There is something quite fascinating about the Ouroboros. The idea of a serpent, or dragon, devouring itself touches that part of us that makes us shiver on dark nights. With the exception of Christian circles, it has had a positive reputation. Within ancient Christianity, it has taken on a less than stellar appeal. It tends to symbolize the “limited confines of the material,” and the self-consuming transitory nature of this world. It is seen as self-defeating in and of itself. Some fantasy authors have picked it up as a symbol for evil.
I speak of it now because it so succinctly pictures Fundamentalism. I happen to be affiliated with a group lead by fundamentalist leadership, the Southern Baptist Convention. During my infancy the battle had begun, and by my early adult years the heavy handedness of the Fundamentalists had triumphed.
This explains quite a bit, actually.
While in college, I picked up a Mickey Mouse hat as a memento of a trip to Dallas with some good friends. I wore it to class the next day, not knowing that SBC had passed a motion the day before boycotting Disney due to it’s percieved affirmation of homosexuality. Throughout the years, it has always been something. We’ve continued to do battle over various and sundry things. This past meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention didn’t stray from history.
There were quite a few motions made against a non-Southern Baptist pastor named Mark Driscoll. Poor guy has been labeled the “cussing pastor.” He’s a guy on the west coast that pastors one of the few growing churches in America. He also holds prominent position within the Acts29 church starting movement..or so I hear. You see, he’s so far off my radar that the SBC rancor against him caught me by surprise. I know he’s a Reformed Theologian (read: Calvinist), but seriously, that is all I know about him.
People are being saved, churches are being planted, so what do we do? We come after him with no less than five motions, as well as a shot from the podium. Amazing.
The messengers also severed a 125 year relationship with a congregation over “perceived toleration” of homosexuality. It seems that is the current sin the SBC is aligning itself against. It used to be dancing, then it became alcohol. I’ve often wondered why smoking, obesity, gossip and arrogance haven’t been brought before the chopping block…but, then I see the average SBCer, and I read their blog posts…and I come to see why. Did the people making the motions not know that they were being streamed live for the world to see? Makes a guy want to smack his how head in disbelief.
You see, Fundamentalism seems to only be able to frame itself as being against something. It gains power in the fight, it gains momentum through indignation. This is bereft of problems, but one glaringly stands out to me. Sooner or later, you end up having no more enemies…and you start eating your own tail. I believe that is what happened with the church relationship that was severed. That is an example of the SBC starting to eat it’s own.
Will there be more? You bet. Will it be over homosexuality? Maybe. Probably not for long though. Most SBC leaning churches won’t have “perceived toleration” of homosexuals in their midst. We’ve taught them by our hate for quite some time that we are neither welcoming nor affirming. We’ll go after the churches ordaining women next, most likely. Next, we’ll take on churches that allow women to teach men in Sunday School. That should keep our hate satiated for about a decade. But, eventually, the legalism will kill us. We’ll never make it to the point of severing ties with churches over Gluttony and Arrogance. To many proud, fat preachers out there. But, we’ll continue to see a decline in our churches. More will continue to close their doors. We’ll become a more scarce commodity with no market.
And we will die.
Which is ok. God’s Spirit is more obviously being poured out on other churches in other places. His work won’t stop because we cease to exist.
Tim Dahl
June 29, 2009 at 2:09 pm |
Just when you probably thought I wasn’t reading…I post.
This is a fantastic post. You should have this one published!
June 29, 2009 at 2:55 pm |
Thank you so much. I doubt I’ll get published any day soon. My writing needs a lot of work. But, thanks anyway!
Tim
July 13, 2009 at 5:37 pm |
Your analogy works well.
The opening business session of the SBC, where motions are made, is always an interesting session. Fact of the matter is, though, that few of the motions ever get back to be voted upon. They usually die in referral to the EC, or are ruled out of order, and are generally not a reflection of the majority view of the convention messengers which, in turn, do not necessarily reflect the majority view of Southern Baptists. Nutcase motions have always been part of the scenery. In this case, the messengers were not called upon to vote on anything related to Mark Driscoll, and the fact that he has been invited to participate in denominational life by one of the SBC’s more prominent and popular leaders, Danny Akin, would seem to indicate a willingness to listen to what he has to say, at least as far as a majority are concerned.
The Broadway situation is still not clear. Something happened in that process to move the EC from a position of consideration and discussion moving in a positive direction to support of the motion to dismiss. Did a disgruntled church member get to the EC with incontrovertible evidence that showed the Broadway leaders dealing with them were lying, and the church was far more affirming of homosexual lifestyles than they were admitting? Did a current church member provide evidence? Apparently, those details are being kept confidential if they occurred. I’m not sure about this particular incident at all, but I do know that there is a big difference between affirming homosexuality by declaring it not to be sinful, and churches not disciplining members for other sins.
The Ouroboros is an excellent analogy for moderate Baptists as well. The tendency to drift away from both the Spirit and the Word has at least as many negative consequences for faith, and for its practice via the church and church organizations as fundamentalism does. If Baptists are racing toward oblivion, I tend to think the moderates will get there first.
July 13, 2009 at 8:36 pm |
Lee, you’re always fun to have around.
As I recall, that which was changed prohibited churches from “actively” affirming homosexuality. The motion brought against Broadway was that they “tacitly” were affirming it. This was misstep after misstep, fraught with problems. There may have been some disgruntled member, but more likely the tendency for SBC Fundamentalists to need an enemy/sacrifice won in the end. They haven’t done anything (per the SBC by-laws) to call for them to be disfellowshipped. The members I know believe that homosexuality activity (same gender intercourse) is a sin. The homosexuals I know laugh at the idea of Broadway being called an “affirming” congregation. It just isn’t true.
The sad thing is, if the same standard applied to Broadway…that of “Perceived Toleration of Un-Repentant Sin”…is applied to all churches, both your church and mine would be disfellowshiped. That would happen if for no other reason than that we are a horribly gluttonous people. It can be proved by attending any church pot-luck, see the people on the platform during any service, and the parusal of any church directory. We are an obese people, accompanied by all the diseases associated with it, and we don’t care. We treat the gift of God, our bodies, as personal idols. We give it what it wants, no matter what. We worship at the feet of our stomachs, buying our sacrifices from the Golden Arches. We are hypocrits of the worse order, showing the way of defilement to our children’s children.
The SBC Fundamentalists were, are now, and will continue to do more harm to God’s Kingdom than good. Why else are we dying out?
Tim P.s. next time I’m in Houston, we need to hit Ninfa’s off of Westheimer!