The Law Amendment seeks to clarify the extent of complementarian commitments within the SBC, answering this question: can a church remain in good standing with the Southern Baptist Convention if they have women staff members holding the title of pastor?
If the question stopped there, the conversation around the Law Amendment would be quite different. However, proponents of the Law Amendment have repeatedly claimed this also includes fulfilling ministerial functions of a pastor (with special emphasis given to women preaching to a mixed congregation), and is also extended to other titles they affiliate with “pastor,” such as ministers or directors.
Bezner agrees that women should not serve as pastors in a church. However, he opposes the Law amendment because he believes supporters would use it to exclude churches that have female staff members, even if they don’t have the title of pastor. He further objects to the Law amendment because he believes supporters will use it to police whether or not women are teaching men in a given church.
What are we to make of these objections to the Law amendment?
As I said above, these arguments really don’t touch the substance of the amendment but rather what Bezner thinks are the hidden motives of those who support it. I would urge messengers to remember that they are being asked to vote on the language of the amendment, not on the motives of other people who might be supporting it. The specific language of the amendment is this:
The Convention will only deem a church to be in friendly cooperation… which… Affirms, appoints, or employs only men as any kind of pastor or elder as qualified by Scripture.
The highlighted portion is the amendment, and it simply specifies (among other things) that the SBC wishes to cooperate only with those churches that call biblically qualified men as pastors. That’s it. It’s pretty straightforward. There is no provision in this amendment for policing churches with female staff members with other titles. Nor is there any provision in this amendment for policing whether women are teaching men in a given church. Those items are simply no part of this, and messengers are not being asked to vote on those things.
I support the Law amendment, and I spoke in favor of it on the floor of the SBC in New Orleans. I also know many supporters of the amendment, including the person who drafted the language of the amendment. I don’t know any supporter who wants to use the amendment as a pretext to police churches on matters not mentioned in the amendment. I have opinions on things like the roles of female staff members and women teaching men. Those are important issues that I’m certain all Southern Baptists have views about. But the fact of the matter is that neither of those things are mentioned in the amendment. The amendment really is about whether or not Southern Baptists wish to cooperate with churches that have female pastors. It’s not any more complicated than that.
Bezner writes:
Although I am willing to cooperate with [supporters of the Law amendment], it appears that supporters of the Law Amendment are not willing to cooperate with me, or by extension, any individual or church with similar convictions.
This mischaracterizes those of us who support the Law amendment. I have no problem cooperating with a church like Bezner describes in this article. I’m sure we would have disagreements about things, but that is to be expected within the SBC. He and I both agree with the BF&M that God only calls biblically qualified men to serve in the office of pastor. Both his church and my church only employ men in the office of pastor. I don’t know why we would need to part ways over whatever remaining differences we may have.
For these reasons, Bezner’s arguments against the amendment fail to persuade. There are no ulterior motives here. The amendment simply clarifies what our Constitution already provides—that Southern Baptists wish to cooperate with churches that call biblically qualified men as pastors. Anyone who can get on board with that ought to be able to support the Law amendment. I hope and pray that they will.
]]>On a recent episode of the 9Marks “Bible Talk” podcast, Jim Hamilton argues that the author of 2 Samuel does not portray David’s relationship with Bathsheba as rape. Nor does the author portray Bathsheba as a temptress. Rather, the author highlights David’s lechery and blameworthiness in the whole affair. Nevertheless, the author does not depict David’s actions as “rape.” You can listen to the argument below. It begins at 12:49.
It is a compelling presentation that gives a better account of the biblical author’s intention than alternative interpretations. It tracks pretty closely with Alexander Abasili’s interpretation, which appeared about 12 years ago in Vetus Testamentum. I highly recommend that article as well:
Alexander Izuchukwu Abasili, “Was It Rape?: The David and Bathsheba Pericope Re-Examined,” Vetus Testamentum 61, no. 1 (2011): 1–15.
But if you don’t have time for the article, listen to the case that Jim Hamilton makes in the podcast. Very compelling.
About 15 years ago, Jim Hamilton preached a message in Southern Seminary’s chapel on this text. It’s also worth a listen:
]]>No one pulled harder than me for Karl “the Mailman” Malone and the Utah Jazz when they made their title runs in the late 90’s. The Mailman was a graduate of my alma mater, and his Louisiana fandom were all-in on his quest for a championship ring. There was only one problem. Our quest led us to the foot of the NBA Mount Everest, also known as the Chicago Bulls. The Jazz found themselves at the foot of this mountain in both the ’97 and ’98 finals, and the Jazz could not scale it either time.
At the time, it seemed less like a team but more like one man standing between the Jazz and the long sought-after prize. And that man was Michael Jordan. I don’t know if I could have loathed a player more than I loathed Jordan in those years. I have never seen a more fierce competitor. Nor have I ever seen a single player elevate the rest of his team like Jordan did. Nor have I ever seen a player take-over and win games seemingly by himself like Jordan did. He was the GOAT, and I hated him for it because my fandom was on the wrong side of that greatness.
But in the years and decades since those disappointments in the late 90’s, something changed. My loathing turned into recognition of what Jordan really was as a player. So much so, that I am ready to throwdown with anyone who questions whether Jordan was the GOAT. Call it the irrational vicissitudes of sports fandom. I call it the inevitable recognition of greatness.
Two days after the retirement of Nick Saban, I can already recognize that I’m experiencing a similar change of heart.
I grew up in Louisiana, but I became a rabid fan of LSU as an adult. I kind of married into it, actually. My wife and her whole family are graduates of LSU. When we moved away from Louisiana over 23 years ago, LSU was pretty much the only team from back home that played on television every week. As a Louisiana expat, pulling for LSU became more like pulling for home. We may not be good at much, but, man oh man, are we good at food and smashmouth football.
The Tigers had a new coach named Nick Saban who was on a quest for a championship, and he led the team and the entire fandom to believe it was possible. Not only was it possible, it happened in 2003. As Saban held the BCS trophy over his head in the SuperDome on January 4, 2004, we all believed that this was just the beginning.
But then he left. He not only left LSU, but he left the SEC altogether for the NFL. After a disastrous stint with the Miami Dolphins, we had to face the bitter reality of his return to the SEC in 2007 to coach one of LSU’s biggest rivals—the Alabama Crimson Tide.
For many LSU fans, that’s when their loathing of Nick Saban began. For me, however, it took a little longer. I wasn’t bothered at all by Saban’s return because I was still convinced that LSU was the better program. But that illusion was blown away in 2012 when Alabama curb-stomped undefeated LSU in the BCS Championship game. LSU did more than lose a championship game after that disappointment. The team lost its mojo. Its swagger. There was a dark lord rising in the East, and he seemed untouchable.
It would be eight long years before LSU would be able to beat Alabama again, and it took Joe Burreaux and the greatest college football team ever assembled to do it. Those eight years were eight years of frustration and loathing among the fandom as our former coach grew into the GOAT right before our very eyes, and we found ourselves time and again on the wrong side of that greatness.
It has been easy to loathe the mastermind throughout these wilderness years as an LSU fan. I know he was part of an entire team, but it really felt like one guy standing between the Tigers and the prize every year. We were on the wrong side of greatness, and we knew it. It was all him.
That is why there was a collective sigh of relief in the SEC fandom two days ago. A sense that our long nightmare was finally over. A sense that maybe none of us will have to die trying to climb that mountain again. The mountain—the man—is gone.
Is there any better tribute to Saban’s greatness than his opponents’ response to his departure? Probably not.
I am already starting to feel the change come over me. We all know he’s the GOAT. Many of us just didn’t want to say so while we were on the wrong side of his greatness. But now it feels like it might be okay. And I’m already feeling a little plucky about anyone who might want to argue with me about it.
Congratulations, Coach Saban. It was a great run.
Postscript:
Over those years in the wilderness, I amassed a treasure chest of irrational and fanatical public loathing of the Sith Lord Saban. The record is there for everyone to see. And it really is fanatical, which is what “fan” stands for anyway. There’s way more than this, but here’s a sample:
When Tennessee couldn’t beat Bama like I wanted them to:
Emperor Saban is doing that electricy-from-his-fingers thing on the Vols right now.
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) October 26, 2013
Practicing my SAT analogies:
Who cares? Bama is still the Slytherin of college football, and Saban is Sauron. Except the analogy breaks down for me because Sauron is so much more likeable than Saban.
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) November 4, 2018
Trolling my dear friends who are Saban fans:
@BrianKPayne86 @DrJimHamilton I know your favorite hymn: “The Saban is waiting to enter your heart. Why won’t you let him come in?”
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) November 22, 2015
When Saban defeated Mark Dantonio’s Spartans in the Cotton Bowl in 2015:
We’re almost to the part where Saban walks across the field and says, “Mark, I am your father. Join me, and we’ll rule the galaxy together.”
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) January 1, 2016
Jeering at the vaunted “process”:
Nick Saban says it’s all about the process. Here’s to hoping Bama is in the process of imploding. ?:^)#GeauxTigers
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) August 30, 2014
Keeping readers informed of salient news:
How Nick Saban ruined SEC football. https://t.co/5h306a4Ubt
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) November 29, 2016
Taking the opportunity to share the important work of those making fun of Saban:
*Mrs. Saban prepping thanksgiving*
“Honey, what side should we bring?”
Nick Saban: pic.twitter.com/GL9vs1jNO6
— Joey (@JoeyMulinaro) November 27, 2019
Me not daring to let myself hope that he would leave Bama:
No way. Saban already washed out once in the NFL. Why would he do that again? https://t.co/bbAB13Xarh
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) January 9, 2018
Again, hopes for Saban leaving SEC West dashed:
Wow // Texas was prepared to offer Nick Saban $100 million to coach the Longhorns. http://t.co/7xyNRXAAoW
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) July 17, 2014
Me giving a white, hot take on politics:
Let me be clear. I support building the wall, and Saban should definitely pay for it. @LSUBeatTweet https://t.co/p7r9tU6UTs
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) February 2, 2017
Making fun of deranged Saban fans:
BARF: Groom’s cake features Nick Saban riding an elephant while hoisting a crystal football. @BrianKPayne86 https://t.co/F6qBmLSCM0
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) May 11, 2015
And of course my recent rant to end all rants:
Please indulge a lengthy complaint about why the 2023 college playoff is complete garbage. It all boils down to this. Alabama is the Special, and everyone else can get hosed so long as the Special gets a second chance. The two teams getting hosed this year are Florida State and… pic.twitter.com/R3AR65CXO9
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) December 3, 2023
Post-postscript:
During Saban’s years at Alabama, two teams tied for the most wins against Alabama. Auburn had five wins, and LSU had five wins. In 2019, LSU finally climbed the mountain. It’s my favorite game from that season. Even better than the actual championship game.
If you’re interested, here are links to lists from previous years:
2022 | 2021 |2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008
Son vanquishes Dad in epic wrastlin’ match. pic.twitter.com/7qXMxv0iI8
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) December 24, 2023
This guy witnessed the crash of a fighter jet near his rural home. No one was injured, but his description of what happened is one for the ages.
I’ll bet you a million dollars that this guy has a tremendous singing voice.
I'll bet you a million dollars this guy has a tremendous singing voice.
pic.twitter.com/FrAkrC4CuO— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) September 20, 2023
Apparently, human civilization reached its apex in the 1980’s. Kind of an open and shut case from what I can tell here.
Apparently, human civilization reached its apex in the 1980’s.
Kind of an open and shut case from what I can tell here. pic.twitter.com/wvoupSc6wd
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) February 18, 2023
This is one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen.
I’m crying over here.
Charles Barkley says a lot of funny stuff, but this takes the cake.
pic.twitter.com/0dzVYr0Xem— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) March 18, 2023
Guitar = $800
Incredible Cover of Bee Gee’s = $1,000
Little brother slow dancing in helmet and flippers… priceless.
This is fantastic.
A young man uses his trombone as a soundtrack for all his mom’s sundry activities.
Hilarious!
pic.twitter.com/jY0K1O6vFU— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) March 31, 2023
Look out, Dude Perfect. These guys are awesome.
These guys rock.
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) November 22, 2023
Dear @USTA,
This achievement in tennis needs some kind of official recognition. Can you make it happen?
Sincerely,
All Tennis Fanshttps://t.co/FhERyUydnx pic.twitter.com/LQNjrsAIMt— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) July 1, 2023
All respect. She nails every one of these classic moves and does it with a smile. Well done!
I’m gonna have to add this to my Top Ten list for the year. She nails every one of these moves. pic.twitter.com/crVZzlPz61
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) December 30, 2023
Fatherhood?? pic.twitter.com/Wb5N0cEALL
— Sachin Jose (@Sachinettiyil) June 18, 2023
A tennis player gets emotional after losing his match in the French Open. His son runs to him at the end of the match. The crowd roars approval. Even the winning player lost it.
I’m not crying. You’re crying.
“Tennis player’s son ran on the court to give him a hug after seeing him cry after loss at the French Open.” pic.twitter.com/uEXMKQtO75
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) June 9, 2023
Jayden Daniels won the Heisman in 2023. Here are my two favorite plays from his historic season. In his epic 85-yard run for a touchdown against Florida, he clocked a top speed of 21.8 mph. What an incredible player.
Here are my two favorite plays from Jayden Daniel’s Heisman season, followed by my favorite play from his career at LSU.
1. The 51-yard cat-and-mouse run against Florida.@JayD__5 @LSUfootball @MattMoscona @TBob53 @JacobHester18pic.twitter.com/1O2e6vEFHD
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) December 10, 2023
2. Jayden’s 85-yard run for a touchdown, also against Florida.
He clocked a top speed of 21.8 mph during this run.@JayD__5 @LSUfootball @TBob53 @MattMoscona @JacobHester18
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) December 10, 2023
Well, 2023 will be remembered for Taylor Swift’s entry into football fandom. Here’s a clip of her first appearance at one of her new boyfriend’s games. Some epic memes came out of this one.
Taylor Swift’s football fandom seems a little bit like Taylor Swift’s country music stardom.
Questionable and ephemeral. pic.twitter.com/IbSlbHzD6q
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) September 24, 2023
This is the best spy-balloon explosion video I’ve seen.
An old friend from college is at Myrtle Beach with some cadets from the Citadel, one of whom captured this video.
Listen to the cheers from the cadets.#ShotDown
Source: https://t.co/sJe6sGBcgZ pic.twitter.com/6LiIhkCwkC
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) February 5, 2023
@baju_skoda #sawa #jpam ? original sound – LanDaud
This happened early in 2023. Remember?
This is Asbury’s chapel this evening. This has been going on for over 70 hours straight.#AsburyRevival pic.twitter.com/zVcxLkhbIv
— Denny Burk (@DennyBurk) February 12, 2023
In 2009, therefore, I did something I had never done before. I followed a Bible reading plan. I adopted Robert Murray M’Cheyne’s Calendar for Daily Readings. It provided the schedule that I needed. It also outlined daily readings from different sections of the Bible. On any given day, I would be reading something from an Old Testament narrative, something from the prophets, and something from the New Testament. Although this plan provided the accountability that I needed, I found it difficult to be reading from three to four different biblical books every day. I know that not everyone is like me, but that approach lacked the focus that my brain requires. I missed reading the Bible in its canonical arrangement and focusing on one book at a time. I wished for a schedule that would go from Genesis to Revelation in canonical order.
So in 2009, I created a plan that calls for reading all the books of the Bible in canonical order in one year. A couple years ago, I revised this plan to make the daily readings more evenly distributed. Previously, the daily reading covered 3-4 chapters without respect to how long each chapter was. That has changed. This new plan is based on the daily divisions in the “Beginning to End” plan in the Olive Tree Bible app (which I highly recommend). The readings are not identical, but they are pretty close to the ones in the app. The plan is in the same format as before. It can be printed on both sides and folded to fit neatly in your Bible.
WORD: 2024 Bible Reading Plan
APP: Olive Tree Bible App
(Download the “Beginning to End” reading plan within the app.)
Christians need the Bible like humans need water. The Bible is our life-blood. The Lord Jesus plans to perfect His people by means of His word. That is why He prayed, “Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth” (John 17:17). Since the Bible is the word of God written, our progress in sanctification relies on our contact with the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments. Every Christian, therefore, should make it a priority to master this book.
I want to encourage you to commit to reading the entire Bible this year. It may seem a daunting task at first. But it really isn’t. If you will make a plan and stick to it, then you can do it. I am a pretty slow reader, and even I can do it. So I know that you can too.
If you find this plan helpful, I hope you’ll use it. In any case, I hope you will commit to reading the Bible all the way through this year. It will be a blessing to you if you do.
“How can a young man keep his way pure? By keeping it according to Thy word.” -Psalm 119:9
“When you received from us the word of God’s message, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.” -1 Thessalonians 2:13
]]>The incarnate Son of God was obedient even to the point of death. And three days later, what was mortal became swallowed up by immortality in the resurrection.
Even now, the resurrected Christ sits at the right hand of God in glory. As I type these words, the incarnate God intercedes in the flesh for His people before the Father (Romans 8:34).
And it all began in a manger 2,000 years ago. No, actually, we have to go nine months before that—when Jesus Christ was first conceived by the Holy Spirit within the virgin Mary, when the God-Man was an embryo. “Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God. . . The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy offspring shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:30, 35).
How can it be that God has come in the flesh? How can it be that he is in the flesh now? Yet this is precisely what the Bible teaches. “Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people” (Hebrews 2:17).
As we ponder the imponderables of God, let us never cease to be amazed at the manifold mercies of God that have come to us through the incarnation of King Jesus. Let every heart prepare Him room.
As the film finished, this is the word that stirred in my heart:
“All flesh is grass, and all its loveliness is like the flower of the field
The grass withers, the flower fades,
When the breath of the LORD blows upon it;
Surely the people are grass.
The grass withers, the flower fades,
But the word of our God stands forever.”
–Isaiah 40:6-8
All human glory is like that fading flower. Yes, beautiful in its own time and way, but also very fleeting. Very transient. Soon to be replaced by another. And then another. And then another. And all the replacements—no matter how beautiful—are just as fleeting. And just as forgotten.
Our lives go by us in a flash. Our time is so short. And yet, still our hearts long for a fading glory—a glory that will be forgotten and unknown infinitely longer than it was known or acknowledged by anyone.
“No one remembers the former generations, and even those yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow them.”
–Ecclesiastes 1:11
It is a rare thing in the world to be remembered. Out of the ocean of humanity, only a precious few have their names recorded in history books. Most of us will live and die and be forgotten within a generation or two. The pop stars and movie stars of our time will be just as forgotten and unremembered as the rest of us. How many film stars can you name from a hundred years ago?
This is the vanity that the Preacher laments in Ecclesiastes, but it is a truth that is absolutely crucial for us to grasp if we wish to understand our place in the order of things. God did not make us for vanity. He made us for an unfading glory that cannot be taken away (1 Peter 1:4).
The great folly of our race consists in our persistent casting aside of the permanent things for the transient things. The constant quest for the food that spoils instead of the food that endures to eternal life (John 6:27). The hoarding of moth-eaten, corruptible treasures rather than storing up heavenly ones (Matthew 6:19-20). The tragedy of our lives is that we spend so much time fixated on the fading glory rather than pursuing the unfading one.
There really is nothing new under the sun. What has been done has been done before and will be done again. This is the way of things in this fallen world of sinners. Apart from grace, we don’t learn. We walk in the sins of our ancestors.
But it doesn’t have to be that way. It doesn’t have to be that way at all.
“Ho! Every one who thirsts, come to the waters;
And you who have no money come, buy and eat.
Come, buy wine and milk
Without money and without cost.
Why do you spend money for what is not bread,
And your wages for what does not satisfy?
Listen carefully to Me, and eat what is good,
And delight yourself in abundance.
Incline your ear and come to Me.
Listen, that you may live;
And I will make an everlasting covenant with you,
According to the faithful mercies shown to David.”
–Isaiah 55:1-3
The “faithful mercies shown to David” come to full flower in person of Christ, who was crucified and raised to break the vanities of this age. We don’t have to die and be forgotten forever. We can live and be known by God forever because of Christ and what he has done for us. Our lives aren’t fleeting and fading glory, but rather are working toward an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison (2 Cor. 4:17). That is the good news, and it’s ultimately why our fleeting lives don’t have to leave us in despair. It’s also why those who have given their lives over to the fading glories have lost more than they will ever know.
]]>This is the human condition, and it really is desperate. We are corrupted by sin and headed for damnation, and yet we don’t have it in us to seek out or even to want the salvation that God has provided. Left to ourselves, we open the Bible or we hear the gospel, and they leave us cold. Indifferent.
So what does God do to address the fact that we are so broken that we don’t even want what He spent all his love to provide for us? Jesus’ conversation with Nicodemus on the new birth answers that question for us.
For the whole sermon, listen below.
This local-church non-connectionalism simply says that two churches can do something together without taking on any responsibility before God for the other church…
This idea is woven into Article XIV (“Cooperation”) and Article XV (“The Christian and the Social Order”) of The Baptist Faith & Message. Those articles remind churches that it does not compromise a church’s faith to cooperate with other churches who differ theologically.
Quoting from the Baptist Faith & Message, he elaborates:
“Christian unity in the New Testament sense is spiritual harmony and voluntary cooperation for common ends by various groups of Christ’s people.”
“Cooperation is desirable…when such cooperation involves no violation of conscience or compromise of loyalty to Christ and His Word as revealed in the New Testament.”
Thus, so long as the ACTIVITIES do not violate conscience, the mere cooperation does not do so.
Let me say, first of all, that I agree with all of this. But as I was reading it, I also thought there might be one false implication worth warning against. This is not an implication that Bart embraces in his thread. It’s just one that some readers might be tempted to draw themselves. Here it is. While it is true that Southern Baptist churches in friendly cooperation may have many theological differences among them, it does not follow that all theological differences are therefore a matter of indifference to our cooperation.
Article 4 of the SBC Constitution has something profound to say about cooperation among our churches. Here it is:
While independent and sovereign in its own sphere, the Convention does not claim and will never attempt to exercise any authority over any other Baptist body, whether church, auxiliary organizations, associations, or convention.
There are two parts to this, and both are crucial. Let’s take the second part first. The second part guarantees the autonomy of local churches. The SBC does not have authority over any Baptist church (or any other church for that matter). Those churches really are independent and may run themselves how ever they see fit. Hopefully, they will order their congregations under Christ’s Lordship as revealed in Holy Scripture. But even if they do not, the SBC has no authority over those churches to make them do or believe anything.
If a Baptist church wishes to baptize babies, the SBC cannot stop them. If a Baptist church denies the Trinity, the SBC cannot stop them. If a Baptist church wishes to call female pastors, the SBC cannot stop them. If a Baptist church wishes to affirm so-called gay marriage, the SBC cannot stop them. Churches really are autonomous and have authority over their own affairs. The SBC has no official power over any congregation, for better or for worse.
The SBC does, however, have power to determine its own composition. And that brings us to the first part of Article 4, which says that the SBC is “independent and sovereign in its own sphere.” Among other things, that means that the SBC as a convention gets to decide which churches can seat messengers at the annual convention and which churches cannot.
The Convention is composed of “messengers who are members of Baptist churches in cooperation with the Convention.” A church not in friendly cooperation with the SBC cannot seat messengers. What must a church do in order to be in “friendly cooperation” and thereby to seat messengers? Among other things, such a church must have “a faith and practice which closely identifies with the Convention’s adopted statement of faith.” Our statement of faith says that the office of pastor/elder/overseer is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.
The messengers of the SBC have the right to determine whether or not a church is living up to that standard. This is the right that the messengers exercised at our most recent convention in New Orleans, when messengers voted by overwhelming majorities to remove two churches for having female pastors. In doing so, the Convention demonstrated that it is “independent and sovereign in its own sphere” while not disturbing in any way whatsoever the autonomy of the churches we removed. Those churches have continued on with their female pastors, and there is literally nothing the SBC can do to stop them.
But why would the SBC take such a drastic action—to declare these churches not in friendly cooperation? Why didn’t messengers simply allow those two churches to seat their messengers? Why not continue friendly cooperation with churches we disagree with theologically? It was not because we wished to declare them not to be Christians or to be off into some unredeemable heresy. The question of female pastors is a second-order issue after all. Nor did we remove them because of a zero tolerance for theological difference. After all, we have many differences among us.
We removed them because we have agreed to have some parameters to our cooperation for missions and theological education. The convention has declared over and over for decades now that it believes that pastors should be men as qualified by Scripture. If we seat messengers from churches that defy that standard, we will eventually cease to be the convention that we are now. We will eventually become a convention that reverses itself on the question of female pastors. And messengers have indicated time and again that this is not a direction that they wish to go. Any Baptist church is free to go that way, but the SBC is also free not to follow them.
So yes, church autonomy is real. A Baptist church in South Carolina is not culpable for the errors of a cooperating Baptist church in Texas (or vice versa). Nor can either church exercise authority over the other. Nor can the SBC exercise authority over either church. Nevertheless, the SBC is “sovereign in its own sphere” and has every right—indeed the duty—to determine its own composition in line with its own stated principles. Those principles are outlined in the Baptist Faith & Message, which says—among other things—that only biblically qualified men can fill the office of pastor/elder/overseer.
]]>