Andromeda: Unsplash
“I forgot to shake hands and be friendly. It was an important lesson about leadership.” Lee Iacocca
Saddleback and Fern Creek Baptist are out and no longer considered friendly.
Well, it happened. The SBC Messengers upheld the Executive Committee decision and agree that Saddleback Church and Fern Creek Baptist Church are no longer in friendly cooperation with the SBC. The Washington Post wrote Southern Baptists reject Rick Warren’s appeal to reinstate Saddleback.
Who came up with the category “no longer in friendly cooperation?” I looked at Rick Warren and the folks at his church; they seemed able to cooperate in a friendly manner with the SBC. The lovely, long-term female pastor at Fern Creek also appears to be the friendly cooperative sort.
On the other hand, I know some leaders of churches in the SBC who are definitely not in friendly cooperation with a whole bunch of SBC churches, but they are deemed “friendly” since they don’t have female pastors. This confuses me. I am the friendly sort and could conceivably find myself cooperating in all kinds of activities with people who are quite different than me.
Being the friendly sort has little to do with the matter. That’s too bad since being friendly can lead to many good things in this often unfriendly and cold world. Take Habitat for Humanity, for example. Jimmy Carter, now considered a progressive Baptist by the really friendly, cooperative SBC types, cooperates with all sorts when building housing for those who need decent housing. Somehow, his church is not one that the current SBC would accept, nor would his church wish to be part of the SBC.
So, does being deemed “not in friendly cooperation” with the SBC have anything to do with being friendly? Good gracious, no!
So, being in “friendly cooperation with the SBC” has nothing to do with being friendly or cooperative.
In kindergarten, all of us were taught the value of being friendly and respectful while never running with scissors. As we grew older and more sophisticated, some of us added new meaning to being friendly and cooperative while still accepting that running with scissors means never running with scissors.
I found a post by Baptist Press (the one approved by the SBC, unlike Baptist News Global, which is looked upon with suspicion. That’s why I like it.) An Aid To Understanding the SBC.
What does friendly cooperation look like?
Requirements for a church to be affiliated as a Southern Baptist church are straightforward and simple. Southern Baptist Convention bylaws on membership state that in order for a church to represent and vote at the SBC, it must “be in friendly cooperation with the Convention and sympathetic with its purposes and work” and be “a bona fide contributor to the Convention’s work during the fiscal year preceding” (Southern Baptist Convention 2004 Annual, p. 4). No exact amount of financial support is specified; it simply must be a “bona fide contributor.” It further specifies, “Among churches not in friendly cooperation with the Convention are churches which act to affirm, approve, or endorse homosexual behavior.”
“Friendly cooperation” can be demonstrated by various means … the adoption of The Baptist Faith and Message, use of Bible study materials published by the Southern Baptist Convention, and so forth. It certainly implies that a church should give very serious consideration to whether it understands that it is following the Lord in aligning with the Southern Baptist Convention, and is committed to doing so.
That indicates that one needs to give money, whether a little or a lot and adopt the BFM. Let’s try the one by Baptist News Global. SBC clarifies ‘friendly cooperation,’ updates criteria for church affiliation.
Messengers to the June 10-11 SBC annual meeting in Baltimore approved without discussion changes to the SBC constitution defining what it means to be “in friendly cooperation” with the convention — the language used for congregations that qualify for representation at the annual meeting.
Prior to 1992, Southern Baptists defined friendly cooperation solely by financial support. That changed after one Southern Baptist church ordained an openly gay person and another blessed a same-sex union. A constitutional amendment excluded congregations which “act to affirm, approve or endorse homosexual behavior.”
The newest amendment, which must be ratified by a second vote next year, retains the homosexuality prohibition as an example of a church which does not have “a faith and practice which closely identifies with the convention’s adopted statement of faith.”
…The new membership article additionally defines a cooperating church as one that has “formally approved its intention to cooperate with the Southern Baptist Convention,” such as the regular filing of the Annual Church Profile report requested by the convention and tabulated by LifeWay Christian Resources.
It expands the old descriptor of “a bona fide contributor to the convention’s work” to a congregation that “has made undesignated, financial contributions through the Cooperative Program, and/or through the Convention’s Executive Committee for Convention causes, and/or to any Convention entity during the fiscal year preceding.”
Being unfriendly now means a church that supports homosexuals is most decidedly unfriendly. This was written in 2014. I find it interesting that this does not mention female pastors. Fern Creek Baptist Church had a female pastor at that time. That was OK, but the gay thing was not. I’m confused. A recent article by The Alabama Baptist was helpful. Rashional Thoughts: Defining ‘friendly cooperation’ becoming increasingly difficult.
According to the Alabama Baptists, it is hard to figure this all out.
It requires a great deal of attention and critical thinking to truly assess all the ramifications of what is being proposed, discussed and decided.
…That the sole authority for faith and practice among Baptists is the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.”
“Confessions are … guides in interpretation, having no authority over the conscience,” the preamble continues.
Hey- diversion alert-could anyone explain why The Apostles Creed is a problem for Baptists? They can kick out female preachers but saying the Creed could cause issues with one’s conscience? It seems to me that it states a commonly agreed-upon definition of the Christian faith at its most basic form.
Back to the Alabama Baptists.
While not used as a creed, the Baptist Faith and Message (1925, 1963, 2000 and any future revised versions) is accepted as Southern Baptists’ “adopted statement of faith” and used as a sort of plumb line to measure churches’ ability to be in “friendly cooperation with the convention.”
For instance, the constitution of the SBC states in Article III that a church deemed in friendly cooperation is “sympathetic with its purposes and work.”
“A church deemed in friendly cooperation with the Southern Baptist Convention is “sympathetic with its purposes and work.” —SBC constitution
Article III also states cooperating churches should “formally approve [their] intention to cooperate” such as by filing the annual statistical report and making contributions “through the Cooperative Program (or to an entity) during the fiscal year preceding.”
At least one of the churches recently deemed as “unfriendly” and thus being recommended for removal from the fellowship never saw itself as Southern Baptist, according to current church leadership.
A church leader may have contributed to an SBC-related cause and/or expressed intent to cooperate at some point in the past, causing the church to be assigned a church ID number and be listed in the overall count of Southern Baptist churches.
So some churches on the SBC rolls are not SBC churches just because some former pastors looked into the matter, and now, forever, they are listed unless it is discovered there is some female holding the title of Pastor of Women’s events?
The SBC likes to keep folks and churches on their lists forever. We tried to clean up a membership list for our Sunday school class. We removed several names and were ordered to return them to the list, even if they didn’t come.
Did you know the SBC constitution lists only three reasons for disqualifying a cooperating church, and having a female pastor is not one of those reasons?
According to the Alabama Baptist post:
It makes sense how a church can end up on the list, but it is confusing how it remains in the system with infrequent giving and no participation on any level.
The SBC Credentials Committee is tasked with evaluating concerns of “unfriendly cooperation” by congregations tied to the convention. Could a more accurate system of routine checks and balances prevent unnecessary research and vetting by the Credentials Committee?
Still, the SBC constitution lists only three reasons for disqualification of a cooperating church.Those reasons are:
- affirming “homosexual behavior,”
- acting in a manner inconsistent with the convention’s “beliefs regarding sexual abuse” and
- endorsing “discriminatory behavior on the basis of ethnicity.”
Where’s the thing about women? Oh well, it’s over and done. No female pastors are allowed in the SBC. In case you’re wondering, here is the vote total.
So, I wonder if Beth Howe gets to keep her position. (Thanks, Jerome!)
This part explains why Saddleback, Fern Creek, etc., are not considered to be in friendly cooperation with the SBC:
“’Friendly cooperation’ can be demonstrated by various means … the adoption of The Baptist Faith and Message….”
If your church believes about women in leadership as Linda Barnes Popham believes, then your church is not in agreement with the Baptist Faith and Message.
Why did they stay connected to Fern Creek all these years, she has been pastor for over 20, and just now disfellowship?
re: “Minister of Students”, I think that, strictly speaking, “minister” means “servant”. Women are allowed to be servants as long as they are not called shepherds.
I will never darken the door of an SBC church again. As British Baptists from the UK where the Baptist Union has been glad to ordain women since 1925 my husband and I suffered a real shock when we moved back to the USA. Actually my husband is from Wisconsin and was originally Missouri Synod Lutheran. The issue of women in the pastoral role was one of the reasons he became a General Baptist while we lived in England as we did for most of our married life. We gave belonged to 2 churches in the Uk both of which had men and women pastors In the region where we now live Southern Baptist churches are everywhere and, although we are evangelical, it has been impossible to find a Baptist church to go to. The latest votes in the SBC conference is the nail in the coffin. We are thankful to God for Bent Tree Bible Fellowship.
If you were dating the Southern Baptist Convention your friends would start warning you that you were getting into an abusive relationship.
What we are seeing is a redivision of the world, driven by people who have absolutely no intention of cooperating with anyone else at all, along the current fault lines we’re all familiar with, power over women being a major one. Honestly? If it wasn’t that these people are veering towards executing anyone they don’t like the look of and the damage they cause, I would welcome them going off into their own self-determined world and never seeing any of them again.
‘True success is figuring out your life and career so you never have to deal with jerks.’ John Waters
So, I wonder if Beth Howe gets to keep her position. (Thanks, Jerome!)
That church is here in Nashville where I live; I’ll keep my ears to the ground!
If the group that keeps a list of all women ministers in Baptist churches pulls out the list, this will increase the noise.
Of course she can keep her position. She’s the minister of students and discipleship, not the pastor of the church.
Allison,
She’s allowed to have a desire for pastoral ministry. Minister is just another way to say pastor,; it is gamesmanship, and just about everyone knows it.
Please say hi to Joanne Hummel for me.
Bob M,
The goalposts have been moved.
Wow. Those vote totals are grim.
https://julieroys.com/ouster-of-saddleback-and-fern-creek-from-sbc-over-women-pastors-is-affirmed/
“I think God has greater things for us now because the God we serve is so much bigger than the Southern Baptist Convention,” she said, adding, “I need to say thank you Southern Baptist. You’ve given us great publicity.”
Rev Linda Barnes Popham, 2023
Preach, sister.
“Friendly cooperation” has been gradually redefined over the years by the SBC to mean “lockstep and in total agreement with”.
That is how churches are SBC “autonomous”. I wonder what the next big thing will be?
“Who came up with the category “no longer in friendly cooperation?” I looked at Rick Warren and the folks at his church; they seemed able to cooperate in a friendly manner with the SBC.”
Al Mohler and his band of NeoCal rebels don’t exactly ooze friendliness. Make no mistake about it, they are behind this latest oppression of female believers in SBC ranks. The beauty of complementarity is an ugly thing.
Before there was an SBC, there was God … and God will be around a long time after SBC is gone (it’s days are growing shorter under NeoCal leadership).
Regarding the Apostle’s Creed, my guess is that it sounds too Catholic or too high church. (No offense to either group, I’M not the one who has a problem with the Apostle’s Creed.)
Regrettably, the Lutheran LCMS is neither friendly nor cooperative with many other churches over a variety of issues, the biggest of which is female leadership. The LCMS July convention workbook has a host of anti-woman proposed resolutions. One for example proposes to forbid any woman from writing devotional passages for the well-known Portals of Prayer monthly guide. These thankfully have little chance of passing but the mere fact they are proposed is evidence of deep misogyny in the LCMS as well as SBC and elsewhere. When will American conservative Christianity realize just how misguided they are on this issue?
From the article up-top:
“Hey- diversion alert-could anyone explain why The Apostles Creed is a problem for Baptists? They can kick out female preachers but saying the Creed could cause issues with one’s conscience? It seems to me that it states a commonly agreed-upon definition of the Christian faith at its most basic form.”
The Apostle’s Creed?
I was baffled too.
Please, somebody in the know about the esoterica of the Baptist faith, clue us in.
How many SBC churches/institutions are not in “friendly cooperation” with the Lord Jesus Christ by turning a blind eye to and protecting abusers while forsaking the vulnerable? How many of those churches/institutions has the SBC kicked out? Woe to you, you hypocrites!
Prescient.
The New Testament does appear to use the words “minister” (diakonia) differently from elder (presbuteros), overseer (episkopos).
“Keep Sweet: Pray and Obey.”
Wholesome. Winsome.
When I first joined a SB Church back in the early 90’s, I was given James Sullivan’s book “Baptist Polity: As I See It”.
Even the title of the book reflect the tradition baptist’s way of thinking that Southern Baptists do not agree on all secondary doctrines and how it should practiced.
When I was in a baptist history class at SWBTS (before every good caring prof. is “retired”), the prof. said that there were great concerns among SB churches for the creation 1st Baptist Faith and Message. Some SB churches were adopting the London Confession and staunchly not willing for BFM to be the limus test. Hence, the preamble which laid out the Spirit of the BFM for cooperation with one and other. I wash told and taught Southern Baptist is the “people of the Book” and no creed or authority stand in- between.
This vote reveals current SB messenger do not know their roots, the religious freedom labored by previous generation. IMO, the worst of all, it destroyed the work of the Spirit.
What would be next? “Speaking in Tongues” if the CR group (the Molder cartel decided that it has ceased? Speaking in tongues were a touchy topic among SB churches.
I understand. However, words are infilled by their definition. In this situation, as I put in my tweet, the definition of her position means she should have a “desire for pastoral ministry.” The word pastor is being used in relation to minister according to this church’s own defintion.
When I was in the pastorate, there were times when members would come to me to discuss their call to ministry. Male or female, it wasn’t my responsibility to confirm or deny their call nor would I qualify to a female, “God can’t call you because you are a woman.”
I know little to nothing about the SBC. But, from my rather extensive exposure to Word of Faith nuttiness, I think I can safely say that people who reject the historic creeds of Christendom often fall into MAJOR Christological and theological heresies — including heresies that were soundly defeated back in the earliest centuries of Christianity.
Stephen Ringlee,
These are some of the reasons I left the LCMS and went over to the ELCA brand of Lutheranism.
I wonder when American conservative Christianity will realize that if they don’t re-think their schtick on gender issues, they’ll die out like the dinosaurs did so long ago (in a metaphorical sense).
This is one of the things I keep thinking is strange about a complete blanket ban on all women’s ministry.
For example in the Church of England there are two separate get out clauses for churches who don’t accept women’s ministry for different reasons.
1. One is the mostly low church churches which for reasons of ‘headship’ wouldn’t have a woman as leader but would still have a role for women in ministry.
2. The other is the mostly high church one who wouldn’t have women in ministry (= mainly sacramental priesthood for them) nor as vicar. The nature of their liturgy would tend to rule out ministry for women beyond readings or intercessions.
Churches can vote on resolutions to decide on either of these approaches.
The SBC is doing what the latter are doing, but for the reasons of the former, and it’s really messing with my head.
Sowre-Sweet Dayes,
Interestingly, the earliest Baptist confession was written by Thomas Helwys in 1611. He was Arminian and a defender of freedom, especially freedom of religion. The London Confession came later and was strongly Calvinistic. Members of this group went to America .
Stay home Sunday! Save 10%!
Mike Law’s reasoning for this amendment:
“When an unbeliever looks for a Southern Baptist church in my area, we want them to find a church that holds the Bible’s teachings and our convention’s beliefs.”
https://julieroys.com/southern-baptists-start-process-name-only-men-pastors/
Bold of you to assume nonbelievers are looking for SBC churches in the first place, Pastor Mike.
NEVER.
They are God’s Chosen Righteous Remnant, and Can Do No Wrong.
“Everybody’s out-of-step except My Little Johnny!”
Our church had a former banker take over a ministry area and want to be licensed as a pastor (the way our state allows ministerial benefits) so he could take advantage of the housing allowance tax benefit. A woman, also with a graduate degree, successfully argued that she, as the head of a major ministry area, should also be licensed so she could enjoy the same legal benefit. Our Baptist (not SBC) church agreed. In addition to the theological arguments, it should be pointed out that to disallow women to be “pastors” of specific ministry areas also keeps them poor(er).
shutting women up as a biblical teaching?
Give me a break.
Our Lord sends a woman to tell His disciples about the Resurrection.
God shut the mouth of a man for a time when John the Baptist was conceived.
God gave voice to a donkey once . . .
I think in light of Our Lord’s request to Mary Magdalene,
and and in light of the of the temporary mute lesson to a man,
and in light of God’s gift of the talking donkey;
the SBC might offer some slack to allowing women to speak. . . . where’s the grace???
What’s with all this claim that the SBC follows Scripture as ‘God’s Word’?
strange days, these
stranger people, yes
CMT,
Thank you for a good laugh this morning.
CMT,
With this reasoning, why then does it sound like, from reading here, that many SBC churches fly stealth, seemingly not wanting to advertise that they are SBC? Seems to me that if they know that they know that they know they have a great product and they think unbelievers are looking for the brand, then they would want to make sure the brand name is visibly, prominently marked on their territories.
Which is more important to Mr. Law, Mr. Mohler and the Calvinistas … perfect theology or perfect love?
“By this everyone will know that you are My disciples, if you have love and unselfish concern for one another” (John 13:35)
An unbeliever is attracted to a church by Love not Law … hopefully, they will not be greeted by Mr. Law himself.
Rashional Thoughts: Defining ‘friendly cooperation’ becoming increasingly difficult.
++++++++++++++++++++++
so, apparently this is the letter of the law now:
Article III lists five points that place churches within the definition of cooperation with the SBC. The amended motion calls for a sixth, adding churches that affirm, appoint, or employ “only men as any kind of pastor or elder as qualified by Scripture.”
what does ‘any kind of pastor’ mean?
seems to me everyone functions ‘pastorally’ (such an irritatingly pretentious word for a conceptual idea).
we all guide others physically and intellectually.
we all protect others if we see an impending threat.
the fact that the people in the SBC want a pastoral police is ridiculously pedantic enough.
just how far are they going to parse this concept down into something that can be policed?
eventually, the only thing a woman will be allowed to do is stand inside a square marked for her on the floor, motionless, silent, and pokerfaced.
That is primarily a New Calvinist phenomenon. Not promoting SBC flowed into the denomination on the NeoCal wave over the last 10 years, with young reformers taking over churches by stealth and deception. They don’t want members to know they are Calvinist; it’s common for the YRR to lie to pulpit search committee about their theological leaning. Neither do they want communities to know they are SBC; the denomination has been carrying a lot of bad baggage for years … the latest being all the publicity it is getting over the sex abuse scandal.
elastigirl,
“eventually, the only thing a woman will be allowed to do is stand inside a square marked for her on the floor, motionless, silent, and pokerfaced.”
+++++++++++++
actually, there’s too much risk of influence there, too. the burka comes next.
well, no, there’s still too much risk of influence. that leaves only one solution.
they would want to make sure the brand name is visibly, prominently marked on their territories.
Ella,
Nope.
I live in Southern Kentucky. I’ve driven all over KY and TN…. Nashville lots of times.. Louisville, too!….. the whole Knoxville/Smokies area, Memphis, Lexington………. I’ve driven through good portions of all of our surrounding states too, plus Alabama……. All the way to Maine multiple times……..
I have never, never, ever seen “Southern Baptist” or “SBC” on a Baptist church sign. If ya wanna know, you gotta ask.
burka comes next.
elastigirl,
I have actually sat in an SBC church sanctuary/auditorium and wondered during the sermons…… during the business meetings……..if I should wear one of those cute little vests that says, “SERVICE ANIMAL”.
And, I thought, Ipif I really do have a soul, am I going to be stuck with kitchen duty at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb…… behind the bar…….. helping serve food and refilling drinks…… making fresh coffee….. cleaning the kitchen and the fellowship hall when it’s over?
Yes, those thoughts have truly entered my mind on several occasions.
Nowadays, women (in KY, at least) really struggle to find a purpose, a way to serve with the few gifts and talents that we are allowed to have.
Nancy2(aka Kevlar),
“Nowadays, women (in KY, at least) really struggle to find a purpose, a way to serve with the few gifts and talents that we are allowed to have.”
++++++++++++++++++=
i’d be interested in a hypothetical blog called “She said…” where women can describe their experiences. There’d be a way to sort things by geographical area, by subject matter,…
i know there are many blogs like this, already…. but one Grand Central. Maybe a website that other blogs feed into…
i’m sure there are many logistical problems with my idea.
.
.
i just watched a travel video on youtube of a young couple who visited North Korea with a tour group. They shared their own photos and footage, and described it all. very interesting.
their tour guides (north koreans themselves) surprisingly said that these tours are the only way that citizens of north korea can have any exposure to human beings who aren’t north korean and not in the north korean system. they seemed to be communicating that this was their only hope of helping their country.
sort of similarly, “She Said…” would be a way for all the men (& women) who voted for the male pastor amendment to have exposure to those at ground zero of their ideology, to see and hear what it’s like in an unvarnished sober way.
it’s needed because christian culture has turned off understanding of cause and effect, as well as imagination.
well, there’s no need for either when you have “biblical”. (but really, they are threats to those in power)
it’s just so stupid.
I agree, but have heard in Calvinista-like places “give ’em the Law”……”you’ve got to understand the bad news before you can understand the good news,” and “the end justifies the means,” among other crazy statements.
Just by way of contrast, the Christian missionary alliance voted very differently this past week on the same issue:
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/june/cma-christian-missionary-alliance-ordain-women-title-pastor.html
I know that legalists such as Mr. Law, Mohler, etc, and certain they’re right- they are Pharisees who believe they’re upholding God’s truth. What I can’t understand is what makes them think this is going to attract non Christians to their communities?
Every major news outlet across America reported on this SBC vote. I cannot imagine any person identifying as “not christian” under the age of 35 will ever want to step foot in a Southern Baptist church after reading what just happened.
The demand for slavish like-mindedness is a bit ironic, given the strength of their fear of sameness.
God has called us to oneness, not sameness. SBC is certainly not known for unity in its ranks on pretty much anything.
I don’t think they really care.
So long as the current butts in the seats continue to bankroll the good life for their leadership, life is good.
elastigirl,
I really don’t think that they’ve realized yet, that they’re crafting their own doom.
Muff Potter,
Some kind of handbook like the Driver’s Handbook that the DMV puts out would be really helpful. The Personhood Handbook.
That way it’s clear to women everything they are not allowed to do, and much easier for the Personhood Patrol to cite and disfellowship.
Law and narcissism easily go hand-in-hand . . .
“I go Chop you Dolla,
I make you money Disappear,
Four-One-Nine just a Game —
YOU BE THE MUGU, I BE THE MASTA!”
— “I go Chop You Dolla”, Nigerian Pop song about a con man
I’m not sure if God is still in friendly cooperation with SBC, considering the growing list of sex abusers in its pulpits, silencing half (or more) of its members because of gender, authoritarian may-way-or-the-highway overlords, Paul worship, eternal subordination of Jesus, etc. etc.
Max,
It’s not just the SBC.
Out here in Southern Cali, we have more conservative-protestant-independent-churches than a dog has fleas. In most of them, Paul is thee-hot-ticket-item, which is why I gotta’ laugh whenever I hear those same guys put down Catholics for their statues of Mary.
Paul would be appalled to know that church folks idolize him!
New Calvinism has come in like a flood and the church is not raising up a standard against it. I suppose the movement will blow over someday (most aberrant expressions of faith eventually do), leaving thousands confused and disillusioned.
So, with all this wrangling in Southern Baptist ranks over this and that, does anyone seriously think that God is in “friendly cooperation” with SBC?
But how much damage will it do in the meantime?
Remember Naziism? That blew over in only 13 years, but look what it left in its wake.
They are already but they are so out of themselves . . .
Max,
God Who?
If you preach a gospel that is not ‘the’ Gospel at all, then you worship a god which is not ‘the’ God.
Tom Rubino,
Amen!!! They are focusing on the wrong thing!!