Changes

For most of the 20th century, the factions that became known as "conservatives" and "moderates"<ref>These are the terms preferred by the conservative wing, which ultimately gained control of the convention and refers to their regaining control as the "Conservative Resurgence"; the "moderates" -- who were really theological and social gospel liberals -- preferred to be called "conservatives" while labeling their opponents as "fundamentalists" (notwithstanding that true fundamentalists -- who had formed other denominations or were in the [[Independent Baptist]] camp a half-century or more before -- thought that the conservatives were, and still believe they are, misguided at best and apostate at worst) and the conservatives' actions as the "Fundamentalist Takeover".</ref> were at the fringe of the SBC. That changed when the Civil Rights issue and opposition to [[Jim Crow]] (racial segregation) energized the moderate in the 1950s and 1960s. By the 1970s the conservatives had coalesced. Conservatives believe that moderates were right to support desegregation but that they went too far by accepting changes in changing national social norms, especially regarding abortion, homosexuality and women's roles in society and the ministry.<ref>See Hankins (2002).</ref>  

For most of the 20th century, the factions that became known as "conservatives" and "moderates"<ref>These are the terms preferred by the conservative wing, which ultimately gained control of the convention and refers to their regaining control as the "Conservative Resurgence"; the "moderates" -- who were really theological and social gospel liberals -- preferred to be called "conservatives" while labeling their opponents as "fundamentalists" (notwithstanding that true fundamentalists -- who had formed other denominations or were in the [[Independent Baptist]] camp a half-century or more before -- thought that the conservatives were, and still believe they are, misguided at best and apostate at worst) and the conservatives' actions as the "Fundamentalist Takeover".</ref> were at the fringe of the SBC. That changed when the Civil Rights issue and opposition to [[Jim Crow]] (racial segregation) energized the moderate in the 1950s and 1960s. By the 1970s the conservatives had coalesced. Conservatives believe that moderates were right to support desegregation but that they went too far by accepting changes in changing national social norms, especially regarding abortion, homosexuality and women's roles in society and the ministry.<ref>See Hankins (2002).</ref>  

Beginning in the late 1960s, conservatives under the leadership of layman Paul Pressler and minister Paige Patterson claimed that the denomination's institutions had come under the influence of liberalism and that a redirection was necessary.  Patterson and Pressler noted the structure of the SBC Presidency could be used to gain this redirection: the SBC President solely nominates the Committee on Committees, which in turn nominates the Committee on Nominations (previously known as the Committee on Boards), which in turn nominates the Executive Committee, heads of all SBC organizations, and other positions.  A conservative-minded President would fill vacancies on the Committee on Committees with similarly conservative-minded persons, and when that faction had control it would, in turn, fill nominees for the Committee on Nominations (again with similarly conservative-minded persons), and thereafter fill all other positions similarly.

Beginning in the late 1960s, conservatives under the leadership of layman Paul Pressler and minister Paige Patterson claimed that the denomination's institutions had come under the influence of liberalism and that a redirection was necessary.  At one point the liberalism was so rampant, the SBC actually passed a resolution in 1971 -- nearly two years before the infamous Roe v. Wade decision -- supporting abortion in such cases as "clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother".<ref>See [http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/13/resolution-on-abortion SBC Resolution on Abortion, 1971 Annual Meeting, St. Louis, Missouri.]</ref>  But by 1980 (ironically, meeting again in St. Louis, the site of the 1971 convention) the SBC had completely reversed itself, passing a much stronger resolution condemning the practice.<ref>See [http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/19/resolution-on-abortion SBC Resolution on Abortion, 1980 Annual Meeting, St. Louis, Missouri.]</ref> Patterson and Pressler noted the structure of the SBC Presidency could be used to gain this redirection: the SBC President solely nominates the Committee on Committees, which in turn nominates the Committee on Nominations (previously known as the Committee on Boards), which in turn nominates the Executive Committee, heads of all SBC organizations, and other positions.  A conservative-minded President would fill vacancies on the Committee on Committees with similarly conservative-minded persons, and when that faction had control it would, in turn, fill nominees for the Committee on Nominations (again with similarly conservative-minded persons), and thereafter fill all other positions similarly.

Starting in 1979 they mobilized delegates to attend the annual convention and to elect strong conservative candidates. Usually winning by ratios of about 55%-45% they elected a series of strong conservative presidents. In turn the presidents appointed strong conservative committees and trustees, and systematically transformed the mindset of the SBC's six seminaries, its publishing house, its mission boards, and its numerous agencies to a conservative view. Theologically the issue has focused on the inerrancy of Scripture.

Starting in 1979 they mobilized delegates to attend the annual convention and to elect strong conservative candidates. Usually winning by ratios of about 55%-45% they elected a series of strong conservative presidents. In turn the presidents appointed strong conservative committees and trustees, and systematically transformed the mindset of the SBC's six seminaries, its publishing house, its mission boards, and its numerous agencies to a conservative view. Theologically the issue has focused on the inerrancy of Scripture.