Critical Race Theory is sweeping the nation, and the Southern Baptist Convention is no exception. In fact, many in the SBC seem to be terrified that CRT is the current which will lead to a liberal drift in the convention. So, the question stands, is there a theological drift happening in the SBC? Yes. But perhaps not in the way you suppose.
At its core, there are at least four distinctives of baptistic theology: believer’s baptism by immersion, regenerate church membership, the priesthood of all believers, and potlucks. The SBC tradition in which I was reared and presently serve has always been one which fellowships around food. Moving from East Texas to Northeast Ohio, that food has, at times, taken different shapes, replacing crawfish for pierogis, or pralines for paczki. But there has also been a sure constant—fried chicken. How ironic then must it be that Baptists would avoid good meat for fear of the bones.
A few months ago, Anthony Bradley critiqued Southern Baptists in particular for being unable to approach cultural theories like Critical Race Theory with a “eat the meat and spit out the bones” approach.[1] Rightly so, there has been at times a hesitancy in our tradition to adopt anything which might require much nuance and discernment.
To be sure, this can be wildly exaggerated and depends on the individual’s context, but I have personally seen wholesale rejections of this same vein applied to such topics as the Enneagram, yoga, The Message Bible translation, psychiatric care and medication, and now, presently, Critical Race Theory.
Two weeks ago, a group SBC pastors led by former executive committee chair and current SBC presidential candidate, Mike Stone, released a resolution which Stone intends to bring to the floor at the SBC annual meeting this week in Nashville. Among other things, the resolution denies “that any analytical tools can aid in evaluating a variety of human experiences if those analytical tools are themselves rooted in worldviews incompatible with the Word of God.”[2]
This marks a long trend of retreat from culture in the SBC. Not a retreat as it relates to the SBC’s engagement of abortion, same-sex marriage, or its wide-ranging responses to politics. This retreat is from the wisdom of common grace. In one sense, this is an epistemological concern—the ways we recognize and seek truth.
Baptists, and Southern Baptists in particular, hold firm to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. Instead of ordering truth and authority, we often remove lower categories like tradition, reason, and experience, all together. Categories, if invoked in the wrong circle, lead to accusations of a rejected inerrancy, cultural Marxism, and apostasy. Full reform here would require us to recapture a biblical understanding of epistemology, and there is plenty to dismantle in this single resolution in that regard.
But I think there is another doctrine at play which has fallen out of use in this discussion. As Southern Baptists, we would do well to consider the ways we have pushed the priesthood of all believers to the ditches of deficiency and excess.
It would be most beneficial to explain what is meant here by the priesthood of all believers. Simply put, the faith has not been given to a select caste of believers who determine and dispense truth to the rest of us. The SBC has no pope. It has no high priest beyond Jesus. We hold firmly that all believers are capable of reading, interpreting, and applying the truth of God’s Word in faithful life and ministry in the church and this world.
Stone’s resolution references this doctrine saying, “we reaffirm our absolute conviction that a proper interpretation of the Holy Scriptures—apart from any worldly ideology, any personal identity trait, or any lived experience—is sufficient to serve as the sole standard by which our faith and practice are to be measured.”[3] Yet it distorts the doctrine in two ways.
First in the doctrine’s deficiency, its call for the wholesale dismissal of theories like CRT robs our members of the ability to discern for themselves what is pleasing to the Lord (Eph 5:10). In effect, it uses fear to calcify any good meat from the bones of CRT. Their warning is not that you could choke on a bone, but that if there is any bone, it is somehow all bone.
This tendency is a failure to recognize the priesthood of all believers and its result is to infantilize the members of our churches and denomination. If we hold the priesthood of all believers to be true, we should be careful to go beyond the standards of our cooperation spelled out in the Baptist Faith and Message. In so doing, we give lip service to those beliefs but produce a deficient practice of the priesthood of all believers.
In the other extreme, the resolution hyperextends the priesthood of the believer to remove the possibility of “collective guilt,” as opposed to individual responsibility, and removes any distinction of “social identity groups.” The first is a false dichotomy. Corporate culpability is neither at odds with individual responsibility or the Baptist Faith and Message. Corporate personhood is a solidly biblical concept, Israel and the church (local and universal) being prime examples. Further, passages like Galatians 3:28 do not erase social identity, they show their equality in Christ. We would not argue that the church has no obligation to care for widows or orphans because those are social identities. Rather we address both the need and the cause in Christ.
A restored tension is needed. This is not to say that CRT should be affirmed or applied in its entirety. Rather it is to apply the same framework with which we approach philosophy, logic, democracy, economics, or other non-revelatory secular tools. If Stone’s resolution is to be taken to its logical end, the SBC ought not only renounce CRT, but also any idea, platform, or political candidate that is “rooted in worldviews incompatible with the Word of God.” But this is not their assertion, nor is it mine.
Instead, we must affirm that all truth is God’s truth.[4] If there is meat which would benefit the body, we should feel able to use what is good and to spit out what is not. If I may mix the metaphor, a tool’s worth is not determined by its inventor but by its usefulness. A multitool which calls a screwdriver a hammer is not worthless. It may be wrong in its assessment, but this does not mean that its tools are without value or benefit.
To say it more explicitly, cultural theories and analytical tools are capable of truth. We assess that truth through the lens of divine revelation, and where beneficial transpose it to submit to Christ and serve his church. Perhaps, one such benefit is that an analytical tool could explain why black and brown believers do not feel safe in our churches or denomination.[5] In many ways, this wound was self-inflicted. The 2019 resolution was largely unnecessary and unknown to the majority of the churches in the SBC. There were better and more pressing ways to address the stain of racism in a convention which has battled it for so long. But we do not have the privilege of retreat when questions arise. We meet them with the grace and truth of Christ.
If there is meat on the bone, Baptists should be able to add it to their plate. Baptists may also skip it in lieu of more potato salad, if they so desire, though they may miss out on a more well-rounded meal. What we should not do, is forget that potlucks exist to foster fellowship in our churches and advance the gospel, not increase division. Let us fix our eyes on the one who laid the feast and has invited us to partake with him—our one high priest, King Jesus.
NOTES:
[1] Anthony Bradley, “Critical Race Theory Isn’t a Threat for Presbyterians,” Mere Orthodoxy, February 3, 2021. https://mereorthodoxy.com/critical-race-theory-presbyterian-church-in-america.
[2] Mike Stone, Lewis Richerson, Tom Buck, et al, “Resolution on the Incompatibility of Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality with The Baptist Faith and Message,” https://southernbaptistsagainstracism.org. As an aside, the statement also argues that confusion and division on the matter came from describing CRT as an analytical tool rather than an ideology, which seems self-refuting.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, II.18.
[5] For two perspectives of black pastors who have recently led their churches to leave the SBC over these and similar concerns see John Onwuchekwa, “4 Reasons We Left the SBC,” https://thefrontporch.org/2020/07/4-reasons-we-left-the-sbc/ and Charlie Dates, “‘We out’: Charlie Dates on Why His Church is Leaving the SBC over Rejection of Critical Race Theory,” https://religionnews.com/2020/12/18/we-out-charlie-dates-on-why-his-church-is-leaving-the-sbc-over-rejection-of-critical-race-theory/.
Paul Morrison serves as a Pastor at The Church at West Creek in suburban Cleveland, OH. He is also the director and co-founder of the Ohio Theological Institute. Paul holds a PhD in Christian Ethics from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and is a member of the St. Peter Fellowship of the Center for Pastor Theologians.
