PATEFO.Paper.Jeff

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="Microsoft Word 97/98">
<TITLE>Strategy and Tactics of Religious Oppression Among Baptists 1 (98-99)</TITLE>
<META NAME="subject" CONTENT="1998-1999">
<META NAME="Template" CONTENT="Macintosh HD:Applications:Microsoft Office 98:Templates:Web Pages:Blank Web Page">
</HEAD>
<BODY LINK="#0000ff" VLINK="#800080">

STRATEGY AND TACTICS OF RELIGIOUS OPPRESSION
AMONG BAPTISTS IN THE U.S.: THE SOUTHERN
BAPTIST CONVENTION
 
 
Jeff B. Pool
6 July 2000
Thursday
PATEFO CONFERENCE 2000
Siroky Dul, Moravia
The Czech Republic
 
Introduction
The invitation to participate in this conference initially stated the general theme for this gathering of Baptists: "Baptist Tradition at the Crossroad: Analysis of the Present Situation and the Prospect for the Future." /1/ A more specific invitation followed that statement of the theme for the conference: "to prepare a personal contribution to [this] topic on the basis of [my] own home situation." Thus, in my contribution to our meeting, I will examine my "home situation," as a Baptist in the United States, as Baptists there have most recently experienced "Baptist Tradition at the Crossroads."
Many millions of Baptists comprise the larger Baptist family in the United States: those millions of Baptists, however, participate in many different communities, conventions, and organizations. The largest of the Baptist conventions in the U.S., as you may already know, is the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). Not only is the SBC the largest Baptist convention in the U.S.; it is also the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S.! For those reasons, the SBCs activities, statements, beliefs, agenda, and problems greatly influence the larger religious and cultural situations in the U.S. as a whole.
With these factors in mind, therefore, I further narrow the topic of my own presentation in the following ways. I will limit my own contribution, first, to a more specific focus on the meaning of our theme, "Baptist Tradition at the Crossroads," for the Southern Baptist Convention. Although I am not a member of the Southern Baptist Convention, I have performed a significant portion of my ministry (more than five years) as a teacher of systematic theology in a seminary of the SBC: Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas. For that reason, along with many others, I am more familiar with the situation of Baptists in the SBC than with other Baptist groups in the U.S. Nonetheless, as narrow as my topic may appear, the severity of the SBCs situation, especially with regard to the issues of the larger Baptist tradition and genuine fidelity to it, serves as a very large window into the situation of all Baptists in the U.S. Most Baptist conventions in the U.S. either have faced or will face many of the same problems that have plagued the SBC for a large part of its history, but especially during the last twenty-five years. Second, I will narrow my topic even more by examining the most disturbing dynamic in the SBCs recent, turbulent history: the employment of the strategy and tactics of religious oppression among Baptists in the Southern Baptist Convention.
In this presentation, nevertheless, I do not intend to trace the last twenty-five conflictual years of the SBCs history. Numerous books, by Baptists on both sides of that controversy, have already contributed significantly to fulfilling that historical goal. /2/ While the features of that history may fascinate and certainly horrify many Baptists as well as other observers, and while I certainly will refer to various critical moments in that recent history of the SBC, I aim principally to identify, analyze, and reflect on the strategy and several of the main tactics employed by fundamentalist Baptists in their efforts to capture the SBCs resources and institutions, in their efforts to control and transform the Conventions organizational structures, and in their efforts to enlist the SBCs membership as support for the extreme fundamentalist agenda and credenda of a select cadre of leaders in the SBC.
In the previous statement of my topic for discussion, then, a very important presupposition of my presentation resides. My study presupposes that many Baptists in the Southern Baptist Convention have suffered extreme forms of persecution and oppression during the last quarter of the twentieth century; but they have experienced these evils from their own Baptist family. I guide my effort to identify, analyze, and reflect on the strategy and tactics of the fundamentalists who conjured this phenomenon with the following hypothesis: The fundamentalist Baptists who began their holy war in the late 1970s have conducted their campaign to gain control of the SBC, as well as to consolidate and maintain their power in the SBC, with the most obvious forms of the strategy and tactics characteristically employed by political movements that promote and maintain secular totalitarian or, as described more accurately by Václa Havel, post-totalitarian systems. /3/
Developing that hypothesis, my presentation will contain three parts. First, I will discuss the current situation for the SBC, by examining the larger strategy and several (most assuredly, however, not all) major tactics that produced and presently characterize the current situation: policies, procedures, and practices both that the fundamentalists employed in their persecution of certain Baptists in the SBC on the path to the fundamentalist seizure and consolidation of power, and by which they continue to maintain their hold on that power. Second, I will discuss briefly several of the major consequences of this phenomenon for the present life of Baptists in the SBC and even, to some extent, for Baptists globally. Third, I will reflect on prospects for the future, several responses and attitudes that this situation requires for Baptists in the U.S.; in that light, in my third part, I will suggest several guidelines of a genuinely Christian approach for all Baptists who might or do face such problems.
 
I. Strategy and Tactics of Fundamentalist Oppression
in the SBC
I begin by offering a brief description of the existing situation for Baptists who participate in the SBC. I will expand this description later in part two of my presentation, when I mention several consequences of the oppression in the SBC. In this first part, however, I will follow my initial and brief description of the SBCs current situation with an examination of the strategy and several key tactics of the fundamentalist aggression that produced the SBCs current oppressive situation and still characterizes the SBCs standard mode of operation. /4/
 
A. Present Situation in the SBC
By reading news-releases about the SBC during the last several years, one may easily discover the characteristics of the SBCs present situation. For that reason, I will make my introductory characterization of this situation brief. A group of men, and I intentionally use the term "men" to refer to white males, control all of the agencies, institutions, financial resources, policies, and direction of the Southern Baptist Convention. Political philosophers and scientists describe such a form of government as an oligarchy: the rule or governance by a few. Nevertheless, a hierarchy of power characterizes even this small group: an even smaller group of four or five men guide the larger oligarchy of men in the SBC. This rather small group of men maintains a very tight oversight (may I say, without in any way intending to insult my Anglican, Orthodox, and Roman Catholic friends, episcopacy?) of everything associated with the SBC: the persons elected to the conventions offices, the persons appointed to the conventions various committees, especially its executive committee, those individuals appointed to boards of trustees in the various institutions and agencies of the SBC, the official resolutions formulated for and then adopted by the convention, and even the shape and content of the SBCs official doctrinal statements. Furthermore, this hierarchical oligarchy uses its political power and doctrinal commitments in mutual support of one another: (1) on the one hand, this religious oligarchy uses its absolute political control of the SBC to enforce conformity (by all denominational employees) to the absolutist doctrinal and moral perspectives that it has manipulated the convention to adopt; (2) on the other hand, this religious oligarchy employs its absolutist doctrinal and moral perspectives (one might designate this with the more traditional term: "dogmas") to legitimate or to authorize the policies, programs, procedures, and practices of its absolute political control of the SBC. To say this in a more philosophical way, power as domination presently drives the dialectical relationship between politics and theology in the SBC.
To understand most fully the character of the political, social, and spiritual life of the present SBC, one must also have some familiarity with the doctrinal and moral perspectives that this oligarchy uses to legitimate or justify the character of these dimensions in the conventions life. In this presentation, however, I do not have the time to discuss every feature of that theology. I note, however, several central elements of this doctrinal system (or one might even describe it as the larger metaphorical field): (1) the Bible as the very words of God "HIMself," inerrant or without error in every sensehistorically, geographically, geologically, scientificallyand binding as law on all humans; (2) God under the primary attribute of holiness in the most moralistic and puritanical sense, and also omnipotent in every sense whatsoever, dominating all nature and human history, controlling and manipulating all events and experience in order to bring glory to HIMself; (3) the human as completely subservient to God in every respect, required to obey Gods laws, in order to honor God, or suffer the consequences for disobedience; (4) humans as completely disobedient, fallen and evil, from birth (that is, genetically sinful)sinners by nature, since the sin of the first two literal people in the garden of Eden, and unable to obey Gods laws; (5) humans as deserving punishment and, therefore, damned for dishonoring God by their disobedience of divine laws, a state from which they cannot escape on their own; (6) God as wrathful toward humanity, requiring the condemnation of humans to Hell for offending HIS holiness, thus revealing divine justice; (7) Jesus Christ as the substitute for the sinful and damned human, the one on whom God inflicts punishment for the dishonor that all humanity has inflicted on God through its sin, thus satisfying a debt to God or appeasing the divine wrath over the human offense; (8) the human saved from its eternal destruction by the penal-substitutionary death of Jesus, thus gaining Gods forgiveness for its sin; (9) Christian discipleship as obedience of the laws of Christ, the Bible; (10) the church as gathered Christians, under the authority of the pastor, who resides directly under the authority of Christ and receives from Christ the definitive interpretations of the rules for human life from the Bible that he (the pastor) delivers to his congregation. /5/
My description of the SBCs fundamentalist doctrinal system does not constitute an exhaustive catalogue of all their doctrines. Further, my description of that doctrinal system might resemble several doctrinal commitments that many of us also share. Nevertheless, this particular system of ideas carries several dangerous concepts and symbols in a larger metaphorical field that support and legitimate, if not encourage, dangerous and damaging political, social, and moral behavior, military-like domination, and oppressive activities.
 
B. Strategy and Tactics of Aggression
and Oppression
To understand the true character of the present situation in the SBC, one must understand the process by which this situation for the SBC originated. In the mid-1970s, a group of fundamentalist Baptists in the Southern Baptist Convention stated that they perceived liberalism in the seminaries, colleges, universities, and other denominational agencies and institutions either owned by the SBC or indirectly affiliated with the SBC through state Baptist conventions. Specifically, the fundamentalist Baptists claimed that this so-called dangerous liberalism took the form of attacks on the truth of the Bible by professors and denominational leaders, undermining the authority of scripture, by teaching that there are various errors in the biblical texts. Such, at least, was the primary battle cry of those who initiated this conflict in the SBC.
 
1. Strategy: "Going for the Jugular"
Acting on the basis of the claim (I hesitate to call it a conviction based on real evidence.) that liberalism had infected the denomination, the most prominent leaders in this fundamentalist movement outlined a strategy with which they aimed to solve this problem and rid the denomination of the so-called dangerous liberal drift away from affirming the Bible as "inerrant." /6/ Two principal architects developed their strategy as early as 1976: Paige Patterson, then president of Criswell Bible College in Dallas, Texas, and Paul Pressler, a state appeals court judge in Houston, Texas.
Deciding to work within the convention for change, Patterson and Pressler studied carefully the SBCs constitution and by-laws. On the basis of their findings, they developed the components of their strategy. (1) As their first step, knowing that the president of the SBC had extensive appointive powers, initially they set as their immediate goal to elect persons, in sympathy with them and committed to their agenda, to the presidency of the SBC for at least four, and as many as ten, consecutive years. (2) Second, once such persons occupied the SBCs office of presidency each year, those fundamentalist presidents would appoint fundamentalists to both the Committee on Resolutions and the Committee on Committees, the latter of which nominates people to key committees, especially the Committee on Boards (later, the Committee on Nominations). (3) Third, then, the Committee on Boards or Nominations would nominate other fundamentalists as trustees and directors to fill vacancies as they occurred on the various governing boards of the conventions institutions and agencies. (4) Fourth, these nominations would come to the messengers of the convention in session, where the messengers would elect these nominees to the various committees and boards. (5) Fifth, to insure the success of the previous element in their strategy, Patterson and Pressler would organize networks of fundamentalist pastors and laypeople to inform as many uninformed Baptist pastors and church-members about the issuesat least as the fundamentalists had construed and slanted the issuesand urge or help the people to attend the meetings of the convention. In this way, eventually, Pressler and Patterson claimed that they would restore some parity or equity in the SBC: claiming to mean that the fundamentalist perspective would have equal representation on the governing boards of the SBCs institutions and agencies and, therefore, in the classrooms of educational institutions, especially in the classrooms of the SBCs six seminaries. /7/
Understanding that the governing boards of trustees decided the policies, practices, and philosophies of the SBCs agencies and institutions, Pressler and Patterson developed a strategy that could eventually load those boards and governing bodies with fundamentalists who would enact the fundamentalist agenda and credenda in each institution and agency of the SBC. Pressler, in a well-known and oft-quoted news-story, described their fundamentalist strategy as "going for the jugular."
The term "jugular," of course, refers to either one of two large veins in the throat or neck that carry blood from the head back to the heart. Pressler understood quite well that, if the fundamentalists controlled the presidency of the SBC, then they could control the governing boards of the SBCs institutions, including its seminaries, which the fundamentalists understood as the source of the conventions theology. Pressler stated this again in the language of his own corporate mentality: "the bottom line is trustees." /8/
Not accidentally did Paul Pressler employ that violent metaphor: "going for the jugular." As many Baptists would learn from experience, this phrase often became much more than metaphor. This phrase suggests the image of a wild beast lunging toward another animal, intent on the kill, tearing with its sharp fangs at the veins in the neck of its victim. Precisely such an image, however, accurately depicts the course of events that occurred during the next twenty years in the SBC. The fundamentalists who conceived this strategy could not offer a better description of their attitudes in this movement than the image voluntarily adopted by Pressler. One correctly describes, as did Pressler and Patterson themselves, this as their "strategy," a word that comes to English from the combination of two Greek words, which together mean "to lead an army." Generals develop strategies to defeat their enemies. Such was the attitude of those who purportedly wanted to save the SBC from liberalism. The public announcement of their strategy in April of 1980 amounted to the Mein Kampf of Paige Patterson and Paul Pressler. /9/
 
2. Tactics of "Conservative Resurgence" (Takeover)
How did fundamentalist Baptists implement their strategy? What were some of the primary tactics that they employed as they took these four steps year after year for two decades? Here I will answer those questions, identifying several of these tactics and giving a few examples to illustrate their operation. Due to limitations of time, I can neither discuss all of the tactical operations of this movement in the SBC nor even develop full descriptions of each one that I will present to you. Nonetheless, a few examples will certainly demonstrate my claims about the character of this movement in the SBC and, therefore, help to illuminate the current situation among Baptists in the U.S. in relation to the larger Baptist tradition.
a. First Tactic: Politicizing the Organization and People. As a first tactic in the fundamentalist strategy, Patterson and Pressler politicized the organization and people of the SBC. Never in the SBCs previous history had any group manipulated the political mechanisms and structures of the SBC so blantantly by using the methods of secular politics. Certainly, Patterson and Pressler can defend themselves with the claim that they worked within the existing structures and guidelines, as well as on the basis of the established common practices, of the convention. Neverthless, not only did their claims not remain consistently true for this movement; neither does it represent anything other than the letter, not the spirit, of the SBCs constitution. Historically, the SBC had operated on the basis of open and honest debate during its meetings, perhaps passionately and raucously at times; still, as a community with a commonly understood moral core to its deliberations, pre-meeting-maneuvering always remained minimal and was never accomplished with widespread organization.
The fundamentalist politicization of the SBC, however, took on a different attitude altogether. For example, rather than informing all Baptist leaders and people about the issues and impending decisions and struggle, Patterson and Pressler developed an informational and organizational network among the fundamentalist elements of the SBC, in order to concentrate their strength and to motivate those forces for conflict. This included mailings to vast numbers of people and pastors, organizing large groups for attendance at the SBCs meetings, and even busing large groups of messengers to the conventions meetings. When ballots were cast during the election of the president and officers of the convention, often many more ballots were cast than official messengers in attendance at the meetings. During the meetings themselves, the fundamentalist moderators of the meetings often would even disregard or violate basic parliamentary procedures to manipulate and press the assembled messengers to adopt the fundamentalist agenda any given year. At times, Baptists who asked permission to speak against specific fundamentalist proposals were simply not allowed to speak. Furthermore, often when dissident Baptists did speak, they were ridiculed by the leaders on the platform or interrupted by shouts or insults from groups of fundamentalist Baptists on the floor.
b. Second Tactic: Raising a Battle FlagInerrancy of the Bible. The fundamentalists used a second tactic often employed by those seeking to attract large numbers of people to a cause: they found a rallying cry or a battle flag by which they could incite the emotions of the people, especially the emotions of fear, righteous indignation, and zeal for the cause. This rallying slogan was the constant declaration of the fundamentalist belief in the complete truth and absolute authority of the Bible, summarized by the fundamentalists as the "inerrancy" of the Bible. This theory about the Bible rests on the assumption that the Christian scriptures are the very words of Gods own self, dictated to the writers verbatim by the Holy Spirit. This perspective, of course, contradicted even the SBCs own doctrinal statement, The Baptist Faith and Message, which stated that, although the Bible "has . . . truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter" and "was written by men divinely inspired," the Bible "is the record of Gods revelation of Himself to man." In other words, the Bible records testimony to divine self-revelation, but is not the event of that divine self-revelation itself.
The fundamentalists claimed that their theory of the inspiration and nature of the scriptures represented exactly the historic position of the SBC and that many of the key leaders and theologians of the SBC had now departed from this historic commitment. Although they did repeatedly inject quotations by Baptist inerrantists from the SBCs history, they just as carefully avoided quoting the larger body of historic statements by the SBC on the inspiration and nature of the scriptures, formal confessional statements that explicitly avoided professing or affirming the theory of the Bibles inerrancy.
c. Third Tactic: Re-Construction of the SBCs History and Heritage. The second tactic helps to disclose a third fundamentalist tactic: the fundamentalists systematically began to re-construct the SBCs actual history, manipulating and distorting that history to reflect a perspective that would provide support for their claims, specifically, that their own doctrinal perspectives represented a return to the "old paths" of Baptist life, paths that moderate leaders of the SBC had purportedly abandoned or betrayed. This tactic represents one of the most dangerous of the fundamentalist tactics, because it works by using part of the truth as the whole truth. With this tactic, the fundamentalists construed their own movement in the SBC as a "reformation" or, to use their preferred self-designation for the movement, "the conservative resurgence." Therefore, this sort of activity can easily influence the average Baptists who know very little about the history of Baptist theology. When one examines even only the SBCs official pronouncements about the inspiration and nature of the Christian scriptures, one sees an entirely different history.
d. Fourth Tactic: Demonizing Opponents and Selecting Scapegoats. As a fourth method or tactic, the fundamentalists used rhetoric, often based on no genuine evidence or developed from gross misrepresentations, to characterize individuals within the SBC as "liberals" who were destroying the SBC. Like those who produce propaganda in all post-totalitarian systems, the fundamentalists in the SBC identified those who differed from them theologically or politically as enemies to the convention. According to the fundamentalist leaders, the SBC needed to remove such liberals, because they endangered the health of the denomination. In a number of cases, the fundamentalists demonized their opponents, even suggesting that their opponents were not Christian or were Satanic. In 1979, for example, during the Pastors Conference that preceded the convention in which the fundamentalists won their first presidential victory (electing the fundamentalist, Adrian Rogers, to the presidency), both Adrian Rogers and James Robinson preached sermons on Satan. In those sermons, these preachers identified so-called "liberal theologians" as the danger that the convention must eradicate. They did not name individuals from this group of theologians or even give any real evidence. They simply claimed that these theologians existed and were undermining the faith of men and women who were preparing for ministry. This category of dangerous theologians became the great enemy, against which the fundamentalists could rally masses of conservative people. For example, in his sermon, James Robinson made the following comments:<DIR>
<DIR>

My friends, we are in a battle. And we are in a battle with satan. . . . Satans major attack is on the Word of God. . . . You want to know what my savior said about those of you who sow one seed of doubt in the mind of a precious little believer? . . . He said its better for you that you had a millstone tied around your neck and you were cast into the sea than that you ever hindered one of these, the least of my little children. . . . I tell you the minds of our young people are important. And wed better not poison them. . . Have you ever noticed how many of these instructors of higher learning look like theyve been embalmed with the fluid of higher education? I dont know why they think they have to come out and sit on the platform and look like a God-forsaking corpse. . . . My friend, I wouldnt tolerate a rattlesnake in my house. I wouldnt tolerate a snake of any kind in my house, I wouldnt care how pretty he is. And I wouldnt tolerate a cancer in my body. I want you to know that anyone who casts doubt on the word of God is worse than cancer and worse than snakes. . . . If you tolerate any form of liberalism, any form of skepticism of the word of God, any belittling of the importance of the word of God and its doctrines, if you belittle the importance of biblical New Testament evenagelism, you are the enemy of God. Satan, my friend, is attacking the word of God. . . . "Sometimes even professing Christian leaders and teachers depart from the faith and teach things that subvert the faith they once possessed or professed. If we control the schools, we can remove him" /10/</DIR>
</DIR>

Well, I can give numerous other examples from a large list of examples that continue to appear in the SBC to illustrate the employment of this tactic. But these examples serve to illustrate my claim forcefully enough. The fundamentalists demonized and made goblins of good conservative Baptist Christians, by intentionally or ignorantly misrepresenting their perspectives, in order to frighten the masses of Baptist people and to enlist large groups of uninformed Baptists to change the SBC to a fundamentalist denomination. In effect, the fundamentalist leaders made a group of Baptists into scapegoats and, by doing so, made them ungodly, apostate targets for persecution, against whom their persecutors might justify almost every wrong. This was reminiscent of the witch and heresy trials and inquisitions during the medieval period, when the church tortured and burned witches and heretics to save their souls from hell and to purge the church of evil.
e. Fifth Tactic: PropagandaControlling Information and News. Fundamentalists learned very soon that their actions would attract legitimate public criticism. As a result, when those criticisms did appear in the news, the leadership of the fundamentalist movement began to complain of unfair journalistic treatment. Thus, as soon as the fundamentalists had placed a majority of trustees on the governing board of the SBCs news-service, Baptist Press, they fired the main champions of free speech and the major critics of the fundamentalist aggression and misdeeds: Dan Martin and Al Shackelford. Fundamentalists now had control of the major source for information about the SBC. As a consequence, the fundamentalist began to utilize a fifth tactic: management of the news and systematic development of propaganda to disseminate to the churches of the SBC. Once the fundamentalists gained control of the Baptist Sunday School Board (which produced literature for Christian education), they also enlisted the resources of that agency in the service of this tactic as well. Now the Baptist people and the world began to learn from Baptists in the SBC only that which the fundamentalist oligarchy wanted them to learn.
f. Sixth Tactic: Elimination of Diversity in Perspective. A sixth tactic became very clear early in the SBCs conflict with the fundamentalists: No matter how conservative a Baptist pastor, layperson, or denominational leader or employee might be, if that person disagreed with the direction, methods, doctrine, or attitude of the fundamentalist movement, the fundamentalists assassinated the character of that person in various ways. For the fundamentalists, only those people could remain in the community as employees and leaders who maintained unswerving allegiance to the fundamentalist agenda and credenda. This tactic produced two horribly damaging results: first, when courageous Baptists refused such idolatrous loyalty, immediately the fundamentalists selected those persons for elimination from their places of faithful service in the denomination; second, witnessing the perpetration of such atrocities on their colleagues and friends forced other Baptists into silence in order to protect themselves and their families from similar fates.
g. Seventh Tactic: Enlisting Spies and Instituting Systems of Rewards. Fundamentalists employed a seventh tactic as they implemented their strategy to control the Southern Baptist Convention: as unbelievable as it may sound, the fundamentalists recruited spies in the various institutions and agencies of the Southern Baptist Convention, who would report to the upper eschelon of the fundamentalist leadership, and who would receive for their services various kinds of denominational rewards. For example, fundamentalist leaders recruited various students in all of the SBCs seminaries to tape record conversations of discussions in courses and conversations with seminary professors and even seminary presidents. Although the fundamentalist recruiters explained this as necessary to safeguard the orthodoxy and purity of the SBC, those who participated in these activities did so surreptitiously and deceptively. The victims of this practice learned of it from students who had the integrity to refuse to participate in this evil. Once the recordings or reports returned to the fundamentalist leaders, portions of taped discussions and lectures were often taken completely out of context, in order to prove a given denominational employee or professor to be teaching contrary to the SBCs articles of faith, specifically to be teaching outside the theory of biblical inerrancy.
I give you one example from my own experience. I learned from a student (indirectly) that the chairperson of the board of trustees at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, where I was teaching at the time, instructed some of the student interns at the church where the trustee served as pastor, to get some dirt (meaning to find or manufacture something theologically or morally reprehensible) on Jeff Pool. (An interesting note to that story: That trustee from SWBTS later resigned both from the seminarys Board and from his position as pastor, because his church discovered some "dirt" about his own activities.)
Now, why would good Baptist Christian young people participate in such conspiracies? They did so, and continue to do so, precisely because they received promises of various rewards. Another story from my own personal file: a young man came to Southwestern into the Ph.D. program. That young man took me to lunch, essentially applying to work as my graduate assistant. Because I could sense that something was not quite right about him, I decided to hire a different doctoral student as my assistant. Approximately four years later, when this man graduated with a Ph.D. in theology, our department decided against hiring him to teach with us at SWBTS. I learned from friends that this young man had written a slanderous letter about me to Paige Patterson. Patterson had written a letter to the president of SWBTS to have me removed. Shortly after that event, the administrators of SWBTS began to harass me. That process lasted almost two years, until they finally forced me to leave the seminary. That young man later received a teaching appointment at one of the SBCs seminaries.
h. Eighth Tactic: Pure Deception. I will end this lengthy catalogue with an eighth tactic used by the fundamentalists: sheer deception or lies! Recently, Keith Parks, former President of the SBCs Foreign Mission Board has recently declared this quite pointedly: according to Parks, " This whole takeover was based on deceit, on lying, on cheating. " As a matter of fact, Parks went even further, saying that, once the fundamentalists had complete control over the SBC by the end of the meeting in 1990, " [t]hey [the fundamentalists] sat there and bragged about the fact that they had lied and cheated and deceived. " Those who led the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC told Parks that he could stay in his position as president of the SBCs missionary agency, if he would support their political activity and goals: Parks refused and resigned from his position. /11/
Let me give you one more example of the deception that the fundamentalists employed almost programmatically to attain their control of the SBC. Early in the fundamentalist campaign, in 1985, Paige Patterson published the following remarks:<DIR>
<DIR>

Conservatives do not seek "control" of the Southern Baptist Convention, only the reducing of the bureaucratic structure and the return of the convention to the people. Conservatives do not insist that every decision and policy conform to their own thinking. They do not insist that everyone use the word "inerrant" to describe his view of the Bible. They do seek genuine parity in the faculties and administrations of the schools and insist that employees of the convention never, under any circumstances, call into question any statement of the Bible or say anything that might be construed as disbelief in the veracity of the Scriptures. /12/</DIR>
</DIR>

In spite of these claims, in a paper that he delivered in 1994, Paige Patterson made the following admission publicly:<DIR>
<DIR>

In the early days of the controversy, conservatives pointed to the unassailable fact that there was no parity in the six seminary faculties. Some had no professing inerrantists on board, and none had more than a few. Moderates later discovered that conservatives did not desire "parity" but rather believed that every professor in Southern Baptist Convention seminaries should be an inerrantist. Some moderates felt that they had been deceived. However, conservatives never asked for parity. They simply noted that moderates, who claimed to be inclusive, in fact had been exclusive and doctrinaire. /13/</DIR>
</DIR>

By comparing Pattersons two sets of published remarks, we can see that they contradict one another. Apparently, Keith Parks is right. Such examples can be added to this one, literally, by the thousands. Nonetheless, because of the unprecedented character of such behavior in the SBC, this strategy and these tactics for operating in the SBC completely took the traditional Baptist leadership by surprise. While the turn of events perplexed and troubled the denominational leaders, the people in the pews, with no history of experience against such bad will from their Christian leaders and fellow Baptists, simply could not believe, and still many millions do not believe, that their leaders have done such things or even possess the capacity for such behavior.
Nevertheless, investigate these things for yourselves, if you do not believe the testimony of others. The fundamentalists who seized control of the SBC most certainly planned their strategy and implemented it through the tactics that I have mentioned briefly, as well as many others. These procedures have become commonplace within the SBC, the standard mode of operation among its fundamentalist leaders and institutional employees.
I have hoped, and certainly many others with and before me, that these fundamentalist leaders (such as Adrian Rogers, Paige Patterson, Paul Pressler, Al Mohler, Timothy George, Mark Coppenger, Richard Land, and numerous others) would have experienced, like other Baptist ministers historically, some "agonies [or pangs] of conscience" about their own sins rather than expressing so many of their scruples about everyone elses weaknesses and faults. /14/ Alas, this has not occurredin public expression, at least.
 
II. Consequences of Oppression among Baptists
in the SBC
Instead, the fundamentalist institutionalization of the strategy and tactics of oppression and persecution in the SBC have produced a variety of negative consequences that also characterize the contemporary situation for Baptists in the U.S. These consequences appear on a variety of levels and in numerous dimensions. Again, I will not claim to catalogue all of them. I will briefly discuss only five consequences that will disclose further the characteristics of the larger situation for many Baptists in the U.S.
 
A. Spiritual Exhaustion of the Baptist People
First, the Baptist people who remain in the SBC, those who have departed from the SBC, and most others who have observed the history of the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC are exhausted and disgusted by this seemingly endless display of un-Christian behavior. The fundamentalists initiated the processes of their purge in the SBC in 1979. To this day, the fundamentalists continue to exclude people from denominational service who resist the fundamentalist political agenda and theological credenda. For example, one of my best friends at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Doug Dickens, this very year, has suffered a similar termination. Why? Because he spoke against the legalism and dogmatism and politics of the fundamentalists in the SBC. This clearly shows that the fundamentalists have institutionalized religious violence. They have not only defeated the traditional and mainstream Baptists, but they have also begun to exhaust their own children with the processes of persecution and oppression. They have incarnated the demon of warfare, not the spirit of peace. As recently as 1995, Adrian Rogers (the first president elected through the fundamentalist strategy and tactics) chided Baptists: <DIR>
<DIR>

Now I want to say to every mothers child in this building tonight, there is a battle, and if you dont get in it, you have sinned against the Lord. . . .Now I hear a lot of people say, Well, you know I just dont want to get involved. No man has a right to be at peace when his brothers are at war. Weve got a job to do, and it is a big job. Weve been in a battle against unbelief, against liberalism, against modernism. And its a battle. Now we have a young generation who say, Well, its time to stop fighting. The fight will never be over until Jesus comes. . . . There is a mandate for victory. Were at war, and we will always be at war. /15/</DIR>
</DIR>

In spite of such fundamentalist resolve, the people have had enough of the warfare. Many young Baptists were born at the beginning of this conflict and have only the dynamics of this conflict to define for them the meaning of being Baptist. Many of those young people have begun to leave Christianity and even religion altogether, rather than identify themselves as Baptists. The exhaustion from this religious oppression will continue to rob the SBC and even other newer Baptist groups of the youth that represent the future of Baptist heritage.
 
B. Institutionalized Religious Violence
The fundamentalist aggression has produced another consequence, especially for Baptists in the SBC. Because the fundamentalist leaders used various degrees of violence, through practicing totalitarian strategy and tactics, against their supposed enemies in the Convention, this oligarchy must maintain an atmosphere of power as domination, lest they lose their battle-won seats of control to others. In order to retain the spoils of war, which they fear that others want to take back from them, the fundamentalists have institutionalized religious violence. As the ancient Roman knight and writer, Decimus Laberius (105-43 B.C.E.), said, ""Necesse est multos timeat quem multi timent"; "He must fear many, whom many fear." /16/ The fundamentalists continue to prowl for enemies within their own ranks and, when discovering or creating (both meanings of the Latin term, "inventio") such opponents, also continue to exercise their totalitarian tactics within the convention. These aggressive religious fanatics do not seem capable of curbing their war-like behavior. Like the people of God in the wilderness who desired meat instead of divine manna, and like the apostle Paul says about sinners still lost in the bondage of sin, the fundamentalist victors have received exactly that which they desired. They have acquired the SBC by the sword; now they live by the sword! Paul Ricoeur describes the way in which love transforms argumentation into a "capacity for conversation," precisely that capacity which checks the shift of argumentation to violence. /17/ The fundamentalists who control the SBC have institutionalized religious violence and have lost access to the capacity for conversation!
 
C. Legalistic Morality and Dogmatic Orthodoxy
The fundamentalist aggression has produced a third set of consequences: an increasingly legalistic morality and dogmatic orthodoxy. Baptists in the SBC have traditionally emphasized, on the one hand, that Christians not only receive their salvation by grace, but that they live their discipleship by grace as well. Nevertheless, each year, the SBC produces and adopts more resolutions that define an increasingly legalistic moralism. Not trusting the Spirit to encourage each Baptist to follow the right direction, the fundamentalists legislate or attempt to legislate all human activity. On the other hand, despite their full trust in Jesus Christ as savior, Baptists in the SBC have resisted every form of credal Christianity, claiming that they have "no creed but Christ." When the SBC formed in 1845, that conventions founding document records the founders motivation for forming the convention as a commitment to the "Baptist aversion to all creeds but the Bible." Nevertheless, following the pattern of the last two decades, the fundamentalist leaders of the SBC continue to interpret more narrowly and define more precisely each Christian doctrine in various kinds of doctrinal statements, thus instituting an increasingly rigid and dogmatic orthodoxy by which to measure all aspects of the SBC.
This twin consequence signals the disintegration of genuine "faith" as relationship with a living God: first, defining discipleship as obedience to law, turning the Christian life into a legalistic moralism; second, defining faith as informational knowledge, not experiential knowledge in the biblical sense, turning Christian faithfulness (or trust and trustworthiness) into a dogmatic orthodoxy.
 
D. Fragmentation of Baptist Communities
The character of the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC has obviously produced a fourth consequence: fragmentation of Baptist communities. The fundamentalist violence in the SBC literally scattered the Baptists who once participated together in cooperative missionary activities, evangelistic outreach, social ministries, and educational endeavors. Two other Baptist groups originated from this destruction: first, the Alliance of Baptists; and, then, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowshipthe organization that initially came to the aid of the International Baptist Theological Seminary (while it was still located in Switzerland), when the SBC decided not to support the school any longer. More importantly, Baptists in numerous state conventions have organized themselves to resist various fundamentalist designs to seize control of state Baptist conventions. Such efforts to resist the fundamentalists have also incited fundamentalists in the various state conventions to form their own fundamentalist state organizations. Baptist communities continue to fragment as a result of the fundamentalist assault on the SBC.
I give you one example of state resistance to the larger SBC. The Baptist General Convention of Texas presently contributes millions of dollars to support the work of the SBC, the largest amount contributed to the SBC by any Baptist organization in the U.S. In light of the SBCs abuse of power, people, and resources, presently the BGCT has formed a task force to study the SBC, precisely with a goal toward disassociating from the SBC and discontinuing contributions to the SBC. I participated on June 19th in a three-and-one-half-hour meeting to which the president of the BGCT had invited me to discuss the state of fundamentalist control of the seminary in which I formerly taught: SWBTS. In that same meeting, my friend, Molly Marshall also spoke about the situation at SBTS. I cite this example only to emphasize just how seriously and extensively Baptist communities are fragmenting at present.
 
E. Loss of Effective Baptist Christian Witness
to the World
I mention briefly a fifth consequence of fundamentalist aggression in and by the SBC: the loss of effective Baptist Christian witness in the world. Even though fundamentalists in the SBC have incited this destructive, unrelenting, un-loving, un-Christian, and even ignorant conflict, the course of this history during the last two decades reflects itself upon all Baptistsin the U.S. certainly, but globally as well. Very simply, this means that the rest of the world only perceives the dynamics of this conflict as characteristic of Baptists and their religion. The most important negative implication of this perception is that, because of this unholy fundamentalist "holy war," outside observers no longer see the Christian gospel as genuine good news. The destructive goals, strategy, and tactics of the fundamentalists in the SBC have severely compromised the Baptist witness to the riches of Christ for a world in need. This most certainly has also crippled the traditional strong emphasis among Baptists on missionary and evangelistic efforts. As one indication of this problem in the U.S., many Baptist churches have changed the names of their congregations, intentionally removing the name "Baptist" from their signs and buildings. This also means, despite the many resolutions passed by the SBC on moral and social issues each year, thatagain, due to the horrible nature of this conflictBaptists have also lost moral, political, and culturaland most assuredly spiritualcredibility and relevance for most people in the U.S., including the educated and the leadership of the right-wing Republican party.
 
F. Loss of and Search for Authentic Baptist Identity
I mention a sixth and final consequence of the fundamentalist use of totalitarian strategy and tactics. Among Baptists in the U.S., the dynamics of the fundamentalist aggression in the SBC has produced an awareness that Baptists have lost a sense of the nature of their distinctive Baptist approach to living as Baptist Christians and communities. Thus, this conflict in the SBC has motivated all Baptist groups, fundamentalist and traditionalist alike, to study the specifically, not only historic Christian doctrines that Baptists hold in common with all Christian communities, but especially the Baptist character of historically central Baptist doctrines such as the following: the priesthood of all Christians, the autonomy of the local church, religious liberty, and the competence of every person before God. As you might guess, in the U.S., the different Baptist groups have not agreed on how to understand these doctrines. Nonetheless, the positive side of this consequence is that Baptists have renewed their study of and commitment to these aspects of their faith in ways never before imagined. Nevertheless, instead of emphasizing the historic meanings of these four Baptist principles, the fundamentalists in the SBC have tended to limit or weaken these basic commitments in their resolutions and doctrinal statements. The classic illustration of this claim occurred at the meeting of the SBC in 1988 in a resolution that the convention adopted, entitled "On the Priesthood of the Believer." Among other things, that resolution limited the priesthood of every believer in order to increase the authority of pastors over the members of their churches. /18/ Again, precisely such flagrant misrepresentation of the Baptist heritage has generated a resolve by the victims of the fundamentalist persecution and oppression to teach and disseminate clearly the historic basic Baptist perspectives on basic Christian doctrines and understandings of community.
 
III. Prospects for the Future
In light of the current situation among Baptists in the U.S. and the potential of features from that situation to affect other Baptist communities in the world, I offer a few brief comments on the prospects for the future. Only a genuine seer or perhaps a psychic can predict the future. I do not possess such gifts or calling. I find it difficult, quite often, even to discern accurately the features of the present that I experience. Nevertheless, I offer a few observations about possibilities that Baptists in the U.S. (and in other parts of the world as well) might expect.
In a world in which so many forces threaten the daily security of so many people, we may expect numerous re-appearances of fundamentalist efforts to wrest control of the conventions and institutions from traditional Baptists. What can Christians expect in the future from fundamentalism and similar movements in Baptist life? We may expect many of the same things that we have already experienced and seen.
From such totalitarian religious systems, expect all of the tactics that I have listed and many more. Especially, however, expect such aggressive and unloving movements to use and manipulate the Baptist heritage and resources themselves to accomplish goals and realize aims that contradict the very heritage that fundamentalists employ for this purpose. To say this another way, expect wolves in sheeps clothing!
Fundamentalists will mask and camouflage their meanings and intentions with the language of Zion, the language of genuine piety. Even worse than the seven deadly sins (envy, wrath, greed, gluttony, pride, sloth, and lust) is the perversion of the seven virtues (and, therefore, the masking or camouflaging of the seven deadly sins): (1) wisdom as both a fixed set of cognitive propositions to which one assents mentally as absolute knowledge, as well as cleverness, arrogance, and craftiness in politics, social ethics, and morality; (2) courage as cruel domination, oppression, or bold bullying of weaker foes; (3) justice as retribution and vengeance, or an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth; (4) temperance as identification with and affirmation of the most conservative values of secular culture, while identifying those norms as unequivocally biblical and Christian; (5) faith as pretentious confidence in ones own perspective on reality as a whole, summarized by a body of propositions about God, self, and the universe; (6) hope, based on exact knowledge of the features of heaven, hell, and all last things, as pretentious confidence in the knowledge of both ones own blissful destiny and the destiny of all other reality as well; (7) love as the enforcement of ones faith (creed) and practice (morality) on the remainder of the world. At the basis of these perversions of the seven virtues, however, lie the seven deadly sins: envy, wrath, greed, gluttony, pride, sloth, and lust! On the surface, then, the fundamentalist worldview appears clear, moral, theologically consistent, confident, and faithful: in such clothing, it deceives many good and trusting Baptist Christians. Yet, that worldview remains insidious, in the sense that the fundamentalist totalitarian system conceals a beast, a threat coiled, lying in wait to devour its own adherents. Remember, even Jesus was "betrayed by a kiss." /19/
Beyond this, I only know one other thing for certain about the future. If Baptists want to preserve and transmit their heritage to future generations and to exercise that heritage authentically in historic Baptist communities, they will use the very resources of that heritage to resist such totalitarian strategies and tactics.
 
Conclusion:
Guidelines for Meeting Future Challenges
As I conclude my presentation, then, I offer several guidelines for meeting the realities of that future. I want to clarify something, however: I intentionally use the term "guidelines" not the word "tactics," precisely because I do not want to repeat the offenses of the fundamentalists themselves by suggesting that we must approach this task in any other way than in the spirit of Christ. So, please understand the following comments as prudential guidelines for genuine Christian fidelity to Christ in the face of such evil challenges.
 
A. Remember the Providence of God
First, remember the providence of God in the darkest hours of attack, victimization, and oppression. Perhaps, as my teacher in systematic theology at SWBTS said more than twenty years ago, providence is best viewed in retrospect. In the darkest hours following my struggles with SWBTS, I found myself teaching for one semester at IBTS. In those months, I had no idea of what might follow, of what my future might hold in the way of job or ministry. I felt as if I had been exiled and even abandoned by all sources of sustenance, support, and advocacy. As I expressed it at that time, I felt as if I had been dropped and was falling into the void of nothingness. As I discovered, however, that drop into the void landed me safely, solidly, and securely in the arms of God or, as a river in my homeland says it in Spanishin Los Brazos de Dios! Keep your eyes on the light in the midst of darkness, even when it seems to shrink to a pinpoint like one of the dimmest stars in the moonless inky sky. A verse from a song by a rock band of the late 1960s and 1970s, Credence Clearwater Revival, genuinely expresses this convictioneven though the song has nothing to do explicitly with this spiritual insight: "Put a candle in the window; / but I feel Ive got to move. / Though Im going, going, / Ill be comin home soon, / long as I can see the light!" /20/
 
B. Strengthen and Nurture Genuine Baptist Community Now
Second, with all the means at your disposal, strengthen and nurture genuine Baptist community now. Prepare Baptists to meet adversity. A variety of practices can help to do this. Initially, this may mean gathering into communities of diversity, in which you affirm many gifts and many voices. Emphasize the church as the people of God, the body of Christ with many ministries that strengthen the entire church. Emergat populus! I translate this Latin phrase as "may the people emerge," in order to address Baptists with a petition, an invitation, a hope, or an anticipation. For this reason, I have expressed this petition or anticipation in the subjunctive mood rather than in the imperative mood: as an entreaty or a supplication rather than as a command or a mandate. Traditionally, Baptists have proceeded together in their divine callings on the basis of individual convictions and voluntary decisions, cooperating by consent not under coercion of any kind. /21/ Hence, inasmuch as Baptists hope to preserve the genuine Baptist substance, they will similarly proceed together in the future. For too long and in too many ways during recent Baptist history, the SBCs fundamentalist leadership has submerged the majority of Baptists or the people themselves, along with the SBCs genuine historic perspectives, beneath the waves of the chaotic fundamentalist misconstrual of the Baptist substance, under the violent flood of the fundamentalist agenda and credenda. At this moment of opportunity, a Baptist sentiment invites repetition. May the people emerge: Emergat populus! May Baptists emerge from the waters of domination that threaten to drown them with their own convictions, gasping for the breath of liberty in Christ that will deliver and sustain them.
In places, the Baptist people continue to emerge. If resistance to oppressive fundamentalist forces constitutes weakness among Baptists, I pray for such weakness to increase. Such weakness indicates the authentic Christian refusal to use or to submit to sinful forms of power. "Because the foolishness of God is wiser than humans, and the weakness of God is stronger than humans," as the apostle Paul describes legitimate Christian power, "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised, God has chosen, the things that are not, that He might nullify the things that are, that no man should boast before God." /22/ Empowered by this divine Spirit, may Baptist people emerge into Christs bright, fresh, and broad liberty.<DIR>
<DIR>

As the book of Jude says, "But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith; praying in the Holy Spirit; keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life." /23/
(1) May all Baptist Christians and churches remember that the living God in Christ as attested by the Holy Spirit is the ultimate authority for Baptists: not ecclesiastical leaders of any kind, however coercive such leadership may be; not credal documents or statements, however full of either anathema or false humility they may be; not even the bible itself, however sacred, certain, sufficient, and authoritative that book most assuredly is for Baptists.
(2) May all Baptist Christians remember that all Christians have received from God a shared priesthood: exercising that priesthood with the professional ministers of their churches, not under them; and not trading their birthrights in Christ to any pastor or leader either from spiritual sloth or for mere intellectual and emotional security.
(3) May all Baptist Christians and churches realize that their decisions not to resist totalitarian political processes and events, their decisions to avoid conflict, their minimizations of theological thinking and dialogue only allow the most unscrupulous leaders politically and theologically to dominate and, thus, to diminish the organizations that the churches continue to support.
(4) May all Baptist Christians and churches call Baptist leaders, as well as the trustees, administrators, and employees of denominational institutions and agencies, to accountability for their actions: refusing blindly to trust words alone; considering deeds and their effects; and investigating the issues for themselves.
(5) May all Baptist Christians and churches withdraw their support from any organization, when those entities have departed from the historic Baptist perspectives: especially when the leadership of those organizations refuses to serve as the churches desire, and when the leadership has instituted, and persists in operating with, non-congregational polity.
(6) May all Baptist Christians and churches remember that their support, and theirs alone, has created and continues to sustain the organizations in which they participate.
(7) May all Baptist ministers and pastors learn and teach the complete and genuine history of Baptists to the churches that they serve.
(8) May all Baptist ministers and pastors honestly inform their churches about the un-Christian events in the larger organizations that the faithful and sacrificial contributions of the churches and their members have actually financed and continue to sustain.
(9) May all Baptist ministers and pastors address courageously and honestly the fundamentalist leaders who have manipulated and deceived Baptists.
(10) May all Baptist ministers and pastors resist the temptation to ignore fundamentalist aggression and domination, in order to fulfill personal ambitions for larger churches, for prizes of denominational employment, or for honors of denominational leadership.
(11) May all Baptist leaders remember to whom they really owe their ultimate loyalties: God alone, not one another
(12) May all Baptist leaders trust in God alone, even when bullied with manipulative forms of piety into consenting to decisions or perspectives which their spiritual instincts refuse, remembering that God supplies the contexts and resources for genuine life and ministry.
(13) May all Baptist leaders refuse to compromise their sensitivity to the Holy Spirits guidance, by accepting bribes of any kind: whether those bribes appear as recommendations for positions in large churches, as appointments to boards of trustees, or as employment opportunities in any Baptist organization.
(14) May all Baptist leaders refuse to use employment opportunities either to bribe or to threaten other Baptists in any way.
(15) May all Baptist leaders refuse to do evil, in order to accomplish any goal, however worthy such a goal may appear or may pretend to be.
(16) May all Baptist leaders refuse to consider and to promote themselves as members of an elite group or a spiritual aristocracy.
(17) May all Baptist leaders remember to serve and to cooperate in ministry, rather than to command or to coerce, either openly or manipulatively, those with whom they minister.
(18) May all Baptist leaders genuinely receive and learn from all priests in the body of Christ, refusing to identify the model of a North American corporate executive with the roles to which God has called them, and with which God has entrusted them, through election by other Baptists.
 </DIR>
</DIR>

C. Clarify, Practice, Preserve, and Transmit
Baptist Identity Now
Third, clarify, maintain, and transmit the contours of Baptist identity now. Do not wait until fundamentalists or other religious totalitarians begin to co-opt or hijack the Baptist heritage before clarifying the basic or distinctive principles of Baptist identity: religious liberty, the competence of all humans before God, the priesthood of all Christians, and the autonomy of every local church. All of these basic convictions or commitments arise from one reality: the freedom that God gives to us through Christ. Remember the words of the Roman philosopher, Seneca (4 B.C.E65 C.E.): "Liberty cannot be gained for nothing; if you set a high value on liberty, you must set a low value on everything else." /24/ Clarify the meaning of these commitments; then practice and preserve those principles. Also, and just as importantly, make conscious and creative efforts to transmit that Baptist Christian identity to the next generations: teach them to your children by example and explanation, in deed and in language. By all means, though, remember to do this now. Do not wait until the fundamentalists have launched their campaigns before you prepare yourself, your communities, and your children.
 
D. Employ the Resources of Christian Scripture
in Spirit, Rather than Letter
Fourth, in the face of such religious totalitarianism, employ the riches and resources of the Christian scriptures themselves for support in the struggle: encouragement, wisdom, comfort, even power to resist the devil (that the devil might flee from you). Most importantly, remember the way in which Jesus summarized the whole body of scriptures when asked about the greatest commandment. Use the scriptures in their spirit rather than in letter, in the way that Jesus summarized their meaning. According to Jesus, God makes only two major claims on human life, claims to fulfill the two purposes for which God created humans: (a) to love God with ones whole self; and (b) to love ones neighbor as oneself (Matthew 22:34-40; Mark 12:28-31; Luke 10:25-37; cf. John 13:34-35; 14:15-31; 15:1-17). To use the scriptures for any other purpose than to realize or to promote these two ends, according to Augustine of Hippo, completely misses the whole point of scripture. Augustine long ago perceived this hermeneutical principle in the teaching of Jesus: "Quisquis igitur scripturas diuinas uel quamlibet earum partem intellexisse sibi uidetur, ita ut eo intellectu non aedificet istam geminam caritatem dei et proximi, nondum intellexit"; "[w]hoever, therefore, thinks that he understands the divine Scriptures or any part of them so that [those scriptures or ones use of them] does not build the double love of God and of our neighbor does not understand [the scripture] at all." /25/ If Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, discloses God as love (1 John 4:8, 16), then the essence of being Christian means actualizing human life as love. Although love takes many forms, as Baptists who aim to resist the hate, fear, anger, narrowness, and even ignorance of totalitarian religion, we cannot err by following another bit of advice from Saint Augustine: "dilige, et quod vis fac"; "love and do what you will." /26/
NOTES
/1/. The spirit of the PATEFO (Pankrac Theological Forum) 2000 Conference, as reflected in its theme, contrasts strikingly with the general theme of Calvinist Baptists who have contributed significantly to the fundamentalist conquest of the Southern Baptist Convention. See, for example, the theme for one issue of their journal: "Southern Baptists at the Crossroads: Returning to the Old Paths," Special SBC Sesquicentennial Issue: 1845-1995, Founders Journal no. 19/20 (Winter/Spring 1995). The most obvious element of this contrast, of course, displays itself in the focus on two opposite moments of temporality: the theme of the conference looks to the future, while the Calvinist Baptist journal looks to the past.
/2/. See the following studies and collections by "moderate" Baptists in the Southern Baptist Convention: Robison B. James, ed., The Unfettered Word: Southern Baptists Confront the Authority-Inerrancy Question (Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1987); Robison B. James and Gary Leazer, eds., The Takeover in the Southern Baptist Convention: A Brief History (Decatur, Georgia: Baptists Today, 1989); Bill J. Leonard, Gods Last and Only Hope: The Fragmentation of the Southern Baptist Convention (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990); Walter B. Shurden and Randy Shepley, eds., Going for the Jugular: A Documentary History of the SBC Holy War (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1996); Walter B. Shurden, ed., The Struggle for the Soul of the SBC: Moderate Responses to the Fundamentalist Movement (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1993); Robert U. Ferguson, Jr., ed., Amidst Babel, Speak the Truth: Reflections on the Southern Baptist Convention Struggle (Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 1993); Grady C. Cothen, What Happened to the Southern Baptist Convention? A Memoir of the Controversy (Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys, 1993); idem, The New SBC: Fundamentalisms Impact on the Southern Baptist Convention (Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys, 1995); Fisher Humphreys, The Way We Were: How Southern Baptist Theology Has Changed and What It Means to Us All (New York: McCracken Press, 1994); John F. Baugh, The Battle for Baptist Integrity (Austin, Texas: The Battle for Baptist Integrity, Inc., 1996); Jeff B. Pool, ed., Sacred Mandates of Conscience: Interpretations of The Baptist Faith and Message (Macon, Georgia: Smyth and Helwys Publishing, 1997); idem, Against Returning to Egypt: Exposing and Resisting Credalism in the Southern Baptist Convention (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1998). Also, see the following publications by more conservative and fundamentalist Baptists: Paul A. Basden, ed., Has Our Theology Changed? Southern Baptist Thought Since 1845 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994); James C. Hefley, The Truth in Crisis: The Controversy in the Southern Baptist Convention (Dallas, Texas: Criterion Publications, 1986); idem, The Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention (Hannibal, Missouri: Hannibal Books, 1991); David S. Dockery, ed., Southern Baptists and American Evangelicals: The Conversation Continues (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1993); Paul Basden and David S. Dockery, The People of God: Essays on the Believers Church (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1991).
/3/. See Havels distinction between classical dictatorships and post-totalitarian systems in his well-known essay: Václav Havel, "The Power of the Powerless," in Living in Truth, ed. Jan Vladislav (London: Faber and Faber Ltd., 1986), 37-41.
/4/. See Pool, Against Returning to Egypt, 294-98.
/5/. I begin where the fundamentalists begin, with their doctrine of scripture, followed by the other major doctrines, including the doctrine of God. Not accidentally does one hear echoes of the theologies of Calvin and Anselm. Elsewhere, see my more extensive analysis of this doctrinal system: Pool, Against Returning to Egypt, 139-269.
/6/. See fundamentalist discussions of this drift: e.g., Paige Patterson, "Stalemate," ("Document 31: Paige Pattersons Article in The Theological Educator" [1985]) in Going for the Jugular: A Documentary History of the SBC Holy War, ed. Walter B. Shurden and Randy Sheply (Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1996), 143-48.
/7/. Toby Druin, "Patterson Group Seeks Long Range Control of SBC" ("Document 8, News Story: Patterson-Presslers Long Range Goals" [Baptist Press, 21 April 1980, 1-5]) in Going for the Jugular, 48-53; James and Leazer, Takeover in the Southern Baptist Convention, 15-19.
/8/. Tom Miller, "Committee Appointments the Key" ("Document 11, News Story: Presslers Going for the Jugular Statement" [Religious Herald, 18 September 1980, 8-10]), in Shurden and Shepley, Going for the Jugular, 56-61).
/9/. Of course, I allude to Hitlers master plan: see Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (München, Germany: NSDAP, 1940). Also, see Druin, "Patterson Group Seeks Long Range Control of SBC," 15-19.
/10/. James Robinson, "Satans Subtle Attacks," in Going for the Jugular, 24-33. Robinson quotes from the following book: James Frost, Baptists: Why and Why Not.
/11/. Tim Palmer, "Parks Claims SBC Changed by Deception," Baptist Standard 112 (29 May 2000), 3, 7.
/12/. Paige Patterson, "Stalemate," Theological Educator, Special Issue, The Controversy in the Southern Baptist Convention, ed. Fisher Humphreys (1985): 10 (emphasis mine).
/13/. Paige Patterson, "Anatomy of a Reformation The Southern Baptist Convention," 17 November 1994, TMs [photocopy], pp. 15-16, Special Collections, Roberts Library, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Fort Worth, Texas (emphasis mine). Even James Henry, in his presidential address to the SBC in 1996, after acknowledging his own commitment to the theory of biblical inerrancy, indicated his suspicion of this possibility. "We are making strides in widening the participation level across a wider range of our Southern Baptist family, but there are a few who demonstrate a need to continually manipulate the procedures for denominational service and control beyond the call extended to Southern Baptists several years ago to return us to biblical authority. That call was a unifying factor for us, and that noble intention we salute. But to carry it beyond this, as a few seem determined to do, cast [sic] suspicion on the original intent" (James Henry, "The Southern Baptist Convention: Disintegration, Stagnation or Revitalization?" June 1996, TMs [photocopy], p. 8, Presidential Address, Southern Baptist Convention, New Orleans, Louisianna) (emphasis mine).
/14/. See John G. Crowleys reference to such experiences among early North American Calvinistic Baptists: John G. Crowley, Primitive Baptists of the Wiregrass South: 1815 to the Present (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1998), 26.
/15/. Quoted in Baugh, Battle for Baptist Integrity, 71.
/16/. The Anchor Book of Latin Quotations, compiled by Norbert Guterman (New York: Doubleday, Anchor Books, 1966), 78, 79.
/17/. Numbers 11:4-20; Romans 1:18-32. See Paul Ricoeur and André LaCocque, Thinking Biblically: Exegetical and Hermeneutical Studies (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998), 135-36.
/18/. "Resolution No. 5On the Priesthood of the Believer," in Annual SBC [1988], 69.
/19/. Matthew 26: 47-50. See Bob Dylan, "With God on Our Side," verse 3.
/20/. Credence Clearwater Revival, "Long as I Can See the Light," on Creedence Clearwater Revival: Chronicle, arranged and produced by John Fogerty (Berkeley, California: Fantasy Records, 1976), track 15, Compact Disk.
/21/. The SBC has consistently refused to use coercion, vehemently insisting instead on the operation of consent, to produce cooperation. The following documents illustrate this claim vividly. "Preamble and Constitution of the Southern Baptist Convention," in Proceedings of the Southern Baptist Convention in Augusta, Georgia, 8-12 May 1845 (Richmond: H. K. Ellyson Printer, 1845), 3-5 [Article 2]. "The Southern Baptist Convention, To the Brethren in the United States; to the congregations connected with the respective Churches; and to all candid men," in Proceedings of the Southern Baptist Convention in Augusta, Georgia, 8-12 May 1845 (Richmond: H. K. Ellyson Printer, 1845), 18-19. "Pronouncement on Christian Union and Denominational Efficiency," in Annual of the Southern Baptist Convention: Fifty-Ninth Session in Nashville, Tennessee, 13-18 May 1914; from "Report of Commission on Efficiency to the Southern Baptist Convention," in "Proceedings," Fourth Day, Morning Session, May 16, Item 97; ed. Secretaries, Southern Baptist Convention (Nashville: Marshall and Bruce Company, 1914), 75-76. Fraternal Address of Southern Baptists (Southern Baptist Convention, 1920), 8-9, 14-15. "Defining the Work of the Convention," in Annual of the Southern Baptist Convention: Sixty-Eighth Session in Kansas City, Missouri, 16-20 May 1923; from "Report of Executive Committee," in "Proceedings," FridayEvening Session, May 18, Item 86; ed. Secretaries, Southern Baptist Convention (Nashville: Marshall and Bruce Company, 1923), 74. "Report of Committee on Baptist Faith and Message," in Annual of the Southern Baptist Convention: Seventieth Session in Memphis, Tennessee, 13-17 May 1925; in "Proceedings," Second DayAfternoon Session, May 14, Item 53; ed. Secretaries, Southern Baptist Convention (Nashville: Marshall and Bruce Company, 1925), 74. "A Pronouncement upon Religious Liberty," in Annual of the Southern Baptist Convention: Eighty-Fourth Session in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 17-21 May 1939; in "Proceedings," SaturdayMorning Session, May 20, Item 82 ed. Executive Committee, Southern Baptist Convention (Nashville: Southern Baptist Convention, 1939), 115. "Reply to World Council of Churches," in Annual of the Southern Baptist Convention: Eighty-Fifth Session in Baltimore, Maryland, 12-16 June 1940; in "Proceedings," FridayAfternoon Session, June 14, Item 66; ed. Executive Committee, Southern Baptist Convention (Nashville: Southern Baptist Convention, 1940), 99. "Statement of Principles," in Annual of the Southern Baptist Convention: Eighty-Ninth Session in Miami, Florida, 15-19 May 1946; in "Proceedings," ThursdayMorning Session, May 16, Item 27; ed. Executive Committee, Southern Baptist Convention (Nashville: Southern Baptist Convention, 1946), 39. "Committee on Baptist Faith and Message," in Annual of the Southern Baptist Convention: One Hundred Sixth Session in Kansas City, Missouri, 7-10 May 1963; in "Proceedings," Thursday Morning, May 9, Items 112-124; ed. Executive Committee, Southern Baptist Convention (Nashville: Southern Baptist Convention, 1963), 275, 279. Baptist Ideals (Nashville: Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1963). 20-21, 30-31).
/22/. I Corinthians 1:25, 27-29 NAS.
/23/. Jude 20-21 NAS.
/24/. Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Epistulae morales, CIV, 34.
/25/. Augustine De Doctrina Christiana 1.36.40; idem, On Christian Doctrine, trans. D. W. Robertson, Jr., Library of Liberal Arts (Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1958), 30 (1.36.40).
/26/. Augustine Tractatus in epistolam Joannis 7.8; idem, "Seventh Homily: I John 4:4-12," from "Ten Homilies on the First Epistle General of St. John," in Augustine: Later Works, ed. John Burnaby, Library of Christian Classics: Ichthus Edition, ed. John Baillie, John T. McNeill, and Henry P. Van Dusen (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1955), 316 (7.8).</BODY>
</HTML>