Since my last “Commentary” expressing a personal belief that Frank Page is the best choice for president of the Southern Baptist Convention, two events have taken place that have changed the landscape of the June 13-14 meeting in Greensboro — but neither has altered in the least my wholehearted endorsement of the Taylors pastor.
Don KirklandThe most recent event is that Jerry Sutton, pastor of Two Rivers Baptist Church in Nashville, has entered the race, joining Page and the first announced candidate, Ronnie Floyd, pastor of First Baptist Church, Springdale, Ark.
All three of these men stand close together on matters of theology. They are conservative. They are evangelical. They hold to the integrity of scripture. They do stand far apart, however, on the matter of methodology, which Page has said from day one is what this election is all about.
In terms of Cooperative Program support, Floyd and Sutton stand much closer to each other than either does to Page, whose church has a long-standing history of substantial CP support beginning when Ernest Carswell was pastor and continuing under the leadership of Frank Page.
The other event concerns the report of the special Cooperative Program task force, which is to be acted upon by the messengers. Originally, the report encouraged all Southern Baptist churches to contribute at least 10 percent of undesignated receipts to the Cooperative Program. It also encouraged the election of state and national officers whose churches contribute at least 10 percent. A revision of that report, recommended by officers of the SBC Executive Committee and not including the 10 percent recommendation, will be presented to the full Executive Committee prior to the Greensboro meeting.
The concern, apparently, is that the 10 percent recommendation might be taken in a legalistic way and applied as a “litmus test” for future candidates. My understanding is that the language of the revised report still will be strong. Most likely, the document sent to messengers will encourage the election of officers who, according to one source, are themselves “champions” of the Cooperative Program and represent churches that are “models” of CP support.
This in no way lessens the appeal of Frank Page as what might be termed the “Cooperative Program candidate.” In a conversation I had with him soon after his decision to become a candidate for SBC president, he said he does not endorse a strict 10 percent standard that, in his mind, would rule out many worthy and capable denominational leaders. He did say, though, that any Southern Baptist church”s contributions to the Cooperative Program ought to be “substantial enough to show selflessness.”
The question, according to Page in that same Courier interview, is, “Are the dollars that a church is giving indicative of a missional mindset? What are we saying to our people and to this world when we give a mere pittance to support that which we have voted to do?”
While the 2006 presidential election draws needed attention to the future of the Cooperative Program as a viable means of doing our broad-ranging work as Southern Baptists, it will serve as an indicator of the mood of the SBC on other issues as well. Page”s candidacy is symbolic of the change that a growing number of conservatives believe must take place within the denomination.
This is a type of conservatism that is not altogether unlike the conservatism of old. It clings just as tenaciously to those essentials of the faith that fueled the decades-long “conservative resurgence” in the SBC, but it lets go of the spirit of separatism that grew strong during that era and remains what even some Southern Baptist leaders consider a menacing threat to the future ministry and well-being of our denomination.
A different brand of conservatives who are seeking, and insisting on, a voice in Southern Baptist life and the operation of the convention itself are viewed by many as more cooperative and less exclusive in spirit than many of today”s SBC leaders. Candidate Frank Page has said, “If another Southern Baptist has a sweet spirit, an evangelistic heart and holds to the integrity of the Bible, then I would say to that person, “There”s room at the table for you.””
It seems certain that registration for the 2006 meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention will run high next week, and it appears just as certain that emotions will as well. The messengers will be called upon, probably much more than in recent years, to demonstrate a Christian spirit toward each other, especially if disagreements over strongly held viewpoints arise.
The election of officers and the handling of other business items will be an accurate indicator of how well, or how badly, we deal with the diversity that exists even among conservatives. By our actions in Greensboro, and the attitudes those actions represent, we should send a clear message to all Southern Baptists and to our critics that it is not necessary for all conservatives to walk in lockstep with each other, that unity of purpose can exist independent of conformity of thought and practice concerning every matter of our faith.
It is being said by some that a new wind is blowing across our Southern Baptist Convention. It may more aptly be described as different rather than new. Still, winds of change — whether new or just different — are not always well received, for they shake up the status quo, which can be unsettling and even threatening to those who benefit most from things staying the same. This wind, this breeze, is capable of leaving in its wake a feeling of refreshment, a sense of newness, that can be of benefit to the Southern Baptist Convention. We should relish rather than resist it.