Resurgence vs. McWorld? American Culture and the Future of Baptist Conservatism Russell D. Moore

Russell D. Moore is Assistant Pro- Political scientist Benjamin Barber argues cannot ignore Hankins’s central thesis. fessor of Christian Theology at The that the “culture wars” are a global phe- Resurgent conservatives must ask whether Southern Baptist Theological Seminary nomenon. In his view, the American evan- Hankins and others are right to suggest where he also serves as executive gelical biblical inerrantist and the Islamic that Adrian Rogers, in 1979, and Ronald director of the Carl F. H. Henry Institute suicide bomber both seek a “jihad” of Reagan, in 1980, were swept into office by for Evangelical Engagement. He is a fre- theological certainty fueled by common the same forces of cultural reaction. Does quent speaker and commentator on the anxiety about “McWorld,” a secularizing the Southern Baptist Convention find its theological issues facing this generation culture propelled by economic globalism. unifying consensus in a common under- of Southern Baptists. His first book, Why Thus, for Barber, orthodox religionists of standing of an evangelically orthodox, I Am a Baptist, co-edited with Tom J. all theological stripes react to the culture, distinctively Baptist, and confessionally Nettles was published by Broadman and wanting “to be born again so they can be robust theology? Or does the SBC cohere Holman in 2001. born yesterday,” before the confusion and around its response to the social and uncertainty of a frightening postmodern political upheaval of the culture wars? The era.1 Could it be then that the controversy answers to such questions do not simply between conservatives and moderates in illuminate the root causes of the contro- the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) versy, or of the truth or falsity of the mod- grows from similar angst within Baptist erate critique of the “political” motives of conservatives about a secularizing Ameri- the SBC’s resurgent conservative wing. can culture? Instead, the answers to these questions Baylor University historian Barry Han- carry far-reaching implications for the kins tests such a thesis in his long-awaited future of theology and cooperation among monograph, Uneasy in Babylon: Southern Southern Baptist conservatives. Baptist Conservatives and American Culture.2 Hankins surveys the key players of the SBC Baptist Conservatism controversy and concludes that the “con- and the Culture Wars servative resurgence” was made possible Hankins does not deny that the SBC by Baptist anxieties about the demise of the controversy was, at least at some level, cultural hegemony of southern civil reli- theological. Hankins’s question, however, gion. Thus, for Hankins, the “culture war” is “why did these leaders decide that activism of SBC conservatives is not the theology was so important, and why did result of their theological convictions. so many Southern Baptists agree that if the Instead, the “culture war” informs and pro- theology of the denomination were not pels the theological convictions. narrowed and more clearly defined, the While there is much historical value to denomination would lose its ability to Hankins’s work, there is much more at function as an instrument of God in the stake here. Southern Baptist conservatives world?”3 For Hankins, this is because “con- 32 servative leaders came to believe that Hankins’s obvious gift for historical nar- America, including the South, was in the rative. He offers an often riveting portrayal throes of a cultural crisis that necessitated of the controversy, often with intriguing a warlike struggle against the forces that insights on key “battles” along the way, were hostile to evangelical faith.”4 Alarmed mostly gleaned from interviews with by an increasingly decadent culture, SBC moderate and conservative Baptist leaders. conservatives moved “to end the harmony Significantly, Hankins usually avoids the between the SBC and its host culture,” temptation of partisan revisionism, a wel- which meant capturing the denomination come departure from the “There Once Was from the moderates “in order to create a a Camelot” genre of moderate Baptist new and very different posture diametri- analyses of the SBC controversy.9 While cally opposed to the dominant institutions conservatives will disagree with much of of American culture.”5 what Hankins sees as at the root of their For Hankins, the culture war explains theological concerns, they will appreciate not only the resonance of the resurgence the fact that, unlike other moderate critics, message among grassroots Baptists, it also he does concede that inerrancy was more explains why, despite longstanding mod- than just a Machiavellian ploy to seize erate predictions to the contrary, the denominational power and execute the conservative coalition in the SBC survives culture war.10 Hankins rightly notes that beyond the inerrancy controversy. Where there is a real theological and philosophi- inerrancy once served as a cohesive center cal gulf between the left and right wings for conservatives, Hankins contends, now of the Southern Baptist controversy that fit “the cultural program is the glue that is James Davison Hunter’s categories of holding conservatives together.”6 In short, “orthodox” and “progressive” combatants conservatives cannot split apart over theo- in the “culture wars” of contemporary logical issues—such as predestination or American political discourse.11 millennialism or church polity—because Thus, for the most part, Southern Baptist they are “too busy saving American, if not conservatives will find serious reflection on saving sinners.”7 Thus, for Hankins, Bap- the resurgence, not simple caricature, in tist conservatives and moderates might Hankins’s treatment. Hankins seeks to really disagree about inerrancy, religious understand the conservative vantage point liberty, gender roles, and church state on key issues such as abortion, sexuality, matters, but all the disputes reveal a more gender, race, and church/state relations. At fundamental underlying dispute about the same time, he notes the theological how Baptists should relate to the larger complexity of the resurgent conservative culture. The question was whether South- leadership—a complexity rooted in differ- ern Baptists would remain “the center of ent doctrinal and cultural influences and gravity” in southern culture, or whether presuppositions. It is simply not accurate they would join other evangelicals in their to say that conservatives—from Albert call to a culture war.8 Mohler to Richard Land to Adrian Rogers There is much in Hankins’s work with —are all in lockstep with the Christian which SBC conservatives will agree. What- Coalition, or with each other, on every ever one’s vantage point, the reader will issue.12 Hankins further recognizes, contra not be bored by this treatment, thanks to much moderate Baptist rhetoric, that the 33 conservative SBC leadership does not con- modation to a declining culture. SBC sist of “independent fundamentalists” in conservatives were concerned, first of all, the tradition of J. Frank Norris.13 Instead, about epistemology, soteriology, and Hankins rightly identifies much of the ecclesiology—concerns that were seen all influence on SBC conservatives as coming the more clearly against the backdrop of from contemporary evangelical theolo- the “culture wars.” In short, there is little gians such as Carl F. H. Henry and Francis chance that the kind of theological Schaeffer. reformation called for by Baptist conserva- Even so, there are several irredeemable tives could be anything other than counter- flaws in Hankins’s understanding of Bap- cultural. tist conservatism and American culture. Hankins falters when he attempts to prove Baptist Confessionalism that biblical inerrancy is important for Bap- and the Culture Wars tist conservatives ultimately because of the Hankins finds the key to the SBC con- culture war. Could it be that Southern Bap- troversy in what may be his most pro- tist engagement in the culture war is foundly true assertion in this volume, instead, at least in part, rooted in the namely that “Southern Baptist conserva- recovery of a theologically-coherent tives seek to fashion an identity that is more worldview? It is true that, as Hankins confessional than tribal.”14 Nonetheless, notes, the resurgent conservatives within Hankins errs by assuming that conserva- the SBC have sought to confront what they tives started the controversy with a bare perceive to be a collapsing American commitment to biblical inerrancy, apart culture. Hankins fails, however, to grasp from a more comprehensive confessional fully that conservatives view these cultural commitment. This blind spot causes Han- skirmishes as at their root profoundly theo- kins to argue that conservatives sharply logical. As such, it is impossible to jump moved from rhetoric about “inerrancy” back and forth between biblical inerrancy while out of power to pursuing, when in and the “culture war” flashpoints of con- power, “a certain hermeneutical approach troversy mentioned in Hankins’s work. In to the Bible, meaning that under conserva- order to understand the interplay between tive rule, only those with very similar Baptist conservatism and American cul- interpretations will be eligible for office in ture, one must see the controversy as a the SBC.”15 And yet inerrancy was never a struggle to regain a distinctively Baptist stand-alone issue. Conservatives were confessionalism, rooted in the SBC’s found- explicit from the beginning about the kind ing era and informed by contemporary of theologically confessional SBC they American evangelicalism. One must also believed would reflect the convictions of understand the conservatives’ zeal to pro- the churches and the historic mission of the tect a distinctively Baptist conversionism, denomination. Indeed, a more politically- which they believed imperiled by cultural subtle movement might have feared that shifts. Finally, one must understand the conservatives were too upfront with their conservatives’ vision of a distinctively Bap- agenda, fighting a multi-front battle on tist cooperation, which they believed was issues ranging from women’s ordination destroyed by a theological shift in the SBC to pastoral authority to the sanctity of illustrated by the denomination’s accom- human life.16 34 An understanding of the role of Baptist confessional theological tradition that confessionalism in the conservative resur- recognized Scripture as “truth without any gence would help to explain more fully mixture of error.” 23 Well into the contro- what Hankins rightly identifies as the versy, Mark Coppenger led the SBC Execu- tremendous influence of the thought of tive Committee to defend the conservative postwar evangelical theologians such as resurgence via a pamphlet series that Carl F. H. Henry and Francis Schaeffer on connected conservative concerns on a host the SBC conservative movement.17 Han- of theological issues with the historic theo- kins contends that Southern Baptist con- logical tradition of the SBC.24 The efforts of servatives rallied around biblical inerrancy Mohler to reverse the theological direction because it was “the central issue of evan- of Southern Seminary were set in the gelicalism.”18 Thus, he concludes, the context of a return to the confessional com- “neoevangelical influence became attrac- mitments of the institution’s founding tive to Southern Baptist conservatives confession of faith, the Abstract of Prin- because of its emphasis on cultural engage- ciples.25 Conservatives would argue, then, ment.”19 This argument would have more that what attracted them to the Henry/ traction if the conservatives sought to Schaeffer tradition was not, first of all, its impose what Hankins calls the “Henry/ cultural engagement, but its defense of Schaeffer grid” of inerrantist orthodoxy on evangelical orthodoxy against the contem- an essentially “creedless” denomination. porary challenges of existentialism, But the controversy was never about nihilism, and naturalism. In Henry and inerrancy as a stand-alone issue. Instead, Schaeffer, they heard first the voices of conservatives insisted that biblical author- Dagg and Boyce and Manly and Criswell— ity was part of a full-orbed theology of voices in continuity with a confessional confessional orthodoxy that could be Baptist commitment to biblical inspiration traced back to the very beginnings of the and authority.26 The contemporary evan- Baptist movement. Paige Patterson’s gelical movement resonated with an defense of inerrancy, after all, was rooted already existent confessional Baptist in his doctoral work on the theology of John theology. L. Dagg, the first writing Baptist theologian Hankins is correct to suggest that the in the South, and a dogged biblical “Henry/Schaeffer grid” helps to explain inerrantist.20 The first scholarly defense of the cultural belligerence of the SBC con- biblical inerrancy from the conservative servatives. He is less successful, however, camp traced the concept through the con- in probing just how deeply theological the fessional theological tradition of historic call to evangelical engagement was. In Baptist theology.21 Timothy George sought Henry and Schaeffer, conservatives discov- to reclaim for conservatives the mantle of ered a worldview theology that explored founder James P. Boyce, whose views of the the implications of evangelical theology for inerrancy of Scripture were part of a much all of life. The postwar evangelical move- larger set of confessional commitments.22 ment, led by Carl Henry’s 1947 manifesto One of the earliest organizations of the The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamen- resurgence dubbed itself the “Baptist talism, did not diagnose a cultural problem Faith and Message Fellowship” in order to and seek to find a theology to meet it.27 emphasize the continuity with a Baptist Indeed, that was Henry’s critique of Prot- 35 estant liberalism’s failed attempts at a vative resurgence, however, from the very “Social Gospel.”28 The silence of conserva- beginning was never a “Christianity Today” tive Protestants, for Henry on matters of style of conservatism (unless perhaps one race and economics, and, for Schaeffer, after means the early conservative years of Chris- Roe vs. Wade, was not a “cultural” matter tianity Today under the editorship of Carl at all. For Henry, the social and political iso- Henry). lation of Protestant fundamentalism was Even before his election as president, the result of reducing their theological con- Mohler maintained, along with other con- cerns to the disputed “five points” of the servatives, that inerrancy alone was not Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy of enough to sustain theological renewal in the 1920s.29 Fundamentalist withdrawal the SBC.33 Mohler was clear from the was based, Henry argued, in an unbiblical moment of his election that he would theology of the Kingdom resulting in a pursue a confessional renewal at the semi- truncated eschatology of paralyzed pessi- nary that would include a commitment to mism and a truncated soteriology that saw the exclusivity of Christ, the sanctity of all the mission of the church as simply rescu- human life, and a complementarian under- ing individual souls from a world hurtling standing of male/female relations—an toward Armageddon.30 For Schaeffer, evan- agenda that was met with hostility from gelical silence in the face of Roe vs. Wade the faculty’s old guard from the moment was tied to an evangelical appropriation of his election.34 This was consistent with of a “Platonic spirituality” that valued the over ten years of the conservative resur- immaterial “soul” at the expense of the gence articulating the exact same concerns body.31 The preeminent issue for these theo- on precisely the same issues in publications logians was maintaining the theological and Convention resolutions. The “compro- cohesion of the evangelical movement. The mise” cadre of pre-Mohler evangelical cultural ambiguities were evidence of an faculty members was just that—a compro- even more problematic theological ambi- mise between two competing visions for guity. It is this “worldview” understand- the future of Southern Baptist theology. ing of the relationship between theology When conservatives rallied against Nash- and all of life (including culture and poli- ville because of liberalism in the seminar- tics) that resonated with the confessional ies, they did not have David Gushee in orthodoxy of Baptist conservatives. mind as the answer to the concerns of Hankins’s confessional myopia here the churches. 35 The confessionally anemic skews his understanding of the battle convictions of the “Christianity Today evan- between moderates and conservatives for gelicals” were outside the mainstream of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary grassroots Baptist conservatism from the after the election of conservative R. Albert very beginning. Mohler, Jr., in 1993. Hankins contrasts the Hankins is also wrong to see the “cul- conciliatory “Christianity Today conserva- ture wars” as the axis of cohesion among tism” of the “evangelical” faculty members conservatives since the resurgence. Cul- appointed near the end of moderate con- tural conflicts represent theological issues trol at Southern with the culturally-reac- and fit into a much larger confessional tionary “World Magazine conservatism” of framework of Baptist theology. Hankins is the Mohler Administration.32 The conser- correct that the national media has focused 36 predominately on the cultural aspects of, ate denominational elite following the say, the Baptist Faith and Message revisions culture at some disturbing points. of 2000. But the theological clarity achieved With such the case, most Baptist conser- in the updated confession of faith was not vatives would agree with much of the way limited to what Hankins would define as in which Hankins describes the resur- “culture war” issues. Southern Baptists also gence’s approach to issues such as abor- clarified their stances on a host of issues, tion, gender roles, religious liberty, and such as the substitutionary nature of the race. But, they would want to maintain that atonement, the exclusivity of Jesus Christ, these fronts were not primarily “culture exhaustive divine foreknowledge, and the war” battles, but a theological clash of nature of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. visions, both with an increasingly hostile Clearly, the level of theological consensus secular culture and with that culture’s in the SBC is not limited to issues of “cul- sympathizers within Baptist ranks. They tural engagement,” even if these issues would likewise agree with Hankins that could be abstracted from their place in Bap- the culture set the agenda on these issues. tist confessionalism. Cable news networks Nonetheless, they were issues that could might not be interested in the SBC consen- not be ignored. The culture raised the sus on the foreknowledge of God, but this issues, but Baptist conservatism sought to does not render this consensus any less sig- answer them within the context of its own nificant for the future of Baptist theology. confessional and conversionist theological worldview. Baptist Conversionism This explains what Hankins cites from and the Culture Wars moderates as a perceived “obsession” with Confessional fidelity was never, how- issues of human sexuality—particularly ever, an end to itself. The concern for bibli- homosexuality and gender identity.37 This cal orthodoxy is wedded to a conver- charge is not unique to conservative sionism forged in the fires of Southern Baptists, however. In the current cultural Baptist revivalism, a conversionism that context, it has been leveled against tradi- emphasizes the priority of personal regen- tionalists in virtually every Christian eration and forensic justification through communion. As Newsweek religion editor faith alone in Christ alone. For conserva- Kenneth Woodward has observed about tives, theological liberalism in Southern the culture’s regnant anti-Catholicism: Baptist agencies was about more than political control; it centered on whether And then there is Sex. The Catholic Church also takes sex and gender theological liberalism would destroy evan- seriously—maybe too seriously— gelism and missions in the denomination which means it holds that here, too, by transforming both the content of the norms ought to be observed. But on matters of sex and gender, our soci- gospel message and the urgency of the ety has by now become normless— Great Commission task.36 The “culture a society that, on both the popular war” served as a warning to Southern Bap- and elite levels, also takes sex too seriously, but for very different tists that they were not winning the “Bold reasons. Here there really is a cul- Mission Thrust.” While conservatives saw ture war—and institutionally, the Catholic Church is the biggest, easi- the evangelistic task imperiled by a secu- est target.38 larizing culture, they also saw the moder- 37 Much the same could be said for the way Fellowship (CBF) for this “intolerant” the SBC’s resurgent conservatives view move, but the SBC simply restated a their “obsession” with abortion, homo- Christocentric view of conversion that had sexuality, gender identity, and related been at the heart of the assumed “Grand issues. But, this is because Southern Baptist Compromise” of generations of Baptist theology finds itself against an increasingly Great Commission efforts. This is indeed a insistent—one might even say conver- “culture war” issue, but it is, first of all, a sionist—message of sexual, reproductive, doctrinal concern that cuts to the core of and gender autonomy in the larger cul- Baptist identity and mission. ture.39 As one contemporary gay rights With this theological background in activist puts it, cultural acceptance of mind, it does not take an encompassing homosexuality “perfectly fits that Ameri- theory of American culture to explain why can social theology, that bedrock belief in Southern Baptists were outraged by such liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”40 things as moderate Baptist leader Cecil Southern Baptists are forced, therefore, to Sherman defending a “pro-choice” posi- confront one theology with another in tion on abortion because of the Baptist order to be heard with the message of the principle of voluntarism, or moderate ethi- gospel. cist Paul Simmons defending abortion The conversionist aspect of Baptist con- rights as an essential element of religious servatism comes into focus here as well. liberty—terms that were precious to Bap- SBC conservatives can never embrace a tists precisely because of their conversionist “welcoming and affirming” attitude soteriology.41 The silence, and even sup- toward homosexuality as long as they port, of moderate Baptists in the face of the believe that unrepentant homosexuals “culture of death” caused many Southern “will not inherit the Kingdom of God” Baptists to realize the chilling implications (1 Cor 6:9). For conversionist Southern Bap- of revisionist theology.42 When conserva- tists, such a stance would not just repudi- tive Southern Baptists hear Paul Simmons ate a clear teaching of Scripture about ridicule the rights of the “fetus” to life, they sexual morality, it would negate the realize that liberalism does not simply kill church’s responsibility to warn sinners lov- churches. Sometimes it kills people as well. ingly of the need for personal regeneration The conversionist impulse is likewise in order to find the life of the Kingdom of seen in Hankins’s one example of Baptist Christ (1 Cor 6:11). Indeed, to ignore a conservatism moving toward the culture: culture that deems homosexuality an the embrace of racial equality. Some unchangeable “orientation” would, for moderate scholars have suggested that the Baptist conservatives, be the height of anti- conservatives’ concerns about “plural- evangelism. Thus, this issue would com- ism”—abortion, gay rights, feminism, et pare with another of the resurgence’s al.—were grounded in a racist fear of the counter-cultural moves—namely the con- civil rights movement.43 Such assertions tinued insistence that Jewish people must simply do not bear the scrutiny of history, come to faith in Jesus Christ in order to be as conservative Southern Baptists have saved. Baptist conservatives were roundly called increasingly for racial reconciliation, condemned by the secular media and by even as American culture faces in some groups such as the Cooperative Baptist important respects increasing racial bal- 38 kanization. Why do Southern Baptist the lead on race relations, even before the conservatives, such as Richard Land, social activists of the World Council of repeatedly call for racial justice and the full Churches.46 Henry rightly argued that this inclusion of African-Americans in South- meant that evangelicals who resonated ern Baptist leadership? Why are African- with Graham’s Great Commission fervor American churches among the fastest must ultimately count the one who is growing segments of the Southern Bap- “spiritually a brother” as one who is tist—conservative Southern Baptist—con- “politically an equal.”47 stituency? Quite simply, this is because The same could be said of SBC conser- they treat race as a theological issue in the vatives with a theological commitment to context of the Great Commission. Thus, the global evangelization of all people groups. Baptist Faith and Message (2000) grounds A bigot who claimed commitment to bib- racial justice in two gospel commitments— lical authority could not consistently the imago Dei and the atonement of Christ.44 preach the common condemnation of sin- The civil rights movement served as a ful humanity (Rom 3:23), the common prophetic word to southern civil religion. offer of salvation in Christ (1 John 2:2), and But Southern Baptists carried the seeds of the common access to the Father through the destruction of segregation in their own the Holy Spirit (Eph 2:11-22). One could not conversionist zeal. This is seen in the civil consistently raise the biblical mandate of rights awakening of Southern Baptists’ God’s plan to unite in Christ those from most famous export to twentieth century every tribe, tongue, and language (Rev 5:9) parachurch evangelicalism, Billy Graham. and still maintain racial injustice at home. As Graham biographer William Martin Southern Baptist segregationists were notes, Graham, like other conservative condemned as hypocrites, not by social evangelicals of his day, made numerous liberalism, but by their own Lottie Moon public statements eschewing social action, Christmas offerings. usually relating his political inaction to his pessimistic dispensational eschatology and Baptist Cooperation the priority of evangelism over social and the Culture Wars reform. And yet he was surprisingly pro- Asking whether inerrancy or concern gressive on the question of race.45 Graham about cultural decay was the “real” issue insisted on the desegregation of his south- behind the SBC controversy is a bit like ern crusades, however, not because of an asking whether justification through faith elaborate political theory—and certainly alone or indulgences was the “real” issue not because of the cultural winds of white behind the Reformation. In fact, the abuse southern religion—but because of his of indulgences illustrated for Martin theology of the indiscriminate offer of Luther and his fellow Reformers just how personal salvation. Before Graham could far Rome had fallen from a biblical doctrine articulate the fact that segregation was of justification by grace alone through faith socially unjust, he could recognize that it alone in Christ alone. Contrary to Han- was serving as a stumbling block to the kins’s thesis, conservatives did not rally proclamation of the gospel to individual Southern Baptists around inerrancy in sinners. As Carl Henry notes, Graham’s order to fight a battle against abortion, the conversionist zeal led him actually to take sexual revolution, feminism, or any other 39 cultural phenomenon. Instead these issues writes that biblical inerrancy was “an crystallized the debate over larger theologi- effective tool in the hands of SBC con- cal and missiological questions of biblical servatives as they attempted to convince authority, the Great Commission, and the rank-and-file Southern Baptists that their prophetic role of the church in protecting moderate leaders and denominational those the culture deems not worthy of life. employees were too liberal.”49 Because, for The same can be said of SBC conservatives’ Hankins, the rhetorical use of inerrancy concerns over issues of gender, sexuality, was a means to an end in the “culture war” abortion, and religion in the public square. agenda, the conservatives used a “slippery This is why conservatives rejected what slope” argument that the denial of Hankins, citing moderate historian Bill inerrancy would lead to other grave Leonard, calls the “Grand Compromise,” theological errors.50 Hankins is right that which is defined as “a tacit agreement not conservatives were alarmed by what they to let the right, left, or any other ideologi- perceived as dangerous trends in Ameri- cal party take control of the denomina- can culture, and he is right that they tion.”48 Moderates pointed to the Foreign utilized a “slippery slope” argument that Mission Board’s “Bold Mission Thrust” as linked one’s view of biblical authority to a reason to end the controversy for the sake one’s view of issues like abortion and of evangelism and missions. At the same homosexuality. Conservatives, however, time, however, Baptist conservatives saw believe that history has proven that the Cooperative Program funds being spent to slope was indeed as slippery as they fund a Christian Life Commission direc- warned, if not more so. tor affiliated with the Religious Coalition This is seen in, for example, the contro- for Abortion Rights, a Baptist Joint Com- versy over gender roles in the SBC. mittee opposed even to voluntary student- Hankins points to the 1988 debate between led prayer at graduation ceremonies, and conservative Dorothy Patterson and mod- seminary professors who denied that erate Jann Aldredge-Clanton on women in explicit faith in Christ is necessary for sal- the pastorate. He notes that Aldredge- vation. Why “compromise” for the sake of Clanton’s argument “is not based on an evangelism and missions, conservatives analogy from the civil rights movement or asked, when the “compromise” itself may any secular progressive ideology but on well be destroying the theological founda- biblical exegesis and her reading of Bap- tions for evangelism and missions? For tist history.”51 He thus attempts to refute conservatives, the “culture war” issues Patterson’s claim that Aldredge-Clanton crystallized just how far apart they were was importing a contemporary feminist theologically from the moderates who agenda into her reading of the biblical text. were in charge of the denomination’s effort In so doing, however, Hankins ignores the to reach the world for Christ. The denomi- fact that, if anything, Dorothy Patterson nation’s left swing on these issues was underestimated just how slippery was the indicative for conservatives of an acceler- slope of Aldredge-Clanton’s “biblical” ating drift from confessional moorings and egalitarianism. Since 1988, Aldredge- from Great Commission passion. Clanton has argued that her egalitarianism With this in mind, it would seem that has led her to reject the notion of God as Hankins oversimplifies the issue when he “Father” and “Lord”—even leading her to 40 advocate worship of the goddess Sophia.52 “patriarchal” language such as that of the She advocates the use of the veneration “kingdom of God.”56 This is not to say that of a Sophia goddess idol—a refurbished gender egalitarianism inevitably leads to Virgin Mary statue with a sun and moon feminist revisionism of the doctrine of God, for hands—in a Texas Baptist Sunday but it is to say that conservatives and liber- school class. With “Sophia” centered als both agree that the gender debate is around a candle-decked altar, Aldredge- about deeper issues than simply who Clanton leads the worshippers in singing ordains whom to do what. to “Mother Hen” while flapping their arms In the same way, Hankins quotes Carey in wing-like motions.53 She further grounds Newman’s dismissal of a “consistent link- her feminist theology in a goddess tradi- age of issues of women in ministry and tion reaching back to ancient paganism, homosexuality.”57 And yet conservatives earth religions, and even witchcraft.54 would argue that history has demonstrated Aldredge-Clanton marvels that when her that the revisionist arguments for women first book on Sophia worship was pub- in ministry used by Baptist moderates are lished, she did not get fired by Baylor now the same arguments used to support University Medical Center, where she a feminist/liberationist position on issues served as chaplain, but instead “I got a such as homosexuality and abortion rights. book signing party in the elegant home” Molly Marshall, for instance, includes of some Baylor physicians.55 If Dorothy sexual orientation along with male/female Patterson had suggested in 1988 even one equality as issues on which contemporary of these things as a possible “slippery Christians “have moved far beyond the slope” outcome of Aldredge-Clanton’s biological and philosophical perceptions of evangelical feminism, Patterson would early Christianity” while Baptists have have been ridiculed by moderates as a “allowed the Puritan impress to linger,” hysterical fundamentalist. keeping them from a “clearer, more Granted, Aldredge-Clanton is an informed understanding in the realm of extreme case. But it cannot be claimed that human sexuality.”58 Institutionally, the Aldredge-Clanton’s gender trajectory is an exact same arguments used by the last isolated incident. In her autobiography, generation of SBC moderates to argue for Aldredge-Clanton traces her path from women’s ordination and higher-critical egalitarianism to Sophia worship as one of methods of biblical scholarship are being consistency with her feminist convictions. used by this generation of young moder- Her books on her pilgrimage and on ates to argue for homosexual ordination, Sophia worship are endorsed and pro- a debate that threatens to tear the Coop- moted by Baptist Women in Ministry and erative Baptist Fellowship asunder.59 Like- she delivered a convocation address on wise, some of the same former SBC agency feminist God-language to the Alliance of heads who used “soul freedom” to fight Baptists. Furthermore, similar feminist confessionalism, now argue that “soul free- revisionism is advocated by the chief dom” means that pregnant Baptist teenag- proponent of women in ministry among ers should not have to face protesters on moderates, Molly Truman Marshall, who the way to the abortion clinic, or that con- now faults even fellow moderates for using ventions should not refuse to cooperate masculine pronouns for God and biblical with churches that “marry” same-sex 41 couples.60 more likely to retreat to the “double-speak” Hankins is correct that conservatives of saying one thing in the seminary class- were alarmed by the cultural “Babylon” room and another on the denominational they increasingly saw around them. But “campaign trail.” The moderate leadership conservatives did not use “inerrancy” to seemed to believe that the churches should suggest an inauthentic link between support the program of the denomination, moderate views of biblical authority and while the elites determined matters of confessional libertarianism and the “cul- theology and cultural engagement. Conser- ture war” issues of abortion, homosexual- vatives believed these views were out of ity, and the “naked public square.” Instead, sync with those of the congregations that they feared that Nashville was slouching paid the bills. The outcome of the contro- toward Gomorrah. The culture pointed versy indicates that, at least on this, the them to a foretaste of the outcome of this conservatives were right. drift. One may disagree with Baptist con- This struggle continues in Baptist life servatives on gender, abortion, sexuality, as moderate groups claiming to represent or other issues, but it is difficult to disagree “mainstream Baptist” values contend with their linkage of these issues to larger against confessional requirements for cultural and theological commitments. I international missionaries, especially on would argue that, if anything, the conser- “social issues” such as abortion. In so vatives themselves have been surprised by doing, they marshal the arguments of just how radically Baptist theology was notorious abortion rights advocate Paul moving, a movement that is evident in the Simmons.62 Conservatives would argue contemporary state of moderate Baptist that Simmons views are all too “main- theology. The “culture war” served to high- stream” within the context of contempo- light essential worldview differences that rary American culture—a culture they seek convinced conservatives that the “Grand to confront with a biblical worldview. But Compromise” simply no longer existed. Simmons’s views are not at all representa- Add to this a distinctively Baptist eccles- tive of “mainstream” Baptist thought in the iology and the link between culture and churches of the SBC. Confessionalism and cooperation becomes even clearer. Conser- conversionism define the parameters for vatives did not reject the distinctives of cooperation. Therefore, for conservatives, local church autonomy and priesthood of issues such as abortion are not merely believers. Instead, they believed that these “culture war” concerns. Pro-life Southern concepts meant that the denominational Baptists should not be asked to pay for a elites must be held accountable to local missionary to tell a new Chinese believer congregations, and not the other way that she should abort her second child around.61 As Hankins demonstrates, mod- under the lordship of Jesus Christ. If South- erate denominational leaders were largely ern Baptists hold to a theology that affirms “pro-choice” on abortion rights, over- the sacredness of all human life, that the- whelmingly in favor of women in the ology should inform their cooperative pastorate, and dismissive of biblical iner- efforts across the world. The same would rancy. While conservatives were forthright be true for the issue of race. A hypothetical about their traditionalist views on abortion, white supremacist would be immediately sexuality, and other issues, moderates were recalled from the mission field by the 42 SBC—not just because the bigot is an Instead, these issues demonstrated to con- embarrassment—but because he is outside servatives that the tribal basis of coopera- the parameters of the Southern Baptist con- tion could not provide cohesion to the SBC fessional consensus and he repudiates the in what is, after all, the most counter- gospel of Jesus Christ. cultural of all endeavors—the conversion This explains some of conservative of the nations to belief in Jesus Christ as frustration with moderate rhetoric that the the sole sovereign of the cosmos. controversy was simply a “political” destruction of a harmonious “big tent” Conclusion built for cooperative evangelism and mis- Barry Hankins’s Uneasy in Babylon gets sions. Moderate Russell Dilday, for several things precisely wrong. The con- instance, makes just such an argument in troversy over biblical authority was not a recent symposium rejecting confes- a subset of the “culture wars.” Instead, sionalism on the mission field. He then, the fact that Baptists had “culture wars” however, proceeds to detail a list of theo- among themselves on issues such as abor- logical “errors” in Baptist conservatism— tion, sexuality, and gender roles indicated ranging from premillennial eschatology to that there indeed was a crisis over biblical a complementarian view of male/female authority. Even so, the book gets a crucial roles to a “Calvinistic” understanding that point precisely right. Hankins argues that God knows the future.63 Similarly, David the conservative resurgence means that Currie argues for a political—rather than Southern Baptists “have recaptured the a theological—conservative refusal to Baptist tradition of dissent that was lost cooperate with moderates. Inexplicably, when the denomination dominated the Currie then concludes that Baptist conser- South.”65 Hankins’s insight here offers the vatives worship a “different” Jesus and that SBC’s resurgent conservatives a critical moderates and conservatives have “differ- opportunity to chart a course for the next ent, irreconcilable visions of the gospel of generation. Jesus Christ.”64 Why these moderates The temptation for future generations would want a “big tent” of missionary of Baptist conservatives is probably not that cooperation with those who preach a “dif- they will be too consumed by the “culture ferent gospel” and worship a “different wars.” The temptation will be to surren- Christ” is difficult for most conservatives der to the seeming omnipotence of to understand. “McWorld.” The next generation of Bap- Nonetheless, this disconnect illustrates tists was not reared in the isolated subcul- a divide seen in the controversy over the ture of “Sword Drills” and “Acteen” camp. relationship between the SBC and Ameri- They will come of age in the cultural can culture—a disconnect Hankins atmosphere of a new moralism—with perceives even if at times he explains it Planned Parenthood preaching “safety” in inadequately. Conservatives longed for a their public school classrooms and Will theological definition of Baptist identity and Grace preaching “tolerance” on the and Baptist cooperation, while moderates network airwaves. Moreover, they may longed for a more programmatic defini- find that the future of the conservative tion. The issues raised by the “culture resurgence is not chiefly in middle-class wars” did not define Baptist conservatism. suburban America, but in the persecuted 43 congregations of the Third World. There is, in the Kingdom of Christ—a Kingdom that after all, little appeal to a “moderate” Bap- is seen even now in the advance of the gos- tist social gospel when claiming Christ pel around the world. In the meantime, means literal crucifixion by a despotic Baptist conservatives will stand where Islamic government. Baptist conservatives have always stood— In the end, this “mantle of dissent” will against the stream. And, like their Baptist be the ultimate test of the conservative ancestors across the centuries, they will be resurgence. What will future Southern Bap- hopeful—but uneasy—in a culture that is tist pastors say on Mother’s Day if half the looking more and more like Babylon. congregation has been cloned in a labora- tory? What will future Southern Baptists ENDNOTES churches do if “Evangelism Explosion” 11Against the “sickening” contemporary is outlawed as “hate speech”? Indeed, culture of “McWorld,” Barber argues, what will conservative Southern Baptist stand “the yearning of American subur- churches do now, when their members banites for a literal New Testament” and divorce and remarry at the same rate as “the yearning of Arabic martyrs for the secular America? What will conservative certainties of a literal Qur’an.” Benjamin Southern Baptist churches do now when R. Barber, Jihad vs. McWorld: How churchgoers would rather hear therapeu- Globalism and Tribalism Are Reshaping the tic sound-bytes than the preaching of the World (New York: Ballantine, 1996) 213. whole counsel of God? If conservatives will Barber’s secular analysis is joined by pick up the mantle of dissent in such a Baptist scholar Charles Kimball, When cultural context they must maintain their Religion Becomes Evil (San Francisco: confessional identity, their conversionist Harper and Row, 2002), who argues that missiology, and their cooperative unity. religion becomes politically dangerous This is something that a “movement” can- whenever it accepts universal truth not do—only churches can. claims, regardless of whether these Thus, the counter-cultural nature of claims are Christian, Muslim, or some- Baptist conservatism will be seen chiefly thing else. For a quite different take on in the renewal of Baptist churches through the relationship between religion and the preaching of a Christ who will one day global culture from that of Barber and replace “McWorld” with His own everlast- Kimball, see Samuel Huntington, The ing reign (Dan 7:14). Contrary to liberal Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of Baptist rhetoric, it is increasingly obvious World Order (New York: Simon and that Baptist conservatives do not desire a Schuster, 1996). “Constantinian” peace with the political 22Barry Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon: South- and social powers-that-be.66 Baptist conser- ern Baptist Conservatives and American vatives know they will not find Jerusalem Culture (Tuscaloosa: University of Ala- in an idyllic southern culture or in a bama Press, 2002). This thesis builds on Republican White House or in a less pro- earlier analyses by Hankins such as fane Hollywood—or even in a parachurch “Southern Baptists and Northern evangelical subculture. They must seek to Evangelicals: Cultural Factors and the hold back the cultural darkness, but they Nature of Religious Alliances,” Religion know they will find a New Jerusalem only and American Culture: A Journal of Inter- 44 pretation 7 (1997) 271-298; “Principle, conservatives. From Culpepper’s Southwestern Baptist Theological Perception, and Position: Why viewpoint, the “real issues often Seminary, for instance, castigates Southern Baptist Conservatives Dif- were power and control of the conservatives as “pseudo-Baptists, fer from Moderates on Church-State denomination and contemporary rogues inside the family who either Issues,” Journal of Church and State social issues, but the political short- never knew or have forgotten what 40 (1998) 343-370; and “The Evan- hand of the controversy was how our true identity is.” Larry Chesser, gelical Accommodationism of we talk about the Bible.” R. Alan “‘Authenticus Baptistus’ Growing Southern Baptist Conservatives,” Culpepper, “Scripture,” in A Bap- Extinct, Dilday Tells American Baptist History and Heritage 33 (1998) tist’s Theology, ed. R. Wayne Stacy Baptists,” Baptists Today, 13 July 54-65. (Macon, GA: Smyth and Helwys, 1995, 5. During the controversy, 33Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon, 10. 1999) 80. moderate SBC agency heads often 44Ibid. 11For a discussion of the “culture war” pointed to Norris as the prototype 55Ibid., 274. concept, see James Davison Hunter, of the Pressler/Patterson coalition, 66Ibid., 276. Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define often referring to moderates as 77Ibid., 277. America (New York: Basic Books, “moderate-conservatives” and con- 88For a discussion of the SBC’s role as 1991). servatives as “independent-funda- the “established church” of south- 12Hankins recognizes that some mentalists.” As Hankins points ern culture, see Edward L. Queen SBC conservative leaders, such as out, however, the ideological lead- II, ed., In the South the Baptists Are Mohler, have been influenced by a ership of the conservative move- the Center of Gravity: Southern Bap- tempered form of the Reformed ment came from “moderate Baptist tists and Social Change, 1930-1980 worldview theologies of Abraham stock.” Paige Patterson’s father (Brooklyn: Carlson, 1991). Kuyper and Carl F. H. Henry. Oth- was the executive director of the 99These would include, for instance, ers, such as Patterson, draw more Baptist General Convention of Texas Bill J. Leonard, God’s Last and Only from a conservative appropriation (BGCT). Mark Coppenger’s father Hope: The Fragmentation of the South- of Anabaptist theology. Others, in a was a moderate Baptist professor at ern Baptist Convention (Grand Rap- more populist vein, articulate a a state Baptist university. R. Albert ids: Eerdmans, 1990); Grady C. “Christian America” understanding Mohler, Jr., served as assistant to the Cothen, What Happened to the South- that is quite similar to that of the moderate president of The Southern ern Baptist Convention: A Memoir of new Christian right political move- Baptist Theological Seminary dur- the Controversy (Macon, GA: Smyth ment. Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon, ing the most heated years of the and Helwys, 1993) and The New 41-73. Hankins’s taxonomy of dif- controversy. Hankins notes that, of SBC: Fundamentalism’s Impact on the fering positions on issues ranging the conservative leaders, “only Southern Baptist Convention (Macon, from the posting of the Ten Com- Timothy George was influenced sig- GA: Smyth and Helwys, 1995); and mandments to the definition of vol- nificantly by independent funda- Walter Shurden, ed., The Struggle for untary school prayer to the idea of mentalism.” Hankins, Uneasy in the Soul of the SBC: Moderate Re- “faith-based” federal funding for Babylon, 40. sponses to the Fundamentalist Move- churches is helpful in underscoring 14Ibid., 273. ment (Macon, GA: Mercer Univer- the diversity in the conservative 15Ibid., 4. sity Press, 1993). coalition on some of these questions. 16When moderate theologian Fisher 10This is contra the arguments of, for For a further exploration of these Humphreys devoted the spring example, moderate biblical scholar issues, see Hankins, “The Evangeli- 1988 issue of New Orleans Alan Culpepper, who contends that cal Accommodationism of Southern Seminary’s theological journal, The biblical inerrancy served as mere Baptist Conservatives,” 54-65. Theological Educator, to the contro- political “badges of identity” for 13Russell Dilday, former president of versy, for example, he included a 45 broad range of issues to be debated includes quotes from well-known have a social gospel,” Walter Rau- by combatants on both sides, issues figures in Baptist history, ranging schenbusch proclaimed. “We need a ranging from inerrancy to women’s from Dagg and Boyce to Lottie Moon systematic theology large enough to ordination to school prayer to the and Herschel Hobbs, on issues such match it and vital enough to back it.” authority of the pastor in a congre- as biblical inerrancy, women in the Walter Rauschenbusch, A Theology of gational church government. pastorate, and the priesthood of the Social Gospel (New York: Mac- 17Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon, 14-40. believers. The pamphlet seeks to millan, 1917; reprint, Louisville: 18Ibid., 38. argue that the conservative resur- Westminster/John Knox, 1997) 1. 19Ibid., 39. gence was in fact a “resurgence” of 29This doctrinal reductionism, Henry 20Paige Patterson, “An Examination historic Baptist theology and not a argued, led to fundamentalism’s of the Soteriological Thought of “takeover” by “independent funda- “increasing failure to comprehend John Leadley Dagg, Baptist Theo- mentalists.” the relationship of underlying theo- logical of Nineteenth-Century 25R. Albert Mohler, Jr., “Don’t Just Do logical principles.” Carl F. H. Henry, America” (Ph.D. diss., New Orleans Something, Stand There: Southern “Dare We Renew the Controversy? Baptist Theological Seminary, 1973). Seminary and the Abstract of Prin- Part II: The Fundamentalist Reduc- 21L. Russ Bush and Tom J. Nettles, ciples,” convocation address at The tion,” Christianity Today, 24 June 1957, Baptists and the Bible (Chicago: Southern Baptist Theological Semi- 23. Moody, 1980). nary, Louisville, KY, 31 August 1993. 30For a discussion of the theological 22Timothy George, ed., James Petigru 26Patterson therefore counts Francis concerns behind Henry’s jeremiad, Boyce: Selected Writings (Nashville: Schaeffer as a key theological ally in see Russell D. Moore, “Kingdom Broadman, 1989). the resurgence. “No one encouraged Theology and the American Evan- 23See the minutes of the organiza- me in my efforts for reform among gelical Consensus: Emerging Impli- tional meeting and statement of pur- Southern Baptists as often or as cations for Sociopolitical Engage- pose of this group in Leon McBeth, intensely as Schaeffer,” he recalls. ment” (Ph.D. diss., The Southern A Sourcebook for the Baptist Heritage Paige Patterson, “Shootout at the Baptist Theological Seminary, 2002). (Nashville: Broadman, 1990). The Amen Corral: Being Baptist Through 31For Schaeffer’s theological diagnoses Fellowship was led initially by Controversy,” in Why I Am a Baptist, of what he viewed as the collapse of conservatives such as North ed. Tom J. Nettles and Russell D. Western culture, especially as it Carolina’s M. O. Owens and Ken- Moore (Nashville: Broadman and relates to the abortion issue, see tucky’s Laverne Butler, who argued Holman, 2001) 71. Francis A. Schaeffer, A Christian that the 1963 doctrinal statement 27Carl F. H. Henry, The Uneasy Con- Manifesto (Westchester, IL: Crossway, was an inerrantist statement. Inter- science of Modern Fundamentalism 1982); and Francis A. Schaeffer and estingly, when the conservative-led (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1947). C. Everett Koop, Whatever Happened SBC passed a revised Baptist Faith 28Henry lamented that Protestant lib- to the Human Race? (Old Tappan, NJ: and Message statement in 2000, the eral social activists “exalt the social Revell, 1979). word “inerrancy” was not included. issue above the theological, and prize 32Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon, 74-106. This was because SBC conservatives the Christian religion mainly as a 33In 1992 Mohler wrote: “Biblical iner- still maintained that the move- tool for justifying an independently rancy must be posited within the ment’s early voices had been right determined course of action.” Carl context of a holistic recovery of the all along—“truth without any F. H. Henry, Aspects of Christian Social Scripture principle within the Chris- mixture of error” means verbal Ethics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, tian tradition.” He defined this inerrancy of Scripture. 1964) 21. The language used by the framework as a confessional theol- 24Coppenger’s pamphlet, “We Social Gospel pioneers themselves ogy in the classical Christian, evan- Thought You’d Like to Know” only bolsters Henry’s critique. “We gelical Protestant, and distinctively 46 Baptist traditions. He argued further- unity needed for cooperation in in his 1979 Pastor’s Conference ser- more that Southern Baptists must terms of a “theological triage.” See mon blasted the idea that theology return to the confessional task of R. Albert Mohler, Jr., “Has Theology and evangelism could be separated. seeking to articulate the tension a Future in the Southern Baptist Con- “Your zeal is never any greater than between “what can be assumed and vention?,” 108-109. your conviction,” Rogers said. “And what must be articulated.” R. Albert 35This is only further illustrated by your convictions come out of the Mohler, Jr., “Has Theology a Future Hankins’s recounting of Gushee’s Word of God. Now, don’t you let in the Southern Baptist Convention? response to the Molly Marshall res- anybody tell you that what I’m say- Toward a Renewed Theological ignation at Southern Seminary, a res- ing is not true because you mark it Framework,” in Beyond the Impasse? ignation that was due to Marshall’s down. You look and you see the Scripture, Interpretation, and Theology inclusivist understanding of salva- churches that are reaching and win- in Baptist Life, ed. James B. Robison tion and feminist revisionism of the ning and baptizing people in this day and David S. Dockery (Nashville: doctrine of God. Hankins writes: of sagging statistics, and every one Broadman, 1992) 100-105. I would “Gushee believes that while theol- of them, and I say every one of them argue that the Mohler Adminis- ogy is important, so are human is a conservative fundamental Bible tration’s positions on the exclusivity considerations such as friendship, believer. Every one of them!” Adrian of Christ, homosexuality, abortion, loyalty, and concern for the careers Rogers, “The Great Deceiver,” ser- and the pastorate as a male office and dreams of those whom the con- mon delivered to the Southern Bap- were previously “assumed” aspects servatives were finding theologically tist Convention Pastor’s Conference, of Baptist theology that must now be unacceptable.” Ibid., 95. One might 10 June 1979, cited in Walter B. “articulated” against the revisionism wonder whether self-identified Shurden and Randy Shepley, eds., of the Baptist left and the secular evangelical Gushee takes Marshall Going for the Jugular: A Documentary culture. seriously as a theologian at all. If History of the SBC Holy War (Macon, 34Hankins unfairly characterizes her ideas about theism and salvation GA: Mercer University Press, 1996) Mohler’s opposition to hiring gen- will shape a generation of pastors, 15. der egalitarian faculty in Machiavel- and if those ideas are seriously 37Mohler’s outspoken stance on the lian terms. “Mohler has acknowl- flawed, then how can that be in any issue of homosexuality, an issue he edged that the Bible does not make substantive way “balanced” against confronted early in his tenure as opposition to women in the pulpit her “dreams” for her career? president, Hankins writes, “Led to nearly as important as some other 36This is why, as Hankins notes, Mark the charge by some moderates that issues, yet the Firm has decided to Coppenger compared the baptism Mohler had an obsessive preoccupa- make it central anyway.” Ibid., 103. statistics of moderate congregations tion with homosexuality.” Hankins, Such a statement reveals a funda- with those of conservative churches, Uneasy in Babylon, 46. mental misunderstanding about the and found the moderate churches 38Kenneth L. Woodward, “The Last kind of theological confessionalism flagging. Coppenger, along with Respectable Prejudice,” First Things, held by conservatives. The Bible many conservatives, came to the con- October 2002, 25. does not make believers’ baptism by clusion that the difference was a 39For a study on the SBC’s sense of immersion nearly as important as theological one. Moderate churches incongruity between biblical author- issues such as justification through had given something away that ity and the assumptions of the abor- faith. Nonetheless, a paedobaptist should engender Great Commission tion culture, see Michele Dillon, faculty member would never be fervor among the people of God. “Religion and Culture in Tension: hired, even under the previous mod- Ibid., 36. This critique was present The Abortion Discourses of the U. S. erate administrations. Mohler has from the very beginning of the resur- Catholic Bishops and the Southern described the levels of confessional gence. Adrian Rogers, for instance, Baptist Convention,” Religion and 47 American Culture: A Journal of Inter- 45William Martin, A Prophet with Honor: 57Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon, 87. pretation 5 (1995) 159-180. The Billy Graham Story (New York: 58Molly Truman Marshall, “Persons,” 40E. J. Graff, “How the Culture War William Morrow, 1991) 362. in A Baptist’s Theology, ed. R. Wayne Was Won,” The American Prospect, 21 46Henry writes: “In Copenhagen, Stacy (Macon, GA: Smyth and October 2002, 36. when evangelist Billy Graham Helwys, 1999) 44-45. Similarly, 41In perhaps the most famous Baptist opened his crusade, a heckler inter- Marshall recently preached about the sermon on religious liberty, George rupted him with the cry: ‘Why didn’t need for the church to fearlessly W. Truett defended the concept you march in Selma?’ But Graham explore “human sexuality—in all the based on a prior commitment to the had been integrating meetings in the forms it takes” and to recognize necessity of personal regeneration. South long before the marchers had “other ways of faith as traditions in Forced conformity “might make become existentialized and, more- which the Spirit of God is at work.” men hypocrites, but it can never over, had done so in the context of Molly Truman Marshall, “Led by the make them Christians,” Truett biblical Christianity.” Carl F. H. Spirit: Hazardous Duty,” manuscript observed. George W. Truett, Baptists Henry, The God Who Shows Himself of sermon preached at Chapel Creek and Religious Liberty (Nashville: Sun- (Waco: Word, 1966) 67. Baptist Church, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 22 day School Board of the Southern 47Ibid., 71. September 2002, http://www. Baptist Convention, 1920) 13. Here 48Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon, 4. chapelcreektulsa.com/ledby Truett is in continuity with the con- 49Ibid., 5. spirit.htm. versionist argument for religious 50Ibid., 6. 59For an analysis of this, see Russell D. liberty going all the way back to 51Ibid., 208. Moore, “Forum: Issues Relating to Thomas Helwys, Isaac Backus, and 52Jann Aldredge-Clanton, Breaking the Family,” Southern Baptist Journal John Leland. Free: The Story of a Feminist Baptist of Theology 6 (2002) 110-113. For per- 42Hankins does recognize the theologi- Minister (Austin: Eakin, 2002). See haps the clearest theological articu- cal nature of the abortion debate also Aldredge-Clanton’s mono- lation of the pro-homosexuality when he notes Timothy George’s elo- graphs on Sophia worship and femi- viewpoint among moderate Baptists, quent response to the assumptions nist God language, In Whose Image? see the Alliance of Baptists 2001 state- of Enlightenment autonomy found God and Gender (New York: Cross- ment, “A Clear Voice: Report of the in Simmons’s defense of abortion road, 1980); God, a Word for Girls and Task Force on Human Sexuality” and rights. Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon, Boys (Louisville: Glad River, 1993); In Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth: A 192-193. Search of the Christ-Sophia: An Inclu- Resource for Congregations in Dialogue 43Andrew M. Manis, Southern Civil sive Christology for Liberating Chris- on Sexual Orientation, a joint project Religions in Conflict: Civil Rights and tians (Mystic, CT: Twenty-Third, of the Alliance and the Baptist Peace the Culture Wars (Macon, GA: Mer- 1995); and Praying With Christ-Sophia: Fellowship of North America. cer University Press, 2002) 168-169. Services for Healing and Renewal (Mys- 60Grady C. Cothen and James M. 44The Baptist Faith and Message (2000) tic, CT: Twenty-Third, 1997). Dunn, Soul Freedom: Baptist Battle Cry thus ends the article on the doctrine 53Aldredge-Clanton, Breaking Free, 228- (Macon, GA: Smyth and Helwys, of humanity with the following state- 232. 2000) 35-37; 53; 105-106. ment: “The sacredness of human 54Ibid., 208. 61As Paige Patterson remarked, the personality is evident in that God 55Ibid., 213. denomination’s polity is “what created man in His own image, and 56Molly Truman Marshall, review of makes a populist revolution possible in that Christ died for man; therefore, Let Her Be: Right Relationships and within the SBC.” Paige Patterson, every person of every race possessed the Southern Baptist Conundrum by “Anatomy of a Reformation: The full dignity and is worthy of respect Charles O. Knowles, Folio, Fall 2002, Southern Baptist Convention 1978- and Christian love.” 13. 1994,” Faith and Mission 16 (1999) 25. 48 62See Simmons’s arguments on legal recourse in Robert O’Brien, “Voices of Pain and Consternation,” Main- stream: Mainstream Baptist Network Journal, November-December 2002, 9. Simmons has also been featured on the Mainstream Network’s Internet site, arguing against requir- ing International Mission Board mis- sionaries to affirm the Baptist Faith and Message. 63Russell Dilday, “A Serious Look at the Baptist Faith and Message Revi- sions,” in Stand with Christ: Why Mis- sionaries Can’t Sign the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message, ed. Robert O’Brien (Macon, GA: Smyth and Helwys, 2002) 33-54. While the former South- western Seminary president’s cri- tique of the affirmation of God’s exhaustive foreknowledge was sur- prising to many conservatives, it can perhaps be chalked up more to Dilday’s lack of familiarity with con- temporary theological movements such as “open theism” than to an outright rejection of God’s fore- knowledge. 64David R. Currie, “A Line on the Ground,” in Stand with Christ: Why Missionaries Can’t Sign the 2000 Bap- tist Faith and Message, ed. Robert O’Brien (Macon, GA: Smyth and Helwys, 2002) 15. 65Hankins, Uneasy in Babylon, 275. 66The “Constantinian” charge is made against conservatives in, among other places, the “Baptist Manifesto” of 1997 signed by mod- erate Baptist theologians such as Stanley Grenz, Curtis Freeman, and James McClendon.

49