EDITORIAL: Texas Baptists learn to live at peace

Posted: 8/03/07

EDITORIAL:
Texas Baptists learn to live at peace

Democracy sure is messy. Especially in times of peace.

For years, the Baptist General Convention of Texas faced an ominous threat: Fundamentalists with a theological/political agenda for absolute domination set out to take control of the Southern Baptist world. They succeeded nationally in 1990, and then they set their sights on state conventions. One fundamentalist leader notoriously said their ultimate prizes were the BGCT, Baylor University and the Baptist Standard.

For traditional Texas Baptists living “abroad”—beyond our borders—those years afforded numerous opportunities for embarrassment. The most visible leaders of the fundamentalist movement hailed from Texas, so outsiders associated Texas Baptists with their theo-political excesses. Non-Texans seemed to think the BGCT would fall and become the bastion of Baptist fundamentalism.

This left traditional Texas Baptists saying something like this: “The BGCT is not like that. Traditional Texas Baptists are biblical conservatives, but we’re certainly not fundamentalists. We believe in the priesthood of all believers and religious liberty. We champion local-church autonomy. Texas Baptists will resist fundamentalism like nobody else. Our convention will stay strong. When others fall, the BGCT will remain a beacon for liberty and freedom.”

Thanks in large part to a then-new organization called Texas Baptists Committed, we were right. Time after time, as other conventions capitulated, the BGCT withstood the fundamentalist onslaught. Texas Baptists Committed provided the structure, will and discipline to hold on, to resist the seemingly irresistible force that gained control of the national convention and most other state conventions.

Ironically, Texas Baptists Committed faced its greatest challenge not in the heat of battle but at the onset of peace. In a reverse-image of national politics, fundamentalist leaders acknowledged defeat in Texas and went off to start their own convention. Soon, their followers quit attending the BGCT meetings, and threat of takeover ended.

So, what happens to a potent—and valuable—political force when the din of battle falls silent? Some Texas Baptists, who never really wanted to resist fundamentalism or who felt queasy at the thought of resistance, clamored for TBC to dismantle. Others, who deeply appreciated TBC for providing core leadership in resisting fundamentalism, began to question its peacetime role. And even many TBC leaders acknowledged the need to redefine the organization in an era when fundamentalism does not present an imminent danger.

Now we’re up to date: For the first time since TBC began leading Texas Baptists to resist fundamentalism, a non-fundamentalist candidate with a potentially broad base is opposing a TBC-supported candidate for convention president. The broader issue has nothing to do with either candidate’s background and qualifications. It has everything to do with how the BGCT elects leaders and moves forward in a post-fundamentalist era.

Temptation beckons from the extremes: Either the TBC should fold up shop, or anyone who opposes the TBC is not loyal to the BGCT. Neither extreme—which, incidentally, is not the position of the candidates and their close supporters—is accurate. The TBC still has a role to play, and at minimum, it should include educating Texas Baptists regarding their history, heritage and future. And Texas Baptists can thrive with open elections. Multiple viable candidates are good for our convention, and diversity of opinion regarding whom to elect is a distinct Baptist quality that demonstrates healthy openness.

Let’s take the high road: Say good things about the candidates and their supporters. Speak well of each other. Encourage each other as we look to the future. We showed how to win the Baptist “holy war.” Let’s show the world how Baptists of goodwill can wage peace.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard.