Book Review: Let Men Be Free
Obbie Tyler Todd, Let Men Be Free: Baptist Politics in the Early United States 1776-1835 (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2022).
Introduction
In his foreword to the book, Thomas Kidd writes, “Baptists in the English-speaking world have tended to engage rather than withdraw from the political sphere,” and “there has always seemed to be a natural affinity among Baptists for politics, especially in the United States.”[1]Obbie Tyler Todd has written this book to provide a historically accurate summary of that Baptist affinity and the various features of the interplay between Baptist politics and Baptist theology and practice. For the historian, this book is a welcome addition to the conversation about Baptists in American history. And for the interested reader, this book is an accessible and informative counterweight to the common assumptions that Baptists were either political party sycophants or complete outsiders to the American political experiment.
Todd claims that this book is the “first comprehensive treatment of Baptist politics in the new American nation.”[2] It may well be since Todd explores in detail both Baptist politics and Baptist doctrine, as well as how the former helped to shape the latter. As he describes it, “in a nation that separated church and state, religion and politics were still inextricable. Therefore, the story of Baptists in the early United States cannot be told without accounting for the theological convictions that propelled them to action and the political consequences that animated their decisions.”[3]
Baptists in America and Americans in general have indeed embraced at least one shared fundamental freedom, that of religious liberty. But as Todd argues and documents in this book, “Baptists did not always define religious liberty in quite the same way.”[4] And the same could be said of the pluralistic society that America has been since its founding as a nation. That’s why Todd’s book is so fascinating. He affirms, like many others, that Baptists were shaped by American politics; but he also argues that America’s political philosophy was and is shaped by Baptists as well.
This book also contributes a new perspective with which to view Baptists’ political involvement in the new nation, that of Baptist Federalists. Baptist alignment with the early Republican Party (i.e., Thomas Jefferson) is well-known among historians. But the story often left untold (and therefore mostly unknown) is that of the many Baptists who fought against Republicans and their descendants. This can be documented by the fact that many Baptists publicly embraced and argued for the Federalist Party’s candidates and programs. From Todd’s perspective, “Baptist politics was defined not by a candidate or party or even a single issue, but by its goal: religious liberty.”[5] There were Baptists among both Republicans and Federalists. But the Baptist goal of religious liberty “seemed,” then as now, “to demand participation (and persecution) in the public square,” and Baptists participated vigorously.[6]
Book Summary
The book is structured in three basic parts. The first four chapters describe the “principles, patriotism, and partisanship” of Baptists in America during the early years (roughly 1770s through to the beginning of the Andrew Jackson presidency).[7] During this period, Baptists were perceived as political and cultural outsiders, but their involvement in both American politics and American culture was remarkable. The last three chapters explain the “policies, programs, and progress” of Baptists as they discovered and, in many ways, created their own sort of respectability and influence.[8] This was especially notable in American society and politics after the Revolutionary War and following the pivotal presidency of Thomas Jefferson.
Chapter five serves as a sort of hinge for the book, providing the reader with additional content that is not normally available in a historical exploration of this sort. Todd gives considerable detail about the various perspectives among Baptists in America concerning the morally troubling realities of African slavery and the treatment of Native Americans. He addresses head-on the irony that many Baptists argued for a kind of religious liberty for white Baptist men that they did not do for African Americans or Native Americans. And yet Todd also documents the divergent views among Baptists on each of these important issues.
Todd writes, “it would be no exaggeration to suggest that behind every article for religious liberty in the national and state constitutions in the early republic, there were Baptists.”[9] And he also undergirds this claim with historical facts. Baptists were not the only proponents of religious liberty, but they were absolutely a vocal and active coalition of politically interested Christians who viewed religious liberty as a necessity for their existence. As Todd says, “For Baptists, the relationship between church and state was a two-way street. Just as religion influenced civil government, civil government inevitably shaped religion. Therefore, Baptists regularly argued that religious freedom wasn’t simply about civil liberty; it was essential to biblical Christianity.”[10]
That political and religious conviction which seemed to unite all Baptists was indeed religious liberty. Todd writes, “If Baptists agreed on one thing, it was the evil of state-sponsored religion.”[11] But Baptists often disagreed about the meaning and practice of religious liberty. Todd also says, “However, if Baptists disagreed on one thing, it was the nature of this ‘court of judicature, erected in every breast’ [i.e., the ‘empire of conscience’ as John Leland called it], and to what extent it should be respected in those outside the Protestant faith.”[12] Some Baptists were quite adamant that religious liberty did not mean that atheists, Roman Catholics, or Muslims should be allowed to hold political office or free to promote their own political theology.
This disagreement among Baptists in early America is on display in their divergent party affiliations, Republicans and Federalists. Todd notes that many scholars, “from Nathan O. Hatch to Daniel L. Dreisback to Thomas Kidd have tended to frame Baptists as Jeffersonians due to their mutual defense of the First Amendment.”[13] But Todd also argues that “this telling of the Baptist and American history is incomplete.”[14] Baptists did align themselves with Thomas Jefferson on the issue of religious liberty, but “America’s Baptist leadership… [was] in fact predominantly and distinctly Federalist.”[15]
It would be inaccurate to say that Republicans were champions for religious freedom and Federalists were champions of religious establishment, though Congregationalist Federalists were certainly on the side of the establishment. Baptist Federalists, however, advocated for religious disestablishment without the complete neglect of civil religion. Todd writes, “Baptist Republicans and Federalists quarreled over the best way to procure and protect this most sacred freedom. In general, Baptist Republicans emphasized the restraint of government and the importance of individual rights while Baptist Federalists stressed the responsibility of government and the importance of public virtue.”[16]
While the Federalist and Republican parties did not continue as such after the defeat of Rufus King by James Monroe in the presidential election of 1816, the general perspective of Baptists in America (both among leaders and commoners) continued to reflect similar characteristics. Baptists wanted and formed institutions for cooperation, for missions, and for social improvement. Indeed, “Religious liberty and religious nationalism were by no means mutually exclusive in the early American nation.”[17] Baptists seemed to envision American advancement (both in domestic moral improvement and in foreign missional efforts) as Baptist and Christian advancement in the world.
In the end, Baptists did not want established religion in the sense of government-coerced religious institutions and participation. However, many Baptists did want a kind of voluntary religious establishment, in the sense that they believed the good of the nation depended upon the voluntary (and even sometimes state-encouraged) growth of Christian churches and Christian people among the nation. Thus, the Baptist view of religious liberty (both past and present) is not so easily described by the oft-repeated and seldom-defined phrase “separation of church and state.”
Conclusion
This book is well-researched, well-written, and much-needed in the current American political debate. Baptists are a major segment of the American population, having gained many converts during the nineteenth century and many more in the twentieth. Still today, Baptists are deeply interested in religious liberty and vigorously active in the political arena. Readers of all sorts may find this book a fascinating and informative dive into the historical narrative that has shaped much of what we are experiencing today. Those particularly interested in history, politics, and Baptist political theology should consider it a must-read.
[1] Obbie Tyler Todd, Let Men Be Free: Baptist Politics in the Early United States 1776-1835 (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2022). ix.
[2] Let Men Be Free, xiii.
[3] Let Men Be Free, xiv.
[4] Let Men Be Free, xv.
[5] Let Men Be Free, 1.
[6] Let Men Be Free, 1.
[7] Let Men Be Free, xvii.
[8] Let Men Be Free, xvii.
[9] Let Men Be Free, 11.
[10] Let Men Be Free, 25.
[11] Let Men Be Free, 28.
[12] Let Men Be Free, 29.
[13] Let Men Be Free, 83.
[14] Let Men Be Free, 83.
[15] Let Men Be Free, 83.
[16] Let Men Be Free, 72.
[17] Let Men Be Free, 141.