The Great Evangelical Mea Culpa
- 15 views
Some of what you say I understand why you say it and how you got there. But at least with the FBFI, it’s not quite as simple as…
They seem to believe that folks in the body of Christ who are not precisely like them are traitors. This is a problem.
Even this issue of Frontline demonstrates that. You have Mike Harding and Mark Minnick contrasted with Dan Unruh. The FBFI includes others like the Van Gelderens and the Baptist College of Ministry in its membership.
Minnick and Mount Calvary have some pretty unique things that have marked their ministry from others in the Fellowship. They have had a plural elder model for decades. They have a culture at their church that encourages hats on women during the worship services.
The one FBFI Annual I attended was painfully uncomfortable to watch at times, in that you had sessions where the contrasting positions of the two speakers were put in what felt to me an uncomfortable confrontation (Chuck Phelps and Mark Minnick basically taking opposing position on Lordship Salvation, as I recall). You had a panel discussion where the participants got almost combative when talking about personalities in Fundamentalism’s history. In talking to others who have deeper history and experience with the FBF over the years, it sounds like this is the culture. They all know they agree on the basics, so they use the platform to highlight there differences (I assume to attempt to persuade those on the fence to one side or the other?). This has been done in the past on issues related to education, I know (accepting Federal funding, merits of regional accreditation, online vs. exclusively resident… that kind of thing).
All that to say that in the culture of the FBFI, it really isn’t about who is precisely like them on many, many issues. It’s strange, though. As much diversity as there is in their mix, as someone who didn’t grow up being familiar with the culture, it feels sometimes like there is an air of guardedness and lingering suspicion, even of one another… like someone, somewhere, is just waiting to pounce. That’s what this issue of Frontline seems like to me… a pouncing kind of instinct given expression (especially the Unruh article).
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
I said “some.” The antecedent of the “they” you cited was the “some” from the previous sentence.
I shared that to contrast it with what I believe is a destructive attitude from some areas of fundamentalism. My point is that some in the FBFI don’t seem to have that view. They seem to believe that folks in the body of Christ who are not precisely like them are traitors. This is a problem. That is my point.
You wrote:
The one FBFI Annual I attended was painfully uncomfortable to watch at times, in that you had sessions where the contrasting positions of the two speakers were put in what felt to me an uncomfortable confrontation (Chuck Phelps and Mark Minnick basically taking opposing position on Lordship Salvation, as I recall
This may be an example of the “big filter” (I gotta come up with a better term) I spoke about earlier. Under the defining umbrella of “fundamental Baptist,” any number of theological deviations are tolerated. They are tolerated because the community of “fundamentalist Baptist” is worth being a part of for some of these men. This hearkens back to the charge that fundamentalist Baptists have been very selective about who they separate from. Too selective.
I suppose it depends which doctrines are important to you. We can give on the finer points of soteriology in favor of ecclesiology, etc, etc. Well, some men give on ecclesiology in favor of detailed agreement on soteriology. Is one better than the other?
You also wrote:
That’s what this issue of Frontline seems like to me… a pouncing kind of instinct given expression (especially the Unruh article).
This is why I want nothing to do with that stripe of fundamentalism. Who would want to do ministry in this kind of atmosphere? Again the focus for some shifted away from liberalism and apostasy long ago to policing it’s own ranks. They can continue that, if they wish. I have other things to do.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Tyler R. said:
“Again the focus for some shifted away from liberalism and apostasy long ago to policing it’s own ranks. They can continue that, if they wish. I have other things to do.”
I think this is also the attitude of the targeted convergents. While the CE’s were addressing meaningful issues and cleaning out seminaries “some” of the more visible fundamentalists were publicly misrepresenting (I could have used a stronger word) Calvinism to their silently assenting friends and fighting music battles.
BTW, I don’t know how many members are in the FBFI (this list is available to members only) but with 5 officers and 104 board members on 4 boards, the impression is that there must be a lot of them.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
Without giving a blanket endorsement to everything you said, Tyler, I think your last paragraph should be instructive to the previous generation watching these conversations. The FBFI has had a big enough tent in the past to accommodate Minnicks and Van Gelderens… a range of people on the Calvinist/Arminian spectrum… a variety of polity that has congregationalism at its core… and so on. What is it that is changing where they cannot have room for some of the people on this thread… and not just “little people” like you and me toiling in obscurity and trolling on internet message boards ( ;) ), but some of who should be their leading figures, like Dean Taylor and David Doran?
I’ve been around enough people and conversations now in the last decade to know that if Institutional Fundamentalism wants to have a future, they need to deal with the answer to that question. How can “you” retain principles and yet still present an atmosphere of winsomeness, congeniality, and collegiality… make it the kind of place where people, especially new people, would want to be? If the response continues to be some variant of “they hate us because they ain’t us,” decline will hasten.
I’m watching Jim Tillotson down at my alma mater (Faith). No question in my mind he’s a principled separatist, etc. etc. But that man comes across as reasonable, accommodating, friendly, willing to serve you… and even though the student body and the constituent churches had no idea who this obscure, hockey-loving pastor from Western Canada was, when they do get exposed to him, they’re all in. Those on the fence are going to give consideration to his principles because of his attitude.
There’s a lesson there for those who care to learn it.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
Discussion