To begin with, I'll mention that Bauder's article is also available in a different format at
Religious Affections Ministries.
I would like to hear back from my brother Fundamentalists (and IFBers) on; your view of the Master of Divinity degree, Bauder's view of fundamentalist history, and should the "Cadillac" MDiv be shortened?
https://centralseminary.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Nick20180518.pdf
I'll not say much about the MDiv degree being shortened, since I don't see copying the secular model of education as the ideal. But, for those who are strong supporters of this model, it seems that the shortening of the program from 90 hours to 72 hours is in effect denying what they advocate. (I suppose they might argue doing this for financial reasons?)
Second, "a man with seminary behind him will be more effective in ministry than the same man without it" is an unprovable assumption. I have, on occasion, witnessed the reverse -- a man, the same man, with an "effective ministry" becoming less effective after a stint in the seminary.
Third, I have seen (somewhat from afar) the types of ministries that "more closely resembled circuses and theaters than New Testament congregations." Definitely poor thinkers with a fairly weak ability to study the text of Scripture for themselves and a relatively sketchy knowledge of the system of faith have led congregations to "pack a pew" and such like with promises of swallowing goldfish or preaching from church roofs in their underwear. (May God deliver us!) But I've also seen non-seminarians who'd never fall into such religious quackery. I've also seen among certain cliques of IFBs where every Tom, Dick, and Houdini claimed to be a "Doctor" (however sketchy that claim may be).
Finally, I think Bauder's history is accurate so far as it goes. In my opinion it somewhat limits the strain of just who are Fundamentalists. My background follows a different trajectory for what he talks about, being Baptists who left the convention both earlier and later than J. Frank Norris (the best known IFB name in our region). Our roots are in denominational trouble in the Baptist General Convention of Texas in the late 1800s. By 1900, a fairly large minority had withdrawn and created the Baptist Missionary Association of Texas. Many people don't think of the BMAT as IFB, and in some ways rightly so, but they were and are clearly ensconced in the of the Fundamentals of the faith. There was co-mingling of the BMAT with other Fundamentalist come-outers, such as Norris and the Bogard Baptists in Arkansas (the combination of Texas and Arkansas churches in the ABA would meet at Norris's FBC Fort Worth in 1935, even though he was not a member of their body). Many, if not most, also took stands that were separatist (against liberal, ecumenical, and denominational churches, e.g) and militant (against card-playing, movies, TVs, dancing, mixed bathing, long hair on men -- but not smoking!). All this to say that I believe our background is solidly fundamental, even though some don't think about it this way (otoh, the
Handbook of Denominations places both the Baptist Bible Fellowship International and Baptist Missionary Association of America under "Fundamentalist and Bible Churches"). But one interesting thing in relation to Bauder's topic is this. These Baptists made preparation for an educational institution -- albeit a college rather than a seminary -- even before they organized separately from the BGCT. In 1899 a charter established the Jacksonville Baptist College as a four-year senior college (it's now a junior college, probably because of finances) and it opened in the fall of 1899. The BMAT wasn't formed until 1900 (the college was several years later given to the association). Again, I realize this was a college and not a seminary, but it indicates we may have had a little different background organizationally toward education. (These Baptists wanted
all their children to have access to a good education.) While there were churches and preachers who did not believe in the necessity of seminary education for preachers, it seems for the most part (as far as I know) these churches with a generally high view of education didn't fall into some of the same theatrics that other fundamentalists did.
Also, though I'm trying to stop rambling, it is worth noting that churches through the years since 1900 even until recently have departed from the BMAT and ABA organizations and entered the completely unaffiliated fundamentalist ranks. This is true of several of the churches we are closely associated with.