“There cannot be unity of spirit and purpose where all are not working together.” These words are the heart of the final paragraph in a timely article by editor E. C. Routh in the December 4, 1924 edition of the Texas Baptist Standard. Baptist associations and conventions were not merely “social organizations,” he argued. Rather, they were built for a singular purpose: the global advancement of the gospel. “Why would any Baptist church desire through its individual members to have representation in such an organization, if at the same time it did not expect to co-operate in every part of the program set out by Baptists assembled in that association or convention, and follow the general policy adopted in such meeting,” Routh asked.
Good question. Baptist churches are autonomous and voluntarily associative, so why associate and why convene if full-throttled cooperation is not the intention? And why balk at the system and structure of cooperation fashioned alongside your fellow Baptist cooperants? It is true today as it was 100 years ago: Baptist unity of spirit and purpose go together, or they go nowhere at all.
Cooperative consciousness was at an all-time high while denominational solidarity was facing its greatest challenges. Opportunity enlarged, but naysayers abounded. Conviction seemed sure, but unity felt tenuous. For three hundred years, the Baptist people in their Baptist churches had worked together on two continents to sharpen and strengthen one another, and to pool their resources and relationships for greater missionary effectiveness. But was such cooperation merely a means to an end? Or was it more than that?
The 100th anniversary of both the Baptist Faith and Message and the Southern Baptist Cooperative Program is upon us. They were born together, moments apart, and they have walked hand in hand all these years. At times they have pulled against one another, the tension between them stretching the muscles of both—correspondingly, over time, strengthening each. At other times they have marched together in lockstep, without a second of asynchronous hesitation noticeable between them. These two institutions are twin pillars of Southern Baptist history and, as SBC President Clint Pressley has noted recently, they are still today twin rails on the track of our shared forward mission, guiding and guarding our concerted efforts in Great Commission advance.
By December of 1924, Baptists in the South had worked together across state lines for missionary expansion for seventy-nine years within the SBC before they shared either a singular confession of faith or a unified funding strategy. But a new era dawned on Southern Baptists in the second and third decades of the twentieth century. It came with the rise of businesslike organizational efficiency; denominational consciousness brought about through the $75 Million Campaign; global awareness of American evangelicals bolstered throughout the War years; and a rising missionary spirit undergirded by Wilsonian volunteerism.
The bells of Baptist doctrinal distinction rang worldwide through the 1914 Southern Baptist “Pronouncement on Christian Union and Denominational Efficiency” and the 1920 “Fraternal Address.” But it felt like a more comprehensive statement was needed, especially as a perennial, unified funding model was approaching.
Most Baptist churches and associations in the South affirmed either the 1742 Philadelphia Confession (based on the 1689 Second London Confession) or the 1833 New Hampshire Confession. But some churches, associations, and state conventions were cautious to adopt a confession at all, afraid that ecclesiastical hierarchy and “Popish” authoritarianism might creep in between them. Whether the union between Baptist churches should be confessionally broad or tight was not a matter of consensus. E.Y. Mullins, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, weighed in as early as 1908 in The Axioms of Religion:
We have two kinds of radicals among us today—the high church radicals who want to bind us hand and foot with the multiplication of minute tests of fellowship, on the one hand, and the broad church radicals on the other, who are without doctrinal moorings of any kind. The high church radicals would give us a creed like the tight-fitting shoes and trousers and dress coat of a dude which forbid the free action of the limbs in any direction. The broad church radicals would give us a creed like the flowing robe of the Oriental, exactly adapted to the life of indolence and self-indulgence, but not for strenuous endeavor. Baptists however will insist on a creed like the garments, not of a dude nor yet of the voluptuary, but like the habiliments of the athlete, which guard the body and protect it at every vital point but which leave it free for conquest.
In their 1925 Baptist Faith and Message, Baptists found a confession of faith that captured doctrinal consensus but left room for vigorous and rhythmic cooperative activity. No church was required to adopt it, but it was a statement of faith upon which the larger Convention body, in session, could agree. In essence, through their Baptist Faith and Message, messengers to the 1925 Convention told the world: this is generally what our Southern Baptist people believe, the doctrines “most surely held among us.”
Confessed within was a new article, expressed marginally in Baptist confessions throughout history but not fully developed until this moment—Article 22, on “Co-operation.” The doctrine of cooperation had become the linchpin of Baptist engagement for many across the South, including E.C. Routh in his December 4, 1924 Baptist Standard article, to which we now return. Routh wrote in unapologetic advocacy, “Any complete statement of the doctrines of our faith must include the scriptural doctrine of co-operation. This is one of the fundamentals of our faith.”
Like L.R. Scarborough, E.C. Dargan, E.Y. Mullins, J.M. Frost, Z.T. Cody, J.B. Gambrell, and many more Baptist leaders of the day, Routh saw cooperation as both a clearly taught biblical doctrine and the linchpin for Southern Baptist success. Organization could be built, businesslike efficiency could be attained, and a streamlined budget could be installed. But if the Baptist people did not hold to their doctrinal impulse of sacrificial, voluntary missional cooperation, all would be lost. For that reason, a church of this union “is presumed to be wholly in agreement with the other churches … in their purpose to carry out the missionary, educational, benevolent program of Christ,” Routh wrote. Spirit and purpose. Confession and cooperation. They would go forward together, or they would go nowhere at all.
In 2025, Southern Baptists have the opportunity to embrace both their confession and their cooperation again. Tensions between the two come and go, as has been true for many decades. But it is a very Baptist thing to work together with missional focus while forbearing the process of confessional clarification. Ours is a unity of both spirit and purpose: in the one we confess, and in the other we cooperate. For either to thrive, both must be upheld. At the 1925 SBC in Memphis, when doctrinal conviction and denominational consciousness wed, these two healthy twins were born. They were—and are—as delicate as any institution of man and as vital as any rule of faith. Each spurs the other along, and, together, they keep the SBC train on track.
When we sacrificially work together, doctrinal solidarity is forged; when we clarify doctrinal solidarity, sacrificial work together is enriched. Spirit and purpose. Confession and cooperation. Maybe one is not more urgent than the other—maybe, having come to us together, they will drive us forward together as well. My prayer for Southern Baptists in 2025 is that we confess and cooperate, cooperate and confess, allowing this season to sharpen us, to strengthen us, and to focus us anew on our forward mission. Where doctrinal consensus and missional urgency come together again, there we will see the whole of our Baptist work revitalized.
Editor's Note: As a part of its commitment to fostering conversation within the Southern Baptist Convention, the Baptist Review may publish editorials that espouse viewpoints that are not necessarily shared by the TBR team or other contributors. We welcome submissions for responses and rebuttals to any editorials as we seek to host meaningful conversations about the present and future of our convention.
Tony Wolfe
Dr. Tony Wolfe has served as the SCBaptist Executive Director-Treasurer since May of 2023. Prior to that, Wolfe was the Associate Executive Director of the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention. He holds degrees from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, and Lamar University and is currently in the final stages of earning a Ph.D. in Evangelism and Missions from Southern Seminary, researching confessionalism and cooperation in Baptist history from 1609-1925.