Three weeks prior to the BGCT annual meeting Rick Scarborough, fundamentalist candidate for president of the Baptist General Convention of Texas, sent a message in print and on tape to every Texas Baptist pastor. The title of the message was “Twisted Thinking or A State Convention Adrift?”

Scarborough’s message was a response to an article I wrote in the Spring 1996 issue of the Texas Baptists Committed newsletter entitled “The Sadness of Adrian’s War.” I wrote my article as a response to Adrian Rogers’ 1995 Pastors Conference message when he spoke about “spiritual warfare” within the convention.

Since Scarborough’s candidacy showed Texas Baptists clearly the spirit of fundamentalism, and since Southern Baptists of Texas have pledged to press on in their efforts to take control of the BGCT next November in Austin, I believe it is appropriate and important that I answer Scarborough’s mailing. I am sure Texas Baptists can expect more of the same during the coming year from Scarborough and other fundamentalist leaders.

Scarborough quoted me accurately and I appreciate that. In other mailings he quoted me, but left out parts, thus changing the meaning of things I have written. He called me after I misquoted him in a TBC meeting in Marshall. I quoted from Don Wilkey’s review of Scarborough’s book Enough is Enough, which was mailed to every Texas Baptist pastor, but it sounded like I was quoting Scarborough. I told him over the phone I would apologize in our newsletter for not making myself clear and I do apologize for not being more clear. Our disagreements over the future direction of the BGCT should be done with honesty and integrity.

Allow me to reprint my quote from the Spring 1996 TBC newsletter:

“The 1995 Baptist General Convention of Texas Annual Meeting is over. Texas Baptists have once again rejected fundamentalist leadership of the state convention and have shown their deep understanding of Baptist polity and their commitment to staying focused on the ‘mission.’

“Am I pleased? Yes! Am I filled with joy? No. Why? Because I am profoundly sad that so much energy, time and money has to be spent protecting and supporting the leadership, programs and institutions of the Baptist General Convention of Texas when there is nothing wrong with the leaders, programs or institutions. There is nothing broken to be fixed. There are no liberals to get rid of: This fight is an absolutely irrational encounter brought on by some unbelievably twisted thinking”

Scarborough wrote, “I want to challenge that statement,” and proceeded to do so for four pages.

DIFFERENT OPINIONS

Now I would like to respond to his challenge. But first let me point something out to you. This controversy is not about Rick Scarborough and David Currie. We simply represent two different points of view. This controversy is about the future of the Baptist General Convention of Texas and its effectiveness in the Kingdom of God. This controversy is about Baptist principles, our Baptist institutions, our state mission programs. It is not personal between Rick and me. I have never met the man.

Second, I would like to say I am very proud of the quote he is responding to. I will stand by it. I do believe in the leaders, programs and institutions of the BGCT. I believe the BGCT is the strongest Baptist mission organization in the world. I do believe this controversy is a sin against God. I believe it was foolish when it started in the SBC in 1979 and is foolish today. I wish it would end tomorrow.

What I must do, and I believe as a matter of integrity, we all must do, is stand up for the Gospel of grace. Fundamentalism is the same spirit as that of the Pharisees Jesus encountered and JESUS STOOD UP TO THAT SPIRIT! It is a spirit of suspicion, anger and control. Over and over again we read in God’s Word that the Pharisees, rather than rejoice at Jesus healing someone, instead “plotted against Him.” We have among us those with a spirit of suspicion who are plotting against our leaders and institutions. I will follow the example of Jesus and resist this spirit.

In 1979 the Southern Baptist Convention was focused on Bold Mission Thrust, our plan to take the Gospel to every person on earth by the year 2000. Fifty thousand of us gathered in the Astrodome to launch this event. That same year fundamentalism rose up and the SBC has never been the same. Virtually none of our Bold Mission Thrust goals have been accomplished. We became a denomination embroiled in controversy.

Politics became our focus, not missions. I believe many more people are spending eternity apart from God because of what happened to the Southern Baptist Convention since 1979. A bad spirit came among us. People’s character was assassinated. People were fired. The SBC lost its effectiveness. Bold Mission Thrust is a faint memory.

I believe the Kingdom of God needs Texas Baptists. I believe Texas Baptists have a responsibility before God to keep our focus on missions and evangelism and show the world what “real” Baptists are like. I believe Texas 2000, our Texas Baptist plan to share the Gospel with every person in Texas by the year 2000, should not go the way of Bold Mission Thrust. We must stay focused on “mission.” Unfortunately, we are going to have to turn back a “spirit of suspicion” in order to accomplish what God has set before us.

Now allow me to respond specifically to Scarborough’s charges.

First, he tells about the beginnings of the Texas Pastor’s Conference, which he was instrumental in starting. This is history I know little about. I do know the SBC Pastor’s Conference was a showcase for fundamentalist preachers and was used to help with the takeover of the SBC.

BAPTIST MEN AND WMU

His message includes a slap at Texas Baptist Men and the WMU. He says leaders of Baptist Men and WMU “urged me not to offer a meeting to compete with their meetings on Mondays, preceding the annual convention. Then I reminded Texas leadership that very few pastors were attending those meetings, but that many would attend a conference just for pastors that focused on strong anointed preaching.”

Friends, I believe there is plenty of “anointed preaching” at the Texas Baptist Men and Texas WMU meetings and pastors should be attending. I know of no more effective organizations than Baptist Men and the WMU. Current SBC leadership has been highly critical of the WMU for years and is closing down the Brotherhood Commission. I do not want that to happen in Texas.

I can remember as a small boy accompanying my father and other Baptist Men to our Baptist encampment in Brownwood to put new roofs on the buildings. I remember wonderful breakfasts that I got to attend. I remember accompanying my mother to WMU house parties in Waco.

With the current SBC leadership seemingly more interested in politics than missions, and with most of the recent past SBC presidents giving less than 3% to missions, we would not have a strong SBC mission emphasis if not for the WMU and Baptist Men.

Joy Fenner, the state director of the Texas WMU, was criticized for speaking at a CBF Global Missions meeting. The WMU is supposed to support missionaries supported by local churches. It should respond to the direction of local churches, not national Baptist organizations. Joy Fenner should speak at SBC Foreign Mission Board conferences and CBF conferences if she is responding to the lead of local churches like she should. And the SBC and the CBF should not try and dictate to the WMU what missions to support. The WMU is an auxiliary organization free from any control and it should stay that way in order to respond to churches, not conventions or fellowships.

Scarborough says that BGCT leaders used their influence to secure a redefinition of what constitutes a gift to the Cooperative Program in 1994. I have never been prouder of Texas Baptists for making this decision.

In the midst of controversy, Texas Baptists tried to do something fair and healing. We decided to respect local church autonomy and respect all church gifts equally—whether to SBC agencies, CBF, Criswell College, etc. It was an effort to keep peace and prevent division. It would work if people would respect local church autonomy and not criticize the decisions of local congregations just because they disagree with where local churches send their mission dollars. Scarborough does not like the freedom we have as Texas Baptists. I believe this freedom is of God.

NAME NAMES

Next Scarborough accepts BGCT Executive Board Chairman Bob Campbell’s charge to “name names” of BGCT leaders trying to take the BGCT into the CBF. He names Charles Wade because Charles co-chaired a CBF General Assembly. He is right. Charles did co-chair an Assembly. But that action does not constitute “trying to take the BGCT into the CBF.” It simply means Charles supports CBF which is his right. CHARLES WADE HAS DONE NOTHING DURING HIS TENURE AS PRESIDENT OF THE BGCT TO CONNECT THE BGCT AND CBF.

He names Ophelia Humphrey, immediate past BGCT first vice-president, and her sin is having served on the CBF Coordinating Council and belonging to a church which gives some mission dollars to CBF. Again, Ophelia has done nothing to try and “connect” the BGCT and CBF.

He names Noah Rodriguez, immediate past BGCT second vice-president. Noah’s sin is convening a workshop during a CBF General Assembly. Again, Noah has done nothing to try and “connect” the BGCT and CBF.

He names Jerold McBride, former BGCT president. Jerold’s sin is also convening a workshop during a CBF General Assembly. Again, Jerold has never done anything to try and “connect” the BGCT and CBF.

Finally he names Bob Campbell, current chairman of the Texas Baptist Executive Board. Bob’s sin is that “some in his church family” contribute to the CBF.

Texas Baptists, there is nothing in these five examples that even hints that these people are trying to “connect the BGCT and CBF.” These people simply support CBF or attend churches that give to CBF. If Scarborough has church members who send money to Jerry Falwell does that make them disloyal Southern Baptists? I do not think so.

Are our many African-American churches, who have been dually aligned with other denominations for years disloyal Southern Baptists? Surely not!

Yes, many Texas Baptist leaders like those named above support CBF. They are opposed to the “spirit of suspicion” that characterizes the fundamentalist leadership of the SBC. They have expressed their opposition to fundamentalism publicly. That is what makes them leaders and why Texas Baptists have elected them leaders. But supporting CBF is not a requirement for leadership among Texas Baptists. The two vice-presidents elected at this years convention attend churches which do not support CBF in their budgets.

I support CBF. I love Daniel Vestal like a brother. I have admired Keith Parks as long as I can remember. I believe Southern Baptists need an alternative to the pharisaism of the SBC. But I will join Rick Scarborough in fighting any connectionalism between the BGCT and the CBF.

Connectionalism is foreign to Baptist polity and the autonomy of local churches and state conventions. No one that I know is trying to connect the BGCT and CBF. CBF should be a non-issue at the annual meeting because supporting CBF is a local church decision.

What I hope is happening is that the connectionalism between the BGCT and the SBC is being broken. With the BGCT staying true to Baptist principles and the SBC having abandoned them, tension between the two conventions is a natural result. Since conventions are “independent and sovereign” according to the SBC Constitution, it is important that we honor this principle. Texas is not a farm team of the SBC. The BGCT is an independent and sovereign convention and we should act like one. Connectionalism is not good Baptist polity. Voluntary cooperation is!

Scarborough goes on to criticize the things CBF supports. I will not respond to that section except to say I am proud of CBF for supporting Associated Baptist Press, so many wonderful Baptist seminaries (Glenn Hinson and Dan Bagby teaching at Richmond do not seem like radicals to me), and the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs.

Scarborough links CBF to Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, which I believe is quite a stretch. CBF has no connection with Americans United to my knowledge. I support most of what I read about Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and since Scarborough has said “the separation of church and state is a lie,” I can understand why he does not support them. Baptists throughout our history have been champions of religious liberty.

I want to address three more things in closing: women in ministry, local church autonomy, and inerrancy.

WOMEN IN MINISTRY

Scarborough makes a big deal out of CBF recognizing women ministers and deacons and points out Bill Turner, pastor of South Main, Houston, quoted a woman deacon in an article he wrote.

I can think of no issue that should be less divisive than women ministers and deacons if we will act like Baptists. This issue has been around since 1845 when the SBC was formed. The founder and first president of the Southern Baptist Convention, W. B. Johnson, advocated women deacons in his book The Gospel Developed Through the Government and Order of the Churches of Jesus Christ, written in 1846! He wrote:

“The particular department of service, which each member in the deaconship would occupy, would be determined by the talents possessed. To one, the keeping of the money, and the specialties of the church, might be committed. A second might keep the records of the church. A third might exercise a supervision over the meeting house and its arrangements, that all things may be kept in a decent and orderly manner, attracting hearers to the sanctuary of God. A fourth might be employed in attending to the poor, seeking them out, relieving their wants, and giving them good counsel. In these two last departments, deaconesses would be particularly useful. In visiting the female poor, and in attending to the interior of the meeting house, their services would be exceedingly valuable. And therefore it is, that the deaconship admits of females into its number. Phebe was a diaconos, deaconess, or female servant of the church at Cenchrea, a succorer of many, even of the apostle himself: “ (pp: 96-97)

Whether the Bible teaches that women can be ordained as ministers or deacons is a matter of interpretation of Scripture. Texas Baptists Committed stands for historic Baptists principles. We do not have a position on women in ministry, abortion and many other such issues. But whatever a person’s position is on such issues, it does not determine whether a person believes the Bible or not. Their position simply reflects their interpretation of God’s Word, not if they believe it!

Baptists are supposed to believe in the priesthood of every believer and local church autonomy. If we let those two principles guide us, women in ministry is not a divisive issue. If a woman feels called to the ministry that is between her and God. If a church wants to ordain a woman to the ministry or as a deacon that is a matter between the woman, the local church, and God. That is the freedom that is supposed to characterize Baptists.

CBF recognizing the decisions of local churches is simply good Baptist polity. Baptist headquarters is the local church, not a state or national organization.

AUTONOMY

Now a little more about local church autonomy and convention autonomy. Scarborough seems to have a real problem with this principle. The freedom we have as Texas Baptists seems to be a major issue with him. He criticizes the Texas Christian Life Commission for working with both SBC and CBF missionaries to fight hunger. He criticizes the BGCT for respecting the choices made by churches about financial giving. He seems to like control a whole lot more than freedom.

Later he writes: “Should our State Convention allow continued and unlimited opportunity to continue recruiting more churches and their resources in the CBF? I don’t think so.”

Excuse me, but I am a Baptist! My state convention better not try and limit what my local church has access to now or ever!

The SBC Constitution says: “While independent and sovereign in its own sphere, the Convention does not claim and will never attempt to exercise any authority over any other Baptist body, whether church, auxiliary organizations, associations, or convention.” (Article 4)

The BGCT Constitution says: “This body (the BGCT) is and always shall remain, only and solely a medium through which Baptist churches may work harmoniously in cooperation with each other, promoting the work and objects set forth in this constitution. It has not, to any degree, and shall never have any ecclesiastical authority. It shall not have and shall never attempt to exercise a single attribute of power or authority over any church, or over the messengers of the churches in such wise as to limit the sovereignty of the churches, but shall recognize the sovereignty of the churches under the one Sovereign, Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Article 1, Section 2)

The BGCT better not try and “exercise any authority” over the local church I attend and what we have access too. How would Scarborough feel if the BGCT wrote Jerry Falwell and told him not to mail any material about Liberty University to any Texas Baptist church. Scarborough would cry foul in a heartbeat.

INERRANCY

And finally, inerrancy. How in the world did the Word of God survive and Christianity grow until someone came up with this word in the late 19th century?

Inerrancy, as Jim Denison so wonderfully explained in an article for TBC several years ago, has eight different definitions and twelve different qualifications. I personally do not think anyone knows what it really means. It means something different to everyone who uses it. It is a word that has been used by the “spirit of suspicion” to divide denomination after denomination.

I believe the Bible is the Word of God, every word of it. I agree with the Baptist Faith and Message that it is “truth without mixture of error.” I believe it should be the final authority in all matters of faith and practice and is totally trustworthy in all theological matters. To my knowledge, that is all it claims for itself.

But I really agree with the great Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary theology professor W. T. Conner who wrote in 1945:

“I would not make the value of the Bible to depend on a doctrine of its inerrancy. That is, inerrancy in the ordinary sense of that term. I know that some of our preachers would, but it seems to me that in order to prove its inerrancy you have to assume the very thing that you start out to prove. If man asks about the inerrancy of the Bible, then you have to ask, ‘What Bible?’ If he says the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, then the only answer is that I have not seen these and could not examine them. If he says the Bible as we have it, then we know that that is not inerrant. So it seems to me that you soon run into questions to which you can give no straight answer. I remember that Dr. Mullins somewhere says that we cannot make the religious value of the Bible to depend on any certain conclusion that men come to with reference to the date, composition and authorship of books of the Bible. I do believe in the infallibility of the fundamental teachings of the Bible. I believe we can depend on these and realize them in our own experience and after all, as I see it, that is what we need. The other is pure theory and is unprovable. I don’t think it is best to make the religious value of the Bible depend on an unprovable theory.” (Quoted from Southern Baptist Thought Since 1845: Has Our Theology Changed? Edited by Paul A. Basden, Broadman & Holman Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee, 1994, p. 27 )

Thank you for reading these thoughts. If you would like a copy of Scarborough’s article, we would be happy to send you one. You could probably write him and get a copy. It is important that you clearly understand the two visions being put forward regarding the future of our beloved state convention. It is also important that they be presented with honesty and integrity. I believe God has a beautiful and challenging plan for Texas Baptists in His kingdom’s work if we will keep our focus on Him and His mission. God bless each one of you and your service in His name.

February 1997