I love the Southern Baptist Convention. I am a Southern Baptist by conviction. Theologically and missions wise I feel that the Southern Baptist Convention is the strongest. I love the influence that the SBC has, but could our name be hurting our influence? Could the name ‘Southern Baptist Convention‘ actually be holding our convention back?
Yes.. You might be a little surprised by my answer, but I think that it is true. I was born in Nebraska and I talk to a lot of people from there. I also served in Indiana for awhile and spoke with many people up there. The church in Indiana was an American Baptist church. They agreed that the SBC was better theologically, but thought it would be weird to be a part of the SBC when they are on the north side of the Ohio River. I asked my friends in Nebraska if they knew of any strong SBC churches in Nebraska and they said, ‘Southern Baptist?’ They were kidding because they are well aware of the SBC, but were making a point that the SBC has little to no influence in Nebraska. It struck me as interesting because I know that the Oklahoma Baptist Convention a very large convention within the SBC. Yet, the SBC in Kansas and Nebraska barely exists. Could this be because of the name?
I do not want to say that it is all because our name but I do think it is part of it. I just kept hearing, ‘why would we want to be Southern Baptists when there are other ‘good enough’ denominations up here?’ There is an Evangelical influence in the Midwest and more northern states, but almost none of that is Southern Baptist. The Evangelical Free Church does pretty well and there are a few conservative Lutheran and Presbyterian churches. If you know anything about ‘church culture’ in the midwest/north then you know that the Catholic influence is overwhelming. The town my mom lives in has only 35,000 people there and yet there is a Catholic television channel. There are about 8 churches that have more than 1,000 people, but half of them are Catholic. Where is the SBC influence?
If there could be any proven fact that our name was hurting our influence and holding back our growth/expansion would we change our name? I hope so… Hopefully, we wouldn’t let a name get in the way of Kingdom Growth. I am not sure why people wouldn’t join a convention just because of there name, but they seem to be out there. What bothers me the most is our lack of effort for these places. Where are the Midwest, Northern, and Northeast church plants? I know there are a few out there and I am thankful, but they are greatly lacking.
I truly think if we would change our conventions name then more doors would open. People would be more interested in considering the ‘Baptist Missions Convention.’ Let’s be honest about our name. We got our name as we split the convention because we wanted to hold on to our Racial Slavery position. Indeed, we were purely Southern. But we have moved on from there. We have a larger influence. We could have an even larger influence with a mere change of the name. Let’s get a name that can represent us globally! We are no longer a convention that is stuck in the South. We are sending more missionaries than any other convention over sees. We are planting churches all across the globe!
It would be great to see a name that represented that work, mission, and goal. Our mission is to reach the world with the gospel. This includes the south, midwest, north, west, northeast, southwest, South America, Africa, Asia, Europe, you should be getting the point. Let’s have a name that does not automatically turn people who aren’t in the South off. It is just a name, it should not be a big deal, but it is. It is a big deal when it hinders back our growth and influence. Is anyone willing to follow me here? Are we as a convention willing to do whatever it takes to reach the world with the gospel? Changes a name seems like a very small, insignificant piece of the puzzle and yet it would make a difference in reaching lost souls above the Ohio River and in the Midwest. Let’s pick a name that has God’s love for the Nations in mind!
At the end of each post on SBC Voices, we suggest related posts from other Southern Baptist websites and blogs. These will often include contrary points of view and should not be understood as endorsements.
{ 4 trackbacks }
{ 37 comments… read them below or add one }
I understand your situation. I live in Illinois and have heard the same things that you have, yet I have found that educating people about the SBC is essential.
The county that I live in has two SBC churches and they are only twelve miles apart and on the far western side of the county. God has been burdening my heart for the rest of the county for almost two years now and as a result my wife and I are going to plant churches here.
It is not the name that is the hindrance but the people who claim to be Southern Baptist. Here we have many “displaced” Southern Baptist who attend churches of other denominations or drive twenty-five miles or more to attend churches in bordering states.
Why is it then, that there are only two SBC churches here? The answer is that no one felt burdened enough for the lost. I fear that they have lost the zeal for missions at home. For them giving to the Lottie Moon and Annie Armstrong offerings is enough; let someone else do the work.
This is the true issue! The name is not important to people around here, but it is more about where your feet are traveling. They want action not adjectives. When the people of the local church start to get involved in their communities, then people will know who Southern Baptist are and what it means to be a part of the SBC.
Hmmm, what would be a good descriptive name?
Possibly the “Fighting Baptist Convention” (FBC)? No, that won’t work, since the church signs would look silly. (“FBC, FBC affiliated”)
Possibly “Contentious Baptist Convention” (CBC), or, if we want to keep SBC we could become the “Sour Baptist Convention”.
;>)
Jerrys last blog post..Not Guilty Anymore
first of all, nice, thoughtful post
second, i tend to agree. i agree in my love for the southern baptist convention and my appreciation of its ministries and churches. but, i also tend to agree with the need for a name change. isn’t it awkward that some institutions, associations, and churches in canada are labeled “southern” baptist lol?
it may not seem like a big deal to most folks, but right now i’m at a university where baptists are few and southern baptists are scarce, and it’s in texas! i can tell you that the “southern” part of our name is a big-time turnoff for many. and let’s be honest, the name does originate with mason-dixon concerns from the 19th century.
our name should say something about what we do and who we are. i’m from arkansas and love much of the south’s heritage . . . but not as much as i love my “kingdom” heritage. right now “SBC” says we are a convention (hard to get around that one), we are baptists (bingo), and we are . . . southern? there’s too much baggage in that title, we’re way overdue for a change. the hard part is picking a new name.
thanks again for the thoughtful post
mikes last blog post..a free old testament resource you should know about
Matt …
Why are you stirring up trouble? That’s been our name for so many years. That’s the way we’ve always done it. If we change the name, pretty soon we’ll be changing our values and doctrine too. We’ll be on the slipper slope to liberalism and apostasy, and Obama will join our denomination and reveal himself as the antichrist!
I’m kidding of course. I think we not only need to change the name, but that we desperately need to change it.
Bradley
Bradley Cochrans last blog post..“Don’t Push Your Morality Off On Me” ::: Religious Intolerance
I am incredibly nostalgic and love the history of the SBC, but I agree with you. Maybe something like the “Evangelical Baptist Convention.”
Joshua Hutchenss last blog post..My Letter to President-Elect Obama
I can’t say the “Southern” baptist name is a huge draw in the Pacific NORTHwest… but then again the name if Jesus is not exactly loved up here either.
Our current name is a definite branding weakness, both outside the South and increasingly in the non-rural South. Most new church plants keep their SBC affiliation as quiet as possible. So, I think Matt’s argument has some weight.
On the other hand, none of this matters if God is speaking from the pulpits in our churches. Church marketing should be a minor consideration, far down the line from earnest prayer and Spirit empowered preaching.
Tony Kummers last blog post..THE GRIEF OF HOLIDAY CELEBRATIONS
Wow… I have to be honest. I truly thought nearly everyone one would be completely against the idea.
The only reason why I have ever thought ‘maybe we should change our name’ is because of the numerous people and churches I have spoken with that just think it would be awkward if their church was a Southern Baptist Church even if the church loves what we do in missions and agrees theologically.
I do not think this is a huge issue, but why not? Why Not Change Our Name? I feel that it can only help!
Matt Svobodas last blog post..Do You Remember?
hey, cool to check back in and see that others are concerned about this.
as for those who say the the preaching or teaching matters, not the name, let me respectively disagree. it is possible that some churches are preaching and teaching sound doctrine, but that the name “southern” baptist is turning people off. for those who say it wouldn’t make a difference in your area, i understand, but i believe there are definitely areas in which it would and does make a difference.
mikes last blog post..time to change the name "southern baptist?"
Mike,
Always glad to see this issue raised. I wrote a post on another group blog last year on this topic and was really discouraged to see the extreme negative and short-sighted reaction it received. I am more encouraged to see the reaction you have received thus far.
I am a church planter in the Northeast and I could not agree more that we need to both educate people about the wonderful aspects of being Southern Baptists AND to adopt a name that would not create a hurdle that we had to help them leap over.
The biggest problem that I have with the “southern” in the SBC is the boatload of bad experiences that so many seem to have had in SBC churches in the past. Most brands (franchises) carry with them some consistency from location to location. I’ve found that here in Colorado some have been reluctant to try a SBC church because of what they have either experienced personally or have heard from others concerning SBC churches. They expect that all SBC churches are alike and that the experience that they had, say in Georgia, will be repeated in our Colorado church. It is fun to hear, “you’re nothing like what I expected”. It’s sad to hear, “we drove by for months afraid to come in”.
Dave Sampless last blog post..Blogging with Euodia and Syntyche
It appears that a lot people think that a name change would be a good move… What has to be done in order to make it happen?
Matt Svobodas last blog post..Should the Southern Baptist Convention change its name?
The Baptist General Conference is one example of a group making a name change to deal with the issues you bring up in the article.
They changed their Name to “Converge Worldwide”
Each of the regional conference adopted a variation on that name. Here in the Pacific Northwest they changed from “Columbia Baptist Conference” to “Converge NW”.
Count me among those who would be against changing the name. Of course, I live in TN.
No really, the convention will not be changing its name because of this reason (among others) given by the Executive Committee in 1998… “Legal counsel has advised that changing the name of the Convention would most probably have the effect of discarding the Convention’s current preferred status as a legislatively created entity, subjecting the Convention to a wide array of statutory mandates that would alter the Convention structure in undesirable ways.”
joe whites last blog post.."Neo-Landmarkism" Is Neither New Nor Landmark!
i find picking a new name to be a very difficult task. another sticky point will be the name “baptist” too. i for one want to keep the “baptist” moniker, but others have told me they want to get rid of the baptist name altogether (as joe pointed out above, looks like more and more are actually going that route).
possible suggestions:
- evangelical baptist partnership (ebp) (or does evangelical carry too much political baggage now days?)
- baptist partnership of churches (bpc)
- evangelical baptist convention (ebc)
- baptist partnership for the world (bpw)
- baptist partnership for missions (bpm)
i’m just brainstorming. if you think they’re corny, that sort of illustrates my point that choosing a new, descriptive title isn’t easy. any suggestions?
mikes last blog post..time to change the name "southern baptist?"
I Like:
Evangelical Baptist Convention
Evangelical Baptist Partnership
Worldwide Baptist Convention
World-Missions Baptist Convention
Clearly, I like keeping the name Baptist, but I understand some wanting to lose it…
Matt Svobodas last blog post..Should the Southern Baptist Convention change its name?
“Missional Baptist Network” would get back to what we were originally aiming to do, rather than where our churches started.
The name change would not have to eliminate the SBC name on the charter. It is customary and proper to simply add an additional name as a dba “doing business as”. Let me suggest “Great Commission Partnership”.
Dave Sampless last blog post..Blogging with Euodia and Syntyche
Yeah, I like that Tony… Global Baptist Network/Convention could be good as well. I think we can all agree that their are plenty of names that we could come up with that are suitable.
The question is this: Is this issue worth taking seriously? If it is, then what should we be doing in order to see this issue raised on a larger scale within the SBC? If we actually feel, and I do, that it is hurting our efforts in parts of America and globally then we ought to be committed to doing what it takes in order to see this change happen!
Matt Svobodas last blog post..Do You Remember?
As a longtime Iowa Baptist, I would welcome a name change.
*It won’t happen. Bible Belt Baptists don’t seem to understand the hindrance the name causes north of the Mason-Dixon line. Some, don’t seem to care.
*There is no obvious name choice. “Cooperative” would have been a natural, but for obvious reasons, that won’t work.
Missional – does anyone really know what that means?
Worldwide – fundamentally flawed. We are a convention of USA and Canadian Baptist churches. The conventions in foreign countries are completely independent and we just work with them. So, if we went with worldwide, it would imply we have authority over them that we do not have.
American, National, and North American Baptist are all taken.
Baptist Convention of North America? (Too similar to North American Baptist Convention).
*Fundamentally, Southern Baptists resist change and this isn’t likely to happen.
Dave Millers last blog post..In (Moderate) Praise of Labels
Joe,
I’ve heard that reason quite a bit. What I’ve yet to hear is a reason why the SBC could not do as many other organizations and businesses and simply add a “dba” – “doing business as…” While I am no lawyer, as I have had it explained to me by those who would know, this happens all the time.
Dave Samples,
There already is a denomination in the midwest (I don’t know about elsewhere) called the “Great Commission Churches.”
I would love a name change, but all the good names seem to have been taken.
How about National Association of Baptist Fans of the New York Yankees?
Dave Millers last blog post..In (Moderate) Praise of Labels
Though I agree some sort of a name change could be helpful, I do think we need to be careful in the ways we speak about the generations that have lead the SBC in the past. We of a younger generation are often quick to criticize and question their practices. I would encourage you to use as much honor in your speech as you can.
I, for one, am thankful they have been resistant to change on numerous amount of issues. In the end, their being resistant to a name change may be as a result of pride or it may be a result of wisdom.
john michael,
i agree about respecting and appreciating the work of our predecessors in the SBC. but, i think we can have a discussion about changing the name for cultural reasons without showing disrespect to our forebears who did not face this issue like we do today. but yes, whether we change our name or not, our baptist heritage and that of the radical reformers should definitely continue to occupy our studies and demand our respect.
as far as trying to do something about, i suggest everybody start by posting something on your own blog site and including links back to discussions like this one. that’s where i’ve started if anyone wants to drop by and leave a comment (hint hint)
mike
mikes last blog post..time to change the name "southern baptist?"
Mike,
I agree, I think this is a conversation that we ought to have. At least on this thread I feel that we have in no way been disrespectful of those who have gone before us. Lets be honest the generation before us has gone through a lot and have had a lot more difficult and important issues to deal with… For example: the conservative resurgence!
Matt
Matt Svobodas last blog post..Jesus’ Atoning Death: For the elect or for every single person?
The main problem with a name change is the resistance of the majority of SBC churches. 13 (out of 41) state conventions make up an overwhelming majority of the SBC: 81.6% of CP budget, 83.35% of 2007 messengers, 83.07% of members. They are all continguous and southern. Oklahoma and Missouri are a part of them, because they were early mission fields during the 1850’s.
So the issue is not “Should we change our name?” and list all the logical reasons for it. It is “Can we change our name?” and consider all of the cultural reasons….
Andrews last blog post..Theology Ditty 4: “How is the Bible Special Revelation?”
@Andrew: Thanks for the very helpful comment. Our denomination is not just tied by name to the South, we are also culturally south. (I would add that the South of today is radically different than even 50 years back – much less 150 years ago.) The name is an accurate definition of what the SBC has always been, and the question remains if that is the future too.
This makes me wonder if the whole home mission strategy should be re-examined. Why not recognize the South as it’s own distinct cultural context, and then plant non-Southern churches outside the South? They can be sister churches, and encouraged to do missions as God leads.
This would be something like what the IMB does on foreign mission fields. We never expect those churches to become a part of our association.
I decided to add a poll about this to the sidebar too.
andrew,
i agree that one issue is whether or not we “can” change our name. but, whether or not we “should” change our name is still an issue too. i think we “should,” so it’s worth it to keep the dialogue going on this issue and start the ball rolling toward “can.”
tony,
i completely agree about doing contextual church planting here in the states. church planters from the south trying to plant traditional, southern churches in the north and west tend to have a hard time. i do think we’re moving in the right direction – i know of more and more cases where church planting is being more contextual and effective. right now i’m thinking of a house church in northern michigan, a barn church (or was it ranch church) in wyoming, a club church in california, and other such examples. there’s hope!
mikes last blog post..taking my recycling up a notch
Having an identity as a Southern Baptist church is more of a hindrance than a help in Houston, Texas these days. I’ve encountered our name and indentity as an obstacle to making contact with people for quite some time, now. Though our church is far from the stereotypical Southern Baptist church, getting past that is a major obstacle for many people who are living around us, most of whom are unchurched and don’t make looking for a church a priority when they move into our neighborhood. I am a native of Arizona, where there aren’t very many Christians of any kind, and where Southern Baptists are a small minority of the Christian community, so I know what kind of obstacles that identity can present. However, I wonder if it is possible for a church to be Southern Baptist to its own self, yet put forth a more non-denominational image to do outreach? Some people think that would be dishonest. I don’t really think so, since training new members in congregational identity is part of the discipleship process.
Lee Saunderss last blog post..How Baptist is Baptist Enough? And Does it Really Matter?
I have heard many people suggest Evangelical Baptist Covention and I like it. It retains our Baptist heritage… It retains the fact that we unite as a denomination for missions… and it rightly recognizes that we are evangelicals. Many of the new Baptist Identity folks we complain but i think it is time for a name change and Evangelical Baptist Convention is the best I’ve heard.
bill,
i like evangelical baptist convention too, maybe even evangelical baptist partnership better! one of those is probably my first choice
still, i’m double-thinking “evangelical” in the title because it has a weird connotation for outsiders. i’m one of the few evangelicals in the school program i’m in and most of my classmates think “evangelical” means you want a christian president, to make all the public schools christian, to legislate christian morals like “no alcohol,” and other more political things.
thinking of a new name is tough!
mikes last blog post..taking my recycling up a notch
Changing the name would be fine. It would provide a fresh front to the secular world. But it would only be a band-aid without the change on the inside.
Folks don’t scoff at the name but rather what the name represents. To them Southern Baptists are mean spirited, egotistical, hypocritical, don’t-practice-what-they-preach stuffed shirts.
Scotts last blog post..Jesus, Light of the World
MOE-Mother Of Emergents
HIYWAY B- Have It Your Way Baby
MRPIB- Majoritarian Ruled Perpetual Infant Believers
NAIBOB- New And Improved Band O’ Boy
WFS- Wayfarrin Strangers
MMM- Many Members Missing
WWW. PNR- We Were Wonce Protestants Not Romanists
A discussion has recently emerged at my church about a name change (interestingly enough, it is an SBC church in Indiana that includes the word “southern” in the church name, as some others have discussed). We were discussing the reasons for this as primarily Biblical, not marketing strategy. Our church is seeing a resurgence of discipleship and conversion growth – in Scripture, God’s work of radical change in the lives of individuals was often marked by a change in their name (primarily, Paul, once Saul). If the SBC should change its name, it should be to point to renewal and new life in our mission and conduct. The recent (past 15 years or so) movement within the Convention to rely upon the authority of Scripture and affirm theological conservatism is a great reason for us to change the name to represent this renewal of affirmation of Scriptural truth by our denomination. However, a name change that represents new life in our denomination has to be accompanied by a continued commitment to the principles that ignited and sustain that renewal.
I prefer the name we have. Of course, we could call it the Sweet Baptist Convntion in contradiction to the Sour Baptist Convention. It is hard to be a southerner these days. I was raised on Lee and Jackson and the South without ever having been around African Americans. I also did not know about Boyce, Broadus, and the other great Southern Baptists who all made mistakes along with their successes. But I never dreamed that I would become a Black Historian (the proper term today would be African American Historian – I almost have a Ph.D. in that area of studies and I did do my D. Min. on Christian Love and Race Relations). I also never dreamed that I would be a Baptist Historian – though I have never written much in either African American or Black History (a prospectus for a Doctoral Dissertation at Columbia Univ. and the D. Min Project) and in Baptist History (an M.A. thesis in Amercan Social & Intellectual History, articles in a few Baptist papers, an article, a play, and an address. O yes, some Book Reviews). What I have been doing for 51 years is thinking about the Chrstian experience and the word of God (living and written) and the truths taught. The result has been a deepening appreciation for what God has done through Baptists (along with other believers) and through our nation (along with others). Actually, what we need to do is just simply to live out what God has done in and to us. We have the means at our disposal to become balanced, flexible, creative, and magnetic witnesses to the transforming power of Christ. In short, mature people. The Pilgrims set us a wonderful example, when they said that they were willing to be stepping stones for others to advance the cause of Christ. I know that I feel distinctly humbled, when I think of their attitude which was fulfilled. Does any one know where Adoniram Judson’s father served as pastor, when he was growing up? I think it was Plymouth. Through Judson along with others would come the great call to missions. Ironic to think of Judson’s father serving in that town where the Pilgrims had expressed such devotion. As sorry as Southern Baptists have been at times, yet out of such poor failing human beings has come the largest and most enthusiastic mission force in the world up to the present moment. Two-three years ago I was a member of the church where the first missionary of Southern Baptists to China was saved and called, we received request from China to send a representative for a memorial service for Yates in that land. Yates went to China and lived like the Chinese. He won their respect to the extent that over a hundred years after his death they wanted to honor him in a memorial service. I felt exceedingly humbled by that man’s example, especially in view of the times and the situation in which he lived and served.
Dr. James Willinghams last blog post..The Climax of the Reformation
ANOTHER THING WE NEED TO KNOW IS THE NATURE OF THE PEOPLE WHO RUN AFFAIRS IN THIS WORLD AND WHAT BELIEFS THEY WANT PROMOTED. SUGGEST EVERYONE SHOULD READ CARROLL QUIGLEY’S TRAGEDY & HOPE AND THE BELIEFS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THE WORLD AND THE BELIEFS THEY OPPOSE. QUIGLEY’S 1400 PAGES WILL BE DULL READING UNTIL YOU COME TO THE PART ABOUT THE CONSPIRACY. (NY: MACMILLAN HOUSE, 1965) & HIS THE ANGLO AMERICAN ESTABLISHMENT.(SEE LAST WILL & TESTAMEN OF ONE OF THE CONPIRATORS – WHO IS, BY THE WAY, NAMED BY C.S. LEWIS IN HIS THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH). WHO WAS MR. QUIGLEY? MR. CLINTON’S PROFESSOR & MENTOR AT GEORGETOWN, WHO RECOMMENDED HIM FOR THE RHODES SCHOLARSHIP. THESE PEOPLE INTEND TO CONTROL & DO JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING GOING, INCLUDING THE SBC FOR MANY YRS., & THEY WILL EXERCISE SOME CONTROL EVEN IN THE NEW MILIEU. POWER IS THE NAME OF THE GAME. MR. LEWIS TOLD HOW IT WOULD BE OVER COME IN THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH. HE DID NOT KNOW HE EAS DESCRIBING A GREAT AWAKENING, WHEN HE SAID, “THEY PULL DOWN DEEP HEAVEN.”
.-= Dr. James Willingham´s last blog ..The Climax of the Reformation =-.