Last week was a religious/political split screen.
At its annual meeting in Indianapolis, the Southern Baptist Convention overwhelmingly approved a resolution condemning the practice of in vitro fertilization as “dehumanizing.” Earlier, the convention narrowly defeated a resolution that would have put its already stated opposition to women pastors into its constitution.
It might seem puzzling that the votes would split in this way, but it’s easily explainable in terms of consequences. The SBC has already decertified some Baptist churches with women ministers, and if had formalized its policies it would have to divorce itself (so to speak) from quite a few more. So the consequences would have been very close at hand.
The IVF resolution, on the other hand, only stated the convention’s position on an issue over which it has no control. What to actually do about a medical procedure that has come into wide use in this country, often by Baptists, is somebody else’s problem. It quickly became clear just whose problem it is.
Later Wednesday afternoon, after the IVF amendment was adopted in Indianapolis, Democrats blocked a bill by Republican senators Ted Cruz of Texas and Katie Britt of Alabama which would have blocked states which prevented IVF treatments from receiving federal Medicaid funds. The following day, Republicans blocked the Democrats’ version of a bill protecting IVF, guaranteeing the body’s reputation as a do-nothing Congress.
“There should be no question that in vitro fertilization will remain available in Georgia,” House Speaker Jon Burns said the day after the convention’s vote, joining a chorus of Republican officials quickly distancing themselves from the SBC resolution.
Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, there have been signs of growing tensions between religious conservatives who want to press for more changes they see as protecting the sanctity of life, and Republicans who see a threat to their political lives in the way voters have reacted to the ruling in several elections. The controversy over IVF, which flared in February when the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that the frozen embryos used in the procedure must be treated as human beings, has raised these tensions to a new pitch.
The death of Paul Pressler at age 94 was not yet announced when the Southern Baptists met last week, but his shadow looms large over all that happened. It was in large part because of the movement he set in motion that the SBC’s resolution matters so much to the Republican Party in this election year.
Beginning in the late ‘70s, Pressler, a Texas appeals court judge, was a leader in what came to be called the Conservative Resurgence, which pushed the SBC rightward on issues from abortion to biblical inerrancy, forced moderates out of Baptist seminaries and aligned more publicly with the Republican Party.
The tactics Pressler employed in the takeover of his denomination were echoed later by Newt Gingrich and other Republicans who pushed their party rightward. It would be no exaggeration to say the Conservative Resurgence and the Contract with America were joined at the hip.
In 2017, a former aide filed a lawsuit accusing Pressler of sexual abuse, and in the complicated legal proceedings that followed, several more men came forward to claim they had been assaulted by Pressler. The lawsuit led to a much wider scandal involving sexual abuse and coverups by church officials and more lawsuits.
Pressler denied the charges until the end, but several months ago, he settled a lawsuit brought by the SBC, which he molded into its current form. The bitter nature of their private negotiations was conveyed over social media by the SBC’s attorney, who described Pressler as a “monster” and “sexual predator” who had done “the devil’s work.”
Small wonder, then, that Pressler’s death wasn’t announced until after last week’s SBC gathering, even if the organizers knew about it.
The connection Pressler helped to forge between the Republican Party and the SBC will continue after his passing, but it has reached a place where both sides might be inclined to welcome a little more separation between church and state.
I was puzzled by the southern baptists stand, until I recalled, wasn’t this the same church that justified modern slavery using the bible? It makes total sense it was molded into its current form by ” a “monster” and “sexual predator” who had done “the devil’s work.””
As a retired Baptis pastor who worked hard to resist Pressler and the Takeover, this is some of the best writing on this subject I have seen. And I’ve read it all. Thank you, Tom Baxter!