How far should they go?

Actions at the Southern Baptist Convention’'s (SBC) annual meeting in San Antonio (June 12-13) suggest that most Southern Baptists have settled into a rather comfortable course of broad conservatism and like it just fine, thank you very much.

Others, however, press forward with various agendas for fine-tuning doctrinal standards and drawing the lines of acceptability more narrowly.

Those who think the conservative surge has gone far enough prevailed when a motion on the issue came to a vote, but the victory will probably have little practical significance.

Let me set the stage:

When a revised version of the Baptist Faith and Message statement (BFM) was approved in 2000, it not only described itself as an “instrument of doctrinal accountability,” but tightened the lines of doctrinal acceptability, and was considered a rather radical departure from the 1963 version that preceded it.

While many Southern Baptists saw the statement as the capstone of the conservative movement, others apparently saw it as a stepping-stone.

During the past two years, trustees of the International Mission Board went beyond the BFM, approving new hiring guidelines that disqualify missionaries who speak in tongues during their private prayer time.

The IMB also narrowed baptism requirements, disqualifying candidates who were baptized in a church whose understanding of baptism was not considered acceptable.

In 2006, it became known that Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary had forced out a popular Hebrew professor because she is female. Seminary president Paige Patterson declared his belief that the Bible prohibits women from serving as pastors, and thus he believed that a woman should not teach prospective pastors about theology.

Several outspoken bloggers, many quieter rank and file Baptists, and some Baptist leaders raised questions about the actions and said the entities should not go beyond the parameters of the BFM in setting doctrinal requirements.

Shortly after his election in 2006, SBC president Frank Page said he would encourage SBC entities not to go beyond provisions of the BFM. Executive Committee president Morris Chapman made similar comments.

During its February 2007 meeting, the SBC Executive Committee responded by approving a statement declaring the BFM to be a sufficient guide, and calling on Convention agencies not to go beyond it.

That sets the stage.

With the approach of the 2007 annual meeting, three different people (including Les Puryear of Lewisville Baptist Church in N.C.) submitted resolutions to the Resolutions Committee that would call on messengers to declare the BFM to be sufficient. The Resolutions Committee declined to bring any of the resolutions forward, but Rick Garner of Liberty Township, Ohio, brought a motion asking the convention to adopt the Executive Committee’s statement on the sufficiency of the BFM.

Here’s the statement:

"The Baptist Faith and Message is not a creed, or a complete statement of our faith, nor final or infallible, nevertheless we further acknowledge that it is the only consensus statement of doctrinal beliefs approved by the Southern Baptist Convention and as such is sufficient in its current form to guide trustees in their establishment of policies and practices of entities of the Convention."

The motion was hotly debated and ultimately went to a ballot, with those who wanted to declare “enough is enough” winning with about 58 percent of the vote.

Some messengers considered it an important victory that sent a clear message to entity leaders.

In their annual reports after the vote, however, two seminary presidents said they disagreed with the action and would continue to apply additional criteria when hiring faculty members.

Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said the SBC’s faith statement does not cover all doctrinal threats. “You don’t want to hire those who merely meet those requirements,” he said, but those who thoroughly meet the standards.”

Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary Phil Roberts described the BFM as a “minimalist statement” that does not comment on everything affirmed in the Bible.

Midwestern requires more of its employees than the BFM specifies, he said.

During the Southwestern Seminary report the previous day, Patterson said he recognized that tongues-speaking is in the Bible, but said he would not hire people known to have a "private prayer language" because Southwestern is a Baptist school, not a charismatic one.

Danny Akin of Southeastern Seminary noted that Southeastern, like Southern, requires professors to sign the Abstract of Principles as well as the BFM. Those are sufficient, he said. Akin said he's never asked professors if they have a private prayer language, but emphasized that anyone whose teaching "distracts from the Great Commission" will not have a place at Southeastern.

In contrast, Chapman, in his annual address, said "Any practice instituted by an entity in the Southern Baptist Convention that has the force of doctrine should be in accord with the Baptist Faith & Message and not exceed its boundaries unless and until it has been approved" by convention messengers.

Has the SBC’s conservative surge gone far enough, or should the tent of acceptability keep getting smaller?

The only certain thing one can say is typically Baptist: the house is divided.

For other blogs/updates from the SBC, click here.

Posted by TonyCartledge ( Jun 15 2007, 10:05:17 PM EDT ) Permalink Comments [2]