In Part 2 I’ll discuss changes in the SBC that I’ve observed in my lifetime (75 years).
I’m not suggesting these are negative things, but they are significant things, at least in my opinion. One big change is the rise of Calvinism in the SBC. In the 1950s Calvinism was barely a blip on the SBC’s radar. I studied for my Master of Divinity degree at Southwestern Seminary from 1972-1975. The only time I remember Calvinism being mentioned in class was in my church history class. We spent lots more time in class discussing dispensationalism and the Charismatic Movement, which was roaring at that time. Today, Calvinism is a major force in the SBC. I have read an estimate that 20 percent of SBC pastors are Calvinists. It is hard to know the exact percentage, but it’s lots higher than in 1955.
Why did Calvinism increase so dramatically? I attribute its growth to these factors: the election of Albert Mohler as president of Southern Baptist Seminary, the influence of John Piper and John MacArthur, the dissemination of Calvinistic resources by Nine Marks Ministries (Mark Dever), and the rise of the Together for the Gospel conference. Southern Seminary is now the largest of the six SBC seminaries, and it is committed to Calvinism. Dr. Mohler is a Calvinist, and he has recruited a Calvinistic faculty. When I left Southern Seminary to return to missionary service in 2004, the dean said, “We’re certainly sad to see you go.” When I asked why, he replied, “When people say all the professors at Southern are Calvinists, we say, ‘Oh, no, Mark Terry is here.’” For what it’s worth, I believe the influence of Calvinism will continue to increase in the SBC. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? It depends on whom you ask. Dr. Al Mohler would certainly say the rise of Calvinism is good, while Dr. David Allen would say it is bad.
Another change I see in the SBC is the number of churches switching from congregational polity (form of church government) to a board of elders. Some churches employ an elder-led approach, while others have elder rule. I believe the elder-led is more common, but I do not have any evidence for that. The students at Southern Baptist Seminary are being taught to institute elder polity in the churches they will serve. The transition from congregational to elders has divided a number of churches. When I taught at Mid-America Seminary, Dr. Jerry Phillips, our professor of practical theology observed, “With congregational polity, it takes 51 percent of the members to vote out the pastor, but with elders, three of five can vote the pastor out.” Indeed, I’m thinking of a prominent pastor in the SBC who tried for years to get his church to move from congregational to elder polity. Finally, the church did vote in an elder system. At their first meeting, the elders fired the pastor.
Another obvious change is that lots of Southern Baptist Churches no longer use the Baptist name. My own church is called Cross Church. We’re thoroughly Southern Baptist, but we don’t use the name. Houston Baptist University recently changed its name to Houston Christian University. When Dr. James Merritt started his church, he did not include Baptist in the name. Personally, I’m neutral on this. When I teach church planting at the seminary, I tell the students to use whatever name works best. In many parts of the country, the name “Baptist” is associated with fundamentalism and legalism. Beyond that, young adults today do not have brand loyalty. Growing up in Arkansas, there were Ford families and Chevrolet families. That is, the family was loyal to a particular car brand. Those same families were loyal to a particular denomination. My wife and I remain loyal to the SBC, but our adult children attend non-denominational evangelical churches. I believe this trend will continue and strengthen. That bodes ill for the SBC.
Stay tuned for Part 3 in which I’ll share even more fascinating observations on how the SBC has changed.
