by Sandy » Thu Jan 22, 2015 10:21 am
The key to understanding the whole thing from a moderate perspective is, as far as I am concerned, wrapped up in their continued use of the term "takeover" to describe the CR. The arrogance and sense of entitlement that implies is elitist. The entrenchment of a particular "class" of denominational leaders prior to 1979 and the way the denominational apparatus was structured made it virtually impossible for anyone not in the closed circle of friends and relatives to be involved in leadership. The use of the term "takeover" indicates an attitude that those in leadership felt entitled, by virtue of their connections, influence, and level of "prominence" and prestige within the denomination, to determine who was part of the leadership class, and who didn't belong. There was considerable resentment when conservative leaders figured out how to use the backward system to make a change of direction, and consternation when the realization set in that their following was large enough to sustain the necessary support to bring about complete change.
For some reason, moderates feel compelled to keep producing this kind of literature, rehashing their own perspective of why Southern Baptists, when offered the chance, moved away from the direction of their leadership. It's like some sort of collective inferiority complex has developed, and they're still seeking legitimacy for a cause that's never attracted more than a handful of supporters and followers, and never materialized according to expectations. In this particular genre of moderate Baptist literature, there's a lot of emphasis on "why we were right", and on finding reasons for the lack of success in forming an effective opposition, or in gathering much of a following, including everything but the real reason for the success of the conservative resurgence. An honest analysis is rare.
I have a pretty fair collection of books of this type by now, most of them gathering dust. My attraction to this one in particular is due to Stephen's presence among its authors. After reading much of what he writes here, I'm interested in seeing how that gets incorporated into this particular book.