Immersionists: The Only Real Ministers!

Did you know that the Presbyterian theologian R. L. Dabney admitted in his Systematic Theology that he was not a member of the visible church and that Immersionists (those who baptize by immersion) are the only real ministers in the world?

He sure did!

It's in black and white in chapter 41 (p.774)!

I have the volume open and I'm looking at it right now with my own two eyes!

Here's exactly what he says:

"Again: it is preposterous that a man should receive and hold office in a commonwealth where he himself has no citizenship; but this unimmersed paedobaptist minister so called, is no member of any visible Church. There are no real ministers in the world, except the Immersionist preachers! The pretensions of all others, therefore, to act as ministers, and to administer the sacraments, are sinful intrusions."

What a shocking admission, eh?

Don't you see the obvious implications here?!!

Dabney is admitting that paedobaptists -himself included- are not members of the visible church! He plainly states that unless you are an immersionist, you are no true minister of Christ! He even confesses that it's sinful for paedobaptists to even act as a ministers or administer sacraments!!!

Okay, okay... Let me stop now. I've been deceiving you! (sorry!)

While these are Dabney's words, they actually lack the full context of what he was saying. What I did was "quote mine" R.L. Dabney's book in such a way as to show him saying that paedobaptists are not part of the visible church! Something I assure you R.L. Dabney would've never taught. Anyone well acquainted with Dabney would know this, but a novice or someone unfamiliar with the Dabney might actually fall for the gimmick.

What I want to demonstrate is that even though someone may cite an author -and provide chapter and page number as well- it is always helpful to check their sources (if possible) and see if what they are quoting is in context and if it's what the cited author was trying to convey in his work. I have encountered this ploy a number of times in the blogosphere. It happens not only with authors, but with Scripture as well. (And I imagine we've all been guilty of it to one degree or another!)

Either through ignorance or by design, not everything we see someone quote in an article may in context or being interpreted how the original author intended it to be understood. We must be careful not allow ourselves to be duped by selective citing and quote mining.

The fact is, a person can make a heretic out of just about anyone by ripping their words out of context. When citing something in an article or reading something that has been cited, remember: context is essential!

Now, what exactly was Dabney saying above?

Well, it certainly wasn't what I tried to make you think at first! Below is the entire argument in full context -with emphasis added to the sentences I took out of context above so you can see how I misused his words!

"The odious ecclesiastical consequences of the Immersionist dogma should be pressed; because they form a most potent and just argument against it. All parties are agreed, that baptism is the initiatory rite which gives membership in the visible Church of Christ. The great commission was: Go, and disciple all nations, baptizing them into the Trinity. Baptism recognizes and constitutes the outward discipleship. Least of all, can any Immersionist dispute this ground. Now, if all other forms of baptism than immersion are not only irregular, but null and void, all unimmersed persons are out of the visible Church. But if each and every member of a pedobaptist visible Church is thus unchurched: of course the whole body is unchurched. All pedobaptist societies, then, are guilty of an intrusive errors when they pretend to the character of a visible Church of Christ. Consequently, they can have no ministry; and this for several reasons. Surely no valid office can exist in an association whose claim to be an ecclesiastical commonwealth is utterly invalid. When the temple is non existent, there can be no actual pillars to that temple. How can an unauthorized herd of unbaptized persons, to whom Christ concedes no church authority, confer any valid office? Again: it is preposterous that a man should receive and hold office in a commonwealth where he himself has no citizenship; but this unimmersed pedobaptist minister so called, is no member of any visible Church. There are no real ministers in the world, except the Immersionist preachers!

The pretensions of all others, therefore, to act as ministers, and to administer the sacraments, are sinful intrusions. It is hard to see how any intelligent and conscientious Immersionist can do any act, which countenances or sanctions this profane intrusion. They should not allow any weak inclinations of fraternity and peace to sway their consciences in this point of high principle. They are bound, then, not only to practice close communion, but to refuse all ministerial recognition and communion to these intruders. The sacraments cannot go beyond the pale of the visible Church. Hence, the same stern denunciations ought to be hurled at the Lord’s Supper in pedobaptist societies, and at all their prayers and preachings in public, as at the iniquity of "baby sprinkling." The enlightened Immersionist should treat all these societies, just as he does that ’Synagogue of Satan,’ the Papal Church: there may be many good, misguided believers in them; but no church character, ministry, nor sacraments whatever.

But let the student now look at the enormity of this conclusion. Here are bodies of ministers adorned by the Lord with as many gifts and graces as any Immersionists; actually doing the largest part of all that is done on earth, to win the world to its divine Master. Here are four fifths of Protestant Christendom, exhibiting as many of the solid fruits of grace as any body of men in the world, doing nearly all that is done for man’s redemption, and sending up to heaven a constant harvest of ransomed souls. Yet are they not churches or ministers, at all: Why? Only because they have not used quite enough water in the outward form of an ordinance! What greater outrage on common sense, Christian charity, and the spirituality of Christ’s visible Church was ever committed by the bigotry of prelacy or popery? The just mind replies to such a dogma, not only with a firm negative, but with the righteous indignation of an incredulus odi. When we remember, that this extreme high churchism is enacted by a sect, which calls itself eminently spiritual, free and Protestant, the solecism becomes more repulsive. Only a part of the Immersionists have the nerve to assert this consequence. But their dogma involves it; and it is justly pressed on all."

(R.L. Dabney, Systematic Theology p.774)

What is There to Fear for the Calvinist?

Some Christians believe that the Reformed doctrine of Perseverance will lead to sinful living because a Calvinist "has nothing to fear."

That's not true...

R.L. Dabney explains:

"In conclusion, we believe that all the supposed licentious results of the doctrine of perseverance result from misapprehension; and that its true tendencies are eminently encouraging and sanctifying. (a.) How can the intelligent Bible Christian be encouraged to sin, by a doctrine which assures him of a perseverance in holiness, if he is a true believer? (b.) So far as a rational self–love is a proper motive for a sanctified mind, this doctrine leaves it in full force; because when the Arminian would be led by a backsliding, to fear he had fallen from grace, the Calvinist would be led, just as much to fear he never had had any grace; a fear much more wholesome and searching than the erring Arminian’s.

For this alarmed Calvinist would see, that, while he had been flattering himself he was advancing heavenward he was, in fact, all the time in the high road to hell; and so now, if he would not be damned, he must make a new beginning, and lay better foundations than his old ones (not like the alarmed Arminian, merely set about repairing the same old ones). (c.) Certainty of success, condition on honest efforts, is the very best stimulus to active exertion. Witness the skillful general encouraging his army. (d.) Last: Such a gift of redemption as the Calvinist represents is far nobler and more gracious’ and hence elicits more love and gratitude, which are the noblest motives, the strongest and best.

Just so far as the Calvinist is enabled scripturally to hope that he is now born again, he is, to that extent, entitled to hope that his triumph is sure; that death and hell are disarmed, and that his heaven is awaiting his efforts. To him who knows the weakness of the human heart, and the power of our spiritual enemies, the Arminian’s adoption, beset by the constant liability to fall, would bring little consolation indeed. It is love and confidence, not selfish fear, which most effectually stimulates Christian effort. Let the student see how St. Paul puts this in (1 Cor. 15:58)."

From Systematic Theology, by R.L. Dabney. Ch 26.

The Eschatology of R.L. Dabney

To my sheer delight, the Father's Day gift I received this year was a copy of R.L. Dabney's Systematic Theology. Dabney was a theologian in the Southern Presbyterian Church. He served in the Confederate Army as Chief-of-Staff to General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson. No less a theologian than A. A. Hodge refereed to Dabney as "the best teacher of theology in the United States, if not the world."

Seeing how my last couple of posts have been on Eschatology, I would like to share with you some of Dabney's Eschatological thoughts.


The following comes from pp. 837 and 838 of Dabney's Systematic Theology:


"That doctrine which we hold, and which we assert to be the Apostolic and Church doctrine, teaches, just as much as the pre–Adventists, the literal and personal second advent of Christ, and we hold, with the Apostolic Christians, that it is, next to heaven, the dearest and most glorious of the believer’s hopes: as bringing the epoch of his full deliverance from death, and full introduction into the society of his adored Saviour. This hope of a literal second advent we base on such Scriptures as these: Acts 1:11: 3:20, 21; Heb. 9:28; 1 Thess. 4:15, 16; Phil. 3:20; Matt. 26:64, etc., etc.

Before this second advent, the following events must have occurred. The development and secular overthrow of Antichrist, (2 Thess. 2:3 to 9; Dan. 7:24–26; Rev. 17:, 18:) which is the Papacy. The proclamation of the Gospel to all nations, and the general triumph of Christianity over all false religions, in all nations. (Ps. 72:8–11; Is. 2:2–4; Dan. 2:44, 45; 7:14; Matt. 28:19, 20; Rom. 11:12, 15, 25; Mark 13:10; Matt. 24:14). The general and national return of the Jews to the Christian Church. (Rom. 11:25, 26). And then a partial relapse from this state of high prosperity, into unbelief and sin. (Rev. 20:7, 8). During this partial decline, at a time unexpected to formal Christians and the profane, and not to be expressly foreknown by any true saint on earth, the second Advent of Christ will take place, in the manner described in 1 Thess. It will be immediately followed by the resurrection of all the dead, the redeemed dead taking the precedence. Then the generation of men living at the time will be changed (without dying) into their immortal bodies, the world will undergo its great change by fire, the general judgment will be held; and last, the saved and the lost will severally depart to their final abodes, the former to be forever with the Lord, the latter with Satan and his angels."





In case you were wondering, Dabney was a Postmillennialist!