The story goes that a politician was once asked where he
stood on an issue. He responded, “Some
of my friends are for it. Some of my friends are against it. I’m for my friends.” I thought about this story when I read the
news reports about the latest annual meeting of the Tennessee Baptist
Convention held in Memphis. Many of my
friends still find their place of denominational service through the state
Baptist convention, so I am always interested in learning how they are getting
along.
The report in the Baptist and Reflector, the TBC paper, stated
that the meeting had “the lowest messenger count in decades”—926 registered
messengers from 419 churches. (There are
3200 churches affiliated with the state convention in Tennessee.) This is even
more surprising when one considers that about one-tenth of those registered
were probably denominational employees (including directors of missions from 66
district associations).
Editor Lonnie Wilkey suggested a couple of reasons for the
low attendance. First he cited the cost
involved. I can see his point. I have tried to promote meetings in the Bluff
City and it is hard to get folks from east of Nashville to make the trek. But his second comment really got my
attention.
Wilkey suggested that while “the overwhelming majority of
Tennessee Baptists are happy with the current direction of the TBC, there are
some who are not totally on board, especially when it comes to the issue of the
[2000] Baptist Faith and Message.” One
of the recommendations from the Vision 2012 committee approved at the meeting was
that the Baptist Faith and Message (2000) would be the convention’s “confessional
foundation guiding our faith and practice as a convention of churches.” So, at least most of the 926 registered are “on
board.”
Well, how is that working out? Let me cite one example from the Baptist and
Reflector report. One of my friends was
nominated for the Executive Board. He
affirmed the Baptist Faith and Message (2000) with one exception—“The office of
pastor is limited to men.” My friend is
the long time pastor of a church that gives 15.15 percent of its undesignated
gifts to the Cooperative Program of Missions.
His church has never ordained a woman or had an ordained woman or deacon
in a leadership role in the church during his 25 years of ministry, but he
objected to the BF&M 2000 being “a litmus test for leadership.” Of course, he was removed from the slate and
replaced by a person whose church gave only 3.84 percent of its undesignated gifts
to the Cooperative Program last year but who obviously has no problem with the
creedal statement.
Although I wish that my friend were more proactive in
his affirmation of women in ministry, I appreciate his willingness to take a
stand even it meant that he was “cast out” of a leadership role in an organization
that he and his church have faithfully supported.
There are a couple of other incidents that came out of the
meeting, one that seems to have been a rebuke to a younger leader, but I think
you get the idea about the direction that this particular judicatory is going.
Last week I wrote a blog about various approaches to serving
churches in a new religious environment.
One reason that churches are seeking partnership alternatives is that
they want to find individuals and organizations that will come alongside them and
work together as fellow servants in the Kingdom of God. This is very different from judicatories that
seem to want the churches to serve them and assure the judicatories’ survival
while allowing the judicatories to “call the shots” on who will be allowed to
have influence and control.
In light of this, I think some of my friends need all the
friendship that I can supply.
Comments