Chapter 19

Chapter 19 Tearing Down Priesthood of the Believer: The Takeover’s Authoritarian Pastors

The SBC Controversy was dismissed early on as a preacher fight and something that had little to do with the local church. It was easy for regular church leaders not to understand how yearly national conventions electing an SBC president had any connection at all with Our Baptist Church in Our Town, USA.

In reality, the SBC Controversy has always been about influencing the local church and national secular political power. One way to gain control of the local church is to control the resources that the overwhelming number of SBC churches use — resources from the Baptist Sunday School Board (now Lifeway) and the seminaries that many churches contact for their next pastor.

It is when a typical moderate SBC church calls a recent SBC seminary graduate as its pastor that the local church experiences The Controversy firsthand. And the experience is often painful for the stunned church.

The Takeover’s efforts to control the local church through a more authoritarian pastor can be seen in the passage of a 1988 Convention resolution which elevated pastors as the sole leaders of the church and de-emphasized the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer. The resolution highlighted the pastor’s “authority” and encouraged churches to “obey” and “submit.”

Jerry Falwell, now America's best known Southern Baptist preacher, spoke at Southwestern Seminary on August 24, 2004. In his address he clearly articulated the hope of SBC leaders to capture moderate churches through an authoritarian pastor: “May God lead many of you to some of these moderate churches that deserve fundamentalist pastors like you . . . . Sometimes it takes a full year before that church is who you are.” [119]

Pastor Jeffrey D. Vickery of Cullowhee, North Carolina, raises critical questions and concerns about the effect of the SBC Takeover on the local church:

Any moderate church that continues to identify with the SBC in an era when fundamentalism has firm control over the denominational hierarchy will potentially one day find themselves with an SBC-indoctrinated pastor whose allegiance to fundamentalism is strong. SBC leaders like Patterson, Aiken, Mohler, and others expect that their pastors will find their way into moderate churches and take control. Falwell simply put the truth into plain words.

What is amazing is that many Baptist churches that do not identify themselves as fundamentalist continue to maintain strong connections with the SBC and search among recent SBC seminary graduates for their next pastor, or make use of convention-supported Sunday School curriculum. In essence, they are Falwell’s hoped-for church converts and the home for these new fundamentalist pastors.

I believe it is time for congregations to reassess their position of dual alignment with a nod toward congregational honesty. It is increasingly impossible to maintain a connection with the SBC and with moderate Baptists and be honestly moderate or honestly conservative. As the SBC becomes deeply entrenched in its fundamentalism and more open about that reality, any church that remains tied to the SBC will be forced into open fundamentalism as well.[120]

119. Ken Camp, “Falwell offers vision for America , election advice at SBC seminary,” Associated Baptist Press, August 27, 2004.

120. Jeffrey Vickery, “More Honest Churches Needed,” Christian Ethics Today 11 (Spring 2005): 23-24.





Chapter 19 Tearing Down Priesthood of the Believer: The Takeover’s Authoritarian Pastors The SBC Controversy was dismissed early on as a preacher fight and something that had little to do with the local church. It was easy for regular church leaders not to understand how yearly national conventions electing an SBC president had any connection at all with Our Baptist Church in Our Town, USA. In reality, the SBC Controversy has always been about influencing the local church and national secular political power. One way to gain control of the local church is to control the resources that the overwhelming number of SBC churches use — resources from the Baptist Sunday School Board (now Lifeway) and the seminaries that many churches contact for their next pastor. It is when a typical moderate SBC church calls a recent SBC seminary graduate as its pastor that the local church experiences The Controversy firsthand. And the experience is often painful for the stunned church. The Takeover’s efforts to control the local church through a more authoritarian pastor can be seen in the passage of a 1988 Convention resolution which elevated pastors as the sole leaders of the church and de-emphasized the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer. The resolution highlighted the pastor’s “authority” and encouraged churches to “obey” and “submit.” Jerry Falwell, now America's best known Southern Baptist preacher, spoke at Southwestern Seminary on August 24, 2004. In his address he clearly articulated the hope of SBC leaders to capture moderate churches through an authoritarian pastor: “May God lead many of you to some of these moderate churches that deserve fundamentalist pastors like you . . . . Sometimes it takes a full year before that church is who you are.” [119] Pastor Jeffrey D. Vickery of Cullowhee, North Carolina, raises critical questions and concerns about the effect of the SBC Takeover on the local church: Any moderate church that continues to identify with the SBC in an era when fundamentalism has firm control over the denominational hierarchy will potentially one day find themselves with an SBC-indoctrinated pastor whose allegiance to fundamentalism is strong. SBC leaders like Patterson, Aiken, Mohler, and others expect that their pastors will find their way into moderate churches and take control. Falwell simply put the truth into plain words. Vickery continues: What is amazing is that many Baptist churches that do not identify themselves as fundamentalist continue to maintain strong connections with the SBC and search among recent SBC seminary graduates for their next pastor, or make use of convention-supported Sunday School curriculum. In essence, they are Falwell’s hoped-for church converts and the home for these new fundamentalist pastors. I believe it is time for congregations to reassess their position of dual alignment with a nod toward congregational honesty. It is increasingly impossible to maintain a connection with the SBC and with moderate Baptists and be honestly moderate or honestly conservative. As the SBC becomes deeply entrenched in its fundamentalism and more open about that reality, any church that remains tied to the SBC will be forced into open fundamentalism as well.[120] Previous Chapter \| Next Chapter 119. Ken Camp, “Falwell offers vision for America , election advice at SBC seminary,” Associated Baptist Press, August 27, 2004. 120. Jeffrey Vickery, “More Honest Churches Needed,” Christian Ethics Today 11 (Spring 2005): 23-24.
• info@SBCTakeover.com •