Landmarkism is a belief within Baptist theology that espouses the view that baptism by immersion is the only valid form of baptism. It developed in the mid-19th century within the Southern Baptist Convention. Landmarkists believe that Baptist churches are the only true churches, and that only Baptists administer valid ordinances and preach the true Gospel.
The origins of Landmarkism can be traced back to James Robinson Graves, an influential Baptist preacher and editor in Tennessee. In the 1850s, Graves became concerned with the rise of open membership and pulpit affiliation between Baptists and non-Baptists. He believed that Baptist principles and doctrine were being diluted. Graves argued for Baptist exclusivism and that Baptist churches were the only true churches. He developed his landmark principles based on his interpretation of New Testament teachings about the nature of the church and baptism.
Graves outlined three key tenets of Landmarkism:
1. Baptists churches are the only true churches. The Landmarkists argued that historically, Baptist churches are the only denominations that have legitimate claim to being the “true” church that Jesus founded. They point to their history of persecuted minority status and adherence to believers baptism by immersion as evidence.
2. Baptism by immersion is the only valid baptism. Landmarkists reject infant baptism or sprinkling as unbiblical. They argue that baptism is only valid if a person makes a confessional faith in Jesus, and it is done by full immersion in water. Thus, those baptized as infants or sprinkled are not truly baptized.
3. Baptist churches are independent and self-governing. Each local Baptist church is autonomous under the lordship of Jesus Christ. Landmarkists reject denominational hierarchies and governing bodies that attempt to exercise authority over local churches.
Graves’ landmark principles were popularized through his widely-read Tennessee Baptist newspaper. His views became influential across the Southern Baptist Convention in the late 1800s. However, they also became quite controversial and divisive. Prominent Baptist leaders and scholars argued against the exclusive claims of Landmarkism. Critics pointed out that the principles are not found in the Bible and that Landmarkists were sectarian and schismatic.
Defenders of Landmarkism contended they were upholding Baptist doctrine in an age of doctrinal compromise. They feared that Baptist identity was being threatened by trends toward ecumenism and inter-denominational cooperation. Landmarkists saw themselves as protecting scriptural teachings on the church. They aimed to restore Baptist principles that they felt were being eroded and forgotten.
One of the lasting impacts of Landmarkism was an emphasis on local church autonomy. Landmarkists promoted congregational authority and rejected outside interference in Baptist churches. They developed a strong doctrine of the local church that influenced Baptist ecclesiology. Landmarkists were wary of conventions, associations or fellowships that claimed any jurisdiction over local congregations.
Landmarkism also contributed to a climate of suspicion between some Baptists and non-Baptists. Landmarkist rhetoric about Baptists being the “only true church” led many to view other denominations as illegitimate. This exclusivist ecclesiology hindered cooperation and fueled sectarian attitudes. The rapid spread of Landmarkist thought demonstrated that it resonated with many Baptists who were concerned about doctrinal drift.
In the 20th century, Landmarkism began to wane as a distinct movement. Its more extreme assertions about Baptist exclusivity were gradually moderated. But vestiges of Landmarkism persisted, especially in the South. Many of its ecclesiological principles continued to shape Baptist identity and practices. Debates flared up periodically over the lingering influences of Landmarkism within the Southern Baptist Convention.
While no longer an organized movement, Landmarkist beliefs still impact Baptists today. Some level of Baptist exclusivism persists among certain conservative groups. Landmarkism also contributed to the Baptist doctrine of a regenerate church membership. Its emphasis on correct baptism and church authority affects how Baptists view church membership and inter-denominational cooperation. For good or ill, Landmarkism has left its mark on Baptist theology and practice.
The key teachings of Landmarkism include:
– Baptists are the true successors of the New Testament church. There is an unbroken continuity and succession of Baptist doctrines and practices extending back to the apostles and first churches.
– Only Baptist churches administer valid ordinances like baptism and communion. Immersion of confessing believers is the only legitimate form of baptism. Other modes like sprinkling or infant baptism are rejected as having no biblical warrant.
– The terms “church” and “kingdom” in the Bible refer exclusively to local Baptist churches. The Landmarkists argued that passages about the “church” and “kingdom” apply only to Baptist churches, not any universal or invisible entity.
– Denominations like Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc are not true churches in the biblical sense. Their infant baptism and sprinkling are invalid. Their ministers have no scriptural authority. These groups are religious societies but not churches.
– Baptist churches must be completely self-governing and independent. Associations or conventions can only be advisory bodies with no binding authority over local congregations. Each Baptist church answers only to Jesus as head of the church.
– Inter-denominational cooperation, joint-efforts or ecumenism often lead to theological compromise. Landmarkists generally opposed these activities with non-Baptists as undermining Baptist doctrine.
– Open/closed communion – most Landmarkists practice closed communion, restricting it to members of that local church. Since other groups are not true churches according to Landmarkism, it would be inappropriate to share communion with them.
– Alien immersion – Landmarkists reject accepting someone’s prior baptism if it was done by a non-Baptist denomination. They insist on re-baptism of anyone joining a Baptist church if their baptism was not by a Baptist church.
– Successionism – some Landmarkists claimed there is an unbroken chain of Baptist churches back to the first century. They asserted Baptists alone have maintained apostolic origins and invalidated other denominations.
– Separation and sectarianism – Landmarkism promoted separation from other denominations and fostered a very sectarian spirit. This exclusivism disrupted fellowship and cooperation between Baptists and other evangelical groups.
Critics of the Landmarkist perspective make the following arguments:
– It relies heavily on historical revisionism. There are gaps and inconsistencies when Landmarkists try to demonstrate historical succession of Baptist churches.
– The New Testament does not support the rigid exclusive claims of Landmarkism. It does not limit the terms like “church” only to local Baptist churches.
– Landmarkism is inherently divisive. Its sectarian spirit runs counter to Christ’s desire for unity among his followers. Their exclusivism breeds pride, suspicion and separation.
– The principles of Landmarkism are not found explicitly anywhere in Scripture. They rely on inferences and interpretations imposed onto the text.
– It fosters a kind of Baptist exceptionalism and elitism. This contradicts the biblical teaching that all believers are equally part of Christ’s body through faith alone.
– Landmarkism narrows the meaning of “church” to only refer to Baptist churches and ignores the biblical imagery of the universal church.
– It places unwarranted restrictions on fellowship and cooperation between different denominations that hold to biblical orthodoxy. This stifles the unity of the broader body of Christ.
– Landmarkists have an inconsistent and convoluted understanding of church history. Groups like the Anabaptists held similar views on baptism and church polity as modern-day Baptists.
– A rigid view of baptism risks making it into a work that earns or guarantees salvation, rather than an ordinance symbolizing salvation already received by grace alone.
– Many early Baptist confessions did not make the exclusivist ecclesiological claims of Landmarkism. This shows it is not inherent or essential to Baptist doctrine.
The extent and impact of Landmarkist beliefs varies across different Baptist associations, conventions and churches today. Some of the more radical assertions about Baptist exclusivity have diminished over time. But ecclesiological views similar to certain Landmarkist tenets are still present among various conservative Baptist groups.
Traces of Landmarkism can be seen when Baptist groups or individuals do some of the following:
– Refuse to cooperate or fellowship with other denominations and parachurch groups on the grounds that they are not true churches.
– Reject the validity of denominational baptisms performed on infants or by modes other than immersion. They require “rebaptism” for membership.
– Practice closed communion and prohibit other Christians who have not been baptized as believing adults by immersion.
– Emphasize Baptists have a exclusive continuity with New Testament and apostolic doctrine.
– Argue that the terms “church” and “kingdom” refer only to local Baptist congregations, not any universal body of believers.
– Promote strict independence and congregational authority while opposing outside cooperative efforts or entities perceived as exercising any authority over local churches.
– Trace Baptist origins historically in “successionist” arguments in an attempt to invalidate other Protestant denominations.
– Display suspicion or hesitancy towards “ecumenical” cooperation, joint-worship, or ministry partnerships with non-Baptists.
However, there is diversity among Baptists on these matters. Some strongly uphold Landmarkist-like views, while others adopt more moderate positions. Not all Baptists who practice closed communion or advocate local church autonomy, for example, would necessarily identify with the Landmarkist label. There is often nuance in how Baptists parse some of the ecclesiological issues raised by Landmarkism.
In conclusion, Landmarkism was an influential movement within 19th century Baptist life. Its doctrines highlighted certain ecclesiological precepts that shaped Baptist identity. While Landmarkism faded organizationally, aspects of its teachings persisted and continue to impact various Baptist groups today. Traces of Landmarkist thought can be observed when Baptists promote strict exclusivism, separation, and sectarian attitudes towards other Christians. But Landmarkism remains controversial, with Baptists dividing over its biblical merits and appropriateness within a diverse denominational landscape. Understanding Landmarkism provides insight into ongoing debates over Baptist ecclesiology and inter-church relations.
