Stephen Fox theory of SBC takeover vindicated

[Stephen Fox]

[Sandy]

As I've said before, there are a lot of post-controversy stories about "voting irregularities," but if all of that actually occurred, why wasn't it being challenged through the available means at the time? I can point to instances where I "heard" moderates talking about making sure certain people got registered, even though their church hadn't actually elected them. That's all anecdotal anyway.

As far as the denominational cocoon goes, that's a matter of factual record. Bylaw changes and constitutional amendments passed in the 60's and early 70's brought about the system of appointments in which just one person, the SBC president, appointed the committee on committees, and made that committee the key to all other trustee boards and committees in the SBC. That was a deliberate move. Moderate leaders have admitted to the practice of the SBC president asking seminary presidents and institutional heads for lists of people they wanted on their trustee boards. And Sutton documents the fact that during the decade prior to the 1979 SBC, more than 80% of the individuals on trustee boards and convention committees had served on other boards and committees. There were plenty of relatives and wives of agency heads and seminary presidents in that elite little group, too, also documented.

Pressler and Patterson, among others, figured out what it would take, using that system, to gain control of it, and found plenty of support to sustain the necessary majorities, and open up the appointment process to conservative Southern Baptists who had been excluded from it for years. The only defenders of the old, backward way of doing things were those connected to it.

[Sandy]

[Dave Roberts]

[Sandy]

[Stephen Fox]

Will have that quote from my blog for you soon.

And I've said many times before, sometimes deleted by monitors, Molly's description of 1961 efforts by BSSB officials to raise the level of information across the denomination on the nature of Biblical scholarship was most noble.

In the Baptist case of Molly's wide analysis, those well intentioned, noble efforts were met by the worst type of demagoguery the Powers quote will drive home for you. Again, this conversation needs to be enlightened and elevated by everyone participating reading the full Powers review in the print issue of www.nybooks.com

Lot of the conversation is just rehashing of the same conversation we had on this board ten and 12 years ago.

Worthen and now Powers have advanced the insight considerably if only the rest of you would take advantage of that advancement.

[Stephen Fox]

Quoting:

Excerpt from review:

Ken Chafin said: "I'm not gonna roll over and let a group of Frank Norrisite Texas fundamentalists steal the institutions of my denomination."

But the Pressler-Patterson faction did exactly that; an unbroken string of fundamentalists were elected to head the denomination for the next decade and with power of the presidency they systematically packed every committee and board, pushed out anyone who did not agree, and gradually purged the Baptist seminaries of all the moderates, defined by Pressler as anyone 'who believes the bible does or could contain error of any kind". End quote

Notice how the fundies have tried to refine Pressler's definition of inerrancy over the years, to put more sheen and lustre on it. But the above quote was the rubric Pressler used to demagogue the denomination into his religious political corner.

[Sandy]

If you can steal something that belongs to you, by virtue of your financial support and participation in it, then I guess the quote from Chafin is relevant. But how can you steal something that belongs to you anyway?

I do not know of a single "Norrisite" who was involved in the conservative resurgence. The entire movement, and its leaders, were all members of cooperating Southern Baptist churches and that is the bottom and final line. Chafin's statement is proof that moderates were exclusive, and elitist in thinking they were the only entitled ones to leadership, an Chafin was one of those who rotated from seat to seat, board to board.

[KeithE]

[KeithE]

[William Thornton]

[KeithE]

[Stephen Fox]

Pressler's family had a long history in rightwing politics before Pressler invaded the committee system of the SBC and boasted about it to Gary North. Pressler had direct ancestry in the Texas legislature in the 50s that were in the grievance conversation with friends at FBC Austin that led to Carlyle Marney's resignation. Coke Stevenson was the righteous white man's candidate in 48 against LBJ as Sidney Blumenthal pointed out in the 90's exceptions to Robert Caro's version of the LBJ Series.

Chandler Davidson, Tom Edsall and others have written about Exxon Oil and the Birch saturation of Harris County(Houston) in the 60s. Pressler's father was a vice President of Exxon Oil. His closest comrades in the SBC takeover were Jesse Helms and his operatives and the Bircher Albert Lee Smith of Birmingham who had a history of antagonizing Hugo Black, Judge Frank Johnson and their civil rights and church states legacies.

All evidence is from Pressler's obsession with the Baptist Joint Committee and James Dunn is it arose in large part from Dunn's support with Jimmy Allen, both civil rights progressives and major supporters of Carter in the 76 Texas Primary.

In 78 according to Tom Edsall Carter hit the oil industry with a windfall profits tax.

So Keith, not to be pissy, but you do the math and see what you come up with.

As for the 4.99 the library in Huntsville almost certainly has the Oct 9 NY Rev of Books. So you and many others who passionately participate in this conversation have no excuses regarding this poignant piece on the evolution of Baptist fundamentalism in America other than will ful ignorance.

That said, Love you all and hope tomorrow's SEC football contests go well for all.

Thornton you may want to preview my blog efforts on the legendary Gaffney Spartanburg game of 1969 at www.foxofbama.blogspot.com

[William Thornton]

I look forward to reading about the '69 game. Forget Worthen and Birchers. Stick with football.

[KeithE]

[Sandy]

[KeithE]

[Sandy]

Depending on whose stats you follow, the 5 million or so Baptists in the US, mostly in the South and MIdwest, that self-identify as "Fundamental Baptist" have an informal, but pretty solid list of requirements that I consider the identifying mark of "Fundamentalism." They would include:

1. Belief that the Bible is inerrant and infallible in all matters, not just faith and practice, but science, history, philosophy and all other disciplines.
2. Literal "verse by verse" interpretation of the Bible, belief in verbal, plenary, "dictation theory" origin of the scripture.
3. Belief in the supernatural nature of Christ, miracles, his virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, death, literal resurrection from the dead, as well as his physical return.
4. A dispensational, pre-millenial view of end times events.
5. The literal nature of the creation account in Genesis, as well as all other Biblical narratives.
6. Landmarkism.
7. The lack of a close identification with other like-minded churches through association of membership in an organized "convention."
8. Many fundamentalists are identified by KJV only.

Leadership of fundamentalists goes back to Gresham Machen, Lewis Sperry Chafer, and D.L. Moody. The separation is clear enough that there are few Southern Baptists that meet all those conditions.

[KeithE]

Thanks Sandy

You classify yourself as a Conservative but not a Fundamentalist; is that correct?

Let me guess what a conservative (like yourself) but not fundamentalist Christian might strike from your requirements to be a Fundamentalist. Correct where I’m wrong.

1. You admit to the possibility of the bible not being error-free in history, science and some other disciplines.

2. You do not agree with “dictation theory”.

4. You are not a dispensationalist in end times viewpoints (which new) and perhaps opposed to dividing up history into 7 periods where God deals differently with mankind.

5. You see the Creation stories non-literally (actually not sure what you believe here)

6. You are opposed to Landmarkism (e.g. Trail of Blood and exclusivism).

7. You favor associations when like-minded,

[Dave Roberts]

I remember the conversation I had with a lady over fifty years ago. We were discussing the Bible and she suddenly said, "There is not a single preacher who takes the Bible literally. How many one-eyed, one-handed preachers do you know?" Her point can't be refuted.

[Sandy]

[Stephen Fox]

And Powers is spot on in his Pressler definition of fundamentalism the rubric quoted above Pressler used for the takeover.

Heckfire my Dad probably fit some of Sandy's criteria above about the nature of Scripture, but Randall Lolley was a personal friend of his, a classmate at SEBTS with Bill Self of Wieuca Rd and he knew Pressler and Patterson and Jesse Helms were lying about him.
My Mother walked out on Charles Stanley in Atlanta.

Got a few more quotes from the piece coming for SAndy and others.

[Sandy]

[Dave Roberts]

[Stephen Fox]

Sandy, again for Inerrancy see the working definition in the print issue of the New York Review of Books piece by Thomas Powers. That's what we are talking about, Inerrancy as defined by Pressler as the takeover rubric not some esoteric in your confused and foggy mind.

Inerrancy as a smokescreen for Pressler's right wing designs.

BTW this fellow probably knows more about that than you do:

http://sociology.rice.edu/Content.aspx?id=78

As for my Dad, his view on the Bible was this oft told Rubric: "Some preach it from the Greek, some from the Hebrew; but whether its the Greek, the Hebrew or the Homebrew it's still the Wordagod, Amen!"

Dave is right about the Alamo in 88. I was there with the sticker on the car. I followed Lolley's group that day to the Alamo. I think former FBC Gaffney pastor Johnny McKinney is in the picture taken there that made Ellen Rosenberg's book about the SB's in Transition.

If you want to kinow what happend at SEBTS ask Jim Deloach and Jerry Vines. Vines broke protocol of the Peace committee and had off campus meeting with the Rocky Purvis fellow whose Father Don took Delanna Orien and the WMU to task in 93; and younger Brother Paul was a president of the Furman SGA.

And for fun here is another quote from nybooks: "Adrian Rogers broad political purpose,only half-hidden by the campaign for an inerrant bible, offended and alarmed traditional Baptists..." Great phrase, half hidden by the campaign for the inerrant Bible.

Stay tuned for reminder of what happened in the Missouri synod, a success for right wing politics Pressler had to be aware of. And we cannot forget Moyers pressing questions that caused Pressler to leave the set of the PBS documentary.