Dr. Brad Whitt’s article raised two concerns: What tool should be used to determine if one is a bona fide (definition: genuine; real) Southern Baptist, and who are the SBC leaders that are leading the convention astray?
I, along with Whitt, am a relatively “young” pastor (38 years old). I proudly serve a traditional SBC church. I wear a coat and tie when I preach. I love to hear my church choir sing every Sunday morning. I preach from the King James Version. I invite people to Christ in every service. Whitt and I are similar in our preferences. Does our shared personal preference of a pulpit over a stool make us bona fide Southern Baptists? Are those who prefer stools any less Southern Baptist as Whitt and myself?
According to the statistics, the SBC is a diverse convention with more than 42,000 congregations. I’m sure there are plenty of Southern Baptists who do not share the same preferences as Whitt and me. Many SBC pastors serve contemporary churches. (Most new SBC church plants, funded via the Annie Armstrong Easter Offering, are contemporary.) Their personal preferences are very diverse from mine and Whitt’s.
What should we use as the measuring stick to determine if a person’s convictions and commitments are bona fide Southern Baptist? According to Adrian Rogers, Paige Patterson, and Jerry Vines, the greatest tool is The Baptist Faith and Message (2000). All three men were on the committee that formed the 2000 BFM, and Patterson served as chairman.
Dr. Whitt’s article was void of any mention of that grand document: Not one of Whitt’s personal preferences is addressed in the 2000 BFM. It is silent on a pastor’s dress preference, worship style, favorite Bible translation, altar call, stool preaching, pulpit preaching, etc. I’m sure that if Rogers, Patterson, and Vines would have deemed these preferences necessary for defining exactly who is or isn’t a Southern Baptist, they would be found in the document.
Furthermore, isn’t a bona fide Southern Baptist really one who ascribes to the 2000 BFM and supports the Cooperative Program? If that is true, one can have very different personal preferences from myself and Whitt and yet still be a bona fide Southern Baptist – stool and all.
Whitt was ambiguously vague in identifying the leaders in the SBC with whom he accuses of misleading the SBC. He should name the names of the Southern Baptist leaders who desire to become Presbyterian. Who are they? He also accuses these unruly SBC leaders of not possessing Southern Baptist theology. This is a serious charge.
Whit also charged that the “new in-charge minority” (Great Commission Resurgence Task Force?) SBC leaders have “gained possession of the microphone” and “hijacked” his SBC utopia. If memory serves me correctly, the overwhelming majority of messengers at the 2010 SBC annual meeting in Orlando voted to embrace the GCRTF’s report.
Isn’t voting the Baptist way? Plenty of microphone time was allotted for the GCRTF report debate; in the end, the voting ballots, not the microphone, ruled the day. Therefore, Whitt might need to consider that he may be in the minority rather than the majority of Southern Baptists. Furthermore, according to the 2000 BFM, the GCRTF, and the overwhelming majority of SBC messengers in Orlando, stools and pulpits can and will coexist in the SBC.
What do you think? Click here to send a letter to the editor addressing this or another subject.