply it to things which are merely hard to find out. But . . . the New Testament use [of the word] . . . uniformly denotes that which we could not know unless revealed, whether it is in its own nature simple or profound.  Paul’s favorite application of [musterion] . . . is . . . the great fact that the Gentiles were to share in the salvation of the gospel on equal terms with the Jews, a fact always before kept in silence and secrecy, but now manifested by God and to. . . [be] everywhere proclaimed.[63]

 

Further Broadus explains that:

 

Our Lord is in this series of parables setting forth views as to the true nature of the Messianic kingdom—such as its partial acceptance among men, its small beginnings and gradual spread, its allowing the wicked to live on in the world mingled with . . . [the Kingdom’s] subjects until the end—which the mass of the Jews were not spiritually minded enough to comprehend, nor humble enough to receive. So he presents these views in the form of parables, which would, with the help of his explanations, make them clear to his disciples [or elect] but would leave them mysteries (secrets) to the unspiritual and unbelieving multitude.[64]

 

A Catechism of Bible Teaching [65] by John A. Broadus

Our discussion has considered Broadus’s Sermons and Addresses and observations from his Commentary on Matthew; now consider a final glimpse concerning “how he embraced the doctrine of election” towards the end of his life. In “Lesson VIII,” on “Regeneration—Question 9,” in his A Catechism of Bible Teaching [66] he poses the following question:

Q. Does faith come before the new birth?

A. No, it is the new heart that truly repents and believes. [67]

 

It seems at “first blush” that he has either argued himself to a more narrow position on election, or has been persuaded by others to a more staunchly reformed position, or that he has come to believe the “regeneration precedes faith and repentance” through life experience and self-study. However he came to his catechetical conclusion, it is clear that he may have been only a “half step” in front of the softer understandings of election held earlier. This final position smacks of the Reformational understanding of the “Ordo Salutis.”

Wayne Grudem states concerning election that it is only one event in a “list of the events in which God applies salvation to us . . . called the order of salvation, and is sometimes referred to [by its] Latin phrase.” [68] Grudem further explains that “election” is the primary of

[many] steps in God’s work of applying salvation to our lives include[ing] our hearing the gospel call, our being regenerated by the Holy Spirit, our responding in faith and repentance, and God forgiving us and giving us membership in his family, as well as granting us growth in the Christian life and keeping us faithful to himself throughout life. At the end of our life we die and go into his presence, then when Christ returns we receive resurrection bodies, and the process of acquiring salvation is complete. [69]

 

From a Reformation view, election is the first of a process that springs forth from God’s eternal decrees.[70] Grudem lists these as follows:

The Order of Salvation” [consists of . . .]

1. Election (God’s choice of people to be saved)
2. The gospel call (proclaiming the message of the gospel)
3. Regeneration (being born again)
4. Conversion (faith and repentance)
5. Justification (right legal standing)
6. Adoption (membership in God’s family)
7. Sanctification (right conduct of life)
8. Perseverance (remaining a Christian)
9. Death (going to be with the Lord)
10. Glorification (receiving a resurrection body).”[71]

 

Towards the end of his life and ministry Broadus stands in the same stream of theological thought with his colleague James P. Boyce and their forbearer Andrew Fuller. For “Fuller, the only way for faith to be holy is for God through his Word to regenerate the heart prior to believing.” [72] Fuller declares that

The . . . question is in what order these things are caused. Whether the Holy Spirit causes the mind, while carnal, to discern and believe spiritual things, and thereby renders it spiritual; or whether he imparts a holy susceptibility and relish for the truth, in consequence of which we discern its glory, and embrace it. The latter appears to me to be the truth. [73]

 

Gleanings Concerning “Broadus’s ‘Embrace of The Doctrine of Election’”

1. Broadus was primarily a linguist, philosopher, and historian by training. As such, he was a Professor and Tutor of ancient languages at the University of Virginia, Chaplain to the University, and Pastor of the Baptist Church at Charlottesville, Virginia. In this role he was used as Itinerant Evangelists and had acquired a name for himself as pastor and orator before ever he came to The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
2. Broadus came to his Reformational understandings of the “doctrine of election” late. He undertook a study of Calvinistic Soteriology sometime around 1857 after consulting with his uncle and the Princeton scholars.
3. Particular redemption was then—as it is now—a flash point of doctrinal controversy.
4. Broadus had come to consensus on the “doctrine of election” with others of the “Founding Four,” else he would not have been able in “good conscience” to sign the Abstract of Principles.
5. At this point Broadus was what could be considered “moderately Calvinistic.”
6. As a linguist and not a systematic theologian per se, he is not concerned with the “mechanics of election.” He just understood it to be just the plain truth of the Gospel.
7. Towards the end of his life, he seems to have embraced the ordo salutis from a harder reformation understanding that “it is the new heart that truly repents and believes.”

 

This week’s interview is with Roger Duke. He has edited some wonderful books on men in Southern Baptist History that I have reviewed. You can read those here.  Also, check out the interview with Brian Mooney, the co-founder and President of BorderStone Press.

1) Could you please share how you came to know Christ Jesus as your Lord and Savior?

I was reared in a nominal SBC church that was more “fundamentalists” that SBC. My home pastor was a “Bob Jones man.” So my understandings of the Gospel started off rather skewed to say the least. I was taken to church before ever I was born. I like to say I was a “Baptist before I was a Baptist.” I came up through the ranks like a good little SBC boy would or could do. I was in the RAs, and made a “profession of faith” about the age of 7. But this “did not take” as they say.

When I graduated from high school (1969) I did not choose to attend college, but rather wanted to be “blue collar worker” and make my living with my hands. So I defaulted to the “College/Career” group at my home church. We sang for revivals, held “youth revivals,” and other ministry projects like VBS events and such. But on the job I was going to “dirty movies” with the guys, drank some “Red Ripple” wine, and gambled on the job. All the while I was under the conviction by the Holy Spirit. And it was maily by my lost co-workers—who accused me of being a hypocrite. And I was!! At the age of 20, while helping with one of these youth events, I cried out to Jesus for mercy and surrendered my life to Christ.

2) How did you come to being an educator, minister and author?

I was trained as a Steamfitter—Pipefitter—Welder. I went through a 4 year apprenticeship. The end product was that I graduated as a Journeyman Building Tradesman. This is a profession that is still as productive as a college degree for making a living. I married my wife of 36 years in 1974. We have three grown children; Leah 31, Keren 28, and Roger (Dale) Duke, Jr. Our son Dale is mentally retarded with a myriad of secondary health issues. He is one of the main foci that probably have defined me, my wife, our family, and my ministry.

When I was “called to preach” I had no college. I had known about Mid America seminary via Evangelist Sam Cathey and Dr. Jimmy Millikin. So it was natural to go to seminary here in Memphis. I attended there all the while believing that I should go on to get enough education in order for me to teach. So I went on to get my bachelor’s degree, and MAR from Harding Grad School, an MDiv from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (I commuted from Memphis), did some PhD work at The University of Memphis, and received my doctorate from The University of the South @ Sewanee. I have taught Communication and Religion at the Baptist College of Health Sciences since 1998.

It has been my pleasure to co-edit, publish, or otherwise work with:
A. David S. Dockery on John Albert Broadus: A Living Legacy Broadman & Holman, 2008.

¬B. Michael A.G. Haykin & A. James Fuller on “Soldiers of Christ”: The Piety of
Basil Manly, Sr. and Basil Manly, Jr. Founders Press, 2009.

C. Robert R. Agee on Reason for the Season: Ministerial Reflections on Personal Grief, Suffering, and Loss. Founders Press, 2010.

3) You have edited a couple books that deal primarily with particular men in the history of the Southern Baptist Convention (I will mention Broadus and the Manly’s). Why look at these men?

First, I cannot say it any better than Dr. Al Mohler has said it with reference to the Manly work: Without the work, influence, vision of the two Manly’s, there would probably be no Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. And without Southern Seminary the SBC would not be what it is today. The vision for there to be a seminary for the Baptist churches, ministers of the South can in large measure is attributed to the elder Manly amongst others. In that same vein, the younger Manly was commissioned to write The Abstract of Principles for Southern Seminary. The educational tentacles of these two great visionaries continues throughout the SBC and I believe always will!

Secondly, John A. Broadus may be one of the best (or at least one of the best) homiletical minds that the United States has ever produced. His Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons is still being used in some iteration even today to teach preaching to young preachers. It is Broadus’s direct application of the art or Classical Rhetoric to the training of pulpiteers.

Third, it may not be known to all of your readers, but both Manly and Broadus were two of the original founding four professors of Southern Seminary. For this reason alone they merit a fresh look to all who are Southern Baptists.

4) Do you have any books planned or ready to be published that you would like to share with us?

I have co-written with Dr. Phil Newton a new volume entitled Venturing all on God: a Short Introductory Biography of John Bunyan. This work also includes some lesser known writings of Bunyan so the reader can gain a broader understanding of Bunyan’s breadth and depth. This work is due out sometime in early 2011 and will be published by Reformation Heritage Books.

Secondly, I am under contract with Dr. Michael AG Haykin of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary to edit The Proceedings of the Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies annual volumes. Dr. Haykin is Professor of Church History and the Director of The Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. We hope to have the first of these volumes out in late 2010 or early 2011.

Third, I am in the process of organizing, procuring scholar-contributors, co-editing, and writing the introductory chapter of Aristotle—On Homiletics: Classical Rhetoric for Preaching. (This is, of course is just the tentative title at present). This work will include six academic essays on each of the six major dynamics of Aristotle’s rhetoric and how they can be applied—once again—to the preparation and delivery of sermons. Already signed on to do chapters in addition to myself are: Dr. Richard Wells, Union University; Dr. Herschel York, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary; Dr. Archie England, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary; Dr. Robert Smith, Beeson Divinity School; and Dr. Frank Thomas, Mississippi Blvd. Christian Church, Memphis, TN. We are all extremely excited about this volume we believe may “make everything old new again” for homiletics.

5) You recently co-founded BorderStone Press, LLC. with Brian Mooney. Why start your own publishing company?

Brian Mooney called me out of a clear blue sky and asked if I wanted to go partners with him in BorderStone? It really excited me to say the least. Brian’s dad has been in my Men’s Bible Class and we have been great friends for over 12 years. I saw a place to exercise my gifts and calling. I also, and this is what excited me for sure, saw the opportunity to make a real contribution to the Kingdom of God that will last beyond my years. And we are particularly interested to help others who are coming along—who passionately want to get published—to get their works out there. Personally I see it as a great ministry opportunity that can impact and magnify my personal contribution to Christ’s work in a way I never dreamed possible!! SDG!

6) BorderStone Press already features a pretty significant number of books like The Empire of the Holy Spirit and The Sacred Rhetoric, can you offer a glimpse of what is to come?

Many have said as they look at the web page that it seems as though we are focused on the academic community only. But if some have this perception let me put it to rest. We want to fill the void between Sunday School and the Academy. We want to have all genres of Christian publications, including Christian novels, Christian children;s books, devotional writings, but also including college and seminary textbooks. I am sure if anyone of your readers watches the web page closely, it will not be long before there will be something there for each and every taste.

7) Are you taking manuscripts from other writers? If so, what are you looking to publish? How can an aspiring author submit a manuscript to BorderStone Press?

Just now we are looking at any and all manuscript proposals from seriously minded authors and authors-to-be. My partner and I would like to invite each of your readers to visit BorderStonePress.com and look around. We may be able to work with you to get you published, whether you are a novice just dreaming of being published, or an “old hand” who has published before—give us a “look see!”

8) How can our readers support and pray for the two of you as well as BorderStone Press?

First off we want all we do to be “to the praise of the glory of His (Christ’s) grace….” We want to glorify God in all we do. So pray for us to that end. We also need wisdom as to which manuscripts to accept and which to reject. And rejection is not something we at BorderStone take lightly. We have has our share of rejection letters I assure you. We do need to make some money, however. So that tension between being a ministry and making money is always present. Pray that we will know how to be faithful to the Lord’s calling and direction.

Secondly, go to our web page, look around, and buy some books! LOL!

Haykin, Michael, Roger Duke, and A. James Fuller.  Soldiers of Christ: Selections from the Writings of Basil Manly, Sr. & Basil Manly, Jr. Cape Coral:  Founder’s Press, 2009.  218 pp.  $17.95.  Purchase through Founders Ministries.

As a student at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, I am thrilled to experience the festivities of the sesquicentennial being celebrated in 2009. As a book reviewer, I have been blessed to read and review many of the books that have been published as a result of this celebration. Some of these include The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary 1859-2009 by Gregory A. Wills, John A. Broadus: A Living Legacy by Dockery and Duke with more to come. Added to this list is Soldiers of Christ, a book dedicated to the life, ministry, and writings of Basil Manly, Sr. & Jr.

The book is separated into four parts. The first section is a short biography of the life of Basil Manly, Sr. written by A. James Fuller. The second section is a biography of Basil Manly, Jr. written by Michael Haykin. Both of these essays offer a much needed context to the selection of letters that follow. For example, when reading about the elder Manly’s treatment of a particular slave, it is important to keep in mind the context of the day.

Manly, Jr. is best known in Baptist life as one of the four founders of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. It is interesting to see how his heart for theological education was rooted in his father’s passion to see a theological institution (pages 97-104) established in the south apart from “those Baptists from the north.” The younger Manly wrote the Abstract of Principles, the creed by which all professors at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary must adhere to. He also wrote the hymn “Soldier’s of Christ, in Truth Arrayed” which became the seminary’s graduation hymn since it was first sung at the 1860 commencement.

Soldiers of Christ is an excellent resource that every Baptist should read. It is abundantly clear through the selected letters (and one can only assume the life) that the piety of Manly, Sr. was passed on to Manly, Jr. To see how the elder Manly handled the death of two infant children or how the younger Manly handled the trials of the founding of the seminary. To see the legacy of Christian piety handed down from generation to generation is needed in the context of today’s church. I commend this book to any student of history or to any minister wanting to see first hand how to live a life of Christian piety amidst much trial. We are indebted to Founders Ministries for publishing this volume.

Dockery, David S. and Roger D. Duke. John A. Broadus: A Living Legacy Studies in Baptist Life and Thought, ed. Michael A.G. Haykin.  Nashville:  Broadman and Holman Academic, 2008.  260 pp.  $19.99.

Introduction to John A. Broadus – A Living Legacy

This book is first in a series of books that looks back at the history of Baptist life and thought.  The series editor is Michael Haykin who is Professor of Church History and Biblical Spirituality as well as the Director of The Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

This particular book is edited by David S. Dockery and Roger D. Duke.  Dr. Dockery currently serves as the president of Union University in Jackson, Tennessee.  Dr. Duke is assistant professor of religion and communication at the Baptist College of Health Services in Memphis, Tennessee and is an adjunct assistant professor at Union University.  More importantly, Dr. Duke is a new contributor to Said at Southern Seminary. Read more…