In the aftermath of our Annual Meeting and the decisive victories on so many issues facing our Convention, I heard more than one person lament to me that the SBC has gone liberal. I thought about that statement and wanted to offer my thoughts to the contrary. I do so in the hope that these brothers and sisters will join me in the hope for a bright future for our Convention and a change in their thinking about the obvious shift in our approach to politics and what that really means for the SBC.
The SBC has not gone liberal. Yes, our approach to politics and to political engagement has changed and is changing, but that is not akin to abandoning conservatism in favor of liberalism. Rather, the SBC is coming to a more biblical approach to engaging our society and government. Much of this change has come, admittedly, as the Convention has become more racially, ethnically and generationally diverse. As we have strived for brothers and sisters from such different backgrounds and experiences to be in unity around the gospel, we are discovering some things about politics and our approach to it:
- You can agree on theology and mission but disagree on which political issues are important or most important.
- You can agree on the importance of addressing a political issue but disagree on political strategy to address the issue.
- You can so often side with a political party that you default to a position where that party is always right and thus cease to biblically evaluate those policies.
- You can so desire your candidate to succeed that you no longer hold leaders accountable for their character or speak prophetically to denounce ungodly rhetoric and policy.
- Brothers and sisters of good conscience can be unified on theology and mission and disagree on politics.
The SBC has not gone liberal, but we are loosening our affiliation to one political party and view. That does not mean we have embraced the other. We have not softened our stands on the key moral issues historically important to Republicans such as abortion, marriage, and family. What we HAVE done is affirmed that brothers and sisters may agree on theology and mission and disagree on politics. That we can agree on what issues are important and disagree on how to address them. That we can hold different opinions on which issues are most important.
Further, as participation in the life of the Convention has become younger and more diverse, and as we loosen our affiliation with one party, our list of shared values has expanded. In addition to caring about abortion and marriage, we now include biblical values that were once ignored or held more loosely. Our shared hierarchy of values is no longer monolithic. No longer do all Southern Baptists view abortion as the single most important issue and our collective view of how to address issues is now more varied.
In recent years, what we have heard out of Baptist leaders has challenged our thinking, asked us to choose Christian unity over culture, confronted our prejudices, upset the status quo, and called us to evaluate the character of our leaders even when those leaders are on “our side.” We have increased the volume on our concern for a just society for people of color, for a godly view toward immigrants, on the protection of the most vulnerable in society, and in speaking truth to power even when that power is Republican or Christian.
A decade ago, Richard Land challenged the Convention to “vote values.” That hasn’t changed. What HAS changed is that our constituency no longer is monolithic in regard to which values are most important or how government should address those values. Thus, Baptists of good conscience can disagree on the best political strategies to address those issues. Baptists of good conscience may disagree on which candidate or which party most aligns with Christian values.
The SBC has not gone liberal. The binary hardline that one must be either “conservative” or “liberal/progressive” is purely a political one. I contend that if your interpretation of the shift on issues in the SBC is a shift to liberalism, then you have too closely married your religion with your politics. You likely see conservative politics as closely parallel to conservative, biblical theology. I think that’s a mistake. I vote values, and yet neither party’s platform, strategies, and actions are completely consistent with the Christian worldview. While my political philosophy is seen as conservative on many issues, it may be seen as progressive in others. That depends on who is doing the observing and where their political affiliations and commitments lie.
I would add that too often groups think politically first and let their political views shape their religious ones instead of vice versa. This is evident when the Republican political platform and policies are accepted without critique from believers. The same is true, of course, of Democrats as well. A thoroughly Christian worldview will not be able to fully align with either party without some compromise.
Thus, the conservative/progressive binary is not suitable to a thoroughly Christian stance on the issues that face us today. While one word or the other may be a helpful label in some contexts, these labels really are unhelpful if we want to develop a thoroughly biblical and Baptist worldview. The truth is that there are some things in our society and some values that we hold that ought to be conserved. Likewise, our society contains some things in which we need to make progress and some values that ought to be changed. And, for that matter, there are some political philosophies and principles that are amoral and that Christians of good conscience can disagree.
To the extent that we closely affiliate with one or another political party and philosophy, we inhibit our ability to speak biblically and prophetically to our society and its leaders. Especially when our priority becomes to preserve power and ability to achieve a political agenda rather than to speak biblically to the policies, rhetoric, and character of our leaders.
The SBC has not gone liberal. The shift that has occurred in the SBC is in some ways generational, in some ways cultural, but I hope is also biblical. In a young and diverse SBC, a strong tie to one political party has given way to an independence from political affiliation. This liberation allows the Convention and its entities to speak biblically to issues important to both sides of the aisle, to evaluate and challenge policy leaders to think and act biblically and to confront sin without regard to loss of political influence or insider status.
The SBC has not gone liberal. But what is perhaps the key issue that has some of our brothers feeling like they have lost their Convention, and for this I have no solution, is that we have changed our fundamental strategy of political engagement. For the past generation, Southern Baptists have sought to change the culture through political victory. To fight abortion by electing presidents and senators that would give us conservative judges. To fight for religious liberty by electing leaders and passing laws. This approach to politics has indeed been largely lost in SBC life.
So those that feel a loss at the direction of our Convention HAVE lost something. But I would hope that my brothers would come to see that what is lost is far less important and valuable than what has been gained. Yes, we have lost close affiliation to political party. Yes, we have lost the monolithic culture in which most all of our churches look and work and serve and are the same. Yes, we have lost some of our heroes as a new generation assumes the mantle of leadership. Yes, we have lost the sense that everyone in the room looks and thinks and worships and votes like me. Yes, we have expanded what it means to cooperate as Southern Baptists. But I hope my brothers would evaluate that none of these things we have lost is of spiritual or eternal significance.
It is healthy for our Convention to include godly leaders who disagree on politics. Such diversity forces us to speak to ALL issues and not only those that are most important to our group. Because now our group is now multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, and multi-generational we have the opportunity to speak to and learn from one another and are in a better position to discern and evaluate which of our values are biblical and which have been more strongly influenced by our cultural experience. Further, Freedom from political affiliation allows us to speak prophetically to power both commending them when they do well, challenging them when they are making key decisions, and speaking out against sin and injustice.
Even more, what we have gained is the opportunity to partner together united around a commonality that is more significant than politics and more grand than a shared ethnicity and culture but on the gospel of the Lord Jesus and his mission to make disciples around the world. What we have gained is the ability to speak to a culture with biblical clarity on not just some issues but on all of those that are important to Christians. What we are gaining is a foretaste of the biblical vision of Rev 7:9 and an outworking of the call to be one people of God.
No, the SBC has not gone liberal. But I am glad that we are moving away from a close alliance with a political party. I am thankful for the increased diversity in Baptist life and am hopeful for an increased diversity in its leadership. Such diversity will not lead us into liberalism, but into a day when we can learn from one another and sharpen one another so that our worldview is not political, but is biblical, and gospel-centered, and marked by the one-anotherness of being one people of God.
Nah. Not liberal only moderate.
You were at the same buffet I was Monday night. We don’t do anything “moderately” as Baptists.
Secular political philosophies and methodologies must not dominate or even influence the SBC or we will become as divided as the American political system is now. For us allow our identity as believers to be defined by the language of this political culture is to explicitly deny the very Christ in whom we claim to believe. For the foundation of the modern American political system is clearly divisive and intends to marginalize every opponent. It would have us hate our brother. But walking in the light demands something different. 1 John 2:9-11says, “Whoever says he is in the light and… Read more »
Todd, So, are we moving to the left or to the right? You seem to be saying that we are moving but not in the polarizing binary way, and that any movement is subjective at best. Ideally we should be so gospel focused that “left” and “right” would not come into view however political philosophy and theology are so inextricably bound to each other that we are apt to be disrupted over various issues. I would tend to sympathize with the opinion that the denomination is moving in a social progressive trajectory that is driven by societal changes. Only time… Read more »
It would be my hope that we don’t move left or right, but upward…
What Jamie said
Bingo Jamie! 1 Corinthians 10:31″ So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.”
To the extent that we are moving to a more biblical view because of “societal changes” that is to our shame. Christians should be leading the way on these issues and not limping behind. Further, I reject the idea that a striving toward a just society, protecting the vulnerable, fighting to end the abuse women and bringing abuse when it occurs into the open, seeing immigrants as persons created in the image of God and worthy of humane treatment, caring for the poor, etc. are somehow leftist issues. The Bible instructs us in all these things and Baptists should call… Read more »
Yes Todd. Yes.
Woody and Todd, I agree. However, the extent to which any shift, regardless of its label, may lack Gospel focus, it will also lack health. That has become all too evident for us in recent days and weeks. I believe we would be well served to abandon the secular notions of conservative and liberal/progressive and adopt just one label …. Gospel. And if one’s agenda does not fit that label, then it too would be properly abandoned. The Bible does not teach a conservative gospel or a progressive gospel, but only the Gospel of Jesus Christ, unencumbered by political opinion… Read more »
Ray, I would argue that what you are calling for is exactly what is occurring — not a move to the left, but a move toward the gospel.
And to that extent, I am solidly on board. I’m elated to have JD Greear at the wheel and hopeful for the future of the SBC and that the partisan spirit that has threatened us will continue to fade away.
My question, my concern, is if as you say the SBC is moving, is it truly going to be welcoming to those with different views? I opposed the idea of the Confederate Flag Resolution, not because I fly it (never have and only would in a very limited historical context) but because I saw the dangerous president it set (destruction of historical monuments, which I was told would not happen, but it clearly is), and because I opposed that resolution it was implied I was some kind of racist. I opposed the initial alt-right resolution (but supported the one that… Read more »
We will not tolerate racist comments or those that toe that line.
Dave, first and again, I recognize your right to do that. Period, end of stop, do not pass go, do not collect $200. It is your website and you can do it, those that do not like it can take a hike. Second, I would agree that true racist comments are disgusting and should be remove and I would be happy when such things are removed. But my point, is that care needs to be taken (both in this forum and in the SBC as a whole) that you do not lump people in how have different views on the… Read more »
Sometimes unity calls us to be sensitive to those with whom we disagree. That was why, for example, the Confederate Flag resolution passed so overwhelmingly. Dr. Merritt won the day when he called us to give up our rights (an overwhelming theme in the NT) for the sake of unity in the gospel. That motion did not pass on a narrow margin, it passed on a 98% vote. I would also add a couple of other things. First, there are indeed racists among us. We just disfellowshipped a church this year because they were shown to be unrepentant racists in… Read more »
Todd, the question of giving up our rights for the sake of unity is good, and to an extent I do agree. But I also ask, and I warn, where is the line? If I recall a few months back there was a topic asking the question of how much a Christian missionary should respect Muslim cultural traditions when it comes to appropriate times to go out and share the gospel. Or further of how far do you adopt to the culture of the people you are reaching, such as requiring your wives and daughters on the missions field to… Read more »
These are the kinds of discussions that we have internally. The former is a debate that has been going on and will continue between missiologists, theologians,and practitioners. These kinds of discussions are necessary and helpful as we seek biblical and effective methods to reach the lost. On the latter, I would appeal to our doctrinal statement, the BFM2000. This statement shapes our understanding and shows significant agreement in pastoral ministry and in the home as well as allowing for a range of views on application in other ministries. Nothing is changing here and I see no SBC ethnic churches with… Read more »
The SBC isn’t changing…it’s as pragmatic and political (internally and externally) as ever. I’ve always said its penchant for pragmatism would end in the apostasy of the denomination as a whole and still say it. The day is quickly coming when there will be a great exodus of faithful churches out of the SBC.
Baloney
With mayonnaise
I prefer Miracle Whip. It has that tangy zip.
The fact that no one actually rebuffed your statement Robert, reinforces your statement. A simple, baloney” or “nonsense” or “that’s not true” is dismissive and is not an answer. I don’t know if churches will leave but those confessional brothers and sisters still in the SBC will need to make a choice one day soon.
Tim,
I dont know if Robert is right, half right or wrong, but the short answers he received do not reinforce what he said. He made a general statement without specifics r reasoning and therefore deserves no ong thought out ‘rebuff’.Ifhe would put some meat in his words then , well let us see…
I feel no need to supply a substantial rebuttal to a statement that people who disagree with me are faithful and that the rest of us are apostate. It’s nonsense on its face.
The kind of statements that Robert Love and Tim Scott make are the kind we will be reading, hearing and maybe worse. I have no doubt of the pushback that we as a denomination will receive for the stands we took this week. This is when hate rears it’s ugly head “in the name of God and Biblical inerrancy” which I believe in both God and inerrancy just not the hate part. Although not Southern Baptist, as Mr. Love appears not to be, it forces them to either relook at their own church doctrine or policies or shoots down their… Read more »
Todd, I hear you and agree that change in our Convention is happening whether someone agrees with it or not or embraces the change or not. Our focus, however, must be and always be, on the inerrant truth of the Bible and getting the Gospel to a lost a dieing world. No exceptions. On that, I think we all agree. I just hope that Convention leadership doesn’t feel compelled to pressure people who differ with their political beliefs to change or to feel less knowledgeable about what Scripture says. Our focus must remain on fulfilling our mandate to get the… Read more »
Part of the problem is that a simple right/left continuum oversimplifies the situation. Everything can’t be explained that way and there are times even on one specific issue where people can have views that could come from multiple points on the continuum. Another problem is the changing definition of what’s conservative or liberal. Are we using political conservatism from 1985, 2005, or 2018 as our standard? Still another remains that theological conservatism and political conservatism may not overlap. There are no theological liberals in the SBC. I doubt there are any political liberals in the SBC. I see no theological… Read more »
“There is a peeling apart by many of theological conservatism from this newly rebranded political conservatism, which has more in common with populism than it does with the political conservative movement as represented by Reagan, Buckley, others.”
This is the most succinct, clarifying statement I have read on the shifting public policy focuses within the SBC. Regarding your distinction between theological and political conservatism, some might take your comparison even further: not only that they may not overlap, but do not, and should not. Biblical inerrancy has no antecedent in civic government.
I’ve never been one to like labels like liberal, moderate, or conservative. I agree we have not abandoned our conservative stance but only an ostrich with his head in the sand would believe we have not made a U-turn and are headed in a different direction. Too many of us have mistaken good, old-fashioned PATRIOTISM for political views.
That’s the point of my piece. We have indeed changed direction but not toward liberalism.
Is it possible that some of us have mistaken our good old-fashioned political views for patriotism also?
We’re not going back to critical liberalism or CBF-style moderation. The BF&M2k blocks that particular path pretty well, and I don’t sense much movement in that particular direction.
That said, there’s more than one direction to fall off the table here. As we roll, it’s fair to ask what dangers we are likely to encounter in this direction. A problem is that our vocabulary and senses are tuned to early-20th century American battles.
Todd, Thank you for this thoughtful and thought provoking post. I am going to respond to a few of my own reflections as I read the post. 1). The SBC is and always has been a political entity. It was and is structured as such and shall most likely always be such. 2). I still believe that abortion is the national sin of this nation and it should always stand as a priority of the SBC to do everything possible to end its terror upon the innocent. It is the most important “social issue” before the SBC and all other… Read more »
CB: I agree that Clinton would perhaps have been the most morally corrupt president in history. But what we got instead is in my opinion the most morally corrupt president in history. I’m not saying he’s worse than Clinton would have been, just saying he’s worse than all the rest.
Bill Mac, I agree with you about Mrs. Clinton. I am also convinced that Mr. Trump came to office morally describable as a train wreck. However, it is my opinion that that Mr. Obama came to office and left office as an immoral nuclear holocaust. Never has such a Neo-Pagan Cretian held the office of POTUS, and I pray never again shall one be POTUS.
CB: I agree with everything you said.
“The SBC has not gone liberal.”
A true statement.