The SBC Executive Committee expelled six churches last month. Saddleback was the most, perhaps only, notable church in the group. Five of these (Saddleback included) were kicked out for women pastors and the sixth for mishandling sex abuse. This action was done in secrecy (in the SBC we euphemize that by calling it “executive session”, without public discussion, and without individual votes made public.)
This is a crappy way to do the convention’s business, pardon my mild scatological expression.
Let’s assume that everyone meant well, that decent people were acting in good faith, that we were just following our rules, and that they really, really, really just want the messengers to get the matter to the floor and make a decision. That would absolve the many dozens of EC members and, perhaps, make them feel better about spending hundreds of thousands of Ma and Pa Baptist’s Cooperative Program dollars to fly them into Nashville, feed and house them as they take secret votes. As an aside, while we might be embarking on a riot of expulsions (see below), the EC is going bankrupt (isn’t that what is meant by unsustainable financials?) and future CP dollars may be less abundant.
I’m not at all confident that the EC, though new and improved and sanitized after the resignation of all those Cooperative Baptist Network people, can manage the task of mass expulsions. Much more of this and we may start to have buyer’s remorse for exchanging that bunch with the new bunch. A contested election may give a reading on that.
We started with racism, which evidently cannot be found in any SBC church sufficient to trigger an expulsion. We continued with mishandling sex abuse which we’re led to believe is a huge problem that will be ameliorated by the independent and very expensive database, managed by a division of the Madison Avenue, New York lawyer firm, Guidepost Solutions LLC. You know, the firm mistrusted by a considerable segment of Southern Baptists. And lurking everywhere are anatomically incorrect SBC clergy, women pastors. What’s an ecclesiastical body to do? Worry a lot, I think.
Those who eat and sleep SBC stuff know that there is a site that has compiled hundreds of the offending females and their churches: female senior pastors, female co-pastors, music pastors, student pastors, teaching pastors, elders, etc. etc. etc. These are, one presumes absent evidence otherwise, dedicated servants of Jesus and His church. This is the product of Mike Law who proposed the amendment, and unnamed associates.
I agree with the generation-long reading of the Baptist Faith and Message Statement that we’re talking about lead, big dog, honcho SENIOR pastors and the recent move to police the vocabulary (any female sounding name attached to the word “pastor” is a target) and that when one is found the churches should be excluded. Bah, humbug. Bait and switch, as one prominent voice called it.
A sensible and reasonable pastor has said that using Guidepost is a decision that cannot end well. I say that mass expulsions as a principle of Southern Baptist life cannot end well either. Our convention dieth for a lack of statesmanship and leadership.
The Executive Committee is incapable of managing this, perhaps for systemic and procedural reasons. Maybe things can be fixed. Note that the handful last month (only six, count ’em) include one that will appeal, and two that generated very bad publicity for the SBC. Seems the churches denied being contacted, claimed that for decades no one complained, and now – Boom! – they’re out without a hearing. EC staff maintain that they were contacted, presumably sent letters or something. Looks bad. Probably is bad.
The SBC should call a moratorium on using the BFM as an instrument of punitive action until we figure out how to handle things better.
At the least, it’s obvious that the offense du jour is selective. No one is talking about expulsions for churches that don’t handle adulterous pastors well (we generally pass them along to another church; their problem now, not ours). No one is talking about expelling the churches that have loose Lord’s Supper practices. No one is talking about churches with pastors who are bullies, mountbanks, and sleazy movie producers. No one is talking about other violations of the BFM. But then, no church has to affirm it but rather but be substantially in agreement.
I’m fine with cooperating with a lot of churches that I wouldn’t necessarily want to join, but who generally share our common beliefs and mission.
It may be that the EC expelling churches, or the SBC in annual session expelling churches, is the crack cocaine of destructive ecclesiology – one gets addicted to it because it feels good.
“Out with the wayward brethren and sistren!”
One hopes for a more cooperative spirit and a more irenic attitude.
We should hunger and thirst after righteousness, not indignation. We’d be a better convention for it.
Bottom line: No, neither the EC nor the SBC in annual session is capable of handling mass expulsions. We should find a way not to go down that road. If you want purity, get a water filter.
____________________________
Hey, I get triggered by a lot of things. I was in one of my fave burrito joints yesterday. All the dudes there thought calling me “my man!” was di rigeur: “You want guac? You got it MY MAN. Large drink, here you go MY MAN. Thank you MY MAN!” I didn’t even volunteer my preferred pronouns.
Let’s see. We had a pastor from the state that is home to the reigning and repeated CBF national champs. He lost, narrowly. Current pres is a Texan, not far from the place where your car gets keyed if the bumper sticker says “65-7.” But I like our current prez well enough. Imagine the political score if his opponent had been elected.
Since this article has my name on it. Every word, every syllable, is my own, not that of any of the other Voices guys.