The
new Evangelicals were New Light or Separate Baptists from New England, whose
leaders began to sift into North Carolina and Virginia in the 1750s, and who
soon began to establish their own churches and create new ones. Baptists had
appeared in the South earlier in the century – Charleston had had a Baptist
congregation since 1695 – but they were
quiet, well-mannered folk who were not active proselytizers.
The
New Lights, however, were neither quiet nor well-behaved even by Evangelical
Presbyterian standards, for they openly attacked the Anglican clergy, ordained
semiliterate men as ministers, stubbornly refused to apply for licenses to
preach, and valued emotional outbursts in their meetings as a sign of God’s
presence and favor.
Through
these actions, the Baptists managed to attack most of the underpinnings of
colonial order. They denied the authority of the Crown to direct the moral life
of the community through the Church of England, as well as the right of the
Crown to legitimate religious leadership.
The
Separate Baptists did not insist that education should be a prerequisite for
ordination. They were scornful of traditional prerequisites for spiritual
leadership and did their best to repudiate all traditional forms. The New Light
Baptists taught there were three distinguishing characteristics of the true
Christian.
(1) A personal
religious experience of overpowering emotions rooted in a specific time and
place. So powerful were the emotions
released at Separate Baptists meetings that they were often characterized by
seizures, convulsions, and uncontrollable weeping.
(2) The immersion
in living water of adults who professed faith in Christ Jesus.
(3) Submission
to the authority of the church to scrutinize carefully the personal as well as
public life of each Christian.
Within
four years of their settling in North Carolina, the Separate Baptists had
converted enough people to enable six churches to form an association on New
Light principles.
SOURCE: Religion
in the Old South
by Donald G. Matthews © 1977; The University of Chicago Press; Chicago, IL; pp.
22-24.
Let us know if you like this:
Comments
Post a Comment