The headlines are surging. Everyone and their (non-ordained) mama is trying to get clicks off of what is happening in Indianapolis this week at the Southern Baptist Convention. So I guess I’ll do the same.
The biggest news is that the Law Amendment did not pass. So what does that mean?
In my opinion, not much. The SBC is still conservative, despite what the internet is saying.
Yesterday (Tuesday, June 11th) there was a vote to remove FBC Alexandria - one of the landmark churches in the SBC - for affirming women's ordination. They were removed by more than a 90% vote. Last year, we removed Rick Warren/Saddleback for the same reason. The SBC is conservative and complementarian - they’ve shown that time and time again.
This vote - the "Law Amendment" - was to amend the constitution of the SBC to explicitly say that only men may serve as pastors of any kind. The thing is, the Constitution already says that. In the Baptist Faith and Message, we read
"While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor/elder/overseer is limited to men as qualified by Scripture."
And so, the Law Amendment is redundant. But not necessarily in practice - because some churches have read the BFM to say "senior pastor" is limited to qualified men, not "elders" generally. And SBC churches tend to be sloppy with their titles and language when it comes to their pastors.
And so for many (I’d include myself in this group - though I’m not in Indy voting) the concern was that passing the Law Amendment would indiscriminately remove both egalitarian churches (who promote women's ordination) and sloppy churches that inadvertently call their “children's director” or “children's minister” a “children's pastor.” And there’s a big difference between being egalitarian and being sloppy.
When I came on staff at Union Lake Baptist, I was a “Pastoral Assistant” because I was not ordained and the congregation did not affirm me as an elder. When they did, my title changed to Associate Pastor. But title and perception are vastly different.
Before I was ordained as a pastor, people called me “Pastor Dan” or referred to me as the youth pastor - which technically wasn’t right. We tend to be sloppy with that term. And while it’s not ideal, it’s not a big deal either. I didn’t find it worth correcting most of the time. They weren’t trying to deceive anyone, it’s just a common way of speaking.
So I’m convinced that for many, the Law Amendment wasn't a vote of conviction - of obeying the Bible or not. That's already been settled in the BFM and shown through the FBC Alexandria vote yesterday.
Rather, it was a vote of procedure - how do we ensure conformity to our convictions? Through the already established (and working) process or by creating a new one? And the SBC was split. 61% said we need the amendment to clarify. 39% said things are clear enough as-is. And so, the motion didn’t pass since it required a 2/3 vote.
Which means that the SBC’s convictions and statement of faith and constitution haven’t changed. But “Conservative denomination remains conservative” doesn’t get clicks - so here we are.