Brewster, Paul L. Andrew Fuller: Model Pastor-Theologian. Nashville, TN: B & H Academic, 2010.
Introduction
Paul Brewster has a Ph.D. in Theological Studies from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina. Brewster served as pastor of Ryker’s Ridge Baptist Church in Madison, Indiana. He revised his doctoral dissertation into Andrew Fuller: Model Pastor-Theologian. The thesis of the book is “that British Baptist pastor Andrew Fuller (1754–1815) is a model pastor-theologian” (6).
Summary
To begin with, Brewster shows why a model pastor-theologian like Fuller is needed and gives a sketch of Fuller’s life. In the last two centuries, the place of theology in pulpit and pew of Baptist churches has changed in the pulpits and the pews. This change is both in the content of their theology and the emphasis placed on theology. Theology is now relegated to the academy. Methodology and management now take its place of prominence in Baptist churches.
Next, in chapter two, Brewster argues that Fuller provides a model of how a pastor should arrive at theological conclusions. A pastor, as Fuller exemplified, needs a system of doctrine. That is, he must develop or adopt a theological system that considers what all of Scripture says and presents it in a clear and logical manner. Fuller believed a system of doctrine is always to be tested by and conformed to Scripture. Fuller demonstrates the need to mold one’s system to Scripture in his progression from High Calvinism to a more historical and biblical Calvinism. This shift was not instant. It took him some time to hammer it out and then apply it in his ministry. Which leads to another point of Fuller’s theological method, Christianity is a religion to be experienced in the heart as well as the head. Finally, in his friendships and writing, Fuller shows the pastor-theologians need for accountability.
Thirdly, in chapter three, Brewster summarizes the soteriology of Fuller. Fuller in his soteriology is an evangelical Calvinist. He rejected High Calvinism of Brine and Gill, the half-Arminianism of Baxter, and the Arminianism of the General Baptist. When Fuller came onto the scene, High Calvinism wide-spread in Particular Baptist churches and the churches were in decline. For Fuller and those of his day, the question of whether the gospel should be offered to the unconverted was central. Fuller answered yes because Scripture demands that the unconverted are responsible for their rejection of the gospel while also affirming God’s sovereignty in saving the elect. He affirmed all five points of Calvinism. He taught that men have the natural ability to respond to the gospel but lack the moral ability. A man needs regeneration by the Holy Spirit to respond appropriately to the Gospel demands of faith and repentance. Thus, Fuller holds to total depravity while rejecting that men are automatons. Fuller understood that if God had intended for the atonement to be for all people, then it was sufficient. However, God only intended it for the elect. Christ is the place where all find atonement, but only the elect ultimately finds it. As for Fuller’s view of irresistible, he believed a special working of the Spirit (regeneration) was required for the elect to respond correctly. God used the means of the general call to call the elect effectually. Fuller’s acceptance of unconditional election and perseverance of the saints is not contested. He believed and taught them.
Brewster transitions from soteriology in chapter three, to discuss how Fuller implemented his doctrine. In his pastorate, He placed a priority on preaching the Bible and doctrine to peoples’ heads and hearts. He often preached with passion. His theology also showed up in his shepherding ministry. He pressed people, especially, the sick to trust in Jesus. He also embraced the use of means in ministry. He raised funds and engaged in politics to bolster the missionary effort. All the while he believed that all success came by God’s assistance. In his work as the secretary for the mission society, Fuller used his influence and support to start it and keep it an afloat. He saw himself as a rope holder for those on the front lines taking the gospel to the heathen. His diligence in his work for the society shows the burden he had for the lost. As an apologist, Fuller saw it as his responsibility to respond to whatever attacks the gospel of Jesus Christ and the glory of God. In his view, souls hung in the balance, so he worked long and hard to further and defend the gospel.
The fifth chapter concludes Brewster’s work. Fuller’s weaknesses include his inability to achieve balance in life, and his acceptance of governmental language in the atonement led to the uncritical acceptance of it by some who came after him. His strengths are seen in his resolve always to hold up the truth, his biblical theology, his gospel-centeredness, in his ability to apply his doctrine to life, and his moral purity. In Fuller, the modern pastor-theologian should see the value of theology in the revival of churches. Also, the modern pastor-theologian like Fuller should be theologically literate and contribute to the ongoing discussion. With the rise of Calvinism in Southern Baptist life, one acquainted with Fuller should know the dangers of High Calvinism, prioritize evangelism, and place the gospel at the center of their ministry.
Critical Evaluation
In this work, Brewster supports his thesis with strong evidence and sound argumentation. His thesis is “that British Baptist pastor Andrew Fuller (1754–1815) is a model pastor-theologian” (6). It is evident that Brewster has intimate knowledge with Fuller’s writings, Fuller’s culture and background, and other works on Fuller’s life and theology. One has to look at his copious citations and lengthy bibliography.
Brewster somewhat assumes his audience knows what a pastor-theologian is and gives little argumentation for the necessity of being one. He spends a greater amount of space showing the lack of theology in modern Baptist life than he does the biblical precedence for it. A little more argumentation would be helpful at this point in the argument because this reviewer, who is sympathetic with the convictions and thesis of the book, has a hard time believing it would convince those that don’t already agree with Brewster.
That said, Brewster does adequately show that Fuller is a pastor-theologian. The amount of theological works fuller ground out is incredible, but, as Brewster demonstrates, Fuller was not an ivory tower theologian. Fuller devoted himself to preaching. He was sought after for ordination services, so much so that he laid out his thoughts in writing (112). Fuller saw preaching as more than lecture. Not only must a preacher present the truth and the gospel, but he must plead with his hears to believe and obey it (112). Fuller placed passion at a premium over eloquence in presentation (114). He preached systematically through books in his home pulpit and would devote extra time to instruct younger people (115). He also went out to preach in surrounding villages in addition to his regular preaching ministry (116). He also visited or wrote letters to the sick, pressing for them to trust Jesus (121-123). Fuller encouraged the laity to be active in proclaiming the gospel (125). Many of Fuller’s more substantial works are compilations of smaller ones, and his audience is generally aimed at the masses, not the academy. Another aspect of Fuller’s life that points to the fact that he is not just a theologian, but a pastor-theologian is his work in founding and supporting the Baptist Missions Society. He raised funds by traveling to both near and far (135). He defended the cause of missions from political, financial, and theological threats (141-142). In fact, chapter four alone demonstrates the fact that Fuller is both theologian and pastor.
One weakness of Brewster’s work sticks out, and he acknowledges it. His emphasis on soteriology limits his engagement with other aspects of Fuller’s Theology (159-160). One other reviewer raises a similar point when he states a desire to see Fuller’s theology up against “a full-orbed Reformed theology (confessionalism, Regulative Principle, etc.).”[1] This reviewer and the one quoted above wonder how Fuller’s eschatology influenced his missionary labors.[2]
Also, a more detailed account of Fuller’s weaknesses and its effects on his life and ministry would have been helpful in this work and would have only bolstered the thesis. One hundred seventy-six pages of the book highlight his strengths, whereas only five briefly survey his weaknesses (160-165). For example, the section on his lack of balance could have been expanded. Did it affect his marriage and parenting? If so, how? Did it affect his church ministry? If so, how? How did his church respond to the amount of time he spent away? Did it contribute to his poor health? As one who admires Fuller greatly, this review still would see more engagement with his shortcomings and his response to them.
Conclusion
“In the last several years,” asserts one reviewer, “many new research projects on the Kettering pastor have emerged. Brewster’s work stands as a worthy contribution of this literature.” [3] This reviewer concurs with the assessment above. Even with its limitations, the book demonstrates the truthfulness of its thesis. Brewster has informed, this reader, of the influence and integration of Fuller’s theology in his ministry. All pastors should imitate his concern for the gospel and the lost. His unashamed presentation and thorough defense of the truths of Scripture, likewise, should be a part of every pastor’s ministry. Brewster in this work provides a helpful introduction of Fuller’s life, ministry, and thought. It should be read by pastors but would benefit all those interested in theology and evangelism.
[1] Riddle, Jeffrey T. “Book Review: Andrew Fuller: Model Pastor-Theologian.” Puritan Reformed Journal 4, no. 1 (January 2012): 330.
[2] Ibid. 330.
[3] Rathel, David M. “Book Review: Andrew Fuller: Model Pastor-Theologian.” Journal for Baptist Theology and Ministry 13, no. 1 (2016): 83.