John Wilson writes in today’s Wall Street Journal
about Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton’s “New Baptist Covenant.” I am happy to read that Wilson is not too keen on this new coalition of “above the fray” Baptists (a.k.a., moderate and liberal Baptists). Even though the former Presidents are Baptists, it still takes a lot of chutzpah for two politicians to pose as the new uniters of Christendom, especially when the big meeting is set to take place in 2008 right in time for the Presidential primaries. The whole thing smells more of politics than of piety. So I share Wilson’s low estimation of the so-called “New Baptist Covenant.”
I am surprised, however, how Wilson chooses to characterize the leaders of the conservative resurgence of the Southern Baptist Convention. Wilson is the editor of Books & Culture and an editor-at-large at Christianity Today, so he is no stranger to the various strands of evangelical believers in the U.S. Yet he still chooses to describe Southern Baptist conservatives as “commissars,” “hard-liners,” and “hyper-conservatives.” Why is Wilson adopting the rhetoric of the SBC’s critics in describing SBC leaders? Has CT taken the side of SBC moderates?