Association yields doctrinal autonomy to the SBC?

The Surry (NC) Baptist Association made news last year as a result of their action to summarily and quickly expel a member church because the church had called a female pastor.

The association, presumably tidying up things after that mess is in the process of revising their associational by-laws. Sounds like a good idea.

Here is the proposed revision as concerns the association's doctrinal statement:

Bylaw I. DOCTRINAL POSITION. The Association affirms the Baptist Faith and Message as adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention.

Perhaps the Association desires to have it in writing that the senior pastor of a church can only be a male and that is what the SBC's doctrinal statement, Baptist Faith and Message, says. Perhaps they want to say that without explicitly stating it, which they have done by merely linking their doctrinal stance to the SBC's.

But should an association, an autonomous, cherished, Baptist entity, one that precedes the establishment of the national Southern Baptist Convention, completely yield autonomy on doctrinal matters to the SBC?

I'm thinking no.

But that's what is being done, intentionally or unintentionally, when the association's by-laws reads as it does above. The practical effect of this is that whatever the BFM says counts for the Surry Association. This may be fine for 2012 but the wording is such that whatever changes the SBC makes automatically applies to the association.

Suppose in 2022 the SBC votes to allow female pastors, unlikely, but let's get wild with the possibilities here. That change automatically applies to Surry Association. Letters of apology to follow then, perhaps.

This is all inside baseball and is arcane stuff, but associations should maintain their own doctrinal statement, even if it only "affirms the BFM adopted by the SBC in the year 2000." That wording limits the matter to that document alone and doesn't automically commit the association to any future changes.

Every association I've ever been a part of has some brethren that I would call parliamentary and ecclesialogical geeks who pay attention to this stuff. Surely Surry Association has at least one of these folks who see this yielding of associational autonomy.

I'd hate for my association to adopt by-laws that simly ratify and automatically incorporate whatever the SBC does. The idea that a few thousand folks in Phoenix, or New Orleans could vote and change my association's doctrine doesn't suit me at all.

But...like I said, this is really arcane stuff.

And, yeah, I know that this is none of my business...but what would blogging be without meddlesome bloggers?

Egalitarianism/Complementarianism - our two favorite 50 cent words

Not a lot of deep thinking or tricky exegesis here, just some observations and questions:

Egalitarianism and complementarianism are sterile terms that fail to convey much for either position. They dehumanize women in the same manner that antebellum vocabularly dehumanized a considerable segment of the American populace.

There is no good manner by which Baptist groups (associations, state conventions, or the SBC) can assert their belief in and desire for pure complementarianism and not appear harsh and unfair. Google "Bailey Nelson" and "Surry" for last year's poster situation of the same.

Leading SBC females are almost always wives of prominent pastors or SBC entity leaders. Note, for example, the ABP story about the new LifeWay Women's Evangelical Commentary which features the female spouses of two SBC entity leaders. Plodder would be pleased if readers would submit names of SBC females of prominence who do not fit this profile. Aside from Beth Moore, I cannot think of a single one. Name female members of blue ribbon SBC committees who are not married to pastors or SBC entity leaders.

What is communicated to SBC females by the above? That you will not have great value unless you are espoused to a minister?

Although we officially specify "senior pastor" as limited to men, it is necessary in the application of complementarianism to continually define proper roles. Should women be allowed to read the Bible in worship? Should there be deaconesses? Should they only teach children? To what age? Should they address mixed groups? Should they be "under authority" of a husband? Etc. Etc. ad nasueum.

All the tempered words on complementarianism/egalitarianism are undone by a the regular, if not frequent, intemperate words. Google Andy Davis and FBC Durham.

Quick, name the highest ranking female who is employed by any SBC entity?

Has complementarianism has already passed its high water mark in SBC life?

Will we see, in spite of SBC heavyweights holding conferences, seminars, and publishing materials, a steady erosion of support, first from the pew, later from the pulpit?

We're in for a rough ride with these two fifty-cent terms...and some decry the term "Southern" in our name.

Notable SBC quotes from 2011

Folks in the SBC are always good for some quotable quotes although I wouldn't say that they are always helpful for the Convention. Here are some that I picked up from 2011:

Goebbelesque quote of the year:

Restoration to doctrinal purity and a renewed sense of unity in the churches of our Association were our goals.

This from the official communication of Surry Baptist Association, NC.

So, what’s the issue? Deity of Christ? Soteriology? The trinity? Nope.

What happened was that one of the association's churches called a woman pastor, thereby polluting the pastoral gender pool for the association. That bit of “impurity” could not be allowed to stand. It didn't, as the offending church was unceremoniously and hastily cast out. Other churches left in time over the association's action, thereby adding, one presumes, additional levels of purity.

One has to admit that the terminology has a strong eugenics flavor. Plodder will accept criticism for the use of a National Socialist Party figure in this context as it may be considered overly harsh. If persuaded, I will exchange it for 'Orwellian'.

Head-scratching quote of the year:

I think the challenges confronting the SBC today are different than they have been in decades past. I think one of the issues which is a tremendous challenge for us is the theological divide of Calvinism and non-Calvinism.

This from Executive Committee head Frank Page in answer to the question about what the SBC’s greatest challenges are. This would be the self same Frank Page who is in a better position to understand well that the lifeblood of the SBC is the Cooperative Program which is continuing a decades long decline. The CP was not mentioned by Page as one of the SBC's greatest challenges.

From another planet quote of the year:

First, there is an existing [negative] attitude toward evangelists in certain areas of SBC leadership.

This from evangeilst Jerry Drace who was explaining why the SBC evangelist is an endangered species. This was reason number one. SBC evangelists are endangered because NAMB won't pay their travel expenses. Uh, no.

Dodged-a-bullet quote of the year:

...no one [on the SBC Name Change Task Force] believed the word "Baptist" should be removed from the convention's name

Jimmy Draper explaining that the Committee had reached a decision and would report to the Executive Committee in February.

We will remain Baptists. SBCers might all get tattoos and grow goatees but, however we look and act, our forefathers may rest peacefully knowing that we will officially be called "Baptists."

Generic apology quote-of-the-year:

I deeply regret if I've ever offended you...if you speak as speak as much as I speak you're going to say some goofy things from time to time.

Mac Brunson, FBCJax megapastor, addressing everyone in general and thereby expiating any and all sins in one fell pulpit swoop.

It is not known if the blogger behind FBCJax Watchdog, the one who aroused Brunson's ire and who was investigated by local law enforcement merely for blogging negatively towards the pastor, was addressed specifically in this apology. One might be flummoxed over the meaning of the phrase "deeply regret" in this context. He is absolutely right about those who say a lot do say some things they will regret. I share in that.

Refreshing quote of the year:

I will not personally support any At Large appointment of a person who has recently served. Nor will I support the appointment of that person’s staff member or a member of his/her immediate family to key places of leadership, practices which have become commonplace in recent years.

This quote is rather provincial, coming from John Waters newly elected president of the Georgia Baptist Convention. Any SBCer who pays attention understands that an oligarchy of a few dozen prominent pastors maintains control of key positions and trusteeships in most SBC arenas in part by passing appointments among themselves and, when by-laws prevent their being appointed, by having their family members or church staff members appointed as their proxy.

I attribute Waters' electoral victory this year to this quote.

Most notable Baptist Press quote: Sorry, there were none. Baptist Press was so busy reporting sports stories that they left all of the real news stuff to Associated Baptist Press and other news outlets. Maybe next year.


My memory fades after a few weeks. Perhaps you would have some submissions for notable SBC quotes of 2011.