The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1897-10-27

ConFerer ce Thinks D!. Whi*sI5 9"s
Misunderstood srd sueseots Thai Cos
d.mna.ory RsscluioDs Cesse.
In the interest OF harmony s1oorg
Baptists, number OF repr7S:J ,afiVe
pastors and lsymen from the d1tfaTtn;
soutoern States, II clrdip2 such u$p
as Joshua Levari2g, p-s>idaa! q tAs
board of trustees FOR ;he Sou afrn
Bsptis. Theolosicsl seminary, D,. ).
3. Hawthorne, Of Nashville, &a2 X
Governor Nortbep OF Gecrei&, wlo
me, at Nashville last week to con>!1Sr
the Whitsitt controversy, ASve issued
an address 70 the denomlIa ion urG,
ing cessation of coDdamnatory rsso
lutions, and a temperate cousidecAtio2
of DR.. WhitSitt's utteTapcss on ba2
tism which have been the subjsc! o.
much heated controversy. These gen,
tlemen take the position that Dr..
Whist: has been misunder t2od, aoG
they ask to be besrd on rss:atement
of the case. Tie controversy 50 far
has been, in rrief, as follows:
In Msy, 1896, Dr.. Whitsi,t's article on
Bsptists in Johnsons cyclopedia was pub,
ished in denominational papers. The cgc:o-
pedia had been in print two years, but for
some reason the statements which afterwards
caused so great a controversy were unno-
ticed. When the article Was published Just
prior to the meeting ofthe So~thern bap-
tist convention at Chattanooga, the state
nen: by Dr. Whi;sitt that the English bap-
fists did not practice immersion prior to the
year 164l was Immediately challenged. There
was alarge element otthedeaomlnatlon Of known
SIS Landmark Baptists,' who believed and
still believe that baptism by immersion mad
been continuously practiced from the times
of the apostles. The assertion 10 the contra
~ by the president OF the Southern baptlSt
Theological seminary, which educateS nearly
all the Baptist preachers in the south wasa
great shock to these members Of the church
and they began to express their disapproba,
ton in very emphatic terms.
In the meantime more subject matter was
added to the controversy. Somebody charg.
ed that DR.. Whitsitt had plagiarized the
work Of Dr.. Dexter, o Congregationalist, IN
the cyclopedia article. II defending him
self from this charge, DR.. Whitsitt referred
to editorials he had written for the New
York Independent twelve years before, con-
tanning the same statement. Forthwith those
editorials were printed, and to the surprise
of everyone they were written from an unde-
nominational standpoint and sounded more
ike the cold and dispassionate statement of
historian or critical student Of denomina-
tionsl literature. This did not help matters
and the controversy ragged more violently
Tho 1ooSo-S nS tho
were DR.. T. T. Eaton, of Louisville, pastor
of the Walnut street Baptist church. and ed
itor Of The Western Recorder, and DR., B. II.
Carroll, of Texas.
Dr.. Whitsitt supported his statements with
extracts from historical records in the Brit
ish museum. hecontention of DR.. Whitsitt
and his friends was that the truth Of history
should not be gainsaid, and that the article
was the only rule Of faith and practice for
Baptists, and the question was not affect
ed by practices Of the English Baptists Of the
seventeenth century or anybody else. This
was not satisfactory to the opponents OF the
Whitsitt theory, and the matter was discussed
In various associations and conventions and
came before the trustees Of the Southern
Baptist Theological seminary at Wilmington,
n. c.. during the meeting Of the Southern
Baptist convention. DR.. 8. II. Carroll, Of
Texas, introduced radical resolution which
looked to an emphatic pronouncenent
against DR.. Whitsitt's position, and would,
If adopted, have possibly led to his removal
from the presidency Of the seminary. The
resolution was rejected by the board and the
following substitute was adopted:
seThe trustees Of the Southern Baptist
~ ocoa,pNloS ~ fbo,r q ~
nusl meeting, in Wilmington, n. c., May .,
1897, desire to submit to the Baptists OF the
south the following statement in regard to
the institution whose Interests have been
committed to their care and management.
That we account this fitting occasion to re-
affirm our cordial and thorough adherence TO
the Fundamental articles adopted at the time
when the seminary was established, and TO
assure those in whose behalf we hold II
trust and administer the affairs Of this insti-
tuition Of our steadfast purpose to insist that
the fundamental laws and scriptural doc
trines embodied in these articles shall be
faithfully upheld BY those occupying chairs
ss teachers.
That we cannot undertake to sit in judg-
nent on questions in Baptist history which
90 UOL IutpSEA d4y Va t4VSS SiAAAS&D WV
cernins which all Baptists are agreed, but
concerning which serious, conscientious and
scholarly students are not agreed. We can,
however, confidently leave to continued re-
search and discussion the satisfactory solu-
ton Of these questions.
.sThat believing the seminary to hold an
important relation to the prosperity and use
fulness of southern Baptists, ne consider it
our duty while demanding Of those ID charge
of its departments of instruction the utIc0s;
patience in research and the greatest diScre-
ton in utterance, to foster, rather than re-
press, the spirit Of earnest and reverent in
vestigation
s'Thst, being fully assured that the tender
affection which we cherish for this institu-
ton, founded by our fathers and bequeathed
by them to US, is shared BY the Baptists OF
the south, we can safely trust them, ss We
ask them to trust US, to guard its honor, pro-
mote its usefulness and pray for its prosperi-
ty.''
Dr.. Whitsitt was invited to make state
ment and the next morning read the follow
ing:
Wilmington, n. c., May I, 1897.
seTo the Board of Trustees Of the Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary:
"Dear Brethren-I beg leave to return
sincerest snd heartiest thanks for the noble
and generous treatment which you have be-
slowed upon me. I have only words Of af-
fection for every member of the board. At
ter consulting with the committee, have the
following to say:
ssl. Thatin regard to the articles written
as editorials for The Independent, l have
long felt it was mistake, and the generous
action Of the board of trustees makes 1t easy
for me to make this statement. What l
wrote was from e pedobaptist standpoint,
with view to stimulating historical research,
with no thought that 1t would injure the
Baptists, and with no intention 10 disDarage
Baptist doctrine or practices.
'.2. That the article in Johnson,s Ency-
clopedia has probably passed beyond my
control, butit will be very pleasing to me if
I can hnnnrahlv nrncrrn the elimination Of