Mohler’s Downgrade: Southern Seminary Professor Just Promoted Mariology

Whatever the beast is that’s devouring basic Christian orthodoxy at Southern Seminary, it should be killed with fire. Or maybe it’s the type that only goes away with prayer and fasting, dunno. But it’s awful and it’s destroying the place like The Nothing in The Neverending Story.

For those concerned that Social Religion has replaced the real Gospel in the hearts of American evangelicals and Southern Baptists in particular, Southern Seminary regularly provides a case in point for exactly how fast false teaching can leaven the lump. Once a bastion of Christian conservativism (or so we thought), Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has been chewed up by rank heresy faster than Kyle J. Howard eats away his racial trauma.

A tweet by Dr. Michael Haykin, a prominent professor at Southern Seminary and head of its history department has left some Christians wondering who spiked the kool-aid at the institution with race riot punch while many other Christians know darn well it was Albert Mohler.

As someone who daily tracks the Downgrade (defined as “a theological-dumbing down” – taken from Spurgeon’s Downgrade Controversy) at Southern Baptist institutions, let me tell you, Haykin’s comments even left me gape-mouthed. It’s genuinely jaw-dropping.


Theologians specializing in the field of polemics generally agree that all sub-Christian false teachings are on roads that eventually lead to Rome. We all got a front-row seat to that this week, as we watched Francis Chan embrace Catholics as spirit-filled Christians (apparently Sola Fide be damned).

Any branch of heresy still masquerading as a Christian sect will eventually take a road trip to the Vatican to be baptized in the Tiber and dash their head with ashes. The reason for this may seem mysterious at first, but if you consider that Roman Catholicism is the Whore of Babylon, it’s not surprising. The Catholic Church is a harlot and she hides heretics in the hem of her skirt (not easy considering it’s always hiked up like a hussy).

Before we give out Michael Haykin’s tweet, I’ll recall for you an urgent email I sent him several years ago, when we discovered that a gay-affirming, animal rights activist named Karen Swallow Prior was scheduled to speak at the Andrew Fuller Center. Haykin kindly responded to us, declining to click dozens of hyperlinks to primary sources detailing her liberalism, with an assurance that Russell Moore endorsed her and “Russell Moore is certainly no liberal.”

And all God’s people chortled.

Anyway, Haykin – apparently influenced positively by Chan’s widely publicized cannonball into heresy this week – repeated Chan’s talking points:


Haykin begins by saying, “I wonder…”

This is perhaps the most recognizable tactic of today’s subversive agents in evangelicalism, particularly as it was manifested in the Emergent Church circa 2010 (which has since collapsed, with most of its followers jumping over to Social Religion as their new heresy addiction). Haykin’s employed tactic has been recycled by Social Religionists, and it’s still all the rage in their anti-apologetic.

The tactic is called deconstructionism. The notion underlying this technique is clear enough: if you’re going to build a kingdom you have to tear apart the old one, and what better place to start than the language itself? The Emergents were famous for this strategy, and now deconstructionism has found a warm, inviting home in the halls of modern seminaries.

To exemplify the deconstructionism of trailblazers like Rob Bell, we might ask, “Does hell really imply eternal, conscious torment?” and answer with, “Love wins, bro.”

To give credit where it is due, Satan invented the strategy with his question in Genesis 3:1, “Yea, and hath God really said?” The heretic employs this strategy for two reasons. The first is to open up the plausibility of the false doctrine under the auspices of simply “provoking conversations,” – this is ultimately aimed at undermining orthodoxy. The reason any serious theologian would want people to question God’s Word is obvious – they’re a theologian for the wrong team.

Yo bro, is justification really by faith alone? I’m just asking the question

The second reason for this strategy is deflection and plausible deniability. When called out for promoting annihilationism (as with the example above), works-righteousness, or whatever kind of heresy the seminaries are selling on clearance these days, the subversive teacher can take two steps back and say, “Whoah! Whoah! I wasn’t saying this was so, I was just asking…It would be a fascinating study!

Sadly, Haykin already tried to moonwalk out this controversy (more on that in a minute) using this technique before we were able to put out this article, rendering us unable to say “I told you so,” which as you know is one of our favorite things to say.

Nonetheless, even with a sophisticated back-pedal engaged, we must rebuke this supposedly austere religious scholar for “thinking out loud” in social media, even if his goals aren’t devious.

Haykin presupposes that there is a “large-scale evangelical failure to honor our Lord’s mother.” I don’t think I’m alone in asking what the ^#$& he’s talking about. Who argues this? I mean, Francis Chan obviously argued it this week, but who else argues this besides Romanists?

Chan said something similar only a couple of days ago, which was no doubt read by Haykin and subconsciously affirmed as totes legit…

Or not that I don’t question [Roman Catholic] theology, because I do, but I have a reverence. I tell people it’s like the Virgin Mary. Like if I lived in that day and I knew the Virgin Mary was carrying my savior, that Jesus was really in her womb, how would I treat Mary, Ok? She could throw a rock at me And I’ll be like, okay, but Jesus is in you. My point is if Jesus is in her I’m gonna be really, really reverent with her. Honor her. And so if I believe the Holy Spirit of God is in you, I’m just not so quick to say anything like strongly against you.

Francis Chan, interview with Remnant Radio

Also, the Pope was down to clown on some Mary worship this week, which some kind soul managed to correct for him (HT Cody Libolt)…

Of course, the Romanists don’t respect Mary. They venerate a bitch-goddess manufactured from the leftovers of pagan fertility religion. Simply put, Jesus’ mother is not the idol manufactured by Romanist myth who was herself immaculately conceived, without sin, and who also rose again from the dead. Jesus’ mother would never have called herself a co-redemptrix with Christ. Neither was Mary a virgin for long, much to the chagrin of Romanists.

Forgive us all if we refuse to be lectured by pagans worshiping who God portrays in Revelation 17 as a promiscuous skank. The Roman Catholic “Virgin Mary” is no more Mary than the Pope is the head of the church.

Haykin’s argument is identical (nearly word-for-word!) to the Catholic Answers defense for Mariology made against them by Protestants. Rather than acknowledging that they worship a false goddess who they look to for their salvation and intercession, they just act as though veneration (worship) is the same as respect.

Again, this brings up the question of who in Hades is disrespecting the real and biographical Mary? Where are the Protestant effigy-burning parties? No, really. I want Haykin to be specific…who is disrespecting Jesus’ mom?

Mary, who served as the mother of Christ’s human nature, must surely have been a great gal. Protestants all recognize this. We value her so much that we don’t pray to her or worship her because it would really, really make her mad.

Haykin’s argument seems to imply that we mistreat Mary. I wonder how, exactly, this opinion is formed. He does not say (and cannot say, because it’s utter nonsense). The Romanist argument that Protestants do not respect Mary is entirely and 100% due to their belief that she should be worshipped as the means of our salvation. So when a supposed Protestant says such a stupid thing (repeating the Catholic talking-point), I want to see their math.

Haykin suggests that we don’t focus enough on the “vital place of a holy woman in salvation history.” We would argue that proportionately to the New Testament, we probably give Mary too much attention. The reason is simple, and it’s because Mary isn’t even mentioned by the Apostles in the entire canon of their epistles.

One would think that if Haykin was right, and Mary is due more pomp and circumstance among Protestants, that the Apostles would have constantly reminded the church of her contribution to “salvation history” in their letters. But instead, it sufficed to mention Mary in the biographical sketches of Jesus’ life as little more than an asterisk, only to go on and ignore her entire presence in the early church from there forward. Never in any of the apostolic epistles did the inspired writers take a break from Gospel-preaching to speak to the significance of Mary.

Out of Mary’s womb came the Christ-child. Mary called him her savior (she needed one like anybody else), regularly doubted him and was repeatedly scolded by Christ. Nonetheless, in obedience to the Fifth Commandment, Christ honored her request for a miracle in John 2 – begrudgingly – and made sure before he died to find someone to take care of her. That’s the gist of what the Bible says about Mary, so forgive our focus on Christ rather than his mom because we’re just following the lead of the Apostles.

Haykin also presupposes in this dumpster-fire of a tweet that there is “toxic masculinity” in our ranks. Again, Haykin doesn’t say of whom he speaks. We presume it’s John MacArthur or anyone else who isn’t ready to get down on their knees and repent of (real) complementarianism. And frankly, we don’t trust any of the latte mafia’s sniveling, bowtie-wearing, limp-wristed assessments of what is and is not masculinity. These are the guys cheerleading that homo-priest Sam Alberry and his gaggle of Gospel Coalition lesbians while thinking Jonathan Merritt and Paul Tripp are anything but dandies.

No thanks.

We shouldn’t forget that the term “toxic masculinity” itself is a loaded term and handed to us on the plate of Social Religion. The term was born in the emasculating Mythopoetic Men’s Movement of the 1980s and has continued to be used primarily (if not exclusively) by leftists who think men should be neutered and that Jackie Hill Perry should pee standing up.

Using the term is itself a betrayal of Biblical notions of gender roles, as though there is anything toxic about masculinity. It’s simply not used by people who believe men should be manly and women should be feminine. It’s used by feminists, effeminate men, and Beta Males who prefer to be lorded over by their wives.

Not only does the use of the term betray Haykin’s liberalism (much like the use of the term “reproductive justice” is a dead giveaway for someone’s political leanings), Haykin’s tweet makes a startling presupposition. He presupposes that men are indeed a source of “toxically masculine” in “our ranks,” which ostensibly is conservative evangelicalism. He doesn’t name names for the same reason a sniper doesn’t wear reflective tape, because it will betray his position.


Unfortunately, this isn’t an isolated incident in which an otherwise-solid brother stumbled via a poorly-advised and poorly-worded tweet. This is yet another full-time Social Religion activist (check out Haykin’s social media) being a tad too honest about his beliefs.

I don’t know if Haykin means what he said and is a secret Romanist or if he’s just an ideologically promiscuous man who’s dry-mounting evangelicalism’s bad doctrine of the week.

It doesn’t matter.

Albert Mohler should be under investigation for what appears to be an intentional theological derailment of Southern Seminary. If Occam’s Razor is accurate and the most obvious answer is the most likely, then Albert Mohler was never converted to conservatism shortly before taking over SBTS, as he claimed. Mohler has always been a liberal, playing the long game to corrupt a conservative institution.

There is no other explanation for who he hires, the promotions he’s given the worst of the Social Religionist offenders, and his refusal to lift a finger to stop the rank heresy in his institution.

Ultimately, Haykin would go on to say he’s not promoting Mariology. Of course, heretics are damned liars, so that’s of little surprise. But we make no assumption that Haykin is a Romanist. Rather, we are asserting that Haykin – like Mohler – is fundamentally adoctrinal and will whore after whatever polls well this week in evangelicalism.


After some rightful outrage, Haykin ran to hide behind Southern Seminary’s Confession of Faith.

The term we invented for this strategy years ago is “website orthodoxy.” This is when a rank heretic appeals to his Confession of Faith as a defense against whatever he said that was squarely against his Confession of Faith, usually pointing to a hyperlink on their website. It’s very common among leftists and liberals – people from Rick Warren to Beth Moore – used to defend themselves against discerning Christians who have smoked out the devil’s foxes.

It works like this…

  • Step 1, say a liberal thing.
  • Step 2, when discerned, quote your Confession of Faith, which you have already clearly undermined by the liberal thing you said.
  • Step 3, portray your liberal thoughts as the epitome of conservatism.

This is how the Overton window is moved in evangelicalism. It usually begins with, “I’m a strong conservative, but I believe [liberal garbage].” It’s as genuine as The Lincoln Project arguing, “We are strong conservatives, but we want you to vote for Democrats this election.” It would be like a socialist arguing, “I’m a strong Capitalist, but let me tell you why Universal Basic Income is a great idea.”

There is nothing Reformed or evangelical about Michael Haykin, other than that he’s paid to be one by Southern Baptist tithe-givers and hasn’t fulfilled his end of the bargain. As J. Gresham Machen pointed out, liberals have to pretend to be conservatives in order to stay employed in our institutions. They’ll always swear up-and-down they’re conservative, just as the moderates in the Conservative Resurgence fraudulently claimed about themselves.

Notice how even in his follow-up tweet Haykin again presupposes that Protestants are “silent” about Mary. This is fundamentally untrue. It’s just that we don’t mention her any more often than the Scripture does, which is seldom.

Haykin’s is a Romanist argument. Period.

Haykin then quotes Calvin about the incarnation of Christ, which apparently proves something or other. I suspect that Calvin would think no higher of Michael Haykin than of Michael Servetus.


Bringing you discernment news and commentary from a biblical, polemical perspective means it is tough out there on social media. We’re constantly getting kneecapped and constrained by tech companies who find our fidelity to the scripture and pursuit of truth to be intolerable, resulting in our reach being severely throttled.

For this reason, we ask you please consider supporting us a few different ways. The first, by liking and following our new Facebook page, our home where we share new posts and interact with our members. The second, by following and retweeting our Twitter page. The third, by signing up for our newsletter below.

And last, through direct support. You can catch our free weekly episodes of the Polemics Report by subscribing at BTWN. If you like what you hear and desire to hear more, you can get the VIP full-length version for only $5.95 per month on Patreon. Also, you get other freebies for additional monthly pledges.

Subscribe to us on Patreon here and support our ministry.

God bless!

Stay informed. Subscribe Today.

When you subscribe, please add to your contacts to ensure that your newsletter doesn’t go into your spam folder.

Enter your email address below…

7 thoughts on “Mohler’s Downgrade: Southern Seminary Professor Just Promoted Mariology

  1. He needs to get out of the seminary now. Marianism is garbage. Mariology is scary pagan nonsense. Marian “visions” if they are even real at all are just demonic appearances. Mary veneration was the road to hell for the Roman church and will be for us if the demon can get into the evangelical church. Understand that Catholics consider Jesus the source of all grace and Mary the DISPENSER of all grace. That’s why she’s the “Mediatrix of all grace” – all grace flows through Mary. Once you bring the demon in, it immediately will begin to suck all glory away from Jesus as it’s done in the RCC. I’ve been collecting Mary quotes for years, because it’s a sure sign of the Christian/pagan syncretism of the RCC. Letting the demon in to “honor the feminine “ was the mistake they made in the 5th century or so. It happened to them and it’ll happen to evangelicals if our leaders let it. Understand that Catholics don’t “have a friend in Jesus.” Jesus dwells aloof in inaccessible light. Mary takes the friend and redeemer roles in the CC. Jesus is for them the mediator between man and God, but Mary is the mediator between man and Jesus. And a mediator or intercessor is required to reach him. Here are some Mary quotes to keep in mind next time they insist they don’t worship Mary, or some trouble making heretic thinks we should honor Mary. Enjoy. Or barf. Whichever strikes you.

    “Mary,… as much as was possible for a creature, was deified“;[23] “She is full of grace, the reservoir of sanctity, the Masterpiece of the Trinity“;[24] “In order to choose her as Daughter, Mother and Spouse, the uncreated Trinity must have loved her better than any one created person, and more than all other creatures. Our love for her is but a pale shadow compared to the love [for her] of the Blessed Trinity.”[25]
    Further, “…no salvation exists without Mary.”[26] “From that moment [of incarnation] on, Mary acquired a kind of jurisdiction over every temporal outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Thus, no one receives grace except through Mary.”[27] “No one has ever been saved except through your intercession, O Mary Mother of God. No one receives the gift of God if not through you, O Love full of Grace.”[28]
    23. Igino Giordiana, Mary of Nazareth (Boston, MA: Daughters of St. Paul, 1965), p. 23.
    24. Ibid., p. 125, emphasis added.
    25. Ibid., p. 122, emphasis added.
    26. James Alberione, Mary, Queen of Apostles (Boston, MA: Daughters of St. Paul, 1976), p. 19, emphasis added..
    27. Ibid p21
    28. Ibid. P22

    Pope Benedict XV said of Mary that “[O]ne can justly say that with Christ, she herself redeemed mankind.”

    Pope Pius IX said, “Our salvation is based upon the holy Virgin… so that if there is any hope and spiritual healing for us we receive it solely and uniquely from her.”

    On May 7, 1997, Pope John Paul II dedicated his general audience to “the Virgin Mary” and urged all Christians to accept her as their mother. He noted the words spoken by Jesus on the cross to Mary and John — “Woman, behold thy son!” and “Behold thy mother!” (John 19:26, 27), and he claimed that in this statement, “It is possible to understand the authentic meaning in the worship of Mary in the ecclesial community. . .which furthermore is based on the will of Christ” (Vatican Information Service, May 7, 1997). He said “the history of Christian piety teaches that Mary is the path that leads to Christ, and that filial devotion to her does not at all diminish intimacy with Jesus, but rather, increases it and leads it to very high levels of perfection.” He concluded by asking all Christians “to make room for Mary in their daily lives, acknowledging her providential role in the path of Salvation.”

    “When she is the subject of preaching and worship she prompts the faithful to come to her son,”
    From Vatican Collection Volume 1, Vatican Council II, the Conciliar and Post Conciliar documents, General Editor Austin Flannery, O.P. New Revised Edition 1992, Costello Publishing Company, Northport, NY. 1992, pp420-421 par 65.

    “If God is angry with a sinner, Mary takes him under her protection, she withholds the avenging arm of her Son and saves him” (Alphonsus Liguari).
    “She is the sure refuge of sinners and criminals from the rigour of the wrath and vengeance of Jesus Christ;” she “binds the power of Jesus Christ to prevent the evil He would do to the guilty” (Jean-Jacques Olier). Yes, you read that right! Mary saves you FROM JESUS. Here’s a prayer to Mary for salvation from Jesus: Count me among thy most devoted servants. Take me under thy protection and it is enough for me. For if thou protect me I fear nothing. Not for my sins, for thou will obtain for me the pardon for them. Nor from the devils because thou art more powerful than all hell together. Nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee he will be appeased. But one thing I fear, that in the hour of my temptation I may through negligence fail to call on THEE and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me therefore the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to THEE, O mother of perpetual help.

    But wait! It gets better! God himself is subject to Mary’s will:

    “Since grace enhances our human nature and glory adds a still greater perfection to grace, it is certain that our Lord remains in heaven just as much the Son of Mary as he was on earth. Consequently he has retained the submissiveness and obedience of the most perfect of all children towards the best of all mothers….When therefore we read in the writings of Saint Bernard, Saint Bernardine, Saint Bonaventure, and others that all in heaven and on earth, even God himself, is subject to the Blessed Virgin, they mean that the authority which God was pleased to give her is so great that she seems to have the same power as God. Her prayers and requests are so powerful with him that he accepts them as commands in the sense that he never resists his dear mother’s prayer because it is always humble and conformed to his will….
    “Since the principal mystery celebrated and honoured in this devotion is the mystery of the Incarnation where we find Jesus only in Mary, having become incarnate in her womb, it is appropriate for us to say, ‘slavery of Jesus in Mary’, of Jesus dwelling enthroned in Mary, according to the beautiful, prayer, recited by so many great souls, ‘O Jesus living in Mary’.” St. Louis de Montfort, in Treatise on True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, #27, 246.

    The foundation of all our confidence is found in the Virgin Mary. God has committed to her the treasury of all good things, in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is His will: that we obtain everything through Mary. Sweet heart of Mary, be my salvation! **Pope Pius IX

    **For, since it is the will of Divine Providence that we should have the God-Man through Mary, there is no other way for us to receive Christ except from her hands. **Pope Pius X

    **He will not taste death forever who, in his dying moments, has recourse to the Blessed Virgin Mary. What will it cost you to save us? Has not Jesus placed in your hands all the treasures of His grace and mercy? You sit crowned as Queen at the right hand of your Son: your dominion reaches as far as the heavens, and to you are subject the earth and all creatures dwelling thereon. Your dominion reaches even down into the abyss of Hell, and you alone O Mary, save us from the hands of Satan. **Pope Pius XI

    **Nothing comes to us except through the mediation of Mary, for such is the will of God. O Virgin Most Holy, no one abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; no one O Mother of God, attains salvation except through thee! Every one of the multitudes, therefore, whom the evil of calamitous circumstances has stolen away from Catholic unity, must be born again to Christ by that same Mother whom God has endowed with a never-failing fertility to bring forth a holy people. **Pope Leo XIII

    **Mary, not one of thy devout servants has ever perished; may I, too, be saved! **Pope Benedict XV

    God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary.
    St. Thomas Aquinas

    No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary, as entering through a gate.
     St. Bonaventure

    Mary is called “The Gate of Heaven” because no one can enter Heaven but through her means.
    St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori

    Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary.
    St. Bernard

    Who is this Gate if not Mary? Mary is the Gate through which Christ entered this world!
    St. Ambrose

    We had closed Paradise; you, O Mary, opened the entryway to the tree of life again . . . You are the bridge to life, the staircase to Heaven!
    St. John Damascene

    Every grace granted to man in this life has three successive steps: from God it comes to Christ, from Christ to the Virgin, and from the Virgin it descends to us.
    St. Bernardine of Siena

    All graces that have ever been bestowed on men, all of them came through Mary.
    St. Antoninus

    Every grace and blessing possessed by the Church, all the treasures of light, holiness, and glory that abide in her, on earth as well as in Heaven, all are due to the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary . . . Let us acknowledge, then, that her heart is the origin of everything noble, rich, and precious in all the holy souls who form the universal Church in Heaven and on earth. It is the source of salvation.
    St. John Eudes

    I’ve collected pages of these types of quotes. Kick Mr Haykin out of the Baptist church. Like, yesterday!

    1. How about this question: I wonder if the large scale failure of Catholics to honor Jesus Christ as solus Christus and to “turn the truth of God into a lie and worship and serve the creature rather than the creator who is blessed forever” has “for this reason caused God to give them up to dishonorable passions…men leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another, men with men, doing that which is shameful?” A la Romans 1:25,27. I’m just thinking out loud here. It would be a fascinating study.

  2. Wasn’t the Roman church planning to eventually make her a member of the Trinity, which would mean you could no longer Collett that given its prefix? Also, a cursory review of Luke chapter 1 reveals that Mary herself admits her need for a savior. Shouldn’t that tell Romanists something, if they would actually read and study their Bibles? But then, for most, like I was, it’s all about leaning on the church to eventually get you into heaven, after an undefined time in purgatory, of course. Then again, when you read about purgatory, it sure sounds a lot like you know what.

  3. I’m sorry, but anyone who utters the words “toxic masculinity” is not a conservative. That is a liberal talking point.

    Great article!

  4. “I don’t think I’m alone in asking what the ^#$& he’s talking about.” Again, why are you talking like the world? Is it appropriate for you to use such language?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *