Writing denominationally oriented history can be risky business, especially when one challenges assumed truths that carry political implications within the tradition. Notwithstanding potential risks, Eric C. Smith's Order and Ardor: The Revival Spirituality of Oliver Hart & the Regular Baptists in Eighteenth-Century South Carolina challenges many cherished beliefs about revivalism and Baptists in the eighteenth-century. His conclusions may unsettle more than a few.

There are certain assumptions that students tend to make when studying eighteenth-century revivalism. Among Baptists, the standard storyline goes something like this: revivals swept through the land causing schisms in existing churches that pitted anti-revival Old Lights against pro-revival New Lights. In time, certain New Lights joined the Baptist ranks and formed pro-revival congregations, styling themselves as “Separate Baptists.” Unfortunately, the Separate Baptists quickly ran afoul of Calvinistic Regular Baptists, who dismissed the Separates as overly enthusiastic and theologically suspect. The Separates responded in kind, labeling the Regular Baptists as cold and “worldly.” And, thus emerged the “Charleston Tradition” of Regular Baptist insistence upon formality and proper decorum as opposed to the “Sandy Creek Tradition” of spiritual vitality and worshipful exuberance. It was order verses ardor—or so the story goes.

In Smith's analysis, a different, far more nuanced picture emerges. He maintains that the supposed chasm between Separate and Regular Baptists was neither as great nor clear cut as previous generations assumed. Smith examines Oliver Hart (1723–1795), a highly significant yet understudied figure in eighteenth-century American history. Hart served as pastor of the Charleston (First) Baptist Church from 1750 until 1780 when he left Charleston for Hopewell, New Jersey. Smith's inquiry, however, is not a typical biography. By focusing on Oliver Hart's spirituality, that is, Hart's prayer life, his preaching ministry, and what some might describe as his “lived religion,” Smith demonstrates that while Hart was a Calvinistic Regular Baptist, he was also pietistic, zealous, and pro-revival. Consequently, the Charleston and Sandy Creek Traditions had much more in common than previously assumed. This is where Smith's work is especially valuable. Many Southern Baptists trace some aspect of their identity to either the Charleston (Calvinist) or Sandy Creek (non-Calvinist) traditions. If Smith is right—and he makes a convincing case—Baptist identity need not be locked into this either–or scenario. Oliver Hart proves that Calvinists can make good pietists and revivalists.

Of course, skeptics might claim that Hart was merely an exception that demonstrated a more general rule actually existed. Smith anticipates such criticism and turns to an impressive array of sources, including Hart's diary and other writings, to explore his subject's piety in rich detail. Smith depicts Oliver Hart as a man who was virtually consumed by evangelism both in his pulpit ministry and on a personal level. In contemporary terms, Hart shared his faith eagerly. Beyond his preaching and evangelism, Hart also promoted education for Baptist preachers, but he was never one to observe strict Baptist boundaries when it came to revivalism. Hart maintained an open, warm friendship with revivalist George Whitefield, and he sought to emulate Whitefield, particularly in the way(s) he lived out his commitment to Christ. Unfortunately, Hart owned slaves for most of his life, and even though existing evidence suggests that he was kind and attentive, he was not an abolitionist and did not even move toward emancipationism until late in life. He did, however, support the American Revolution as a means to both religious and political freedom.

It is never easy to write about a person's personal piety and that makes Order and Ardor even more impressive. Smith writes with clarity and grace. He makes Hart believable without over-accentuating his strengths or minimizing his weaknesses. One might wish that Smith had spent more time exploring Hart's involvement in securing support for the American Revolution from his fellow Baptists, but this is a minor criticism, seeing that Smith's purpose was to explore Hart's spirituality. Perhaps a follow up volume is in the offing. On a much more irksome level, the greatest problem with this book has nothing to do with Smith, his research, or his writing. That the University of South Carolina Press would charge $44.99 for this book of one hundred forty-five pages of text, including index, is beyond pricey. Eric C. Smith has written a fine book that challenges much of what is assumed with respect to Baptists and revivalism in the eighteenth-century South, and he deserves a wider readership than he will likely get with a price tag like that.