A MATTER OF PERSPECTIVE:
Meanness is not a Fruit of the Spirit
By David R. Currie, Coordinator

The January Bible Study this year was on Galatians. You can imagine that I love the book of Galatians. It is all about Paul standing up to legalism - fundamentalism. It is the perfect text to support the work of Texas Baptists Committed. There is no other Gospel but that of the Grace of Jesus Christ.

Galatians 5 talks about the Fruits of the Spirit. They are listed as love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance. This list was written by Paul, the same man who wrote in Gal. 2:11, “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.”

It raises the question, “How do you stand against legalism/ fundamentalism as Paul did in chapter 2, and still exhibit the fruits of the spirit such as love, gentleness, and meekness?” How do we do our ministry at TBC without being mean, because meanness is not listed as a fruit of the Spirit?

I believe we avoid meanness by having a strong commitment to integrity and honesty. We must be clear regarding what is fact and what is editorial opinion. We are an advocacy organization. We have an opinion and lobby Texas Baptists to support our position. We also report factual information. Some is positive. Some is negative.

On the positive side, we talk about a vision of the future apart from this battle. We praise the BGCT and its programs.

On the negative side, we report factual events done or said by fundamentalist leaders, because it is important for Texas Baptists to see how fundamentalism is not consistent with Baptist heritage.

Think with me further. Our mission at TBC is to support the BGCT and its programs and support the Gospel of Grace. We urge Texas Baptists to not support legalism/fundamentalism because based on fifteen years of observation, (and study of the Frank Norris years), it looks like (notice my choice of words to indicate this is an editorial opinion), fundamentalism’s legacy is too often what is mentioned in Galatians 5 as “works of the flesh”, i.e., “hatred, wrath, strife, heresies.”

The above writing is not intended to be mean. It is evident that we have a great deal of strife in the SBC that started in 1979 when the fundamentalists took control. I do not think it is mean to say that anymore than I believe Paul was mean to confront Peter to his face because he had given in to the Judizers in Galatians.

It is also not right to ignore legalism and pretend it is not threatening us as Texas Baptists or has already divided the SBC. It has done that. Ignoring that fact will not make the strife go away or stop. Legalism must be confronted as Paul clearly demonstrated for us.

In this issue, we will report many things that seem negative, because an unbelievably large number of negative actions and statements have occurred since our last newsletter. They need to be confronted, especially the false information and statements, because we have found that untruth unchallenged is too often accepted as truth.

So, you will read the fact that some churches are giving less money to support the BGCT, and we will comment that to us this action seems to be punitive in origin. We will try to logically explain our position.

You will read the fact that the fundamentalists wrote that the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs “supports a more contemporary position on church/state issues while the SBC Christian Life Commission supports a more tradition/historical position.” Judge Abner V. McCall will counter that statement with factual information that will clearly show that whoever wrote such nonsense either does not know Baptist history, or was comfortable writing an untruth.

You will read similar articles on Calvinism, inerrancy, Southwestern Seminary, the removal from the WMU of their program assignment to promote mission offerings, and other items. It is a pretty extensive list because, in my opinion, a great many cherished Baptist doctrines and practices have been challenged in recent months. They need to be answered, but not in a mean manner.

I personally believe a great deal of what the fundamentalists do and say is mean. The clearest example of meanness that has occurred in Baptist life is how common it has become to accuse people of not “believing the Bible.” I disagree strongly with Paige Patterson, Adrian Rogers, Ken Hemphill, Morris Chapman, Miles Seaborn, etc., but I would never write that these people do not believe the Word of God. That would be mean.

Yet fundamentalists use this tactic with regularity. An example is found in Light, the “public policy and religious liberty publication” of the SBC Christian Life Commission. In their Nov/Dec, 1994 issue, they report on a meeting with President Clinton regarding abortion. During the discussion, the President said his position on abortion was consistent with that of the resolution passed at the 1971 SBC annual meeting. He asked “did we learn something about the Bible in the last 23 years” that changed our position?

James A. Smith, a member of the SBC Christian Life Commission staff responded, “The reason Southern Baptist Convention resolutions have changed is not because we learned something about the Bible. Instead, we elected new leaders who believe the Bible. The former leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention — including the Christian Life Commission and Baptist Joint Committee —rejected the clear evidence of God’s revealed Word, which holds human life to be sacred and worthy of protection.”

I will not comment on abortion. That is not the role of TBC. We are not an ethics organization.

What I want you to notice is the meanness of Smith’s words, how full of (Gal. 5) “hatred, wrath, strife” they are. He is accusing Foy Valentine, James Dunn, and James Wood (former head of the Joint Committee who now teaches at Baylor) of not “believing the Bible.”

I know each of these men personally. I worked for Foy Valentine in Nashville at the CLC. The Word of God has shaped these men’s lives. Do you think Foy Valentine did not believe the Bible and act on his interpretation of it when he met with White Citizen’s Councils all across the south in the 1960s — standing up to death threats over the issue of race?

They may interpret the Bible differently on many things, but I thought that is what “priesthood of the believer” was all about. We all interpret it differently, but that does not mean we do not believe it. W. A. Criswell publicly expressed satisfaction following the 1973 proabortion ruling by the U. S. Supreme Court and according to Jess Fletcher’s recent book, has not changed his position. Would Smith say W.A. Criswell does not believe the Bible?

The point I am making is this: We do have a major disagreement among us as Southern Baptists. I personally think this whole takeover was stupid and pointless and unneeded (is that blunt enough?). It has happened anyway. On the SBC level, I can not stop what has happened. I can help stop it in Texas and before God will do all within my power, ethically and morally, to do so. I personally could not face the Lord on judgment day without being ashamed if I did anything less.

But in doing so, I must remember that meanness is not a Fruit of the Spirit. As must we all.

April 1995