A MATTER OF PERSPECTIVE--
 Living in Healthy Tension
By David Currie

During the summer CBF General Assembly, I led a breakout session on the importance of preserving our Baptist Identity. When I finished, a trustee of a SBC institution came up to me and said, "I heard you this afternoon and I don't understand where you are coming from."

He went on to say I sounded very conservative on many issues. He wondered how I could serve on the board of a pro-homosexual organization like The Interfaith Alliance. I explained to him I did not think The Interfaith Alliance was a pro-homosexual organization. How other board members felt about homosexuality was their business. Everyone knew my strong opposition to homosexuality. It is easily documented from various sources. They who know the truth never mention it in print in the many attacks against me.

I explained that I believed so strongly in religious liberty for every American that I would work with anyone to protect that freedom. I believe it is the very foundation of our country.

The SBC trustee was confused because it appears to me, he cannot understand the tension a Christian must live in between legalism and license. 

For the fundamentalist, freedom seems to be a foreign idea. They seem to understand only legalism. Things are right and wrong, black and white. The gospel is about rules and regulations and getting everyone to think alike, act alike, live alike. For the fundamentalist, as evidenced by many statements by current SBC leaders, there is only one way, their way. Those daring to exercise their freedom to disagree are branded heretics and persons who "do not love the truth."

They seem convinced that if anyone is given any freedom, they will immediately abuse that freedom and embrace license, i.e., doing whatever one wants without regard to ethical behavior.

Therefore, fundamentalists are concerned that I enjoy relationships with many people, especially fellow board members of The Interfaith Alliance, with whom I do not agree. The fact is, I enjoy my friendships with people in my Sunday School class who do not agree with me. 

I like and admire my fellow board members on The Interfaith Alliance. We share a like-minded commitment to religious liberty for persons of all faiths or no faith (as my Baptist forefathers believed). I think all Interfaith groups should include persons of different faiths and different positions on issues. That is what it means to be an Interfaith Group.

I likewise would not be bothered should Billy Graham want to come to San Angelo and lead a crusade. I would proudly serve on a steering committee with members of the Methodist Church who were pro-abortion, with members of the Presbyterian Church who were strict Calvinists and members of the Catholic Church who supported vouchers for private religious education. All these positions I would not agree with personally. I would serve with many others if it helped win people to Christ in San Angelo.

Fundamentalists seem unable to distinguish between acceptance and approval. I accept persons who live differently than me and will defend their right to live and believe differently than me. It does not mean I approve of the way they live or what they believe. It is an important distinction.

As long as the Interfaith Alliance will accept me, as clearly a conservative member of the Board, I will continue to serve with them in their battle to preserve religious liberty in America. I will continue to share my opposition to homosexuality as a biblical lifestyle. I also will defend the right of others to have different moral standards from me and live according to those standards in a pluralistic society. I appreciate being given the same freedom and acceptance, if not approval of all I believe. This biblical, normal perspective is not confusing to me. 

Others, from a more liberal perspective also struggle with the difference between legalism and license, approval and acceptance. They seem to believe that anyone has the right to believe anything they want to and that anyone who disapproves of their position is denying them their freedom in Christ. I also strongly disagree with this perspective.

I do believe that ANY individual Baptist has the freedom to believe any crazy, fool-headed thing they want to believe if a local Baptist church will accept them as a member. That is not the business of the SBC, CBF, BGCT or anyone else. Local churches accept persons as members. No one reading this is a member of the Southern Baptist Convention or the Baptist General Convention of Texas. No individual can join any of those organizations. A Baptist can only join a local church.

We all have the freedom to believe what we want, however, we do not have the freedom to be approved by others for what we believe. Any organization, a local church, an association, a state convention, a fellowship, has the right to set its own standards for employment and leadership. I have never disagreed with the SBC's right to do this. I just believe that they set them too narrowly and do not respect individual freedom.

I likewise believe that just because an organization or church has standards, that does not mean they are denying others freedom. Some things are wrong and the majority has a right to define that while respecting minority positions.

Setting a standard does not violate anyone's right to disagree. Standards do not deny the priesthood of believers nor any local church's autonomy in whom they accept as a member or employ at their local church. 

For me, freedom is about obedience, always. Freedom is never license. It is always obedience.

Freedom means all have a right to believe as they choose. It does not mean everyone's opinion is correct nor acceptable to the majority, which has the right, in any organization, to set its own standards.

Obedience is never legalism, but rather a true expression of freedom in Christ.

True freedom walks a fine line between legalism and license. Galatians is a great book in which Paul attacks the legalism of the Judizers and yet resists the license perspective of others. True freedom respects the beliefs of others but also does not approve of the beliefs of all others. It is focused on obedience to Christ.

I accept the beliefs of others but I do not always approve of the beliefs of others. I respect any individual's beliefs, fundamentalists and liberals. I do not mind fellowship with either one. I just believe the biblical path is a road one walks in the freedom of Christ, being obedient to Christ and avoiding the pitfalls of legalism and license. I believe that is the best road for Baptist churches, associations, conventions and fellowships to walk, in a healthy tension.

September 2001