Ammerman on Baptist Politics

                                                                                                                                Vol. X, No. 5, May 1997

The following selection is from Nancy Tatom Ammerman’s book, Baptist Battles (Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, 1990) pp 169-71. At the time she wrote the book Dr. Ammerman was associate professor of the sociology of religion at the Candler School of Theology, Emory University. She is Southern Baptist, a very capable sociologist, and highly active among the more liberal Southern Baptist groups, for example, the Alliance of Baptists. Her book is based upon research surveys conducted among a large number of Southern Baptists during the mid-1980s.

  Interestingly, her book’s conclusions uniformly support conservative charges against the liberal establishment which ruled the SBC before the conservative resurgence. This Banner’s “Antiheritage” addresses the often heard “moderate” charge that conservatives introduced politics to the SBC where previously everyone had been treated equally and no politics occurred. Because Ammerman is a widely known liberal, other liberals have a difficult time refuting her conclusions.

Regarding convention politics she writes [bold print has been added]:

“The annual meetings had always been political occasions, of course. ... For the period between 1931 and 1979, most of the work of the denomination went on in its institutions and agencies, relatively undisturbed by the annual gathering to which they reported. Churches accepted that authority and allowed the programs and materials of the denomination to shape what they did. Policies were set and rewards allocated largely inside the network of pastors, trustees, and bureaucrats who were in charge. Power was at issue when people met for their annual meeting; they just never noticed it because they accepted the legitimacy of the leaders who governed and the staff who executed policy. ... When fundamentalists decided to challenge the old powers, they had to organize their own system of rewards and bring to bear a new set of resources. It was not that the convention had become political for the first time. Rather there were for the first time contending political parties, each with its own platform, leadership structure, resources, and rewards. ...

“During the 1950s and 1960s, fundamentalist pastors had largely been excluded from the normal channels of leadership in the denomination. They had rarely been nominated for any office at any level and rarely received invitations to preach in places of honor or to join agency staffs or seminary faculties. They were not recommended to the best pulpits by the state and associational leaders.”

In such a system it was difficult and professionally hazardous for Bible-believing pastors to openly stand for what they believed. This issue’s “Heritage” item by Charles Haddon Spurgeon addresses essentially the same problem he encountered over a century ago. As Jesus said, “I came not to send peace, but a sword ... and a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.” (Matthew 10:34,36)

Our challenge is not to assure we never receive criticism but rather to be willing to stand upon the Word of God regardless of criticism.