CONVERSATION WITH PAIGE PATTERSON

                                                                                                           Vol. VIII, No. 8, September 1995

[This is an abbreviated version of an article which was printed in the July 1995 Texas Baptist. Omissions focussed on questions specific to Texas. Bold print in answers has been added.]

Dr. Patterson, what was it like when you went to Southeastern Seminary?

My immediate predecessor, Dr. Lewis Drummond, had in effect taken the heat, and people were tired of the conflict and probably ready to see some solutions. In addition to that, sometimes bad press is a good thing.

I didn't think about it going in but some were expecting some sort of hybrid between Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan, where there would he blood on the floor. But I went in and took a kind approach and attempted to be just in dealing with folks without compromising our theological position

The response was one of surprise and ... relief. I had a six year program in mind, and essentially all of it has been accomplished in three years, to my amazement. We have an increase from 488 students 36 months ago to probably 1,200 this coming fall. We have established our Ph.D. degree for next fall.

We have also established a baccalaureate program. We have seen already the foreign mission volunteers among the student body rise to a third of the students, which is probably about as large a group as you will see anywhere.

Essentially we rebuilt the entire faculty, so basically what happened is that the Lord took over the situation and we have got a revival type atmosphere on campus.

In every individual community all across Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida many churches are beginning to come back to life. Maybe it's only one church in a particular place, but it's happening. So I think the main thing is that today we are seeing a spiritual awakening.

You would agree that Southeastern Seminary is the primary cause for the liberal bureaucracies in North Carolina and Virginia particularly?

Yes. It is also a contributing cause of the crippling of the churches. It's very common for churches not to have Sunday night services, for example. While that per se is no indication of liberalism, it is sort of an indication for the lack of vitality in many of the churches on the east coast. Southeastern has certainly not been without its positive contributions, but unfortunately it has also had a deleterious effect in local church life on the east coast.

Where do you see the denomination heading now, particularly the relationships between the various state organizations and the national organization?

I see two different things happening. I see rapprochement happening. In many cases there is no conflict going on, such as Oklahoma, Arkansas, Indiana, Ohio, essentially Florida and Georgia, places like that are all doing fine. Many are not altogether where I want them to be but continued cooperation exists and will go on. Those conventions probably realize better than most that their future is with the Foreign Mission Board, the Home Mission Board, and the seminaries over and above what is going on in each particular state. They are in great contrast to some states that have not come to this realization.

Are you speaking primarily of Texas, North Carolina, and Virginia?

Those and Kentucky are our four weakest states, in terms of commitment to the total program of the Southern Baptist Convention. Furthermore, three of the four of them are weak in their evangelistic and church growth impact. I think that Mark Coppenger going to Midwestern will have a good effect on the heart of our country. Al Mohler's presence at Southern will mean that they recover their evangelical emphasis there. Southwestern will gradually have an effect on Texas.

Frankly, I think that time is on the side of the SBC. Basically, in the case of the state conventions that are not in harmony with the SBC, these are primarily aging state conventions. just go to any meeting and note the age of most of the participants. Their colleges and universities are moving ever further out of their orbits and are less and less involved with the things that the churches are interested in.

You've got the influential churches in all of those states, the ones that are growing and exercising an overall impact, the "flagship" churches, you might say, these are not involved with the state convention and they are committed to what's going on in the Southern Baptist Convention. So it's a waiting game to some degree.

It's a struggle that these state conventions have no opportunity of winning. Eventually they will have to decide whether they are going to decline perceptively or whether they want to be a part of the overall program and grow.

What counsel would you have for Texas conservatives in going up against the Baylor machine? Should we simply not participate at all or should we try to win the elections?

Even a broken clock is right twice each day, so you could learn something from the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. In Texas I would have a very strong conservative fellowship. I probably would not form a separate state convention at this time because time is on your side.

I believe that if you challenge the young pastors you will have an overwhelming conservative majority. They are going to lead their churches in conservative type ministries, whether they emphasize the political aspect of it or not.

By the same token, the Baylor family that is interested in Baptist work at all is overwhelmingly in their 60's and older. Many in the more recent generations of Baylor graduates could[n't] care less what happens in the BGCT or in the church at all....

When that becomes no longer an issue, they're not going to go to conventions.

So, at this point, I would say show up at the conventions and be aggressive with backing candidates. Monetarily, if I were a pastor in Texas, in response to what was done by the BGCT, I would reassign my giving and give a much smaller percentage to the state convention until such time as they straightened out. I would do that on a convictional basis that the church has a right to support what it believes in.

They did that in Virginia and ultimately the moderates changed the ground rules to effectively disenfranchise the conservatives. That's probably what's going to happen here.

Yes, it probably will, and if so, of course, you may be eventually forced into a separate state convention. But the difference is that you were forced into this position, you were not given a choice.

You say you went into the Southeastern situation without a meat ax mentality. Why then did the liberals clear out so fast other than the Providence of God?

In fairness, I must again give some real credit to my predecessor, Lewis Drummond. What happened there was that they were in financial exigency, and financial exigency is one condition under which you can dismiss tenured professors. Many of them saw that that was probably what was inevitably coming, as the school was clearly in a decline.

So, going on the press releases, which is all they knew about me, and because of the financial exigencies, many of them decided that they had better find other positions while they could.

Some of the rest of them since that time have become more accepting and have not tried to sabotage what we are doing. But as they have viewed it, they see that it is a totally different place now.

It is an evangelical posture and they're not comfortable with that. Many have elected since then to take other positions or take early retirement. ...

I understand that at Midwestern Seminary, much of the faculty which is liberal is nevertheless welcoming Mark Coppenger, although be is a strong conservative. They also are very tired of the fight and want the seminary to survive. So he may be walking into a situation of serendipity.

I don't think that he will have to be confrontational at all. Midwestern is two things. It is on the edge of difficulty, but it is also in the catbird seat because of the possibility of rapid growth. I think that it has as much potential as any of the seminaries.

We all know what is good and bad about tenure. What would be your "druthers" in a perfect world?

I have trouble seeing any good in tenure at all. I do recognize maybe some, but it's very small. First of all, is there anything else in society that's tenured? The answer is no. You don't tenure attorneys, as you very well know. You either do a good job or you're out of work. What tenure has amounted to across the years has been in the final analysis a fortress to protect professors so that they can peddle anything they want to peddle or be as incompetent as they happen to be and still be protected in their jobs. I view that as far more like socialism than capitalism. It is no accident that the remaining bastions of socialism in America are in the universities.

Yet Southeastern will continue to grant tenure, will they not?

Well, it's very interesting. The last one to be granted tenure there was the president when he was called there. I will probably renounce that tenure at some future point, and there is a committee studying this right now which may very well bring a recommendation for the abolition of tenure.

How about Southern Seminary? Dr. Mohler has sure made some waves there! He said that he would be faithful and he has been.

The worst of the problems there are over. Al Mohler has the brain of Erasmus and the courage of Luther. Those two qualities are so seldom found together that it's refreshing to see it. I also want to commend the trustees. It doesn't matter how good the man at the top is if the trustees don't stand behind him. The key was the last trustee meeting.

The trustees were given a golden opportunity in that they were put in the position of either biting the bullet and doing the tough thing that would guarantee the future of the school or to wither under criticism and cut AI's wings. Had they done the latter, they would have only precipitated more controversy.

They did the right thing. They stood behind their man. It was such a shock to everybody that they did it that, although there will be another 24 months of adjustment, it is basically all over.

Southern Seminary has an evangelical future now, and it will be a very happy and influential future.

At the Home Mission Board Missionary Personnel Committee, we find out if any candidate who has just graduated from Southern participated in the protests against the president. If one ever has or does, he/she will not be considered. We agree with Mohler that students are there only to learn, not to participate in management or politics.

Student opinion is important, but students were certainly not elected to the administration.

Where is our society headed, and bow do evangelical schools fit into it?

I'm a lot like Dr. [Richard] Land, who is an optimistic premillenialist! In the long run, like every other culture, we'll collapse. Cultures don't last, they decay, and ours is decadent. You can see it happening. Steps to protect the criminal and persecute the victim are an example. These are telltale signs that things have gotten out of hand.

Interestingly, Isaiah [3:12] says that one of the ways that you can tell when your society is in trouble is when your women lead. So the whole feminist movement I view in the light of Isaiah as an indication of the decadence of manhood.

On the other hand, it is encouraging to see things like Promise Keepers, where men stand up and say, "We are going to accept our responsibility."

So, while I believe that America, like all nations before it will decay, I also believe that the greater the decay, the greater the possibilities for genuine spiritual awakening.

Contrary to some members of the Christian community who seem to delight in wringing their hands and talking about the decadence, I see great hope. I see, as I travel across the United States while visiting the churches, in every community a work being raised up by God which is impacting the community.

I marvel that, with all the failures we have had in the ministry with moral and financial misdeeds, God is nevertheless really doing something all across this country.

Who would have dreamed it possible that we will meet a Cooperative Program budget of $150 million? Even with all the upheaval it looks like we're going to make it.

So while I see an eventual collapse of the culture, in the meantime I see an enormous amount that can and should be done, and I believe that we've got a chance, under God, to make some real inroads for the Kingdom.

You're a relatively young man to be asking this question to, but as you look back over your life, what are some special joys and disappointments?

My disappointment would be in discovering the lack of courage in the pastors and preachers. Often laymen have had to rise to leadership roles when pastors should have done it. I'm grateful to the laymen and grateful to God that He raised them up, but I marvel sometimes at the lack of courage and conviction in some pastors.

I'm disappointed in myself that I haven't won more people to Christ than I have. I try to be a faithful witness, but I am constantly aware that the business of life takes me away from winning people to Christ, which is a terrible thing -- a tragedy in my own life. Beyond that, I don't have any major disappointments.

On the positive side, the whole [denominational] controversy has been a great blessing to me from strange sorts of perspectives. During the time when the criticism was the harshest and most continual, basically from 1980-1985, when I would be so down and dejected like anybody would, it was in those times that the Lord taught me the meaning of some passages that I would never have grasped any other way.

For example, it dawned on me one day that when Jesus said, "Love your enemy," that this is a command that can never be fulfilled unless I have an enemy. If you do good to those who despitefully use you, or return good for evil, and pray for those who despitefully use you, how do you do any of that unless somebody has despitefully used you or abused you?

It suddenly dawned on me that, aside from the issue of right or wrong, which was a very pregnant issue with me, what God was doing was testing my own brand of Christianity and seeing if it would measure up.

I won't say that I do it perfectly by a long shot, but I do try. I don't think that I could have learned that lesson fully in any other way. So the sorrows that have been a part of it all, and there have been many, are actually great joys.

I do regret any hurt that has come to anybody, whether moderate, liberal or conservative. I realize that whenever you have confrontation this happens. But I don't want to see anybody hurt. I hate that.

A lot of that has been richly deserved.

Perhaps, but I still hate to see people hurt even though I know it is inevitable. On the whole, I have had so much fun in my 52 years, I have been able to be a part of so many lives, and have seen so many lives changed, and have just had so much adventure that if I had complained, I would be ashamed of it.

Do you see any particular theological issues coming up in the next generation or will we see more of the same collapse?

If I were the Devil, which is an easy concept for many to imagine, I would see to it that the internal issues are always there. He has to, because external persecution only does so much. It has an awful backlash. The two most successful ploys Satan has ever had are to demoralize the church of God through the behavior of its leaders and, secondly, to introduce a theological virus into the system.

So we have theological viruses that will break out periodically in the system. Today's issue may not be tomorrow's issue. It's pretty clear that some of the big issues tomorrow relate to Process theology, of seeing God as increasingly anemic and unable to control the situation. So the next great heresy may well relate to God Himself.

That was anticipated to some degree by the work of Timothy George's committee [The Theological Study Committee appointed by Dr. Young]. They saw all of that coming and made excellent statements on the nature of God, and on universalism and incipient universalism.

Those on the committee in academia told those of us outside academia that we really didn't understand what was happening today and that it was imperative that this platform be used to deal with these incipient heresies. Originally the intent was only to address the nature of Scripture.

Well, they hit the nail on the head. It was a wonderful statement.

Do you have any other thoughts you wish to share, particularly on the denominational dispute?

People have to understand that the battle is not over and it will not be over until God calls us home. We will have to be on guard against any particular methodology that Satan thrusts into our life, as those methodologies may change.

We have to face [the fact] that our convention is in a time of transition and there are going to be changes. Business will not proceed as it has in the past, and we have to be elastic enough to make those kinds of adjustments.

We have to have a concept of balance, on the one hand not to be theological detectives hunting for heresy under every bush, but neither should we be optimistic evangelists who spend all our time in doing nothing but growing our churches. The good shepherd's job is both to feed and protect the sheep.

Do you see social issues defining us as Southern Baptists? For example, will the day come when one who is pro-abortion cannot be a Southern Baptist?

The reason I wanted to focus on the issue of the inerrancy of Scripture was because I felt that it was epistemologically the baseline issue. For example, if one is going to take the Bible to be the Word of God, then one has to be opposed to racism.

The same is true of opposition to homosexuality, as Romans 1 makes crystal clear. This is not to say that we want to be "gay bashers," but we should call this sin just as we would any other sin. For a church to proclaim that this life-style is just an alternate choice is unconscionable.

Once you agree the Scripture is the inerrant Word of God, then your position on issues like these is settled. I have great difficulty on seeing how one could [biblically] support pornography or the taking of innocent life through abortion

But the main issue is Scripture, and when you get that resolved, a lot of other things also get resolved automatically.