In 1895, Religious Herald editor Robert H. Pitt was among the first to urge Baptists to unite in a world organization. He repeated the call in 1900, five years before the Baptist World Alliance was organized in London. Both editorials are reprinted below.
According to Horace Russell, who contributed to a 2005 history of the BWA, disagreement existed for decades between Pitt and John N. Prestridge, editor of Kentucky’s Baptist Argus, over who actually initiated the first call for a world Baptist organization.
“The initial action appears to have been that of William Warren Landrum, then pastor of the Second Baptist Church in Richmond, Virginia,” Russell wrote. “He was impressed by the growing strength of the Presbyterian alliance and did not wish to see the Baptists left behind when other denominations were planning world gatherings. From his pulpit he began advocating a ‘Pan-Baptist Conference,’ a vision that he communicated to Robert Healy Pitt …. Landrum urged Pitt to float the idea for such a conference. Pitt responded with an editorial in the April 4, 1895, issue …. His idea attracted some attention from other Baptist papers, and a year later he reiterated it when reporting on a meeting of the Presbyterian alliance. When this second appeal received little response, Pitt issued another call in December 1900 ….”
Four years later, in Kentucky, Editor Prestridge of The Baptist Argus published a call for world Baptists to unite, written by Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor A. T. Robertson. Prestridge mailed copies of the article to leaders around the world, who enthusiastically received it. In response, Southern Baptists created a Pan-Baptist Conference Committee which included both Prestridge and Pitt. Both men helped plan the inaugural 1905 Baptist World Congress. Prestridge was named to the new organization’s post of Western Secretary, which he held until 1913. That year Pitt assumed the post and served until 1923.
As the second World Congress approached in 1910, Pitt, in various editorials, renewed his claim to have initiated the call, and in 1928, BWA General Secretary James Rushbrooke publicly gave credit to Pitt and Landrum. That upset Robertson, the seminary professor, who called for an official correction, and even unearthed a 1904 letter from the general secretary of British Baptists at the time, expressing sympathy with the original proposal and enclosing a marked copy of the article Prestridge had run in The Baptist Argus. Although Rushbrooke apologized to Robertson, he never issued a formal public correction. As Russell succinctly writes in his history, “The question has long since ceased to arouse any concern among Baptist historians.”
A Pan-Baptist Council
We frankly confess to a very strong and cherished desire to see the largest possible denominational fellowship. This is possible without in any way weakening our attachments for our local bodies. Why might we not have at some early day a Pan-Baptist council — a representative gathering of Baptists from all parts of the globe for mutual acquaintance and the discussion of matters of common interest? What a blessed, unifying uplifting thing it would be to have Baptists from Europe, Asia, Africa, America, Australia, coming together in a great gathering! There is the suggestion. Why can’t it be held?
April 4, 1895
Pan-Baptist — Why Not?
On last Sunday night, Dr. Smith of the Second Baptist Church [in Richmond] preached a semon to a great audience on the subject of “Christian Unity.” Among other indications marking the trend to wider brotherhood, he called attention to the frequent pan-councils of sects bearing the same name, and the consequent partial fusions and consolidations that have resulted. Episcopalians, Presbyterians and Methodists have found these great meetings contributive to larger Christian federation. He also mentioned the fact that there has been some agitation in the interest of such a scheme among the great Baptist families of faith. The Religious Herald has several times made the suggestion and so far no opposition has arisen. Is it not highly proper for our leaders to consider more fully the advantages accruing from such a gathering of our divided clans? What is the objection to making it synchronize with the proposed joint meeting of Northern and Southern Baptists in the city of St. Louis in 1903; or with the larger brotherhood of English-speaking Baptists called to meet in Edinburgh in 1901? Combination is one of the victorious forces of our day. Baptists would signify more to the world and to the Master, if we could gradually mass our forces in a well-compacted fraternal unity.
Dec. 20, 1900