Southern Baptists Rally Around Russell Moore

f67e1-moore-web3

Russell Moore

Recently one of my Facebook friends posted a September 2015 article written by a Southern Baptist pastor in Alabama named Dr. Rick Patrick.  I don’t know anything about Patrick other than the fact that he is the pastor of the First Baptist Church in Sylacauga, Alabama and apparently, at the time of publication of his article, did not like the direction that Russell Moore, the President of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), was taking the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC).

Dr. Patrick wants Moore to be more thorough in the way that he applies the Christian idea of the Imago Dei, or the belief that we are all created in the image of God and thus have dignity and worth.

Since he became president of the ELRC, Moore has urged the members of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) to treat their political opponents as if they are indeed created in God’s image.  The list of these so-called opponents have included  population control advocates, Planned Parenthood employees, family members with different political views, the victims of the Orlando gay bar attack, and transgender people. (Or at least this is the list that Patrick has come up with).  Patrick links to websites where Moore is on record making such appeals.

But then Patrick goes political.  Why isn’t Moore defending the men and women who Hillary Clinton called “a basket of deplorables?”  Aren’t they created in the image of God too?  Why doesn’t he criticize the defenders of abortion for their conviction that ending a pregnancy can be a moral act?  Isn’t the child in the womb an image-bearer of Christ?

And he goes on…

In the end, Patrick concludes: “In this Presidential election, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention has demonstrated a clear pattern of bias in favor of the Democratic Presidential nominee and in opposition to the Republican Presidential nominee.  I never thought I would live to see the day.”

Patrick’s piece is a clear sign of the way politics can divide a church.  He implies that the true mark of a Southern Baptist is his or her support of the GOP presidential candidate. His use of the phrase “never thought I would live to see the day” captures perfectly the beliefs of many in the Southern Baptist Convention right now. They seem to have sacrificed their spiritual mission for a political mess of pottage.

It also reveals some shoddy logic. Whenever a Trump supporter is asked a direct question about Trump’s policies they often answer with something like “Yes, but what about Obama…?” or “Yes, but what about Hillary…?” These are not arguments.  Moore is calling his church to task on the particular things that he believes they need to address as a religious body.  This has nothing to do with Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.  By crying “but why aren’t you saying this about the Democrats too?” is just a way to avoid  Moore’s pointed critique of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Patrick’s piece, published on September 15, 2015,  also illustrates the most recent conservative backlash against Moore.  We blogged about this the other day.  Those who have been critical of Moore seem more interested in power and politics than advancing the spiritual mission of the church. They appear willing to destroy the denomination in order to maintain the power they first grabbed in the 1980s when they led the conservative takeover of the denomination.  We will see how far these power-brokers will dig in their heels and fight against the more moderating views that Moore has championed during this election season.  I am guessing that many of them think that Moore is a threat to their control over the denomination and believe that they can form a political coalition, just like they did forty years ago, to bring him down.

Or maybe not. Several Southern Baptists have now rallied around Moore.  Al Mohler has defended him.  Today World Magazine is reporting that Ray Ortlund, Derek Minor, D.A. Horton, Justin Taylor, Lauren Chandler, and Karen Swallow Prior have defended him. Others are rallying around the #IStandWithMoore hashtag on Twitter. Three Tennessee Baptist leaders, all under the age of forty, have called for unity.  Even Princeton University law professor and conservative intellectual Robert George has weighed in with a tweet in support of Moore.

This support of Moore serves as a clear rebuke to those like Rick Patrick, Paige Patterson, Robert Jeffress, Brad Whitt, William Harrell, and others.  Since I am an outside observer, I don’t know what kind of power these folks have in the denomination.  If they represent a majority or even a strong minority they could tear the nation’s largest denomination apart (again). If they are a small group with little popular support in the denomination then I think this current criticism of Moore may be their swan song–a sign of their declining influence in the shaping of Southern Baptist life.  But whatever the case, don’t expect them to go down without a fight.  These folks have a relatively long history of placing power politics over Southern Baptist unity.

9 thoughts on “Southern Baptists Rally Around Russell Moore

  1. There’s an interesting theological correlation here with the Calvinist-Armenian rift in the SBC. Patrick and the Pres of SW Baptist Seminary are on the Arminianism side and Moore, Mohler and others on the Calvinist side. The Arminians have recently mounted a counter-revolution.

    Like

  2. This appears to be a reply to my comment. If I’m permitted to respond,

    Clinton made quite clear who was in that basket: folk who profess “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” ideas and worldviews.

    Most white evangelical churches have a healthy percentage–in many cases a majority–of folk who fit this bill.

    Ah. I see why so many feel they were insulted. They were.

    Serious charges. No proof.

    Let’s all hope he hangs in there, and doesn’t succumb to the bullying of the neo-McCarthyites who are trying to discredit him by charging him with being a fellow-traveler with the DNC.

    In our two-party system, Moore made himself the enemy of Donald Trump, who is an ally if not a friend of pro-life issues, traditional morality, and religious liberty. In ignoring Hillary Clinton’s–and her party’s–own alliance with abortion, homosexuality, the nascent “normalization” of the transgender psychological delusion, and its legal attacks on religious liberty, many feel that he did their dirty work and furthered those causes by attacking Trump.

    As for “neo-McCarthyism” and bullying, that is on the part of the left, alleging racism where there is none. Race is not why these people supported Trump and opposed Hillary. It is irrelevant to this issue.

    Like

    • “Serious charges. No proof.”

      This is a blog where we who are participant-observer-scholars of evangelicalism often come to talk among ourselves. We have a background of familiarity with the research and experience which allows us to assume a certain familiarity with the shape of things among one another.

      We can make mistakes, of course.

      So, if any of my peers wish to object, and assert that it’s incorrect that there’s a significant and observable element within evangelicalism that qualifies as “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic,” I’m all ears.

      Like

  3. <But then Patrick goes political. Why isn’t Moore defending the men and women who Hillary Clinton called “a basket of deplorables?”

    There are many who feel it’s Russell Moore who has politicized the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission with his direct attack on Donald Trump [and on his supporters]. As an outside observer, I see O’Sullivan’s Law at work here: The ERLC has a fat budget and infrastructure. IMO, The tu quoque is accurate–there was no parallel attack on Hillary Clinton either personally or for things like her extreme position on [unlimited] abortion and her party’s recent controversies over religious liberty itself [Hosanna-Tabor, Hobby Lobby, Little Sisters of the Poor].

    Since I am an outside observer, I don’t know what kind of power these folks have in the denomination.

    The WSJ article lists quite a number of major Baptists figures, and their unease with Moore predates the 2016 election. And of course, in the election, 80% of white evangelicals ignored him. His support seems to be coming from the chattering class, which is invariably to the left of those they purport to represent if not lead.

    In interviews, pastors in multiple states, including leaders of some of the country’s largest congregations, said Mr. Moore’s rhetoric insulted many of the people he was supposed to represent as the Baptists’ chief advocate in Washington, D.C.

    “There was a disrespectfulness towards Southern Baptists and other evangelical leaders, past and present,” Baptist pastor Jack Graham said of Mr. Moore’s denunciations of Mr. Trump and some of his supporters. “It’s disheartening that this election has created this kind of divisiveness.”

    I think perhaps the best criticism was that Moore went out of his way to make an enemy of Donald Trump with his personal attack. That’s political. The claim of nonpartisanship doesn’t wash.

    Like

    • “Why isn’t Moore defending the men and women who Hillary Clinton called ‘a basket of deplorables?'”

      Clinton made quite clear who was in that basket: folk who profess “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” ideas and worldviews.

      There’s a simmering culture war in many churches–not just the SBC–that’s been on for many years, and is now coming to a head, thanks to Donald J. Trump.

      Most white evangelical churches have a healthy percentage–in many cases a majority–of folk who fit this bill. Some other percentage repudiates those attitudes and ideas.

      If my observations are at all accurate, these churches have managed to hold together largely by agreeing to disagree, and by minimizing the occasions where the disagreements can’t be avoided. So, preachers may denounce racism, but they avoid specific examples that cut too close to home. The racists in the congregation stay mum unless they’re in the company of others they have reason to suspect share their views. And etc.

      Now, along comes a candidate who implicitly and explicitly promotes those views. The “deplorables” flock to him, of course. Christians who don’t share those views are put in a quandary: Call it out as “un-Christian,” which means entering the political fray, or mince one’s words for the sake of “peace, peace”?

      Moore is being asked to add his pinch of incense to an altar that has nothing to do with Christ, but is dedicated to a nostalgic, exclusivist vision of America as great: white, Christianist, sexist, militarist, and etc.

      Let’s all hope he hangs in there, and doesn’t succumb to the bullying of the neo-McCarthyites who are trying to discredit him by charging him with being a fellow-traveler with the DNC.

      Like

Comments are closed.