Peck-Parker Debates

John Mason Peck 

1789-1858

Daniel Parker

1781-1844

"J. M. Peck twice met Daniel Parker in debate in Indiana. The first was in June, 1822, in Gibson county, at a special session of the Wabash District Association. The contest lasted the entire day and was decided by vote of thirty-five to five in favor of missions. In 1825, the second debate occurred before the White River Association in which the association unanimously voted against Parker."

"Referring to these events Dr. De Blois, the biographer of John M. Peck, describes these scenes as follows: 

Peck "visited various churches and associations, and met the famous (or infamous) Daniel Parker, politician, theologian, reactionary and propagandist. This shrewd and able man embodied the whole devilish spirit of the anti-mission crusade, and had a smooth tongue, considerably eloquent, and a genius for a persistent proselytism."

"Describing the latter sessions of the Association he says: "The subject of missions came up. This was occasioned by one church having charged another with having supported missions." This constituted a serious grievance. Mr. Parker arose and delivered a fiery address, denouncing all missionary effort in lurid and forceful terms. Mr. Peck obtained leave to speak and defended the missionary enterprises of the denomination with great fervor. It was a memorable occasion. Two of the most noteworthy leaders of religious thought and feeling that the 19th century produced were present, face to face, at the meeting of a few humble and insignificant churches. They spoke mightily, the discussion lasted for five hours. Mr. Peck must have appreciated the vigor of his antagonist for he says: "I never before met with so determined opposer to missions in every aspect." But the virile and eloquent Parker, State Senator, splendid man of affairs, religious leader, founder of a sect and stalwart reactionary in all that concerned the kingdom of Christ, received a startling rebuff; for the very Association which had declined to recognize the missionary and had refused him a seat three days before, voted heartily to sustain the cause of missions, and resolved, by formal vote, to support the church which had raised a contribution for the great cause." (De Blois, 48, 49)

From "A History of the Baptists" by John T. Christian, chapter VII, "The Anti-Effort Secession from the Baptists" (here)

Who would not have wanted to be there during those debates!?

I am sure that Peck destroyed Parker and the votes show it. Parker no doubt appealed to the emotions of the unlearned frontiersmen, many who could not even read. In many quarters he was very successful, but when he met men like Peck, his success was stymied. 

I do not doubt that the "spirit" that animated Parker was as described above. I am saddened that such a spirit continued to animate his followers, many of whom called themselves "primitive" or "old school." It was an "anti" spirit, a spirit of opposition to any who did not agree with them who possessed it. It was also a "do nothing" spirit (many called the Hardsells "Do Nothings" and "anti effort" Baptists). It was a spirit that said "come not near to me for I am holier (and more orthodox and Baptistic) than thou."

What think ye?