. . . .Also, I would say that given the fact that the SBC has undergone the conservative resurgence/fundamentalist takeover of 1960-1979, a fundamental change has occurred in the SBC so that today, I’m not sure if the old categories that Southern Baptists used to advocate still apply today.
Indeed, there has been a “conservative resurgence/fundamentalist takeover of 1960-1979” as you noted. I commented on this in several past threads.
Nov. 2012 CAF Thread: ? For past or present baptist osas Post #4
. . .
How the SBC Has Changed by Dr. Rick McClatchy & Dr. Bruce Prescott:
The Patterson-Pressler coalition changed the role of the pastor in Baptist church life.
“. . . .
The Patterson-Pressler coalition insists that the pastor is the unquestioned ruler of the church. W. A. Criswell said, “Lay leadership of the church is unbiblical when it weakens the pastor’s authority as ruler of the church . . . a laity-led church will be a weak church anywhere on God’s earth. The pastor is ruler of the church.” In 1988 the Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution affirming that the pastor was the ruler of the church. . . .”
“. . . . .**The Patterson-Pressler coalition expects seminary professors to indoctrinate their students to a very narrow theological viewpoint. **Adrian Rogers (the first SBC president elected by the Patterson- Pressler coalition) said,
“If we say pickles have souls, they (seminary professors) better teach that pickles have souls.” Seminary teachers who refused to comply were fired, sought employment elsewhere, or took early retirement. Their replacements are indoctrinators who have usurped the place of the Holy Spirit and now presume to make Southern Baptists accountable for living according to the interpretations and convictions of the Patterson-Pressler coalition. . .”
Copyright © 2001 MAINSTREAM BAPTIST NETWORK P.O. Box 6371 Norman, OK 73070-6371 (405) 329-2266. Last modified: February 19, 2001.
Link. . . .
April 2012 CAF Thread: What do Baptists believe? Post #171
The Southern Baptist Convention has taken a sharp conservative swing in the last few decades.
The Baptist Faith and Message was revised in 2000 (BFM2000), and the revision is not without concerns, as expressed by
The Center for Baptist Studies, Mercer University, 1400 Coleman Avenue, Macon, GA:
"Some have built-in suspicions of BFM200 because it was crafted by the “party” who succeeded in a two-decade effort to take control of the SBC. One Baptist editor describes the implied scenario behind this distrust:
Twenty-one years ago a master plan for the repositioning of the SBC would have looked something like this. Elect SBC presidents sympathetic to fiercely conservative principles. Appoint like-minded trustees to govern SBC institutions. Hire to the staffs of convention agencies employees who buy into the SBC’s rightward shift. Create a new SBC infrastructure that reflects a more conservative direction. Rewrite the history of this era with the victor’s spin. Revise the SBC theological statement, the 1963 BFM, to codify the new, more fundamental, direction of the SBC. With the release of the report of the Committee on the BFM last week the final stage of this reimaging is set in motion (Religious Herald, May 25, 2000, p.8)."
Link
See also:
Link
Also, I really get frustrated with religious groups that refuse to acknowledge that they are what they are. This whole “we’re evangelical not evangelicals” to me smells of what Sigmund Freud called “the narcissism of minor differences.”
Yet, we have the religious freedom to describe our beliefs and accept or reject labels. I call myself Anglo Catholic/Anglican Catholic. Yet, Catholics may argue that I am not Catholic.
Southern Baptists have the same rights when it comes to the Evangelical label, and their responses will vary. Some will say unequivocally they are “Evangelicals.” Others will say, we are “evangelical, but not Evangelicals.”
The variation in the way Baptists see themselves was clearly demonstrated on the
christianforums.com Baptist thread "Are Southern Baptists Evangelicals:
In Post #7, BrookGF mentioned Foy Valentine, and quoted from
The Future of Southern Baptists as Evangelicals: “In the pre-1979 Southern Baptist world, many Southern Baptists understood themselves as evangelical or evangelistic, but not as evangelicals.”
In Post # 10, WinBySurrender expressed serious offense by my reference to Baptists being “evangelical to a degree,” even though I was asking for clarification of the issue.
So, two Baptists on the same thread expressed sharp differences in how they see themselves when it comes to the Evangelical label.
Interesting discussion.
Anna