Are Baptists Anti-Ecumenical?

Admittedly, a large number of Baptist individuals and groups have opposed any type of active cooperation or attempts at formal unity with other Christian groups. Perhaps the most extreme example of this was the nineteenth-century Landmark Movement among Southern Baptists, which championed an unbroken succession of Baptist churches extending all the way back through Christian history to Jesus, John, and the Jordan River. Furthermore, Landmarkists believed that the only true “church” was a local body of Baptist believers. Therefore, they refused to participate in pulpit exchanges with non-Baptist pastors, championed closed communion and rejected the validity of “alien” immersions. Demonstrating his contempt for non-Baptists, J. R. Graves, one of the pioneers of the movement, often referred to Methodist churches as “societies” rather than churches. Landmarkism left a permanent legacy among Southern Baptists to the present that with the exception of a few individuals has discouraged ecumenical endeavors with other Christian groups, especially Roman Catholics.
Southern Baptists, however, did not start the Twentieth Century completely opposed to finding common ground among all Christians. At the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1911 a committee was appointed and given the purpose of keeping the SBC abreast of the developments in the ecumenical movement following the 1910 Edinburgh Conference, a world missionary conference that sought to find areas of cooperation among missionaries around the world. The meeting is usually considered to be the catalyst for the ecumenical movement of the twentieth century. This committee presented an interesting report to the annual meeting in 1914 titled, “Pronouncement on Christian Union and Denominational Efficiency.” Although cautious to maintain important Baptist distinctives, the statement did hold out the possibility of optimism in the area of Christian unity. It said,
This Convention rejoices in the many evidences of increasing interest in the subject of Christian union among Christian people everywhere. Many evils arise from the divided state of modern Christendom. . . . We rejoice [in] the substantial agreement among evangelical Christians . . . . We firmly believe that a way may be found through the maze of divided Christendom out into the open spaces of Christian union only as the people of Christ follow the golden thread of an earnest desire to know and do His will. But, meantime, we may have the rare joy of fellowship and cooperation in many forms of endeavor wherein angels might well desire to have a part.[1]
The spirit expressed here did not ever fully take hold in the SBC, however. Although Southern Baptists have been willing to cooperate with some other Christians in areas related to ethics and morality from time to time, they have avoided formal involvement in the ecumenical movement. The SBC has never been a formal participant or supporter of the National Council of Churches (formerly the Federal Council of Churches) or the World Council of Churches, although individual Southern Baptists have occasionally served on committees and commissions of both organizations. Nevertheless, an argument can be made on a broader scale that Baptists are ecumenical and some Baptist groups have even been involved formally in the ecumenical movement.
The Broader Baptist Tradition
While Southern Baptists have tended to resist ecumenical endeavors of a formal nature, other Baptist groups have actively participated in such efforts. British Baptists in particular have been very active in ecumenical work throughout the Twentieth Century. One of the earliest advocates of ecumenical dialogue was William Carey, who in 1805 called for a general meeting in Capetown of representatives from all Christian denominations. Carey believed such a meeting consisting of Christians from all over the world would promote greater understanding and cooperation.[2]
Although Carey’s meeting did not occur, there were other efforts on the part of some British Baptists to bring all Christians into unity. They were represented at the Edinburgh Conference in 1910 and were instrumental in organizing the World Council of Churches in 1948. John H. Shakespeare, general secretary of the Baptist Union from 1898-1928, was a strong advocate for the organic union of all Christians. His book, The Churches at the Crossroads: A Study in Church Unity (1918) lamented the sectarian divisions that divided Christians. He actively sought to reunite Baptists with the Church of England.[3]
Ernest A. Payne was another champion of ecumenism among British Baptists. Elected as general secretary of the Baptist Union from 1951-67, Payne was more involved in ecumenical matters than Shakespeare. During his tenure at the helm of the Baptist Union he ascended to prominence in the leadership of the World Council of Churches, serving a term as vice-president.[4]
In America, Northern Baptists (called “American Baptists” after 1950) represented a strong voice of support for ecumenism. Throughout most of American history there has been a tradition of ecumenical cooperation between Baptists in the North and other Christian denominational groups. In colonial America, Baptists cooperated with Congregationalists and Presbyterians, especially in the area of pastoral installations. In the early twentieth century the Northern Baptist Convention participated as a charter member in the founding of the Federal Council of Churches (1908), which later became the National Council of Churches (1950). The Northern Baptist Convention also had representation at the Edinburgh Conference in 1910 and became a charter member of the World Council of Churches in 1948. Additionally, in 1966 the American Baptist Convention created the Office of Ecumenical Relations for the purpose of maintaining ecumenical discussions with other Christians.[5]
Baptist Theology and Practice
The Baptist theological tradition is not completely original. Baptists borrowed theological ideas and distinctive practices from other Christian traditions. Fisher Humphreys, Professor of Divinity at Beeson Divinity School at Samford University, has described the common beliefs that Baptists share with all Christians in a section of his book, The Way We Were: How Southern Baptist Theology has Changed and What it Means to Us All. Theological concepts such as belief in one God who created the world, the reality of sin in the world, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the life, death and resurrection of Christ, the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church, the missionary imperative, the ordinances of baptism and communion, future hope and the authority of the Bible are all beliefs that are foundational to Baptist theology. Certainly, Baptists did not invent these beliefs. In fact, these theological concepts had been foundational for most Christians for centuries before the Baptist denomination was ever born and were reflected in such ancient statements of faith such as the Apostles’ Creed and Nicene Creed.[6]
In addition to these core theological convictions Baptists share with other Christians, many “Baptist distinctives” are not the exclusive property of Baptists. Believer’s baptism came from the Anabaptist tradition. TheWaterlander Mennonites were even practicing believer’s baptism by immersion before Baptists. The concept of priesthood of the believer, although later modified by Baptists, originally came from Martin Luther. The idea of local church autonomy came from the Separatist tradition within the Anglican Church. Anabaptists championed the concept of religious liberty a century before the birth of the Baptists.[7] Baptists owe a great debt to the broader Christian tradition. So, in that sense, the very nature of what it means to be a Baptist theologically and practically is ecumenical. Baptist historian Walter Shurden advises that the time has come “for Baptists who acknowledge the authority of scripture for faith and practice to confess our oneness with and our dependency on the larger Body of Christ.”[8]
Conclusion
It is true that many Baptists have been opposed to the ecumenical movement. However, it would be a mistake to conclude that Baptists are not ecumenical. Baptist theology and practice, including beliefs and practices known as “distinctives,” are all indebted to the broader Christian tradition. Furthermore, individual Baptists and some Baptist groups have worked diligently for the reunion of Christians. Baptists have always been a diverse people. This diversity is reflected in every contested issue of Baptist faith and practice including their attitudes toward ecumenical involvement. Ecumenism among Baptists simply mirrors the ever-present diversity existing among Baptists.
[1] Annual, SBC, 1914, pp. 73-77, as cited by Timothy George, “Southern Baptist Relationships With Other Protestants,” Baptist History and Heritage, 25 (July, 1990): p. 27.
[2]H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage: Four Centuries of Baptist Witness, Nashville: Broadman Press, 1987, pp. 518-19.
[3]Ibid., pp. 501-03.
[4]Ibid., p. 503.
[5] Ibid., pp. 600-02.
[6] Fisher Humphreys, The Way We Were: How Southern Baptist Theology has Changed and What it Means to Us All, New York: McCracken Press, 1994, pp. 3-22.
[7] Walter Shurden, The Baptist Identity: Four Fragile Freedoms, Macon: Smyth and Helwys, 1993, pp. 9-10.
[8]Ibid., p. 10.

Truth is Unkillable

“Unkillable” is not a word in the English language. However, it is the best translation of a word in the motto that Balthasar Hübmaier, the greatest theologian of the early Anabaptists, used on all his writings: Die Wahrheit ist untödlich (“Truth is unkillable”).
The brilliant Hübmaier was born around 1481 in a small town called Friedberg just outside of Augsburg. He attended the University of Freiburg and there came under the tutelage of the great Catholic theologian Dr. John Eck. Hübmaier completed both the bachelor’s and master’s degrees then followed Eck to the University of Ingolstadt where he received the Doctor of Theology degree. Because of his great preaching ability and keen theological mind he accepted appointment as preacher at the cathedral in Regensburg in 1516. Five years later he became a parish priest in Waldshut and there came into contact with Ulrich Zwingli and the Swiss Reformation. Two years later, he became publicly identified with Zwingli’s reform in Zurich, but soon developed Anabaptist ideas.
Along with his preaching, Hübmaier’s pen became a powerful voice for spreading Anabaptist ideas. Soon, he came into conflict with Zwingli and in late 1525 Zwingli had both Hübmaier and his wife arrested. He was forced to enter the pulpit of the Fraumünster in Zurich and recant publicly. As he began to speak instead of recanting he said, “Oh what anguish and travail I have suffered this night over the statements which I myself have made. So I say here and now, I can and I will not recant.”[i] Zwingli immediately stopped Hübmaier and had him arrested again. This time he underwent torture at the hands of Zwingli and eventually produced a written statement recanting of his Anabaptist ideas.
In early 1526 he left Zurich for Nikolsburg in Moravia where once again he took up the Anabaptist cause, this time with greater force than before. Moravia was one of the most tolerant regions in Europe and Hübmaier had a great amount of freedom to preach Anabaptist ideas there. It is estimated that more than 6,000 were baptized in the one year of Hübmaier’s ministry in Nikolsburg. But this year of relative peace was not to last long. The fortune of Anabaptists in Moravia soon changed and Hübmaier was arrested, taken to Vienna, and burned at the stake on March 10, 1528. Although tortured mercilessly for several days before his death, this time he refused to recant. He was urged to confess to a priest and receive last rites before his execution but he steadfastly refused. An eyewitness to his execution described Hübmaier’s death this way:
To the people he said, “O dear brothers, if I have injured any, in word or deed, may he forgive me for the sake of my merciful God. I forgive all those that have done me harm.”
While his clothes were being removed: “From thee also, O Lord, were the clothes stripped. My clothes will I gladly leave here, only preserve my spirit and my soul, I beseech thee!” Then he added in Latin: “O Lord, into thy hands I commit my spirit,” and spoke no more in Latin.
As they rubbed sulphur and gunpowder into his beard, which he wore rather long, he said, “Oh salt me well, salt me well.” And raising his head, he called out: “O dear brothers, pray God that he will give me patience in this my suffering.” As his beard and hair caught fire, he cried out, “O Jesus, Jesus.”[ii]
[i] William R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1996, p. 92.
[ii] Ibid., p. 103.

God's Presence in a Dorm Room

I hung up the telephone and sat down on my bed and started to cry. It was November, 1981 and I had been a seminary student at the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas for only three months. My mother had just called to inform me that my father had been admitted into Baptist Hospital in Winston-Salem, North Carolina for “tests.” I was 1200 miles away from home but I might as well have been halfway around the world. Even though one of my best friends from my childhood was a few doors down the hall from me, I had never felt so alone in all my life. To say that I was homesick was an understatement.

After a few minutes, I did the only thing that my mind told me to do. I went to the closet and reached for my suitcase to begin packing. I was going home. At that moment, I didn’t care if I ever completed my seminary degree. Three years seemed like a marathon. I’d go home, help my mother, get a job somewhere and settle in to a life surrounded by the people who knew me the best. But, as I reached for the suitcase, another impression was placed indelibly upon my mind. I’ve always been skeptical of those who claim to hear some type of audible voice from God. But that night, I can attest that in my soul I heard a very clear impression from the Spirit. In the midst of the darkness of that moment in my life, I was reminded in a clear and certain way of my calling to ministry. And I was also given the impression that I needed to stay right where I was, that returning to North Carolina would be a mistake. In short, I was reminded of the Apostle Paul’s words in Philippians 4:9, “Keep on doing the things that you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, and the God of peace will be with you.” (NRSV)

More than twenty years of ministry have passed since that lonely night in a dorm room at Southwestern Seminary. Looking back over the years I now smile at this episode. But it serves as a reminder to me from time to time, especially when dark clouds gather on the horizon, that God is ever-present in my life and is there to lead, comfort, and sustain me through times of difficulty.

What Does it Mean to be "Christlike?"

“Greater Love”
John 15:13 says, “No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends” (NRSV). But, what would you call laying down one’s life for one’s enemies? An act like that would certainly rise to the level of being “Christ like!”
Very few people know the name Dirk Willems. But, he is legendary in the annals of Anabaptist martyrology. The year was 1569. The setting was Holland, specifically the town of Leerdam. During his teenage years, Willems rejected his infant baptism and accepted believer’s baptism, was baptized in Rotterdam, and thereby joined himself with the Anabaptists. Anabaptism was illegal in Holland in the late 16th century. And, although it was dangerous to identify oneself with the movement, to be considered one of its sponsors or leaders was an even greater offense. According to the court record of his case, Willems “permitted several persons to be rebaptized in his aforesaid house; all of which is contrary to our holy Christian faith, and to the decrees of his royal majesty, and ought not to be tolerated, but severely punished, for an example to others.”[1] Therefore, Willems was sentenced to death at the stake and was burned alive sometime in May, 1569.
What is so remarkable about this story, however, is what happened before his final capture and execution. It seems that when he was first arrested, he was able to break free from his pursuer and he began to run. He ran out of town and across a field which eventually led him to a frozen pond. The ice was strong enough to support Willems. However, his captor fell through the ice while in pursuit. Hearing the man crying out for help, Willems turned to help the man out of the water. Although he was inclined to allow Willems to go free in return for this good deed, the burgomaster “very sternly called him to consider his oath.”[2] So Willems was apprehended a second time by the man, taken back into town where he stood trial, and was eventually burned at the stake.
How Christ like is that? It is one thing to lay down your life for your friends. But, one who sacrifices one’s life for enemies is clearly living like Jesus. What a testimony!
Prayer
Lord, help me to be more like Jesus in my dealings with other people. Help me to love those who are not easy to love with the kind of compassion and grace that Jesus had. Help me, through showing this kind of sacrificial love, to be a witness to your grace and life-changing power. Through the power of Christ, Amen.
[1] Thieleman J. van Braght, ed., Martyrs Mirror: The Story of Seventeen Centuries of Christian Martyrdom from the Time of Christ to A.D. 1660, Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 2001, p. 742.
[2] Ibid., p. 741.

The Theology of Bruce Springsteen

Bruce Springsteen: Theologian?

Students who have taken classes with me over the years can attest to the fact that I am a big fan of Bruce Springsteen and his music. Various scholars have attempted to discern the numerous theological themes present in Springsteen’s music. To recount those discussions would take more space than I have available.
One important theological theme in Springsteen’s music can be found in his album called “The Rising,” written after the tragic events on September 11, 2001. The title of the album conjures up notions of eschatology, a theme present in much of Springsteen’s music. In several songs on this album one can hear messages about “last things” as he sings about life, death, and life after death. For example, the song “Waitin On a Sunny Day,” while bouncy and fun, is nevertheless a song about hope for a “sunny day” in the midst of darkness, grief and loss.
The longest track on the album at more than 6 minutes is an invitation to the party at “Mary’s Place,” no doubt an allusion to Heaven. The song’s second verse begins with the lyrics:
Familiar faces around me,
Laughter fills the air,
Your lovin grace surrounds me,
Everybody’s here
Mary’s Place is Heaven. Those who come to the party see familiar faces, celebration, and the loving grace of Mary, most likely a reference to the mother of Jesus. “Everybody’s here may suggest a hint of universalism in Springsteen’s theology.
The most chilling song on the album is called “Paradise” which explores different perspectives on the afterlife. The first verse of the song graphically examines the feelings of a Palestinian suicide bomber just before his death:
Where the river runs black
I take the schoolbooks from your pack
Plastics, wire and your kiss
The breath of eternity on your lips
In the crowded marketplace
I drift from face to face
I hole my breath and close my eyes
I hold my breath and close my eyes
And I wait for paradise
And I wait for paradise.
Another (and perhaps best) example of eschatology on the album is the title track called “The Rising.” This recalls the horrors of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers and the firemen who died and has resurrection as its major theme. The chorus of the song is an invitation to “come on up for the rising” and later speaks of “Mary’s garden, a garden of a thousand sighs.”
Bruce Springsteen is not a Gospel musician per se. However, his music contains important allusions to theological themes. And for his loyal fans, these songs give us encouragement as we travel the journey of life.

What is a Baptist Christian University?

The Intersection of Athens and Jerusalem: The Aims of Higher Education in a Christian University

Introduction
During the second century of Christianity, a debate raged between two great theologians over the value of pagan philosophy to an understanding of Christian theology. Justin Martyr (c. 100-c. 165) believed that pagan philosophers had a measure of ultimate “Truth,” but needed a more complete understanding of that Truth which could only be provided by Christ. To the contrary, writing a generation later, Tertullian (c. 160-240) believed that the roots of many of the heresies of his day could be traced to the attempts to blend together pagan philosophy with Christian theology. In his De Praescriptione Haereticorum (Prescription Against Heretics), Tertullian proclaimed “What is there in common between Athens and Jerusalem? What between the Academy and the Church? What between heretics and Christians?”[i]
There is a sense in which a “Christian” university embodies an “intersection” between the academic world (Athens) and the Christian faith (Jerusalem). The modern discussion of the nature of Christian colleges and universities and the topic of “faith and learning” may be reminiscent of this debate so many centuries ago. For the last several decades a number of theologians and philosophers at Christian colleges and universities have been engaged in a discussion of how to bring the Christian intellectual tradition to the experience of learning in the academy. Does the Christian intellectual tradition speak to the academy of learning and can it have influence? I believe it can and does. While it is beyond the scope of my topic this morning to recount that discussion, it must be stated that there are literally thousands of pages of journal articles, books, and pamphlets devoted to this topic. I quickly discovered this as I first began preparing for this lecture. A Google Search on the topic “Christian University” turns up 1,660,000 hits.[ii]
The assignment given to me this morning is to delineate the “Aims of Higher Education at a Christian University.” I plan to do this by posing three questions: (1) What does it mean to be a Christian University? (2) What does it mean to be a Baptist Christian University? (3) What are the educational goals at a Baptist Christian University?
What Does It Mean to be a Christian University?
In an article entitled, “Christian Faith and the Life of the Mind,” Richard T. Hughes asks, “How is it possible for Christian colleges and universities to mature into absolutely first rate institutions of higher learning while, at the very same time, living out of the faith traditions that gave them birth?”[iii] How can the intersection of Athens and Jerusalem be implemented and what does that kind of university look like?
Perhaps it is best to approach the question by first recalling the public perception of a Christian university. Frequently, in the minds of many, including potential students, a Christian university is defined in terms of what it opposes. The definition of a Christian university that many have is a university that does not allow consumption of alcoholic beverages on campus, no co-ed dorms, no sexual activity outside of marriage and, at least for most Baptist universities of a generation ago (and some in the present!), no dancing, as well as a host of other rules.[iv] Furthermore, some perceive that a Christian university exists to shelter Christian students from the intellectual world rather than to encourage those students to interact with it in a meaningful way.
Now, please don’t think that I want to say that rules do not matter. I think they do. I believe that abuse of alcohol by students on college campuses is one of the critical problems that exist on college campuses today. And, for a variety of reasons, I believe that co-ed dorms are not a good idea. Furthermore, as one who believes in the sanctity of marriage, I do not encourage sexual experimentation outside of marriage. Now dancing, well, I don’t know. I’ll only admit that I do “cut a rug” every now and then and never feel like I am sinning!
Scholars studying this question longer than I have developed some very good definitions of a Christian university. Robert Benne defines a “Christian university” as one “in which the Christian heritage is publicly relevant to the central endeavors of the college [or university].”[v] He argues further that such universities must maintain vigilant concern for three elements of the Christian tradition: its vision, its ethos (including public worship and lifestyle), and personnel committed to the Christian tradition.[vi]
Duane Litfin, president of Wheaton College, adds to the discussion in an article entitled, “The Call to Be a Distinctively Christian University.” He begins by arguing that “Distinctively Christian” means to go beyond merely a personal understanding of the Atonement of Christ to a “fuller vision, the vision of Jesus Christ as Lord.”[vii] Furthermore, he argues, “until we arrive at this level of thinking, what we’re doing may be factually sound and even generically theistic, and therefore truly within the circle of what a Christian does think. But it will not yet be distinctively Christian.” This vision of a “distinctively” Christian university, “leads directly to the awareness that He is the One, the only One, who can serve as the centerpiece of an entire curriculum, the One to whom we must relate everything and without whom no fact, no theory, no subject, no practice can be fully appreciated.”[viii]
Where does Campbell University fit in its self-understanding of the nature of a Christian university? If you haven’t read Campbell University’s “Statement of Purpose” I suggest you do so. It is a very fine statement and serves as the foundational theological document for our university. Several components of the “Statement of Purpose” are pertinent to this discussion. The third paragraph reads:
The purpose of Campbell University arises out of three basic theological and Biblical presuppositions: learning is appointed and conserved by God as essential to the fulfillment of human destiny; in Christ, all things consist and find ultimate unity; and the Kingdom of God in this world is rooted and grounded in Christian community.[ix]

Furthermore, the Statement says that as a university, we commit ourselves to a variety of endeavors for our students. The most significant of these (related to our discussion here) reads: “Bring the Word of God, Mind of Christ, and Power of the Spirit to bear in developing moral courage, social sensitivity, and ethical responsibility that will inspire a productive and faithful maturation as individuals and as citizens. . . . [and] Affirm the University’s commitment to the belief that truth is never one-dimensional but in wholeness is revelatory, subjective, and transcendent as well as empirical, objective, and rational, and that all truth finds its unity in the mind of Christ.”[x]
A good scriptural reference which illustrates this Christ-centered concept of the Christian university is Colossians 1:15-17:
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; for in him all things in heaven and earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers—all things have been created through him and for him. He himself is before all things, and in him all things hold together. (NRSV)

Of particular importance in this passage is the last phrase, “in him all things hold together.” A Christian university should be built around this Christ-centered supposition.[xi]
Practically speaking, what should such a Christ-centered university be like? Does this mean that all faculty and staff must be Christian? Does this mean that all students must be Christian? Does it mean that the university espouses certain public positions on the issues of the day such as stem cell research, abortion, gay rights, war and peace, hunger, and any other “hot button” issues in the headlines today? Undoubtedly, there are many who would answer “yes” to all of those questions. However, influencing the “culture wars” is not the most important task of a Christian university as Ralph C. Wood argued here at our university last year. He said, “It is ever so important not to confuse Christian education with taking a position within the culture wars.”[xii]
I would suggest that the picture of a Christ-centered university could be defined much more simply. Plainly speaking, a Christ-centered university should follow the way of Jesus which can be summarized in three concepts: (1) hospitality; (2) servanthood; (3) compassion.
Hospitality
Jesus was hospitable to everyone. He welcomed Jew and Gentile, slave and free, male and female, the sick and the healthy into his presence.[xiii] Not only did he welcome everyone into his presence but he genuinely respected them. How does this happen in the Christian university? My colleague, Dr. Kathy Lopez has articulated this concept very well:
If I think of my academic, intellectual life as a home, a home that has nurtured me a place to be and to thrive, then, as a Christian who has been offered a home in Christ, I must also understand my intellectual home to be a gift. . . . When I teach a class, I am inviting my students into my home; the place where I have found truth and beauty, nurture and meaning, as well as challenge and disorder. . . . As we practice hospitality, everyone must be given a place at the table, not in a way that it is often practiced in our (secular) academic communities, a sort of anything goes which leads to no meaning whatsoever but is merely a freedom from any sort of constraint. Rather we must give everyone a place at the table in such a way that each one of us may have a voice. Only then will each of us have the space to be free and to grow in knowledge, in participation with our Baptist tradition, and in the practice of the Christian virtues.[xiv]

The principle of hospitality relates to the way that we as faculty and staff treat students. In a Christian community we are called to treat students with respect, dignity and courtesy. In return, for this to be a true community, they need to give us the same measure of respect. Campbell University can be a better Christian university if we practice the principle of Christian hospitality.
Servanthood
A second trait which characterizes the life and ministry of Christ is servanthood. In Matthew 20, the scripture reveals an uncharacteristic occurrence of dissension among the disciples. The mother of James and John came to Jesus and requested that “these two sons of mine will sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.” She was asking for some type of special prominence for her sons in Christ’s kingdom. This made the other ten disciples angry. In the midst of this context about prominence and greatness, Jesus made this declaration:
You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. It will not be so among you; but whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be your slave; just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.[xv]

Because of its Christ-centeredness, servanthood should be a principle encouraged and embodied in a Christian university. Goshen College, a Mennonite college in Goshen, Indiana, has a wonderful statement about servant leadership which serves as a great model for this concept.
We believe that servant leadership is reflected perfectly in the life and person of Jesus Christ. We humbly set aside self-interest for the interests of others, because love for others builds up God’s community. By following Christ’s example, we create a culture characterized by joyful service.[xvi]

Compassion
The story in John 8 of the woman taken in adultery is one of the most compassionate images of Jesus that can be found in the Gospels. When he asked for the first stone to be thrown by anyone who had no sin they all dropped their stones and went away. However, his compassion is seen in his words with this woman at the end of the passage:
Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you? She said, “No one, sir.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again.”[xvii]

Is it possible for a Christian university to embody such compassion toward our students? I believe that if we are going to be true to our claims that we are a Christian university, our faculty, administration and staff must embody this principle in our relationships with each other and with our students. As the principle translates into the university setting it becomes much more than forgiveness. I believe that the principle of compassion informs the very nature of how we relate to each other in this university community. As faculty advisors, we should take an active interest in our students. We should take seriously the academic responsibility of advising students. However, we need to be a friend as well. We need to recognize that there may be times that we are called upon to “minister” to our students or to each other. “What would Jesus do?” is not a bad question for all of us to ask ourselves as we relate to each other in this university community.
I believe that Campbell University will be a better Christian university if all employees (both faculty and staff) and our students resolve to pattern their lives after the Christ-like traits of hospitality, servanthood, and compassion.
What Does It Mean to be a Baptist, Christian University?
Is it sufficient for a university simply to be defined as “Christian” without any sectarian designation? A number of scholars have argued that for a Christian university to resist complete secularization it must retain a certain sectarian quality. George Marsden, in his The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief, chronicles how secularization has prevailed over many of the private and public universities and colleges in America. Furthermore, he argues that such universities, originally established by major Christian denominational traditions, underwent an evolutionary process toward secularization, the first step of which was the move toward a nonsectarian or “generic” Christianity.[xviii]
Elizabeth Newman, describing the same process, indicated that many of these universities by the late nineteenth century began to resist identification as sectarian. Consequently, this “anti-sectarian rhetoric in the academy often had the effect of distancing Protestant educators from their own religious commitments with the result that such commitments eventually became invisible.”[xix]
In the same vein of thought, Roger Ward indicates that “staying Christian means staying denominational. Efforts to create a ‘mere Christian’ college have not worked. The institutions that retain a vital connection with their denomination have had the most success at remaining Christian institutions.”[xx]
My colleague, Dr. Steve Harmon, drawing from Robert Benne’s typologies of church-related schools, argues that the best scenario for a Christian university would be for a “critical-mass” of that school’s denominational tradition to be present on the campus but that faculty, staff, and students from other traditions are welcomed and become vital contributors to the common experience. Harmon continues:
The faculty in a Baptist “critical-mass” university, for example, needs to hear from Presbyterian, Catholic, Orthodox, or Pentecostal colleagues in various disciplines their perspectives on the significance of their own Christian traditions for the life of the mind. At the same time, the presence of a “critical mass” of faculty members from the sponsoring tradition will help the denominational college to offer a public account of the unique contributions of a particular denominational telling of the Christian story to the intellectual life of the larger body of Christ.[xxi]

The evidence suggests that for a Christian university to remain true to its Christian heritage it must maintain a commitment to its sectarian sponsoring tradition.
Does the historic Baptist tradition provide its colleges and universities the proper tools necessary for resisting secularization? Several contemporary scholars believe not. Robert Benne argues, “Baptists simply do not have much of a theological heritage, although they certainly carry certain Baptist themes—religious liberty, soul competency, church-state separation—that accompany their classical evangelical beliefs. What will supply that theological tradition to make the integration of faith and learning fruitful?”[xxii] On a similar note, Evangelical historian Mark Noll, although admitting his own “ignorance” of the Baptist tradition in higher education, nevertheless, argues that it has “special difficulty when it comes to . . . requirements for Christian learning—the full, discerning appropriation of the Christian intellectual tradition and an appropriately discerning engagement with modern thought.”[xxiii] Furthermore, he questions whether “Baptist perspectives—which are so localistic in principle, so determinedly anti-traditional in their biblicism, and so wary of creedal definition—can ever contribute as much in intellectual life as they do to community Christian life on the ground.”[xxiv] Although he does recognize some positive qualities about the Baptist tradition for Christian higher education, Noll essentially dismisses its potential largely due, in my opinion, to a misunderstanding of it.[xxv]
As a Baptist, I disagree with Benne and Noll. Furthermore, as a Baptist historian, I believe they are simply wrong and do not possess an accurate understanding of Baptist contributions to Christian higher education. Interestingly, Richard T. Hughes, a non-Baptist, articulates an argument that contradicts Benne and Noll. After examining the essential characteristics and qualities of Christian universities from the Reformed, Anabaptist, Roman Catholic, and Lutheran traditions he argues persuasively that the traditional Baptist commitment to “soul competency” gives Baptist colleges and universities “some of the strongest resources for sustaining the life of the mind that one could possibly imagine.”[xxvi] But, he warns,
if Baptist colleges and universities hope to find, in their own rich tradition, resources that can sustain the life of the mind, they must allow the traditional Baptist notion of soul competency to function, not so much as a shibboleth, or even as a traditional Baptist formulation, but rather as a window that can open widely on the rich theological resources to which all Baptists are heir.[xxvii]

I believe that there are significant theological resources undergirding the Baptist tradition. What are those theological resources? Hughes indicates that the Baptist theological tradition is unique because it draws from all three of the major Protestant traditions and developed a century later than the Protestant Reformation. Consequently, from the Reformed tradition Baptists developed the notion that the soul is competent before God and free from human coercion because of God’s sovereignty. From the Lutheran tradition, Baptists developed the idea of soul competency because of our justification by grace through faith. “We are therefore free to take intellectual risks, to explore the outer limits of human knowledge, and even to confess that we may be wrong.”[xxviii] And from the Anabaptist tradition, the Baptist concept of soul competency gives emphasis to the importance of discipleship and obedience to God. Soul competency, therefore, “is a doctrine of enormous power, a window onto some of the richest resources of the Protestant Reformation, and for all these reasons, perhaps the most potent intellectual resource that is available to any group of church-related institutions.”[xxix]
Baptist heritage finds another theological resource in the pre-Reformation catholic tradition—“catholic” with a lower-case “c.” In an article titled “Baptist Confessions of Faith and the Patristic Tradition,” Steve Harmon has argued for “continuities” between this early catholic tradition and early Baptist theology. He shows that early Baptist confessions of faith clearly “echo” the trinitarianism of Nicea and Constantinople as well as Chalcedonian Christology.[xxx] Therefore, Baptist heritage (at least in its first century) was clearly connected to the larger Christian theological tradition and is not just a further development of Reformation theology.
Campbell University is unapologetically Baptist. It was founded in 1887 by James Archibald Campbell, a Baptist pastor. All four of its presidents have been committed Baptists actively serving in North Carolina Baptist life. All of the trustees of the university have been committed North Carolina Baptists, and each trustee (at least at the present time) is appointed to his or her term by vote of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. All of the major administrators at Campbell University are committed to the Baptist tradition. Every professor in the divinity school and religion department and every professor teaching religion adjunctively at one of our extended campus programs are required to be Baptist. Approximately 50-60% of our student body identifies themselves as Baptist. Furthermore, each year the Baptist State Convention contributes more than $1 million to student scholarships, a sign of its continued partnership with Campbell University. Finally, our campus is bordered by two Baptist churches, both of which are deeply committed to enhancing and ministering to the university community. No doubt, Campbell University has a long tradition of partnership with the Baptist denomination.
What then, should this Baptist university look like? Does commitment to the Baptist tradition mean that Campbell should strive for a student body that is 100% Baptist? Does it mean that the administration should encourage every faculty member and every staff employee to belong to a Baptist church? Does it mean that our General College Curriculum religion course requirements should be changed to force all students to take a course in the Baptist tradition? Should we attempt to proselytize our non-Baptist students into the Baptist denomination? Obviously, the answer to these questions should be “no.”
So, how then does Campbell University maintain not only its “Christianness” but also its “Baptistness?” Richard T. Hughes provides a good answer to this question. He says that the desired answer should be:
It means that here, at this place, we are free to search and inquire and explore and raise the most difficult and even the most threatening kinds of questions because God alone is sovereign, because we are justified by grace through faith, and because we are convinced we must obey God rather than [humans]. . . . We believe these things because we are Baptists who hold most dearly the principle that every soul is competent to read the Scripture and discern the truth for himself or herself, and live out that truth as he or she sees fit.[xxxi]

A Baptist, Christian university therefore should be a place where there is genuine freedom of inquiry into any academic question that may arise. A Baptist, Christian university should be committed to academic excellence, always willing to engage the best of the academic world with the best scholarship formed from the Christian tradition. A Baptist, Christian university should be a place where each person in the community, student, faculty, and employee is not just allowed, but encouraged to encounter the Christian faith in the best sense of what the treasured Baptist doctrine of soul competency implies.
What are the Educational Goals at a Baptist, Christian University?
Given that Campbell University makes claim to be a Baptist, Christian university, what is our educational vision for our students? Aside from the obvious answer that we want our students to be educated in their chosen field so that they can be competitive in the job market in their chosen professions, I believe there are some deeper values that we would or should like to see developed in our students. Since my field is Baptist history, I would like to lift from the Baptist tradition four individual heroes who embody a particular kind of value that I think ought to be developed in our students.
Roger Williams—Lover of Freedom
Although Roger Williams was only a Baptist for a few months, Baptists still claim him as one of our great heroes. He was the founder of the very first Baptist church on American soil, the First Baptist Church of Providence. Even beyond the Baptist tradition, Roger Williams was a great hero of the American tradition. I believe that his life embodies a value that I would like for all our students at Campbell to acquire. He was a lover of freedom.
In the winter of 1631, Roger Williams arrived at Massachusetts Bay from England. Almost from the time he disembarked from the ship he came into conflict with the Puritan establishment there. Although Williams had become a Puritan before he left England, after an intensive study of the New Testament aboard the ship, he became convinced that the Puritans should separate formally from the Church of England. In other words, Williams’ understanding of the church was much more radical than the Puritan leaders in his new home. Furthermore, Williams became very outspoken in defense of Native American rights. He complained that the Puritans had stolen from the Native Americans rather than purchased the land that they inhabited. Finally, and most importantly, he argued against the Puritan establishment that they had no authority over the individual consciences of the inhabitants of Massachusetts Bay. Ultimately, in 1635 Williams and his family were banished from the colony into the wilderness. Had it not been for his relationship with the Native Americans to the south of Massachusetts Bay who sheltered Williams and his family, they might not have survived.
The following year Williams purchased land from the Narragansett Indians and through contacts back in England, secured a charter for a new colony in America. He called it “Providence” (later called Rhode Island). It was the most unique of all the colonies because it was established on the basis of democracy and complete religious freedom for all people. Williams loved freedom so much, and valued freedom of conscience so much, that he was willing to grant such to all who came to his new colony. In his most famous treatise on religious freedom, The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution (1644), Williams declared, “it is the will and command of God that . . . a permission of the most paganish, Jewish, Turkish, or anti-Christian consciences and worships be granted to all men in all nations and countries, and they are only to be fought against with that sword which is only, in soul matters, able to conquer . . . the sword of God’s Spirit, the Word of God.”[xxxii]
Rhode Island became known as a colony that granted freedom where everyone, regardless of belief, was allowed to come and participate. Although Williams disagreed strongly with others in the area of religion (particularly Quakers) he did not persecute them nor forbid them a place in Rhode Island. Williams was ahead of his time. No one of his day would have ever believed that a century and a half later, when the Constitution of the United States was written, the concept of religious establishment, practiced in Massachusetts Bay, would give rise to Rhode Island’s liberty of conscience and separation of church and state model.
What would I like for students at Campbell University to emulate from the life of this short-timer Baptist? I would like to see Campbell University students develop the same love for freedom of conscience and a willingness to grant it to all. Several years ago we had an international student here on our campus from the Muslim tradition. He was a very fine student and became a friend of mine. He came to see me one day complaining about how several students had treated him. In their zeal to convert my friend to Christianity, they forgot the importance of Christian hospitality and most importantly, they did not respect my friend for his beliefs. I would like for the students at Campbell University to be secure in their own beliefs but at the same time be open and hospitable to others who may have different beliefs.
William Carey—Global Vision
British Baptist William Carey represents a second value that I believe would benefit our students at Campbell University. William Carey’s dream to carry the Gospel of Christ beyond the shores of England to other parts of the world exemplified a global vision. From the time that he was a child listening to his sailor uncle recall tales from other lands, to the time when as a pastor he challenged the Northampton Baptist Association to organize a missionary society, William Carey thought beyond the borders of his native England.
In 1787, Carey, a young Baptist pastor, proposed a question for debate at a ministers’ meeting in the Northampton Baptist Association: “whether the command given the apostles to teach all nations was not binding on all succeeding ministers to the end of the world.” The aged and revered Dr. John Ryland, said to Carey, “sit down young man. You are an enthusiast. When God pleases to convert the heathen, He will do it without consulting you or me.”[xxxiii] Carey obeyed, but his heart’s concern for people in other parts of the world did not die.
Five years later in 1792, Carey preached the annual sermon for the Northampton Baptist Association. His sermon had two points: “expect great things from God and attempt great things for God.” As the meeting was about to close following his sermon, Carey tugged on the coattails of Andrew Fuller who was about to give the benediction. Carey said, “Oh, sir, is nothing to be done? Is nothing again to be done?” There followed a discussion out of which the Baptist Missionary Society was born. Before long, Carey’s dream was a reality as he was sent to India to carry the Gospel of Christ.[xxxiv]
I am continually impressed by the desire to travel internationally that I see in many of our students. I believe that desire needs to be encouraged. I would like to see our university create a strong study abroad program. In fact, it would be highly beneficial if each student, during their four years at Campbell University, had the opportunity to study abroad as part of their course of study. I believe we would all benefit from such a program. In our world today we hear talk of “global community” and “global economy.” Information now travels around the world in a matter of seconds rather than months. Our students need to develop a global vision.
Walter Rauschenbusch—Social Conscience
The name most frequently associated with the Social Gospel movement at the beginning of the twentieth century in America is the German Baptist pastor and church historian, Walter Rauschenbusch. In 1886 Rauschenbusch became the pastor of the Second German Baptist Church in a section of New York City called “Hell’s Kitchen.” Known for its poverty, crime, and general misery, Rauschenbusch saw human suffering first-hand among his parishioners, and this experience had a monumental impact on his thought. At the end of the nineteenth century, within Protestant circles, the traditional strategy for the betterment of society was revivalism. Rauschenbusch was raised on this concept. His father, also a German Baptist pastor, and most of his fellow German Baptists, believed that if the Gospel is preached and people experienced salvation, the Kingdom of God would be inaugurated through revivalism. It was, however, Rauschenbusch’s encounter with the misery of tenement living, the horrible working conditions in the factories, the unchecked crime on the streets, the corruption of city officials, and the generally oppressed lives of his church members that caused an awakening within him which led to a new concept of how to better society. Though he never lost his commitment to personal evangelism, his emphasis began to focus on ways to change the structures of society. This shift in Rauschenbusch’s philosophy became the heart of the Social Gospel Movement, and he became its most recognized spokesperson.[xxxv] In 1907 Rauschenbusch published Christianity and the Social Crisis which became a bestseller and gave rise to the Social Gospel Movement. The reader of Christianity and the Social Crisis can easily see that Rauschenbusch had a passionate concern for change within the economic system and society in general. Speaking with the thunderous voice of a prophet, Rauschenbusch declared, “If the Church tries to confine itself to theology and the Bible, and refuses its larger mission to humanity, its theology will gradually become mythology and its Bible a closed book.”[xxxvi]
Rauschenbusch had a passion for social justice. He believed that a person had not truly experienced salvation if the Gospel did not motivate a Christian to make a practical difference in the world by helping to ease suffering people. His passion for suffering people in the world is a value that I would like to see all our students at Campbell University develop. As you love and respect freedom of conscience, and as you develop a global vision for the world, inevitably you should recognize the suffering of many people around the world. There are literally millions of people around the world who go to sleep hungry every night. Many do not even have shelter over their heads. There are children around the world dying from terrible diseases such as AIDS. Cruel dictators terrorize their own people in many nations around the world. Clearly, our world is hurting. I believe that our students should recognize that they can make a difference in this world!
Martin Luther King, Jr.—Following the Dream
One of the greatest citizens of the twentieth century was a Baptist pastor named Martin Luther King, Jr. His life embodies the final value that I would like to see developed in our students. King was a dreamer. In the famous “I Have a Dream” speech, one of the greatest speeches in American history, King said:
I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, sons of former slaves and sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.[xxxvii]

King was a dreamer who worked to make his dream happen. And, although he did not live to see it come to fruition, the dream continues today and has been realized by scores of people in the African-American community.
I would hope that when our students graduate from Campbell University, they would have the capacity to dream. I would like for them to see the needs in the world and dream of how things could be. And then I would like for them to believe so strongly in their dream that they would be willing to spend their life pursuing it.
Conclusion
Recounting the educational goals of Campbell University’s founder, James Archibald Campbell, historian J. Winston Pearce says, “The purpose of the student’s presence in the school was that he [she] might learn and that he [she] might be prepared, first, to make a life and, second, to make a living—both, but in that order.”[xxxviii] One hundred, seventeen years has passed since the founding of this institution, and if Dr. Campbell were to see the campus today, he’d hardly recognize it for the growth that has occurred under the three presidents succeeding him. But, some things have remained the same. Campbell University still has a commitment to work intentionally at being a Christian university. The university also remains devoted to its Baptist denominational roots. Finally, the students remain paramount in the life of this school. And our aim is that our students be prepared for life and career. Twenty centuries ago two great theologians debated about the value of intersecting Athens and Jerusalem. I contend that such an intersection provides our students the best preparation for life.Endnotes
[i] Henry Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church, 2nd Edition (London: Oxford University Press, 1963): p. 6.
[ii] Several important works on this topic are: James T. Burtchaell, The Dying of the Light: The Disengagement of Colleges and Universities from Their Christian Churches (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998); Richard T. Hughes and William B. Adrian, eds., Models for Christian Higher Education: Strategies for Success in the Twenty-First Century (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997); Robert Benne, Quality With Soul: How Six Premier Colleges and Universities Keep Faith With Their Religious Traditions (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2001); George M. Marsden, The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994).
[iii] Richard T. Hughes, “Christian Faith and the Life of the Mind,” in Faithful Learning and the Christian Scholarly Vocation, ed. by Douglas V. Henry and Bob R. Agee, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003): p. 3.
[iv] It is worth noting that the largest Baptist university in the world, Baylor University in Waco, Texas, allowed its first dance on campus just one decade ago.
[v] Benne, p. 6.
[vi] Ibid, pp. 6-8.
[vii] Duane Litfin, “The Call to Be a Distinctively Christian University,” The Southern Baptist Educator 68 (Third Quarter, 2004): p. 4 (Emphasis is the author’s).
[viii] Ibid, p. 8.
[ix] “Statement of Purpose,” Campbell University. Campbell University Bulletin Undergraduate Studies, 2003-2005, p. 17. (Also found at http://www.campbell.edu/catalog/03_05/gen_info.html#Statement)
[x] Ibid, p. 17-18.
[xi] See Litfin, p. 4 and Martin E. Marty, “The Church and Christian Higher Education in the New Millennium,” The Southern Baptist Educator 64 (Third Quarter, 2000): p. 3.
[xii] Ralph C. Wood, “An Alternative Vision for the Christian University” (unpublished address to the faculty of Campbell University, Buies Creek, North Carolina, March 30, 2004), quoted in Steven R. Harmon, “Contesting Our Story: Narrative, and Communal Conflict in the Postmodern Christian University,” unpublished paper presented to the Baylor University Institute for Faith and Learning conference on “Christianity and the Soul of the University: Faith as a Foundation for Intellectual Community,” Waco, Texas, March 25-27, 2004, p. 3.
[xiii] I like the “Goshen College Commitment to Community Standards” statement on “A Spirit of Hospitality.” See http://www.goshen.edu/aboutgc/community.php.
[xiv] Kathy Muller Lopez, unpublished article, n.p., n.d., pp. 1-3. For a fuller discussion on hospitality in a Christian university, see Elizabeth Newman, “Hospitality and Christian Higher Education,” Christian Scholar’s Review 33:1 (Fall, 2003): pp. 75-93.
[xv] Matthew 20:20-28 (NRSV).
[xvi] Goshen College, “Core Values.” (http://www.goshen.edu/aboutgc/values.php).
[xvii] John 8:3-11 (NRSV).
[xviii] Marsden, pp. 3-9. Benne, p. 4 uses the term “generic Christianity” while discussing Marsden’s thesis.
[xix] Elizabeth Newman, “Beyond Faith Versus Knowledge: Religious Commitment in the Academy,” Perspectives 23 (Winter 1996): p. 411.
[xx]Roger Ward, “Reclaiming Church Relatedness for Higher Education,” The Southern Baptist Educator 64 (Fourth Quarter, 1999): p. 7. It should be recognized however, that Wheaton College is not connected to a denomination. However, it is closely tied to the American Evangelical movement. See Benne, pp. 73-78.
[xxi] Harmon, p. 16. Benne’s four typologies for church-related schools are “Orthodox,” “Critical-Mass,” “Intentionally Pluralist,” and “Accidentally Pluralist.” See Benne, p. 49.
[xxii] Benne, p. 115.
[xxiii] Mark Noll, “Christian Higher Education and Southern Baptists: Hopeless or Hopeful?” The Southern Baptist Educator 68 (First Quarter, 2004): p. 4.
[xxiv] Ibid, p. 6.
[xxv] See, for example, his comments about positive signs in Baptist higher education during the last 25 years. Ibid, pp. 8-10.
[xxvi] Hughes, p. 20.
[xxvii] Ibid.
[xxviii] Ibid, p. 21.
[xxix] Ibid.
[xxx] Steven R. Harmon, “Baptist Confessions of Faith and the Patristic Tradition,” Perspectives in Religious Studies 29 (Winter, 2002): p. 349. See also Philip E. Thompson, “A New Question in Baptist History: Seeking a Catholic Spirit Among Early Baptists,” ProEccl 8 (Winter, 1999): pp. 51-72.
[xxxi] Ibid, 22.
[xxxii] Roger Williams, The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for Cause of Conscience, ed. by Richard Groves, (Macon: Mercer University Press, 2001): p. 3.
[xxxiii] H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage: Four Centuries of Baptist Witness (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1987): p. 185.
[xxxiv] Ibid.
[xxxv]Paul M. Minus, Walter Rauschenbusch: American Reformer (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1988): pp. 83-101 for a discussion of Rauschenbusch’s intellectual development on this issue.
[xxxvi] Walter Rauschenbusch, Christianity and the Social Crisis, (New York: The Macmillian Company, 1907): p. 339.
[xxxvii] Roger Lundin and Mark A. Noll, eds., Voices from the Heart: Four Centuries of American Piety, (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1987): p. 358.
[xxxviii] J. Winston Pearce, Campbell College: Big Miracle at Little Buies Creek, (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1976): p. 27.