“To Devote Ourselves to the Blessed Trinity”: Andrew Fuller and the Defense of “Trinitarian Communities”1 Michael A. G. Haykin INTRODUCTION to write something in this vein, he had about t is a curious fact that although the concept sixteen months to live, and he never got beyond Iof the encyclopedia has its origins within the writing down his thoughts on the prolegomena ideological matrix of the eighteenth-century of theology, the being of God, the necessity Enlightenment, when it comes to conserva- of revelation along with the inspiration of the tive expressions of theology, this era was not Bible, and the doctrine of the Trinity.2 Fuller really conducive to encyclopedic or systematic was well aware of his era’s aversion to system- Michael A. G. Haykin is Professor summaries of the Christian atizing theology, for as he noted in a sermon of Church History and Biblical Faith. In this regard, a work he gave at the annual meeting of the Baptist Spirituality at The Southern Baptist like John Gill’s (1697–1771) churches of the Northamptonshire Associa- Theological Seminary. He is also A Complete Body of Doctrinal tion in 1796: “systematic divinity … has been Adjunct Professor of Church History and Spirituality at Toronto Baptist and Practical Divinity (1769– of late years much decried,” and that because Seminary in Ontario, Canada. 1770) was definitely out of such a way of going about doing theology was sync with conservative theo- regarded as “the mark of a contracted mind, and Dr. Haykin is the author of many books, logical trends. The other the grand obstruction to free inquiry.”3 In other including “At the Pure Fountain of Thy Word”: Andrew Fuller As an Apologist great Baptist theologian words, the Enlightenment exaltation of rational (Paternoster Press, 2004), Jonathan of this era, Andrew Fuller inquiry unfettered by such external authori- Edwards: The Holy Spirit in Revival (1754–1815), was more typi- ties as divine Writ or holy Church had made (Evangelical Press, 2005), and The God Who Draws Near: An Introduction to cal. Though he was entirely a significant imprint upon the world of Chris- Biblical Spirituality (Evangelical Press, capable of drawing up a sys- tian writing. Fuller went on to note, however, 2007), and Rediscovering the Church tematic theology, he resisted that only in the realm of religious thought was Fathers: Who They Were and How They doing so until it was too such an attitude acceptable. In other spheres of Shaped the Church (Crossway, 2011). late. When he finally began thought and action, such as philosophy, agricul- 4 SBJT 17.2 (2013): 4-19. ture, or business, it would be regarded as folly undermining the way that “Trinitarian com- to dispense with a foundational system of first munities” in England had established theo- principles.4 Fuller was convinced that there is logical boundaries for themselves.9 This was a system of truth to be found in the Scriptures, part of a growing tide of rationalism in the even though that truth is not arranged system- seventeenth century and the one following atically.5 But the same was true of the world of that led to a “fading of the trinitarian imagina- nature, Fuller argued. There one sees a “lovely tion” and to the doctrine coming under heavy variety but amidst all this variety, an observant attack.10 Informed by the Enlightenment’s con- eye will perceive unity, order, arrangement, fidence in the “omnicompetence” of human and fullness of design.”6 Whatever difficulties reason, increasingly the intellectual mentalité might therefore attend the discovery of the of this era either dismissed the doctrine of systematic interlocking of biblical truths, it was the Trinity as a philosophical and unbiblical vital to recognize that, from God’s perspective, construct of the post-Apostolic Church, and there was a unified body of truth. As Fuller turned to classical Arianism as an alternate, noted in another context, to simply abandon the though admittedly odd, perspective, or sim- idea of theological truth because key aspects of ply ridiculed it as utterly illogical, and argued it were disputed is, at best, absurd and, at worst, for Deism or Socinianism.11 Of course, this “infinitely … pernicious,” for “if all disputed re-tooling of theological perspectives did not subjects are to be reckoned matters of mere happen without significant conflict. Contrary speculation, we shall have nothing of any real to the impression given by various historical use left in religion.”7 overviews of the doctrine of the Trinity, the Now, one of the most disputed theological late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries loci in the eighteenth century was also one that were actually replete with critical battles over had been absolutely central to the Christian Trinitarianism. And some of these involved tradition, namely, the doctrine of the Trin- the Trinitarian community of which Andrew ity. The Trinitarianism of the Ancient Church Fuller was a member, the Particular Baptists. had remained basically unchallenged until the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Even THE PARTICULAR BAPTISTS: A during the Reformation, a most tumultu- TRINITARIAN COMMUNITY ous theological era, this vital area of Chris- Through the seventeenth and eighteenth cen- tian belief did not come into general dispute, turies the Particular Baptists in the British Isles though there were a few, like Michael Servetus tenaciously confessed a Trinitarian understand- (1511–1553) and the Italians, Lelio Francesco ing of the Godhead and so, while other commu- Sozzini (1525–1562) and his nephew Fausto nities, such as the Presbyterians and General Sozzini (1539–1604),8 who rejected Trini- Baptists largely ceased to be Trinitarian,12 the tarianism for a Unitarian perspective on the Particular Baptists continued to regard them- Godhead. However, as Sarah Mortimer has selves, and that rightly, as a Trinitarian commu- argued in her ground-breaking study of sev- nity. Their earliest confessional document,The enteenth-century English Socinianism, in the First London Confession of Faith (1644/1646), had century after the Reformation the Socinian declared this about God: understanding of human beings as “inquir- ing, reasoning and active individuals who In [the] … Godhead, there is the Father, the Son, must take responsibility for their own spiri- and the Spirit; being every one of them one and tual lives” did come to play a critical role in the same God; and therefore not divided, but 5 distinguished one from another by their several Gill. His The Doctrine of the Trinity Stated and properties; the Father being from himself, the Vindicated—first published in 1731 and then reis- Son of the Father from everlasting, the Holy sued in a second edition in 1752—proved to be an Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son.13 extremely effective defence of the fact that there is, as Gill put it, “but one God; that there is a plu- B. R. White has argued that this confession rality in the Godhead; that there are three divine gave these early Baptists an extremely clear and Persons in it; that the Father is God, the Son God, self-conscious sense of their community’s dis- and the Holy Spirit God; that these are distinct in tinct identity and raison d’être.14 And yet, as this Personality, the same in substance, equal in power specific paragraph also reveals, these Baptists and glory.”20 Gill was especially concerned in this were desirous of declaring their complete solidar- treatise to affirm the eternal sonship of the second ity with the mainstream of classical Christianity person of the Godhead. As he explained in a letter that was rooted in the fourth-century Trinitar- he wrote to John Davis (1702–1778), the Welsh ian creedal declarations and that also included pastor of the Baptist Church in the Great Valley, the medieval Western Church’s commitment to Devon, Pennsylvania, in March of 1745: the Filioque. The other major Particular Baptist confession of the seventeenth century, The Sec- Jesus Christ is the Son of God by nature and not ond London Confession of Faith (1677/1689), was office, … he is the eternal Son of God by ineffable equally forthright in its Trinitarianism—in the filiation and not by constitution or as mediator in words of Curtis Freeman, its “words … resonate which respect he is a servant, and not a Son. And with Nicene orthodoxy”15—and firmly linked of this mind are all our churches of the particular this core Christian doctrine to spirituality. The Baptist persuasion nor will they admit to commu- “doctrine of the Trinity,” it affirmed, “is the foun- nion, nor continue in communion [with] such as dation of all our communion with God, and com- are of a different judgment. … I have some years fortable dependence on him.”16 ago published a treatise upon the doctrine of Throughout the long eighteenth century this the Trinity, in which I have particularly handled community unhesitatingly maintained that the point of Christ’s sonship, have established this doctrine is, in the words of Benjamin Wal- the orthodox sense of it, and refuted the other lin (1711–1782), the “first and grand principle of notion, which tho’ it may be held by some, as not revealed truth and the gospel.”17 In 1690, the Lon- downright Sabeleanism [sic], yet it tends to it.21 don Baptist layman Isaac Marlow (1649–1719), for example, published a treatise on the Trinity in The heart of this treatise was later incorporated which he stated his conviction that of those ele- into Gill’s Body of Doctrinal Divinity (1769), which, ments of divine truth that redound most to the for most Baptist pastors of that day, was their glory of God and best further the fellowship of major theological reference work.