Baptist Untouchables
By Charles W. Deweese
Executive director, Baptist History and Heritage Society, Brentwood, TN.

Why does the Southern Baptist Convention treat the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship with total contempt? Acknowledging that reality, Lonnie Wilkey, editor of the Tennessee Baptist state newspaper, Baptist & Reflector, wrote in his February 26, 2003, editorial (titled “Baptist World Alliance deserves a better fate”) that “what frightens me most… is it appears we are developing a ‘hate mentality’ toward the CBF.”

I have just read portions of the book The Essential Gandi: His Life, Work, and Ideas edited by Louis Fischer (New York: Random House, 1962). Mahatma Gandi (1869-1948) was honored by the people of India as the father of their nation because he helped free India from British control by using nonviolent resistance. He was assassinated by an Indian who feared his open attitudes toward all religions.

Gandhi radically opposed the Indian caste system, supported by Hinduism, that relegated to the category of “untouchable” certain segments of society—60 million people, in fact. Untouchables were outcasts. For Gandhi, “untouchability” was “segregation gone mad” (p. 132), a “crime” (p. 251), a “blasphemy” against God (p. 252), a “snake” (p. 253), and a “corroding poison” (p. 253).

Gandhi pounded home his point with reiterating emphasis: The “removal of untouchability . . . will be brought about only when the Hindu conscience is roused to action and of its own accord removes the shame” (p. 252). Further, “God did not create man with the badge of superiority or inferiority. . . .” (p. 252). Jews “have been the untouchables of Christianity. The parallel between their treatment by Christians and the treatment of untouchables by Hindus is very close” (p. 328).

SBC treatment of the CBF convincingly parallels both of the above. The SBC has assigned the untouchable status to the CBF and anything relating to it. Any good historian, or mere observer, of Southern Baptist life in the past decade could produce dozens of pieces of hard evidence to prove this. However, two sample, but striking, evidences will suffice:

1. In 1993 the SBC Historical Commission published a pamphlet titled “Who Are Southern Baptists?” that simply mentioned CBF. That resulted in threats by members of the SBC Executive to defund the agency—threats that were consummated in June 1997 when the agency was totally eliminated.

2. In 2003 the SBC Executive Committee voted to initiate the process of defunding the Baptist World Alliance simply because its membership committee has considered making CBF a member body.

SBC treatment of the CBF is a Southern Baptist version of untouchability. It presupposes that the SBC is superior, that segregation is okay, and that God supports such behavior. All of this raises critical issues about the integrity of the corporate SBC conscience and perhaps helps to explain why graduate studies in Christian ethics are taking such a beating in SBC seminaries today.

Gandhi claimed, “appeal to reason does not answer where prejudices are age-long and based on supposed religious authority” (p. 256). So what can Baptists do? Perhaps SBC Baptists need to confess the sin of separationism and start viewing other Baptists as brothers and sisters in Christ. Perhaps CBF Baptists need to keep emphasizing the values of Baptist diversity and simultaneously to keep in check the occasional urge to view others with an arrogant spirit.

When you call the Baptist History and Heritage Society, neither I nor anyone else on our staff will ask whether you are an SBC Baptist, a CBF Baptist, or any other kind. We will simply ask: How can we help you?

Our membership is open to any and every kind of Baptist worldwide. You will find a membership application form on our Website: www.baptisthistory.org

April 2003