Featured prominently on my desk are framed, black-and-white photographs of two influential Southern Baptists:  John A. Broadus (1827-95) and E.Y. Mullins (1860-1928). I admire Broadus’ passion for preaching and the legacy he left as one of the founders of Southern Seminary. I admire Mullins for his denominational statemanship and his advocacy for religious freedom for Baptists in Romania. 

Not too long ago, I ordered a used copy of William Ellis’ 1985 biography of E.Y. Mullins entitled: A Man of Books and a Man of the People: E.Y. Mullins and the Crisis of Moderate Southern Baptist Leadership. I was intrigued by the title given to Mullins: “a man of books and a man of the people.” Evangelicalism could use more pastor/theologians and theologian/pastors. We need more men like D.A. Carson, John Piper, and N.T. Wright – ministers who serve both the local church and use their gifts in the academy. E.Y. Mullins’ leadership in the early part of the 20th century provides a model of how bridging the gap between library and pew can be done effectively.

Ellis portrays Mullins as a level-headed moderate leader who fought the extremes of fundamentalism throughout his tenure as president of Southern Seminary. The fundamentalist leaders at the turn of last century (men like T.T. Eaton) were highly critical of Mullins’ leadership. Ellis casts Mullins as the calm, collected leader who staved off the fundamentalists who might have succeeded in taking over the (generally moderate) Southern Baptist Convention.

Ellis’ book was published in 1985 during another critical time in Southern Baptist life. I cannot help but wonder how much the events of the 1980’s may have influenced Ellis’ agenda in writing this book. It seems to me that Ellis seeks to portray Mullins as the kind of moderate leader needed to stave off what could be considered the fundamentalist excesses of the Conservative Resurgence.

The most fascinating information in this biography comes from Ellis’ access to Mullins’ correspondence. The letters and Baptist newspapers of the time show that Southern Seminary was frequently criticized by people on the right and the left. According to some critics, Mullins was opening the door to liberalism within the seminary faculty. According to others, Mullins was unwilling to let go of key evangelical doctrines and subscribe to more “enlightened” views.

There are several historical facts about Mullins that do not quite fit Ellis’ portrayal. First, Ellis writes as if the Baptist Faith and Message that Mullins drafted in 1925 was an attempt to keep the heated debate over evolutionism from becoming a core Baptist conviction. But the comprehensiveness of this confession goes against the idea that the creation/evolution debate was the primary motivation for crafting such a document. In other essays, Mullins argued that Baptists were not a free-lance club and that Baptists shared a confessional identity. 

The problem for Ellis is that Mullins’ advocacy of confessionalism does not square with his image of Mullins as the level-headed moderate. So the confessional aspect of Mullins’ legacy winds up being underrepresented in the book. 

Secondly, Ellis describes Mullins as moving towards fundamentalist convictions late in life. Weary from the fight against the denominational conservatives, Mullins eventually succumbs to the fundamentalist agenda, leaves behind his social-gospel liberalism, and becomes an advocate for more conservative views.

But I believe Ellis’ explanation of Mullins’ later years to be inadequate. Is it not more plausible to believe that Mullins only appeared more conservative in his later years because the evangelical and Baptist Conventions with whom he had long held loose associations were moving towards liberalism? I seriously doubt that after decades of criticism from the fundamentalist wing of the SBC, Mullins could no longer withstand the attacks and therefore became a fundamentalist himself. It is more likely that Mullins was always a theological conservative, though one who did not share the fundamentalist attitude.

Third, Ellis mourns the fact that Mullins seemed to have lost his emphasis on the social implications of the gospel – an emphasis featured prominently in his writings at the beginning of last century. But again, there is a better, more plausible explanation of this apparent “loss.” Perhaps in the early 1900’s, Mullins saw a lack of social concern as a major issue in SBC life. But by the 1920’s, Mullins noticed a bigger problem on the horizon – doctrinal error. Therefore, he shifted his emphasis, even if he never intended to neglect social concerns. In fact, his late-in-life push for Prohibition directly counters Ellis’ view that Mullins’ concern for social issues disappeared.

Mullins is an intriguing individual in Southern Baptist history. He took positions that defy easy categorization. He cannot be neatly fitted into a liberal/moderate/conservative framework. Trying to figure out his view of evolution is difficult. At times, it seems he advocated neutrality on the issue. At other times, his disavowal of evolution was more a disavowal of naturalism, which leaves no room for a personal Creator God.

Regardless of one’s view of Mullins’ legacy, Ellis’ book ably demonstrates that he was a talented administrator, important theologian, hard-working denominational leader, and powerful preacher. Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of Mullins’ life is that this “man of the books and man of the people” could succeed at wearing all of these hats at the same time.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Related Posts:
Edgar Young Mullins: An Intimate Biography
E.Y. Mullins Gravesite
A History of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary