|
The
Fundamentalist Mind Set in Baptist Life In
1979, when I first heard about the rising power of fundamentalists
in Baptist life, I was saddened and appalled -- but not surprised.
For 30 years I had been aware of the threat of the fundamentalist
mind set in Baptist churches. I speak from perhaps a unique perspective.
I am a Baptist by conviction, not by family upbringing or by culture.
It was in 1945 that I faced a personal dilemma related to my commitment
to a church-related vocation. Then
I was a member of the Disciples of Christ denomination and was
taking theological training at Southern Baptist Seminary. I lived
near Louisville and could not afford to go away to a Disciples
of Christ seminary. I deeply believe God led me to Southern Seminary. At
this time a struggle existed between fundamentalism and ultra
liberalism (termed modernism) in Disciples of Christ churches
in my area. The ultra liberals were very pleasant, kind, open-minded
people, but some said they believed nothing in the Bible. On the
other hand, the fundamentalists held most of the same beliefs
I did. However, their attitude of intolerance, rigid demand for
conformity, and spiritual arrogance repelled me. I knew that I
could not work on a church staff where a pastor held either of
these views. Home
With Baptists As
I wrestled with this problem, I began to be aware that I felt
at home with Baptists at the seminary. Most of my beliefs were
Baptist beliefs. I enjoyed the chapel worship services. Some of
the finest Christian professors I have ever known fed me spiritually.
Gradually
I came to the conviction that at heart I was already a Baptist.
Dr. Wayne Oates, of blessed memory, shepherded me through the
process of becoming a Baptist. He pointed me to a fine church
-- one we would call moderate today. I entered Baptist life with
every advantage of being a traditional, not a cultural Baptist. In
1949, I went to work at the Baptist Sunday School Board editing
Bible study materials for adult teachers, and I began to discover
the other face of Baptists. These were, to use Carlyle Marney's
stinging phrase, "more Southern than Baptist and more Baptist
than Christian." Firestorm of Protests My
first experience with this fundamentalist mind set came in the
early 1950's, with the publication of the Old Testament portion
of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. The Board periodicals
had been quoting from the RSV New Testament portion since it was
published in 1946. Nevertheless, the translation of Isaiah 7:14,
"a young woman shall conceive and bear a son," rather
than "a virgin," as in the King James Version, set up
a firestorm of protest. People did not remember that the translation
of Matthew 1:23 was still "a virgin shall conceive."
Fundamentalist pastors persuaded their people that the whole Revised
Standard Version was a concoction of the devil. They called it
a "Communist" Bible because the National Council of
Churches (which they considered Communist) put it out. Also, it
was a "Red" Bible because it had a red binding! The
Board got letters of protest. Some people were convinced we were
going to "dump" the King James Version. A letter from
a woman pleaded, "Please don't stop using the Saint James
Bible. After all, Saint James was the brother of our Lord. If
he didn't know how the Bible should read, who would?" One
Sunday School teacher had the class go through their quarterlies
and find quotes from the RSV, which were then cut out and mailed
back to the Board. The leaders of the Board ordered that we no
longer quote from any part of the RSV. This prohibition continued
for many years. Then
came the civil rights struggles of the 50s and 60s. Again, protests
came against anything that even hinted at good relationships between
whites and blacks. The Board ordered editors not to use even the
term "race relations." We could talk about "brotherly
relationships" if our illustrations were between whites,
Asians and Native Americans. Still
almost hysterical protests continued against anything that seemed
to go against cultural prejudices. People protested a picture
on the cover of a Training Union periodical showing a boy and
girl because the boy was a little too dark! An editor was severely
reprimanded after he included in one periodical the suggestion
that young people use collateral reading such as Black Like Me
for better understanding between ethnic groups. A prominent Southern
church sent a delegation of their deacons to me to protest my
including Martin Luther King, Jr.'s name in a matching puzzle
in a teen-age magazine. Then,
in the 60s, came the theological protests. Protests condemned
The Message of Genesis, by Ralph Elliott, because it did not hold
strictly to a literal interpretation of the first 12 chapters
of Genesis. Although Broadman Press had published it, the Board
refused to stand behind its publication and discontinued printing
it. Dr. Elliott called the decision cowardly. Board leaders said
it was prudent. Actually it was expedient! Expedience also played
a part in a later decision to withdraw the first volume of the
Broadman Bible Commentary and rewrite it. The same objections
had been raised about its interpretation of Genesis 1-12. Catered
To Prejudice Besides
these organized protests, many individuals showed their tendency
to let ignorance, intolerance, and prejudice rule their thinking.
In the early 60s a man from Alabama came to the Board to say to
an editor, "Don't tell us how to live. Your job is to teach
the Bible." When the editor said mildly, "The Bible
teaches us to pay our taxes," he asked, "Where?" In
the late 1950's my pastor in Nashville received angry criticism
for this statement: "The doctrine of the virgin birth is
an important doctrine, but it is not the most important doctrine."
They took the second clause out of context to criticize the writer
for not believing in the virgin birth. Yet he remains one of the
most conservative theologians I have ever known. A
woman wrote to me in 1965 protesting a quotation from George Buttrick,
whom she castigated as a liberal. I wrote back, asking her objection
to the quotation: Did she find it untrue? She answered: "Yes,
it's true. But couldn't you find a Baptist to say it?" Problem
of Appeasement What
caused the Board during those years to take such an appeasing
attitude toward persons with the fundamentalist mind set? The
leaders explained that many small churches with 100 to 250 members
might turn to fundamentalist publishers for their educational
material. The SBC could not afford to lose these small churches.
The Board had to cater to their prejudices to hold the Convention
together. Some
large and influential churches already were producing their own
religious educational materials. I wondered why the Board was
not equally concerned about losing them, however, they never answered
nor even asked such. In
1967 I left the Board, married, and moved to Texas. I have watched
with deep sorrow the way the fundamentalist mind set has infiltrated
the SBC and taken power. I find myself asking: Suppose Convention
agencies and their leaders had stood up for Baptist principles
rather than trying to appease the radical fringe of Baptists?
We might have lost many churches, but I believe that the Baptists
of today would be more truly Baptist and we would not be suffering
from the inroads of intolerance, ignorance, and prejudice. Velma
Darbo Stevens is a writer of religious books. She is a member
of Broadway Baptist Church, Fort Worth, Texas. December 1999 |