SBC Heresy Trials

As many of you may know, I have been chronicling the on-going Evangelical Crisis and the demise of the idea of the Conservative Resurgence as a historical opportunity of effective evangelism. My criticism of the Conservative Resurgence has been manifold, but primarily focused on the methods by which the Resurgent leaders purged the convention of those with whom they disagreed. But another criticism has been the assumption made by the Resurgent leaders and Southern Baptists in general that God would bless correct theology. The argument raised by the Resurgent leaders was that if the SBC continued its “liberal” drift then our body’s effectiveness at evangelism would slide and giving to the Cooperative Program would falter. As recent statements from the SBC suggest, despite the Conservative Resurgence and its “conservative” shift, we are now in an Evangelical Crisis and our Cooperative Program proceeds are at an old time low. These are two developments that did not occur during the SBC’s “moderate” years.

My focus on these two developments has not been to point fingers at the Resurgent Leaders and say that these outcomes are their fault. No, I honestly do not believe they are really responsible for these problems. Rather my focus has been on the Resurgent claim that their beliefs about the faith would prevent such negative outcomes.

However, while I have been criticizing the SBC for its pre/assumptions, I have not yet produced my answer to solve the problem of the Evangelical Crisis. For many months now I have been considering the problem and I think that I have an answer.

I originally came up with several practical solutions that the SBC could adopt without necessarily drifting to the “moderate” side of Christendom.

Let me be clear: I do not think that the SBC has to become more “liberal”, “moderate” or “conservative” in order to be more effective at evangelizing. While I consider myself “conservative” and well within the orthodox tradition of the faith, many individuals of a rather more “ignorant” nature when it comes to particular “technical” aspects of our faith, would see me as a “moderate” at best and a “liberal” at worst. Such terms are so influx from time to time, from place to place, and from person to person, they are largely losing their meaning to me. However, while I have significant differences with the SBC about what constitutes “proper” theology and an even greater difference of opinion on the methods that we as believers use to insure “proper” doctrine is maintained, I do not really care whether or not the SBC generally believes what I believe. Their theological beliefs are not necessarily the problem and the current situation would probably not change if they theologically drifted to another place on the Christian theological spectrum.

Since we have a “conservative” convention, let’s play with the cards dealt to us. Therefore, what are some practical solutions that the SBC can implement?

1) We have more women in the church than men but the dominant theological position within the SBC somewhat limits the variety of ministry roles a woman can pursue. Therefore, we are limiting the ministerial role of over half our body. Now I do not expect that the SBC will start recognizing women as senior pastor, but I would like to see the SBC publicly push to have more women in the ministry. Make a grand commitment to invite, educate, and promote women into Southern Baptist ministries.

2) This will probably be the most difficult task. Reconcile with other evangelical groups (such as the CBF and BWA) for joint ventures of Kingdom building. We do not have to agree 100% with every person in order to evangelize. Heck, we join with Roman Catholics to promote moral issues in this country but we refuse to join other Baptists to promote evangelism. Let’s rethink this.

3) Let’s start and promote evangelistic groups and missions (without Cooperative Program funds) that can be ministered by “moderates” in the SBC. Without using CP money, the SBC can allow “moderates” in the convention to seek funds and support outside the CP. This way we can have ministry positions for “moderates” but still not be accused of financially supporting their beliefs.

4) This is a good one. For many decades until the late eighties and mid-nineties, SBC missionaries would help build hospitals and medical centers for the poor. There is a Baptist hospital in Asunción, Paraguay. The thinking up until the Resurgence was that by building hospitals in heavily populated areas, the missionaries could witness to those individuals who came to the hospital for cheap treatment and these people could be introduced to the local Baptist churches. This was the thinking for much of the modern era. However, many moderate and liberal theologians and missionaries began to rediscover the local church as the New Testament focus of missions. They soon began to alter the way in which they did missions. In time, this paradigm shift in thinking came to the Resurgent SBC and its mission boards. They soon arrived at the same conclusion as the liberals and moderates and proceeded to focus solely on the local church. And now you know one of the main causes of the SBC church planting movement. A very successful movement, I might add, that needs to be encouraged and continued. However, with this renewed focus on the local church, the SBC, which was continually losing and continues to lose funds in the Cooperative Program, the decision was made by the International Mission Board to cut many of the medical ministries regardless of how effective they were in evangelism. Therefore, the Baptist Hospital in Asunción, Paraguay had to find support outside of the SBC .., which they did. And they continue to lead people to Christ today … without SBC help. Now in the United States, we are rapidly facing a healthcare crisis; a fact admitted by politicos on the right and left. God, through Christ, is the savior of both the spirit and the body. As His servants on earth in this age, we are both capable and duty-bound to minister to the spiritual and physical needs on man. Therefore, I suggest that the SBC begin to start cheap medical ministries for the poor in order to bring their spirits and bodies to Christ. We have had success in the past with these methods and there is a current need for healthcare in this world that Christian ministers should fill. I would never suggest either abandoning or even limiting our church planting plans, but I do think that there are untapped seekers in this country that can reached through ministering to the body.

These are a few of the broader solutions I am suggesting in order to solve the current the Evangelical Crisis (there are others but I am saving them for later). These solutions are largely aimed at the SBC and are offered as something the SBC can do as a body. However, I do believe that there is an overall larger solution to the Evangelical Crisis; a solution that cannot be reached by the SBC as a body but by the believer as a member of the body of Christ. My solution will have to wait for another time when I have finished my research and contemplation of the various aspects of this issue.

Part of my research has involved an analysis of how various parts of Christendom have understood the faith. This area of exploration has brought me in contact with George Shriver’s “Dictionary of American Heresy Trials”; a very extensive treatment on cases of heresy in America. A large proportion of which have to do with struggles for control of what will be taught in seminary; perhaps there is inevitably a conflict between the conclusions of learned individuals, and the demand that a seminary which is the primary training ground for a group’s future ministers should teach in accord with the beliefs of the group, however ignorant that group is.

I thought the Southern Baptist entries were quite interesting, though I myself might have explained the positions of the individuals on trial with greater clarity.

Anyway, this is the point of this post. What I found most interesting is that three of these professors (Stagg, Moody and Elliott) are intellectual heroes of mind. Small wonder, eh?

Southern Baptists

George B Foster (1858-1910). Ordained as a Baptist minister, taught systematic theology and later philosophy of religion at the Divinity School of the U of Chicago. By 1895 he had abandoned orthodox Christian theology; by the early 1900’s he believed that Christianity was no longer a live option; God became ‘the ideal-achieving aspects of the cosmic evolutionary process.” The Baptists Ministers’ Conference condemned his 1906 book The Finality of the Christian Religion, voting 48 to 22 that its views were ‘contrary to scripture and …subversive of the vital and essential truths of the Christian faith.’ The 1909 book ‘The function of religion in man’s struggle for existence’ aroused even more controversy; Foster declared publicly that he was still a true historic Baptist because “Baptists hold to the right of private interpretation of Scripture, freedom of thought and speech, and the privilege of every man to hold communion with God without the mediation of a priest.” The Minister’s Conference voted on 26 June to expel him; however, he never surrendered his papers of ordination and he continued to teach at U of C. The case served to clarify and widen the split between conservatives and liberals, particularly among the Baptists.

Mercer University (1939). 13 University students filed charges against 4 professors, again primarily around issues of modern biblical criticism (Mercer is Baptist) and around the issue of evolution. Resignations (under pressure) due to doctrinal irregularity had occurred in 1894, 1905, 1906 and 1924. A 10-hour trial was held on 20 March. The faculty were accused of denying the existence of demons, the blood Atonement of Christ, conversion from sin, the second coming of Christ, the resurrection of the body, hell, the Genesis account of creation, and the molding of Eve from the rib of Adam; and of saying that the Bible contained contradictions. The trustee investigative committee however refused to condemn them and simply issued a caution; the majority of students also supported the professors.

Frank Stagg (1911- ). Professor at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary; investigated in 1956, apparently due to his writings on racial justice. Letters were solicited commenting on his views, which reveal six issues:

- undue emphasis on the New Testament, particularly on the human elements as opposed to the divine elements
- his view that the Trinity was unbiblical
- his view of the atonement as ‘transactional’
- his view that God’s wrath was the consequence of sin rather than a response to sin
- his ‘too psychological’ explanation of demons
- views on particular biblical passages

Stagg was called before the Trustees to respond, and then acquitted. He stayed at NOBTS until 1964, went to Southern Baptist and remained there until his retirement in 1982.

Robert Briggs (1915 - ). Briggs taught at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. In 1960 an investigation was begun into the teaching of Briggs, William Strickland and Harold Oliver for “the application of radical Existentialism and so-called Bultmanianism.” Over the next three years an extended struggle took place to resolve the questions of the academic freedom of the faculty versus adherence to the Abstract of Principles which all faculty members had signed on appointment; no formal charge of heretical teaching was ever made. In 1964 Briggs resigned; shortly thereafter he took a post at Vanderbilt University, and then moved on to the Interdenominational Theological Center in Atlanta. Oliver resigned and went to Boston University; Strickland resigned in 1966 to go to Appalachian State University. Briggs’ opinion of the situation was that his colleagues accepted the claims of historical-critical research but were unwilling to deal with its implications for understanding religious authority and truth. He later wrote Interpreting the Gospels, Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1969.

Louisville 13 (1958): Forced resignation of 13 faculty members from Southern Seminary for unorthodoxy.

Theodore R Clark (1912 - ). Clark taught at the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary; he was dismissed in 1960 primarily as a result of the publication of his book Saved by His Life (Macmillan, 1959). The trustees did not make clear the nature of their complaint but said that “His recently published book is one of several instances in which the board had been confronted with questions as to limitations in the area of communication with students and hearers as well as content of lecture materials.” Clark himself seemed genuinely surprised, puzzled and grieved over the controversy.

The book was a meditation on salvation, including a long prayer and several hymns written by Clark. The book aimed to put more emphasis on Christ’s life as a vehicle of salvation, rather than his death; and objected to the theology of some popular hymns about Christ’s death. Clark also emphasized the personal, existential self-giving of God over God’s transmission of propositional truth, and made other comments about the dangers of “Jesusolatry”.

The process appears to have been obscure; it is not clear that the Board ever met with Clark or that the faculty were aware that an investigation was underway. The Dean, J Hardee Kennedy, had written an approving review of Clark’s book and does not appear to have participated in the dismissal. Clark took an appointment at Pan American College in Edinburg, Texas.

Ralph Elliott (1925 -- ); dismissed from Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1962 over conflict about contemporary biblical criticism. In the 1950’s Southern Seminary had 13 simultaneous forced resignations over the issue (the ‘Louisville 13’); Elliott had been at Southern but moved to Midwestern shortly before the ‘massacre’. He was described at the time as ‘quite conservative in the larger world of biblical scholarship, a moderate in SBC religious ranks, and quite liberal in comparison to … most SBC pulpits'. He was tried twice: in 1960 after publishing The Message of Genesis: A theological interpretation, he was examined by the board of trustees who supported him, 14 to 7. The conservatives were unhappy with this result and passed a motion at the 1962 Southern Baptist Convention rejecting theological views which “undermine faith in the historical accuracy and doctrinal integrity of the Bible” and requesting trustees of all SBC institutions to address situations where such views were being taught; simultaneously, elections at the convention changed the balance of trustees at Midwestern. The new board met for a second trial; they agreed with Elliott on 9 out of 10 points, but they failed to agree on republication of the book – the trustees didn’t want to take responsibility for banning it, and Elliott refused to ‘volunteer’ not to seek its republication. The board then dismissed him by a vote of 22 to 7. Elliott moved to the American Baptist church and continued his career. Shriver notes that the second trial did not involve a disagreement over content, but a disagreement about whether the board could control publication of views in order to protect the position of the seminary; one explicitly said that “as long as it is a matter between a professor and his student what he says, that is one thing. But when he puts his beliefs in writing where everybody can read them – as in The Message of Genesis – that’s another thing.”

Dale Moody (1915-1992). Taught at Southern Baptist Seminary. Aroused controversy as to whether he supported the Baptist principle of ‘perseverance of the saints’ (drawn from Hebrews 6:4-6). He was accused in 1961 of teaching that it was possible for a person ‘once saved to be lost’ but was acquitted. In 1979, Moody proposed revision of the Abstract of Principles on this point; the University then said it did not wish to inhibit faculty freedom but would not extend his teaching contract past normal retirement age unless his teaching on this point was more traditional. Moody argued that his reading of the principle was in line with the original Biblical texts and the argument continued for roughly 3 years. On 17 November 1983, Moody gave a talk on the topic “Can a saved person ever be lost?”; whereupon the Arkansas Baptist State Convention asked the university to terminate him (he was already at retirement age). The University employed him until 1984 but refused to give him a further contract.

Paul Simmons (1936 -- ). Professor of Christian ethics at Southern Baptist Seminary, 1970 – 1992. He was attacked not for theological beliefs but for ethical positions, particularly in the areas of abortion, elective death and homosexuality, even though these were "solidly grounded in thorough research and careful biblical exegesis." This occurred in a general atmosphere of “fear, indoctrination and intimidation” led by the rising fundamentalist wing. In 1987 the Trustees reviewed Simmons’ positions, said there were no grounds for dismissing him but asked that he ‘moderate his public involvement’ in the debate on abortion. In 1989 he was accused of saying that Jesus was sexually active but this was proved false. Pressure to remove Simmons for his position on abortion continued and in 1992 the President attempted to offer him a financial package to leave, which Simmons refused. Following a further controversy about a film used by Simmons in a lecture, the Trustees proposed sanctions which Simmons was unwilling to accept, and he resigned.

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary 1985-94. Investigated for allowing teaching contrary to Biblical inerrancy. In 1987 the Trustees announced a hiring policy that would include only orthodox inerrantists; whereupon the President resigned. The school has declined; the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools has declared it deficient, AAUP has censured it, multiple resignations were submitted in 1991 and the school has been placed on probation (i.e. just short of loss of accreditation). Between 1985 and 1994, 27 of the 34 faculty and 13 of the 16 administrators resigned.

Molly Marshall (1949 -- ). Resigned from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1994; now at Central Baptist Theological Seminary (American Baptist, not Southern). A heresy trial was in the offing at the time of her resignation with the outcome largely predetermined; Shriver describes it as tied in with the ‘takeover’ of the SBC by the fundamentalists in the 1979-1990 period. The Seminary statement at the time of her resignation says that the president had determined that her views were ‘significantly outside the parameters of the Abstract of Principles’ although it did not specify; sources involved in the affair supposed it related to (a) the atonement (b) salvation only in Christ (c) ‘whether those once saved will persevere to the end’ (d) whether feminine language and concepts can be applied to God (e) the authority of Scripture. It is also possible that her status as a woman pastor and other gender issues played a role.