Asking what defines a Baptist produces a variety of answers and can contribute to quite a debate based on the setting. In the history of the movement, many books and other resources attempted to set forth the core component(s) that define Baptist identity. In The Baptist Vision: Faith and Practice for a Believers’ Church, Matthew Y. Emerson and R. Lucas Stamps contribute a new work to the collection of books focused on Baptist identity. Their work seeks to set forth how the Baptist tradition possesses continuity with historic Christianity, offers ecclesiological distinctives that are biblically grounded, and applies those truths in the practice of the local church. Emerson and Stamps offer a vision that believes that “Baptists at their best are firmly situated within historic Christian orthodoxy, but their dogged commitment to the supreme authority of Scripture and their quest for more light from the Word has given the movement a nimbleness and vitality that renders it relevant in each successive generation.”[1] Emerson and Stamps embrace the term “Baptist catholicity” as a program whereby Baptists embrace the orthodox and Protestant theology passed down while not shying away from how Baptists apply that theology in a distinct way. The Baptist Vision helpfully sets forth the foundations for Baptist catholicity in a digestible way for pastors, lay members, and students.
Strengths
The book’s organization helpfully shows that to be a Baptist begins not with the right belief about baptism. To be a Baptist, a person must first be a Christian. Emerson and Stamps divide the book up into three parts: Foundations, Distinctives, and Practices. This logical progression aims to demonstrate that the Baptist movement from the beginning saw itself more as a renewal movement. Four terms are used to describe the foundations of Baptist identity: catholic, reformational, evangelical, and covenantal. In discussing Baptists and the Trinity, Emerson and Stamps demonstrate the catholicity or orthodoxy of Baptist as they point out how “Baptists have been eager to demonstrate that they are saying nothing new regarding this cardinal doctrine, echoing the terms of early Christian councils, such as Nicaea (325) and Constantinople (381).”[2] These opening chapters on orthodoxy in regards to the Trinity and Christology provide helpful definitions of the theological grammar used in the history of the church. Emerson and Stamps describe Baptists as “reformational” by connecting the Solas of the Reformation to Baptist doctrine and life. The authors acknowledge the intentionality of using the term “reformational” rather than “Reformed” due to differences of soteriological views on predestination among Baptists as well as some who believe infant baptism plays a crucial part in Reformed identity.
One of the greatest contributions to this book is chapter four on Baptists being covenantal. Many books devoted to Baptist identity and theology in the twentieth century failed to explore or even acknowledge the role of a covenantal hermeneutic in the development of the Baptist movement. A failure to properly understand the covenantal nature of Baptist theology means that one will not grasp how the Baptist vision of the church is tied to covenant theology. Emerson and Stamps helpfully summarize that “this understanding of the change from the old covenant to the new covenant dictates every theological and practical distinctive of the Baptist tradition.”[3] Baptist views on liberty of conscience, a believers’ church, and baptism are all connected with a specific view regarding the covenants. The covenant of grace being promised in Genesis 3:15, progressively revealed throughout the Old Testament, and historically ratified in the new covenant through Christ’s death contains not only importance soteriologically but ecclesiologically as well. The Baptist Vision introduces this covenantal concept in a way that is refreshing and will help introduce many Baptists to a forgotten component of the tradition.
The chapters devoted to baptism and the Lord’s Supper are rich. Emerson and Stamps are at their best in this book setting forth the reason Baptists can speak of the ordinances as sacraments. These two chapters retrieve from historic Baptist writings as well as situate the ordinances in the present. Baptism especially suffers from many Baptists spending time describing what it is not rather than setting forth a positive vision of what it is. It is likely that many Southern Baptists will read these two chapters and discover terms like “ordinary means of grace” for the first time. While it can sound “Romish” to Baptist ears, Emerson and Stamps demonstrate a pastoral care in explaining how a sacramental understanding of baptism and the Lord’s Supper is not at odds with biblical exposition nor is it foreign to the Baptist tradition.
Weaknesses
Considering the entirety of the book, some sections of the book lacked depth and were uneven. Some chapters contained extensive footnotes and contained well-thought-out reasoning; the chapters on baptism and the Lord’s Supper are examples. Other chapters, such as religious liberty, were far too summary-like with little interaction or theological deductions. While I appreciated the authors’ commitment and defense of Baptist views on religious liberty and liberty of conscience, those two separate chapters would have been better as one chapter with a more robust treatment.
The section on “Practices” was the weakest part of the book. In the chapter on “Holiness,” a significant portion of the chapter is devoted to Matthew Bingham’s thesis on Baptist identity in his work Orthodox Radicals: Baptist Identity in the English Revolution. While I am appreciative of Dr. Bingham’s work, his thesis regarding “Baptistic Congregationalists” received pushback from several scholars such as Dr. Stephen Holmes.[4] The excursion in defending Bingham’s thesis seemed out of a place in a chapter about church discipline. Later in the section on “Practices,” a chapter devoted to “Missions” comprised an underwhelming string of summary statements.
While Emerson and Stamps provide rich historical context throughout, there were some errors in their recounting of Baptist history. The authors state that the Second London Confession of Faith was adopted by the Particular Baptists at their general assembly in 1677 and published in 1689. The confession was published in 1677 and again in 1688. Contrary to the monicker “1689” being attached to it, it was never printed in 1689. The Particular Baptists did gather in 1689 and “owned” the confession.[5] The authors state later that dispensationalism became the more prevalent view among Baptists in the nineteenth century. They provide no basis for this claim. While dispensationalism does impact Baptist life, it is not until the twentieth century that the system became mainstreamed in Baptist life.
In seeking to describe Baptist differences regarding predestination and free will, Emerson and Stamps argue that a strength in Baptist life is the forging of a “theological synthesis” regarding Calvinism and Arminianism.[6] The authors do not unpack this and never attempt to explain the nuances of this supposed synthesis. While fellowship can and should be enjoyed by Baptists of both streams, a “synthesis” conveys a watering down of theological convictions. One need only look at the nineteenth century Baptist Union in Great Britain to see what happens when theological distinctions are removed. The authors should have provided some rationale for this statement. It is also implied that Baptists are different from “rigidly confessional denominations” in how they view confessions of faith. Again, this is a general statement made with no supporting evidence or proper framing. As someone who subscribes to the Second London Confession of Faith, there are many who are leery of those seeking to revise or change the confession. Furthermore, American Presbyterians famously altered the Westminster Confession of Faith in 1788 to reflect their new political home.
Finally, this book could have been strengthened by having a recommended reading list at the end of each chapter. While some resources are noted in the footnotes, the book’s reliance on footnotes lacks uniformity. With some of these concepts being introduced for the first time, providing a list of books for further study would help stir further conversations.
Conclusion
Emerson and Stamps seek to capture the Baptist vision in a way that is mindful of the Christian tradition as well as the unique stream that is Baptist life. By focusing on the covenantal hermeneutic, they provide a worthy contribution to Baptist identity literature. This book is a great resource for churches to work through congregationally or in small groups. This volume serves as a great primer to introduce people to the Baptist vision and what it means to be a part of a believers’ church.
[1] Matthew Y. Emerson and R. Lucas Stamps, The Baptist Vision: Faith and Practice for a Believer’s Church (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2025), 2.
[2] Emerson and Stamps, The Baptist Vision, 13.
[3] Emerson and Stamps, The Baptist Vision, 57.
[4] See Holmes, S. R. “Who were the Baptists? A Review Essay” in American Baptist Quarterly, XL(4), 252-272
[5] For more of the historical context, see this article by Sam Renihan at https://pettyfrance.wordpress.com/editions-of-1lcf-and-2lcf/
[6] Emerson and Stamps, The Baptist Vision, 28.
Thank you Jake. I found this article to be a very helpful book review. Do you know whether there is any sort of reading guide or document that would complement this book and could be used for group discussions?