In his farewell address to the nation, President Dwight Eisenhower was emboldened to make this statement:
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
Some have said that, if he had a little courage, he would have termed this the “congressional-military-industrial complex.” Even so, it was an unexpected warning from one who had a first-hand take on this alliance as both a military commander and an elected leader. He had certainly benefited personally from this alliance.
I find myself in a similar situation. I was formed by and benefited from a religious-industrial complex. It was called the Southern Baptist Convention. In my rearview mirror look, the organization that bears that name today is very different from the one that was formative for me.
As a young person growing up in post-war America, I benefited from this alliance in a number of ways. In the 1950s, I was part of a local church led by seminary-trained leaders who had little or no education debt. We had access to quality educational literature, music resources, and training opportunities. The denomination even helped us learn how to build and use our buildings for effective ministry.
In the 60s, I benefited from a denominationally funded campus ministry program (then called Baptist Student Union), served as a short-term missionary, and received a good seminary education (again at little cost to me).
In the 70’s, I was employed to lead two campus ministry programs with access to good supervisors, a plethora of resources, and continuing education opportunities. My colleagues were committed, loving, and supportive. I was part of a national network committed to a mission.
Our denomination was basically conservative, but there were allowances for innovation. The Christian Life Commission led in addressing social issues including drug abuse, racial discrimination, and pornography. The Radio and Television Commission produced quality programs for both radio and television, many of them picked up by national networks. The Baptist Sunday School Board (now Lifeway Resources) attempted to be a cutting-edge provider of collegiate resources (but was often criticized for doing so). The Foreign Mission Board (now International Mission Board) appointed personnel as doctors, nurses, agriculture developers, and educators. They also came up with an aggressive program to mobilize college graduates to serve overseas. The Home Mission Board (now the North American Mission Board) provided initiatives that addressed poverty and racial discrimination. The HMB even funded some women to be church planters!
During this time, leaders of these organizations knew that the innovations would not be accepted by everyone, but they were willing to take the risk. They knew these initiatives were not for every Southern Baptist or every Southern Baptist church, but choices were offered, and decision were respected. We were a diverse people who had lot in common, and we trusted each other.
The system was not perfect, of course. There was both sexual discrimination and outright abuse that was often covered up, ignored, or minimized. The original American sin of racism still held sway among denominational agencies, churches, and leaders. As with many large corporations, a priority was to avoid lawsuits and “bad press”—listening to lawyers first and prophets second.
Things changed in the late 70s and early 80s. Although there were complex agreements that helped autonomous bodies—churches, associations, state conventions, and boards and agencies--work together, fissures began to form. Mission boards argued that, since they were autonomous and churches were autonomous, they could relate directly to churches and bypass the state conventions. State conventions decided to fund new church plants in a geographic area without expecting these churches to be part of the local association. Many churches decided that the “one size fits all” approach in programming and materials did not work and began pursuing non-SBC alternatives.
The emergence of the Religious Right certainly accelerated the destabilization of the SBC, which was seen as a valuable commodity for those with political ambitions. What if they could bring all that influence and wealth to bear for electoral impact, especially for the office of President of the United States? The goals of the SBC became control rather than consensus and uniformity rather than diversity. As President Eisenhower said, “The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That potential was realized.
The Baptist landscape looks very different today, but many Baptist church members still think it is 1960 all over again. Southern Baptists are in decline. Other Baptist groups struggle to differentiate themselves or default to what they consider a safe place. Many gifted former Southern Baptists are sharing they gifts across the denominational spectrum.
A similar story played out in variations across the American religious landscape. From my limited perspective, I accept that the religious-industrial complex in which I was incubated has collapsed and is no more. I am thankful for what it produced but not for what it has become.
Jesus said, “Neither do people pour new wine into old wineskins. . .. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.” (Matthew 9:17, NIV) New movements of the Holy Spirit call for new structures. What will they look like? I don’t know but I do recognize that they are emerging to form a new generation of believers. Thanks be to God.
Comments