Southern Baptists Stay Conservative Course
by A. C. Smith Vol. VII, No. 5, June 1994
Southern Baptist messengers, meeting in Orlando June 14-16, elected a kinder, gentler conservative as president, and they passed a motion instructing SBC entities to stop receiving funds from the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF). Messengers also passed resolutions on Health Care Reform, the French Abortion Pill known as RU 486, Outcome Based Education, EEOC Guidelines on Religious Harassment, AIDS, and Dialogue with Roman Catholics.
Jim Henry, pastor of First Baptist Church, Orlando, was elected president of the Southern Baptist Convention. With 9,876 votes or 55.18 percent, Henry defeated Fred Wolfe, who had 8,023 votes or 44.82 percent. While much of the secular media were hailing his election as a moderate victory, Henry, in a press conference after his election, took the pledge to stay a conservative course. "I'm strongly committed to conservative inerrancy and the infallibility of the Word of God," said Henry. "I'm committed to truth without any error; I'll continue to go in that direction." "I'll appoint people committed to the Word of God. I'll seek to appoint people like that... " continued Henry. "We believe in sanctity of life and are committed to that."
Henry was asked by reporters about moderates who want to come back into the denomination. "If people are committed to inerrancy, our Cooperative Program, and missions, they can come back," said Henry. "My sense is that the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship people are becoming a denomination."
Conservative leaders were optimistic about the new president. The recent, former presidents of the SBC pledged their support to Henry following his election. Retired Houston judge Paul Pressler, an architect of the conservative "takeover," was upbeat about Henry's election. "He's sending all the right signals," said Pressler.
R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and a well known conservative, felt that moderates should not be hopeful about the Henry presidency. "There are some who, in their wishful thinking, will try to paint this as a rejection of the conservative resurgence," said Mohler in an interview with the Orlando Sentinel. "Jim Henry, taken at his word, will not allow that to happen."
Jack Graham, who nominated Henry, said he asked Henry if he would appoint people to committees who are not inerrantists. "Jim answered, ‘Not on your life."'
In other elections our new first vice president is Rev. Simon Tsoi (pronounced Choi) a pastor of First Chinese Southern Baptist Church in Phoenix, AZ. Pastor Tsoi was born in Hong Kong. Each Sunday he preaches three times: once in Cantonese, once in Mandarin, and once in English. Though not large, his church has been very active in sponsoring new churches and currently supports two missions, one an Hispanic mission, the other Anglo. Tsoi was elected without opposition.
Second vice president is Rev. Gary L. Frost, a pastor in Youngstown, OH. Frost, who is black, won in a runoff over three competitors. At the ceremony Thursday where the new officers were recognized, Jim Henry commented to the applause and cheers of the messengers, "We have a real rainbow coalition here!”
Registration secretary Lee Porter and recording secretary David Atchison were reelected without opposition.
Messengers defeated a motion to appoint a special committee to investigate trustee actions at Southwestern Seminary where Dr. Russell Dilday was recently fired as president, by a 55.13 percent to 44.87 percent vote.
Messengers also passed a motion which "directs" all SBC entities to stop receiving funds flowing from or through the CBF. This motion passed 58.6% to 41.4%
Messengers also showed their continued conservative direction in resolutions. The resolution on Health Care Reform expressed concern about provisions to cover abortion on demand, "distribution of contraceptives to minors without parental consent through public school ... health clinics," and the failure to protect religious institutions from "participating in a health care system which would condone and support morally objectionable practices." The resolution also characterized as "morally objectionable" the "forced inclusion of Southern Baptist institutions and churches in reform plans which may undermine the missions activities of our denomination."
The resolution on RU486 displayed strong pro-life views and condemned "the blatant advocacy of RU 486 by the Clinton Administration." The resolution further stated opposition to "the testing, approval, manufacturing, marketing, and sale of the abortion pill in the United States. " All Southern Baptist churches, associations, state conventions, and national agencies were urged "to support the impending boycott which will be waged against Roussel Uclaf and Hoechst AG, including their American subsidiaries."
The resolution Baptists and Catholics in Dialogue grew out of a document that Larry Lewis of the Home Mission Board and Richard Land of the Christian Life Commission had signed. Some Southern Baptists were concerned about possible ecumenical activities the SBC might have with Roman Catholics, and it was feared signing the document would hurt evangelism, especially among nominal Catholics. The resolution acknowledges areas of both doctrinal agreement and disagreement and stresses common moral concerns the two denominations share in our secular society. The resolution notes the strong commitment Southern Baptists have "to world evangelization and ... to share the Gospel with every nation, nationality, people group, and person." It also resolves "that Southern Baptists reaffirm their commitment to evangelism and global missions and renew their intent to share Christ with all people everywhere to the end that the unsaved may be converted and the unchurched may become part of Bible-teaching, Christ-honoring congregations."
The resolution On Outcome-Based Education recognizes parents as having primary responsibility in educating their children and expresses concern about the OBE focus on "`politically correct' social values, New Age philosophy to the exclusion of traditional Judeo-Christian values rather than measuring academic outcomes." The resolution resolves to "oppose educational reform experiments including those labeled ‘Outcome-Based Education,' which risks the undermining of Judeo-Christian values, local control, and traditional academic standards of excellence."
[Editorial Comment. Secular media, CBF spokesmen, and moderate/liberal Southern Baptists are inclined to characterize Jim Henry's election as either a victory for moderates or at least a demonstration of fractures within conservative ranks. There is another, and I believe more accurate way to look at it. Particularly in view of Henry's post-election commitments that he will only appoint inerrantists, the election seems rather to demonstrate the strength of the resurgence. We have witnessed two strong conservatives compete with each other. There is still much remaining to be done to bring the SBC back to where it should be, but praise God that we have passed another milestone along the way.
The vice presidential elections literally demonstrate in living color that conservative Southern Baptists are concerned about the status of an individual's soul, not the color of his skin. I personally know both these pastors as committed inerrantists, with true Christ-centered lives.
The two motions described in A.C. Smith's article are significant. Messengers refused to take any action critical of South western Seminary's trustees. Readers who wish to commend the trustees for dealing with a difficult situation which demanded action may do so by writing the trustee chairman: Ralph W. Pulley, Jr., 5440 Royal Crest, Dallas, TX 75229. When folks take a lot of flack, it is heartening to receive a pat on the back.
The motion directing SBC entities not to accept any more funds from the non-cooperative, non-Baptistic, non-fellowship (CBF) is important. One may consider its impact from three perspectives.
(1) Fiscal impact: Of course some SBC agencies will feel the loss of CBF dollars, initially. And that is to be regretted. But even from this narrow view, CBF contributions are a rapidly waning asset. Dr. Cecil Sherman and other CBF leaders are urging their contributors to move as rapidly as possible to the "Vision 2000" CBF budget track under which not a penny flows on to the SBC. Consider these figures: In 1991 CBF sent 59% of receipts to the SBC. In 1992 45%. In 1993 25%. It is easy to see that the dollars flowing to SBC through CBF even in the absence of this motion would rapidly become inconsequential.
(2) Organizational relations: CBF-ers are fond of claiming they are merely an "alternative missions funding mechanism" leaving the strong implication that they are loyal Southern Baptists who just choose a different route to send their dollars to the SBC. This is obviously not true. CBF is a separate denomination in all but public pronouncement. They have established or are affiliated with all the organizational components of a denomination: a national coordinating council, separate seminaries (most notably BTSR in Richmond), a separate missions agency, separate publishing house (Smyth & Helwys), separate press agency (Associated Baptist press), separate public policy arm (Baptist Joint Committee), a separate money foundation, a separate ethics agency (Baptist Center for Ethics), separate historical commission, and separate budgets. Not only are they separate, they are clearly malevolent toward the SBC and seek to weaken it as much as they can.
(3) Theology: Readers will have noted that CBF has been unable as yet to issue a policy statement on virtually any doctrinal issue, even on homosexuality. When folks do not believe or do not believe ALL the Word of God, they share no common truth foundation. In function this may cause no immediately recognizable problem; however, in theology the absence of that common basis of belief permits, even encourages going off on a tangent.
– Now in any large group there will be individuals or subgroups who begin to follow error. But where biblical authority is honored in fact, not just in word, issues can be thrashed out, truth sought, in Scripture, and one side can convince the other. The Gospel anchor holds in every stormy sea and acts to pull believers always back to the scriptural center.
– But where man's mind is placed above scriptural authority (the prevailing CBF approach) there is no anchor to windward, nothing to draw back those who begin to stray. The consequence inevitably is either disintegration or doctrinal minimalism. Alternately, one could view doctrinal minimalism as the first stage, disintegration as the destination.
In CBF today we see doctrinal minimalism. Cecil Sherman has repeatedly characterized CBF as "a missions delivery system, not a theology standardization system." (Tapes available.) It has also been seriously proposed that the only CBF confession should be "Jesus is Lord." In these statements we see doctrinal minimalism rampant. If CBF really does not agree on doctrine, why would they expend energy and resources on missions. Habit and inertia may prevail for a while, but in the absence of strong biblical doctrine, evangelism soon withers. The history of once strong, evangelistic "mainline" British and American denominations proves the point repeatedly.
"Jesus is Lord" is an essential assertion, but inadequate alone. Why inadequate? Because different people believe in different Jesuses. Muslims believe in A Jesus. Mormons believe in A Jesus. Bultmannians believe in A Jesus. But none of these is the biblical Jesus.
God's written Word is revealed, God-breathed, complete. We are warned in the most serious manner neither to add to it (as feminists do) or take away from it (as doctrinal minimalists do).
Thus the motion to draw a clear distinction between the Southern Baptist Convention which is rapidly returning to its historic stand on the perfection of the Bible, and the CBF which has embroiled itself in a doctrinal quagmire is one of the most important convention actions in some time.
Footnote: Every Baptist has the right to decide both doctrinal and fiscal issues for himself. Those who favor CBF are perfectly free to do so without restraint from the SBC. But to be folks of integrity they should do so honestly acknowledging their true stance and not pretend to be just another group of Southern Baptists.]