The Money Quote for the Southern Baptist Convention
Timothy George has been at Southeastern the last two days to deliver the annual Page Lectures. He spoke on both days about the Reformation, focusing today on Martin Luther's recovery of the biblical gospel. It was rich stuff.
Yesterday, Dr. George also met with both Southeastern's faculty and her doctoral students, answering a variety of questions on a number of topics. At one point, someone asked him to offer some thoughts about the current state of the SBC. That was when he offered the money quote, which I am going to attempt to reproduce with basic accuracy. This is not an exact quote, but it is 95% correct:
The Southern Baptist Convention suffers from both amnesia and myopia. We don't know who we are, but we know we are better than everyone else.Â
This is perhaps the most succinct, intelligent, accurate thing I have heard anyone say about the SBC in the last couple of years. I think he nailed it. Which, I think, begs the question: how can we emphasize (recover?) a healthy, historic, biblical Baptist identity without spiraling into mere sectarianism, unhealthy triumphalism, or prideful self-sufficiency?
Great quote indeed. Reminds me of what he said at the Baptist Identity Conference earlier this year. I hope George’s voice is heard more in the SBC. Thanks for sharing Nathan.
Nathan,
I have three words for you when it comes to regaining an historical understanding of where we come from: “Trail of Blood.”
Just kidding…
But seriously, I think the question you have asked is really what is at the heart of some (and I mean some) of the chatter we see in the blogosphere concerning the SBC. How do we recover baptist identity without becoming sectarian or abandoning our true identity?
Well, I think we have to do it humbly. If one of our brothers is too sectarian, then we shouldn’t call him a closed minded fundamentalist. And, if our brother is a little too, shall we say, loose, then we don’t call him a flaming liberal. I think essentially it requires a humble look at the bible and our history. And maybe, just maybe, some honest historiagraphy that admits, for example, that there just might be two theological perspectives on election in baptist history past.
But, I’ve said too much. All in all, we won’t get anywhere as long as we try to draw lines in the sand and call people names. That part of baptist history I would love for us to abandon.
Thanks for the qoute.
Dougald
Nathan,
Dr. George’s statement is thought provoking. I think one of my main concerns though is my strong suspician that some are being rather “selective” in what they want to “recover” from Southern Baptist roots.
In other words, my suspician is that some want to recover “ecclesiology” while ignoring “soteriology” [which would be, at the least, leaning towards Geneva I think].
If my suspican is accurate, then I think these people do not have the authority to look at others and claim they are lacking SB material when they themselves, I think, lack it.
However, if I may attempt to sharpen what I am saying a bit, I also suspect that they are leaving out the “Southern” in Southern Baptist.
I have yet to hear anyone say “I’m not a Calvinist or an Arminian, I’m a ‘Southern’ Baptist”
And if I am correct, one might wonder if they are advocating some fuzzy Baptist blob [with strong social stands, of course:)]?
Anyway, thanks for the quote.
BCR
P.S. Don’t forget to vote Republican in the upcoming election. It’s your Southern Baptist, I mean, Baptist, uh…I just get so confused…:)
Nathan,
Don't you think that being accused of sectarianism, triumphalism, and self-sufficiency goes along with recovering a biblical Baptist identity? (I know you put some nice adjectives on those vices, but even without the adjectives, none of us want to be accused of those things.)
You and I agree that Booth is about as biblical as you can get among historic Baptists, and even he had to write a vindication for Baptist beliefs. I believe Booth was correct, and I tend to want to think that he conducted himself in a godly manner toward those with whom he disagreed. Still, he had to deal with such accusations.
To be honest, I don't fully understand Dr. George's quote. I mean, I know not every Baptist understands their roots, but I think that's a common problem for members of any denomination or group. I'm certain we have friends within other denominations who would attest to the "heresy of contemporaneity" within their own tribe.
And as far as the "we know we are better than everyone else" part goes, I guess I would have to hear of specific examples. Does he think that most Southern Baptists are elitists? I've seen too many small country SBC churches to believe that. Does he just mean that the average Southern Baptist tends to think he or she is correct on any given issue? If that's the case, he's talking about a malady from which nearly everyone suffers. I would hate to meet the man who thinks he is wrong on most issues.
How exactly did he apply all the quote? Maybe I'm missing something. In fact, that would not surprise me in the least. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
I believe Timothy George is correct about what he is saying and I think he is a brilliant mind.
Nathan I think that this postmodern generation has failed in the area of historical tradition. We are too concerned with the next “big thing” that we fail to look in the rear view mirror.
Warren Wiersbe said “We can have a better idea about what the future holds if we know what happened in the past.” I think this fits exactly with what we are talking about. We must launch forward without loosing sight of the past. I think this should be more emphasized in our seminaries and in our churches.
Seriously, when was the last time you heard a discipleship group or small group study Baptist History in the local church. Our people have a very small grasp of Baptist history. But the even bigger problem is that our pastors are not that much better off (one class in a Southern Baptist Seminary on Baptist History?)
I know the conservative resurgance was important but it seems as though our history as Southern Baptists only goes back to that controversy. Let’s go farther back - to our roots (not simply the big leaf on the tree that makes a lot of noise).
I will commit to doing this!
PS. Nathan I might need a tutor!!:)
Michael,
You would be hard pressed to find a better tutor than Nathan Finn.Â
In response to your post, I just wanted to offer a few thoughts (and I'm not sure if you were responding to me or not.)
Don't get me wrong. I like Dr. George a lot. I, too, think he's brilliant. I've been an admirer of his writings for a number of years, and I believe that some of his writings have had a profound influence upon my life.
And I would in no way downplay the need to understand history. I think it's important for any generation to do just that. In fact, I daily work to preserve the historical resources of Southern Baptists. I believe that our churches should understand both Baptist history and church history. It is imperative that we understand that our history as Baptists goes farther back than grandpa.
But the reality is that members of other denominations face this same type of problem. If this is one of our greatest problems, it affects not only Southern Baptists, but nearly every other denomination as well.
Still, I'm not convinced that I have understood George's meaning correctly here. I'll wait to hear what Nathan says.
Thanks for the thoughtful comments guys. I want to address Jason's specific question, because it's a good one.
I agree completely about a difference between being accused of sectarianism and actually being sectarian, like in the Landmark sense. Baptists will always be accused of being sectarian because of our ecclesiological convictions, and I doubt there is anything we can do about it. Even George, in a later question, argued that we must maintain our ecclesiology, no matter how much other Christians believe we are sectarian.
Based upon other things George said during the talk he dropped the "money quote," it is my understanding (and the understanding of others who were present) that, by amnesia, he meant contemporary threats to Baptist identity, particularly immersion and regenerate church membership.
By myopia, I think he was speaking more about the arrogant rhetoric (or tone) that we sometimes hear from the floor of the convention and read in some published writings, which have characterized Southern Baptist's public discourse since at least the turn of the 20th century. At least that is what I think he was talking about, though admittedly that may reveal as much about my feelings as it does George's.
The moral, I think: focus on recovering/reemphasizing historic Baptist identity, but do so humbly and without rancor or pride in public discourse.
NathanÂ
Thanks for clarifying, Nathan. That does make more sense.