The adoption by the SBC in Orlando of the 2000 BFM will begin a new step forward in the control strategy for the so-called "conservative resurgence" promoted by Fundamentalists.

The striking of the statement that "the criterion by which the scriptures are to be interpreted is Jesus Christ" is tantamount to a rejection of Jesus Christ as the Lord of scripture. That proposal is a clear sign that Jesus is a bit too loving, too opposed to legalism, too forgiving and too non-controlling for the comfort of Fundamentalists. This action will thus serve to lessen opposition to their narrow interpretations of the Bible and enhance their practice of labeling those who disagree with them as "liberals."

The strong support for Calvinism in the new statement will enhance control and undermine strong emphasis on evangelism and missions. We must remember that Calvin interpreted his theology as support for the establishment of a theocratic state government and legitimized persecution of those opposed to his interpretation of scripture.

The new definition of soul competency will further strengthen the push for the new doctrine of "the authority of the pastor" and at the same time weaken the principle of the priesthood of the believer and threaten the autonomy of the local church. The right of the individual to interpret scripture for himself under the leadership of the Holy Spirit has been denied. Southern Baptists have established a "paper pope," whose authority is established by self-appointed fundamentalist interpreters.

Here is the type of strategy we can expect to see unfolding in the SBC in the years immediately ahead:

1. Trustees of the six SBC seminaries will adopt the new statement as a guideline for the employment of new faculty members.

2. Seminary presidents will require all current faculty to affirm the new confession. Those who in conscience refuse to "knuckle under" will be dismissed. This will ensure a "cookie-cutter" group of ultra conservative seminary graduates available to move into leadership positions in local churches, associations and state conventions.

3. All other agencies of the convention, including particularly the Sunday School Board, will implement similar procedures. This will ensure that all educational materials promoted and/or purchased from convention agencies by local churches will adhere to the identical conformist theological agenda. Thus, all local church Sunday School teachers and leaders will become tools to foster teaching the identical narrow interpretation of the scriptures and promoting the same political agenda.

4. The trustees of the International Mission Board and the North American Mission Board will follow the same approach and the staffs of both agencies will quickly fall in line. Then all newly appointed missionaries will be required to affirm the new statement of faith. Shortly thereafter current missionaries will be required to do the same of face termination or early retirement.

5. Attempts will get underway to persuade the WMU to follow the example of the other agencies and affirm the new statement. Since the organization is only an auxiliary and not under the control of the convention, this will prove more difficult. Where resistance becomes too strong, a new type of women's program that conforms to the male domination agenda will be promoted in the churches. These efforts will be strongly promoted in order to override the influence of the WMU.

6. While the above agenda is being implemented, leading Fundamentalist pastors in the various state conventions will begin a campaign for each state convention to adopt the new BFM statement. As soon as that is accomplished, state convention staff will be forced to affirm the revised statement or face dismissal.

7. The next likely step will be for state conventions to use the new BFM as a guideline for the election of persons to serve on the various state convention committees, boards, and agencies. This will effectively shut out all the Mainstream pastors and laypersons from any state leadership role in the respective states. Where state conventions are resistant to such efforts (such as Texas and Virginia), strong efforts will be made to promote and strengthen the separate, competing state conventions supported by Fundamentalists.

8. Most local Baptist associations have previously adopted the 1963 BFM as a guide for the work of the association. Some have articles incorporating it into their constitution and by-laws. Key fundamentalist pastors will begin to encourage local associations throughout the convention to "update" their guidelines to conform to the newly adopted revision. This will result in further pressure on local churches to conform.  In those associations that revise constitutions and/or by-laws, refusal to conform should lead to expulsion.

9. In those associations that revise constitutions and/or by-laws, refusal to conform should lead to expulsion. Most local Baptist churches have adopted the 1963 BFM as a guide for the work of the church. Some have articles of incorporating it into their constitution and by-laws. Fundamentalist pastors and/or key fundamentalist laypersons within the churches will begin to encourage their churches to conform to the new 2000 BFM. This will result in pressure on individual members to conform. In those churches that revise constitutions and/or bylaws, refusal to conform should result in loss of positions and places of service within the church.

10. The final result will be that Baptist freedom and Baptist democracy will exist in the SBC in-name-only. Through this strategy the Fundamentalists will effectively achieve their goal of top-down control over Baptist life. It will be accomplished by rendering null and ineffective the long-cherished Baptist principles of the freedom of the individual Christian under God and the autonomy of the local church.

We will have, in effect, a control hierarchy that dominates the faith and practice of Baptists throughout the whole convention.

July 2000