Reporters receive all kinds of bizarre things in the mail (analog or digital). Religion-beat reporters have been known to have some really, really bizarre items come out of nowhere.
My all-time “favorite” (I am using that term loosely) was a 35-page, handwritten manifesto detailing why — using lots of biblical references — Barbra Streisand was the Antichrist. I filed that one away. That wasn’t the case, however, with the typed, unsigned note in a plain white envelope that pointed to public documents detailing the arrest of a prominent clergyman for a sex crime committed in a public bathroom.
Journalists offered hot documents have to ask two questions:
(1) Can this information be verified as accurate?
(2) What are the motives of the person sharing the information? That question leads to another: How can those motives be explained to readers without identifying the person who provided the documents?
It goes without saying that documents from an on-the-record source will be trusted — by informed readers and “stockholders” in the story — more than those from a source demanding anonymity. The key is to give as much information as possible about the source of the information as possible, including why anonymity was acceptable in this case.
This leads us to the Nashville Tennessean story that rocked the world of Southern Baptist Convention social media, the one with this headline: “Inside the Southern Baptist Convention's battle over race and what it says about the denomination.”
The entire story pivots on documents linked to a former SBC president, the Rev. James Merritt, and the Rev. J.D. Greear, the convention’s leader at the time of the events described in the story. It also helps to know that Merritt was the chair of the national convention resolutions committee in 2021.
All of this focuses on efforts to pass a 2021 SBC resolution that condemned “critical race theory” outright — by name and with no qualifications, as desired by leaders of the SBC’s most conservative churches. Here is a key passage:
The resolution that convention messengers — voting delegates representing local churches — passed never mentioned critical race theory by name. Instead, it simply said messengers "reject any theory or worldview that finds the ultimate identity of human beings in ethnicity or in any other group dynamic.”
The delicate wording was the result of a deliberative effort before the annual meeting by convention leaders who were trying to hold the denomination together. … Black pastors were threatening to leave the country’s largest Protestant denomination if it denounced critical race theory directly.
This brings us to the “binder.”
Newly obtained documents provide a behind-the-scenes look at how convention leaders handled such a tense moment. The documents, included in a binder that once belonged to James Merritt, the chair of the 2021 resolutions committee, include resolutions submitted on the subject of race and emails between top Southern Baptist leaders, including Greear.
Readers are later told that the binder “was obtained independently by The Tennessean.”
Journalists reading those words will assume that the binder didn’t come directly from Merritt, but probably from (1) someone close to the former SBC president or (b) someone involved in the resolutions committee. For many SBC insiders, it doesn’t help that the Merritt family is currently involved in an online controversy about another topic linked to “intersectionality” and forms of critical theory (see this Julia Duin post: “About Southern Baptist wars and the Merritt family — Here's some inside baseball worth covering”).
Other than questions about the contents and origin of this binder, I think that it’s crucial to ask if the story accurately describes the views of many Black Southern Baptists (and some White leaders, as well) who are “stakeholders” in the events swirling around this story.
First of all, here is the definition that the Tennessean team uses for CRT:
The theory, an academic framework largely taught in colleges and law schools, teaches that racism is ingrained in U.S. institutions and white people benefit from it.
That’s a very short definition of a topic that has produced bookshelves full of books and school materials (K-12 to graduate school) in recent years. At the very least, I think it’s crucial to note that CRT emerged as a distinctly “secular” theory in higher education.
You can see more landlines in this Britannica definition:
critical race theory (CRT), intellectual and social movement and loosely organized framework of legal analysis based on the premise that race is not a natural, biologically grounded feature of physically distinct subgroups of human beings but a socially constructed (culturally invented) category that is used to oppress and exploit people of colour. Critical race theorists hold that racism is inherent in the law and legal institutions of the United States insofar as they function to create and maintain social, economic, and political inequalities between whites and nonwhites, especially African Americans. Critical race theorists are generally dedicated to applying their understanding of the institutional or structural nature of racism to the concrete (if distant) goal of eliminating all race-based and other unjust hierarchies.
Yes, “other unjust hierarchies” — which leads directly to debates about “intersectionality.”
The key for journalists is that there is no way to define these terms that will please activists on both sides of the theological, cultural and, yes, political wars surrounding them. Any discussion of these issues creates a target-rich environment, with journalists caught in the middle of the shelling.
The big idea: There are more than two camps here.
For example, the Tennessean story discusses the statement from SBC presidents that stated:
In light of current conversations in the Southern Baptist Convention, we stand together on historic Southern Baptist condemnations of racism in any form and we also declare that affirmation of Critical Race Theory, Intersectionality, and any version of Critical Theory is incompatible with the Baptist Faith & Message.
It helps to see the entire statement from the seminary leaders and some of their commentaries on it, such as this statement by the often-quoted R. Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville.
We must make clear that racism has no rightful place within the SBC, our churches, or our entities. Clearly, much work remains, if we are to be the denomination of churches we pray to be. We are thankful for our African-American brothers and sisters in the SBC whose voices are so needed and must be honored. We are not to be guided by secular ideologies, but by the Word of God alone and in the love of Christ.
Here’s the crucial question: Are White SBC leaders saying that there is zero value in the analysis tools associated with CRT and that there is nothing to learn from the many ways of approaching CRT? Some are, but many are not. At the same time, it’s crucial to note that some Black SBC leaders have stated that they reject elements of CRT that clash with conservative views of biblical authority, especially on race and other issues (think marriage and family life).
It helps to read this SBC Voices post that includes the following (with essential URLS) from a prominent African-American Baptist, the Rev. Tony Evans of Dallas:
As I stated in my sermon, which I encourage everyone reading this to watch, I again affirm that the Bible must be the basis for analyzing any and all social, racial or political theories in order to identify what is legitimate or what is not legitimate. But I did not say, nor imply, that CRT or other ideologies lack beneficial aspects — rather that the Bible sits as the basis for determining that. I have long taught that racism, and its ongoing repercussions, are real and should be addressed intentionally, appropriately and based on the authority of God’s inerrant Word.
The crucial words: “But I did not say, nor imply, that CRT or other ideologies lack beneficial aspects — rather that the Bible sits as the basis for determining that.”
In other words, the Bible judges any use of CRT.
For the left, that is not liberal enough. For the right, that is not conservative enough. But that middle ground is precisely what journalists have to find a way to describe. As your GetReligionistas have been stressing in recent years, it is crucial to listen to the voices of conservatives in Black churches.
Let me end by applauding the fact that the Tennessean didn’t devote a lot of ink to He Who Must Be Named, while keeping the focus on the history of SBC debates about how to condemn racism — a process that predates, well, 2016.
Read between the lines here, including remarks from Rolland Slade, a Black pastor from California:
From the 2016 annual meeting to the 2021 annual meeting, Southern Baptists have spent a total 273 minutes discussing and debating resolutions. Eighty-five of those minutes, or about a third of the total time, have been spent on resolutions about race, according to an analysis of video recordings.
To Southern Baptist leaders, the math is neither a coincidence, nor is it surprising.
“Follow those resolutions and I believe you will see a tension in our country. It’s not an absolute Southern Baptist thing, it’s a tension in our culture,” Slade said, referring to the national political climate surrounding Donald Trump’s presidency.
As I said, the tensions predate 2016.
It helps to do the rest of the math.
FIRST IMAGE: From Twitter account of Liam Adams of The Nashville Tennessean.