By now you’ve probably read that SBC president Bryant Wright has appointed a task force to study the possibility of changing the name of the Southern Baptist Convention. Wright’s announcement has elicited a number of responses, ranging from elation to despair. Besides differing opinions about the possible name change itself, there is an ongoing debate about whether or not Wright’s task force violates Southern Baptist polity, the stated will of engaged Southern Baptists, or both. I suspect much more will be written on these issues in the coming days.
I confess I’m somewhat ambivalent about the name change debate. On the one hand, I have no personal qualms with the Southern Baptist name and seriously doubt that people are going to hell in Vermont or Oregon simply because they object, in principle, to new church plants that affiliate with a denomination that has the word Southern in its name. Furthermore, while the name Southern Baptist Convention is clearly regional in its origin, over time our name has come to mean far more than a group of Baptist churches down in Dixie. I also have some concerns about the timing—like it or not, a lot of Southern Baptists are still upset with either the agenda or the execution (or both) of the Great Commission Resurgence.
On the other hand, I can’t say I object in principle to changing the name of the Southern Baptist Convention—no denominational name should be sacrosanct. Furthermore, we’ve been a national denomination since the mid-twentieth century and have what I believe is a godly desire to further expand our witness to those places in America that are most underserved in terms of the gospel—most of which are outside of the South and Southwest. I understand why many Southern Baptists think our regional name doesn’t accurately represent our national reality (or at least our national aspirations). Will the name Southern Baptist look silly in a generation if, say, 40% of our churches are located outside of the South and Southwest? Perhaps.
All that to say, I’m not enthusiastic about changing the name, but I’m certainly not opposed to it. I have nothing but respect for Southern Baptists with stronger opinions than mine one way or the other—I think there are good arguments on both sides. I suspect we’ll change the name at some point, even if not now. For what it’s worth, if we do change the name in the next couple of years—and I have serious doubts we will—I’d recommend something like the Baptist Convention of North America.
Having laid my own irresolute cards on the table, what I want to offer some thoughts on the manner in which we will have this family discussion in the coming months. I’m urging my fellow Southern Baptists (even those who don’t want to be called that anymore) to be as civil and Christ-like as possible. I seriously doubt that the overwhelming majority of those who want to change the name are closet Presbyterians who are embarrassed of our Convention’s southern roots. I also seriously doubt that the overwhelming majority of those who want to keep the name are redneck racists who don’t care about reaching all of America with the good news.
That said, I think it’s both inevitable and unfortunate that we’ll hear from some obnoxious voices on both sides of the debate. I’ve already vented via Twitter about anti-southern hipsters who love all things urban and are embarrassed by all things rural and southern and southwestern. Let me say now on this blog I’m also troubled by those who imply that the South and/or Southwest are somehow superior than other parts of the country because we have more Baptists, Presbyterians, Pentecostals, and Republicans. I hope few voices will argue for or against the name change who represent even a close approximation to these two (admittedly exaggerated) extremes. But I suspect some will.
I want to plead with you, whatever your opinion might be on a name change, to call down the strident and unhelpful voices that share your perspective. Don’t let the mean or arrogant or irascible or elitist or ignorant tones dominate this conversation. For the sake of our collective witness, let’s mortify the name-calling, motives-judging, power-grabbing tendencies that appear almost every time we engage in some sort of public debate. Let’s agree to act like Christian grownups and love one another on the other side of this debate, whatever our name may be. And let’s agree to continue to cooperate together for the sake of the gospel, even if we don’t get our way when it comes to our denomination’s name.
(This post is cross-published at my personal website, Christian Thought & Tradition)
[...] (This post is cross-published at Between the Times) [...]
Pingback by The Southern Baptist Convention—Name that Denomination | Nathan Finn l Christian Thought & Tradition — September 23, 2011 @ 4:47 pm
[...] posted a powerful call to civility during the discussion of the name-change. It is called, “The Southern Baptist Convention: Name that Denominiation.” If I say “pretty please” will you promise to go read [...]
Pingback by Dr. Nathan Finn: Words We Need to Hear! | SBC Voices — September 23, 2011 @ 6:49 pm
Thanks for the wise counsel. I have been serving in the Northwest for over 35 years (almost 30 of them as a senior (i.e. code for only) pastor). I have never known of anyone I’ve led to Christ to be put off by our name. Most non-believers could care less what our church’s name is much less the name of the denomination. Most of the folks in my church now are not from the south but are from the Northwest. They recognize the name of our denomination as standing for certain theological truths. I like you am ambivalent to the name change. I just pray that people will allow for reasoned and civil discussion as the process moves forward. Regardless of the outcome I will continue to preach and lead our church to participate in worldwide missions through the conventions structure (besides, my retirement is invested in Guidestone, so I’m sticking with them all the way!)
Comment by Steve Schenewerk — September 23, 2011 @ 8:48 pm
Got this in an e-mail today and it seems to be supporting what you are saying here. Thank you for your “always” un-biased opinion. The manner in which you say things is that of a peace maker..
Heavenward by Scotty Smith:
A Prayer for Believers Who Just Can’t (Won’t) Agree
Posted: 23 Sep 2011 03:23 AM PDT
I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Eph 4:1-3
Gracious Jesus, there are times when your faithful servants don’t see eye to eye on very important matters. Our best efforts at keeping “the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:3) get stressed and tested, even bruised. Differing perspectives often lead to sharp disagreements; and sharp disagreements can lead to the parting of ways; and parting of ways can lead to self-righteousness, gossip and cynicism. This happens among good friends, in seminary boardrooms, on the mission field, in our church families… really, in any relationship.
This morning I’m bringing you a few situations which are “exhibit A” of this very scenario. My heart’s heavy, but not as heavy as it would be if I didn’t believe you to be the Prince of Peace; if I didn’t believe in the power of the gospel to effect change; if I didn’t believe your name is Redeemer and Restorer. Here’s my prayer for friends in the throes of turmoil.
Lord Jesus, may seeking first your kingdom and your righteousness far outweigh any other seeking—seeking to win, seeking to be right, seeking to avoid pain, seeking to get our own way. Your glory and story matter so much more than our issues and agenda.
Help us to recognize and resist the schemes of Satan in these conflicts. He hates you, your followers, your church—he is passionately committed to destroying all expressions of beauty among your people. Help my friends keep the main issues in view and not get drawn into biting and devouring one another (Gal. 5:13-15).
May friends who see the issues so differently still honor one another as family and beloved servants of Jesus. How we handle our conflicts is just as important as the issues which generate our conflicts—maybe even more important at times. I pray for both the confronters and the confronted. May the gospel supplant all defensiveness and offensiveness with humility and gentleness. May bearing with one another in love trump besting one another with rhetoric.
Even as you redeemed the painful story between Paul and Barnabas (Acts 15:36-40; 2 Tim. 4), so bring redemption in these broken stories which are breaking the hearts of many. So very Amen I pray, with sadness but trusting in your powerful name.
Comment by Sue — September 23, 2011 @ 11:48 pm
Well said. I appreciate your fairness and clarity.
Comment by Mitchell Landress — September 24, 2011 @ 1:58 am
Equitable discussion. What most folks forget is recognition. The Southern Baptist Convention has been around a long time. The leading Evangelist of the 20th century was and still is a Southern Baptist member and minister though unable to do much due to age and infirmity. Three Presidents were Southern Baptists. Personally, I prefer keeping the name the same. At one time the old Northern Baptist Convention changed its name to the American Baptist Convention. Now it is the American Baptist Churches, Inc., at the last account I had. Far as I can tell, the name change did nothing for them. The SBC stands for contention, sovereign grace, with plenty of room for Arminian type views. After all, we want people to be persuaded to the founding view…not forced or manipulated. Like the Spurgeon who I told that grace was irresistible, and he won a young lady to Christ. She told him why she responded so readily to the salvation he presented, “Oh, it was so wonderful, I couldn’t resist it.” He said,”Then what you said about grace being irresistible popped into my mind.” “Have you changed your mind?” I asked. “No,” he said, “but I am thinking about it.” That was in 1965-66. Fast forward to 2002-2003, and he was still thinking about it. By 2007 he had made up his mind: Grace was irresistible. Funny, because what made it irresistible is that it is so wonderful. He also found out he had some kinship with C.H.Spurgeon. All of this give and take says we are alive..just as it showed Baptists were alive in the 1700s, when some Anglican faulted them for their fussin’. Yep, they were fussin’ and they were securing religious liberty, launching the great century of missions, united Separate and Regular Baptists, persuading General Baptists who were neither very evangelistic nor missionary minded to become Regular (read Particular Redemptionists) BAptists who were both evangelistic and missionary.
Comment by Dr. James Willingham — September 24, 2011 @ 1:09 pm