Interview with Dr. David Dockery: Part Three

Transitioning to issues related to the Southern Baptist Convention, the interview progresses into some current issues of controversy and cooperation. 

SBC Controversy and Cooperation

Brister: Some of the critics will argue that a gospel consensus in the SBC is not possible.  Others will tell you that they prefer the fragmentation.  Over the past year, we have seen such alliances as the Memphis Declaration and the Joshua Convergence, and less organized is the splintering issues as private prayer languages, the emerging church movement, and the Founders movement.  How would respond to those who say that unity and consensus is not possible?

Dockery: Since the 17th century Baptists have been a diverse group with a complex history and more than one theological emphasis. Yet, we can find that our Baptist heritage has had an agreed upon core, as well as confessional boundaries. The Baptist heritage has historically confessed with all true Christians everywhere belief in the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by whom all things were made. We have also confessed the full deity and perfect humanity of Jesus Christ, His virgin birth and sinless life, His substitutionary atonement for sins, His resurrection from the dead, His exaltation to the right hand of God, and His triumphal return. We stand in continuity with the consensus of the Early Church, the Reformers, the Pietists, and the Revivalists on matters such as the truthfulness of Holy Scripture, the doctrine of God, and the person and work of Jesus Christ. This kind of historically informed consensus fidei will serve us well. One of the earliest Baptist confessions of faith, the Orthodox Confession of 1678, incorporated the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed, declaring that “all three ought thoroughly to be received and believed.”
        My concern is not for uniformity, but for a historically and theologically informed consensus that can bring renewal and unity to Baptist life. We need to recognize that unity is a lofty biblical ideal expressed in the prayer of Jesus (John 17) and the teachings of Paul (Ephesians 4:1-6). I believe that inherent in a historically informed understanding of our Baptist heritage is the need for some flexibility and variety lest we place straightjackets around one another. We would do well to affirm the general principle:  “in essentials Unity, in non-essentials liberty, and in all things charity.”

Brister: One of the main arguments from the dissenting movement in the SBC is the narrowing of parameters in cooperation.  With the new IMB policies regarding baptism and private prayer languages, to the continual barrage of articles against Calvinists, to the resolution on alcohol, many Southern Baptists conclude that the lines are being drawn so as not to include those who may hold a differing position on secondary or tertiary matters.  Do you believe this narrowing of parameters is taking place?  If so, are you in support of it?

Dockery:  One of the things that Frank Page has wanted to do is to have a more generous spirit across the SBC without compromising on any essential aspect of the Christian faith. I think it is important to have convictions about all of the things you have mentioned, but most of the items you have identified seem to me to be secondary or tertiary matters. There is a need for theological triage where we are reminded afresh of those things which are primary in our Baptist heritage. I once heard someone say that in essentials, faith and truth are primary and we may not appeal to love or grace as an excuse to deny any essential aspect of Christian teaching. Yet, in non-essential matters love is primary, and we may not appeal to personal conviction or zeal as an excuse for failure to exercise grace or demonstrate love. Faith instructs our conscience. Love respects the conscience of others. Faith shapes our freedom; love and a concern for others limits its exercise.

Brister: How would you define orthodoxy?  Would you include issues such as alcohol, prayer languages, worship styles, or form of church government as defining orthodoxy?

Dockery:  A century ago when Baptists gathered in London for the inaugural meeting of the Baptist World Alliance (1905), led by E. Y. Mullins, Alexander Maclaren, A. T. Robertson, and others, and the assembly stood and recited in unison the Apostles’ Creed. I recognize that some Southern Baptists have problems with the Apostles’ Creed, but, nevertheless, we learn the importance of a foundational framework for an orthodox confession.
        In the attempt to recover a renewed orthodoxy over the past 25 years in Baptist life, the emphasis has been focused primarily and rightly on the nature and truthfulness of Holy Scripture. At times, however, the very use of the term “inerrancy” has carried with it an accompanying set of beliefs that assumed that one not only believed in the full truthfulness and authority of the Bible, and basic orthodox tenets of the faith, but also certain interpretations on pastoral authority, church-state issues, the nature of the Christian life, the return of Christ, and on the list could go. Historically, affirmations about biblical inerrancy have never been intended to be so encumbered.
        On the other hand, affirmations about the nature of Scripture are certainly important. When we say that we believe in the full truthfulness of the Bible we mean that what the Bible says, God says; what the Bible says happened really happened, every miracle, every event in every book in the Old Testament and the New is altogether true and trustworthy. Because some have tried to suggest otherwise, we must recognize that it is not sufficient merely to confess the inerrancy of Scripture – as important and foundational as that is.
        Other pressing issues that have come to light in recent years such as the nature of God, open theism, the question of using biblical language to address God (over against certain models of contemporary feminism), and concerns about belief in Jesus as the sole and sufficient Savior (over against universalism and soteriological pluralism), help us see that indeed it is time for a new rebirth of orthodoxy in Baptist life.
        Baptist need to cultivate a holistic orthodoxy, based on a high view of Scripture and congruent with the Trinitarian and Christological consensus of the early church. Only in this way will we avoid the dangers of fundamentalist reductionism on the one hand and liberal revisionism on the other. I would suggest that our shared Baptist work cannot move forward without confessional convictions or confessional boundaries. This, however, as I mentioned earlier, does not mean we should expect or demand uniformity of belief or conviction on secondary matters.
        We must ground our unity not only in the biblical confession that Jesus is Lord, but in the great tradition from the Confessions of Nicea in 325 and Chalcedon in 451. Likewise we must claim the best of our Baptist confessional heritage as well from the Standard Confessions of 1660 to the London Confessions of 1644, 1677, and 1689, to the Orthodox Creed of 1678, the Philadelphia Confession of 1742, the New Hampshire Confession of 1833, the Abstract of Principles in 1858, and the Baptist Faith and Message. Such historic confessions, though neither infallible nor completely sufficient for all contemporary challenges, can provide guidance in seeking to balance the mandates for right Christian thinking, right Christian believing, and right Christian living. Such historically grounded confessions can help us think rightly about faith and how we relate to one another in love within our convention, pointing out for us the important differences between primary and secondary issues in Christian doctrine and practice.

Brister: When the nominees for the President of the SBC were announced, many denominational heads, megachurch pastors, and leading voices of the SBC came out and endorsed certain candidates.  You didn’t.  Why?

Dockery: As you may remember many people had encouraged me to allow my name to be considered for the president of the SBC in 2006. I was certainly surprised by these suggestions. I had never even thought about serving as president of the SBC. I was at least sure that the timing for such was not right and the Union trustees discouraged me from such for a variety of reasons. They also gave me wise counsel regarding the public support of other candidates. I have known Frank Page for many years, and the same is true for Ronnie Floyd. Jerry Sutton, a Union parent and Board of Reference member, has been a significant friend of our work at Union in the state of Tennessee. I knew that I would be pleased to support the person elected by the convention.
        We are in a major campaign called Union 2010. We were in the important part of building a $20 million science building which will be completed (by God’s grace) in May of this year. It was important for me at that time (Spring, 2006) to keep my focus and priorities in line with the focus and priorities of the university. Union University remains my focus today.

Brister: As a follow up, the younger generation of Southern Baptists have become weary and jaded by the politicization of the SBC through cronyism, nepotism, and other forms of manipulating the system.  Do agree with the assessment that our Convention is being politicized?  What can you say to younger Southern Baptists who are feeling led to leave our Convention due to the frustration and angst which has developed from what they have witnessed?

Dockery: I would encourage the younger generation to stay patient and remain faithful to the SBC. The convention needs you. Recognize that all leaders have clay feet and will likely disappoint you somewhere along the way. You will have opportunities in days ahead to bring balance to areas that previous generations may have missed. Each generation has its own issues to address. Yours are different than those who have preceded you.
        The SBC has always had a political element. Try not to become jaded or frustrated by it. Remain hopeful. The SBC is still positioned to have a huge missionary impact on the world. We will pray that your generation does better than some that have gone before you. I pledge to pray for and with your generation. If the quality of students at Union University is an indicator, the future of the SBC is brighter than ever. I pray that God will grant you great wisdom and discernment in the coming years.

[Part 4 tomorrow: SBC Controvery and Cooperation continued]