That Which We Call a Vomit Blossom: The Southern Baptist Name Change

Shakespeare has, on the lips of his Juliet, famously declared, “That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.”  This, of course, is true enough.  However, if we called them “vomit blossoms” or “poisonous red buds of death” I doubt too many of us would venture to get a whiff.  The ancient pundits of India were going for something similar when they said, “God is one but theologians call him by different names” (Rg-Veda 1/164/46).  Again, there is an element of truth here as Christians certainly employ a variety of names in their worship of the Triune God.  He is Creator, Lord, Almighty, El Shaddai, YHWH, and more.  However He isn’t Krishna or Buddha or Oprah or you.  The tenor of Scripture suggests actually that Bill Shakespeare and company are fundamentally wrong if they are trying to claim that names and naming are irrelevant and insignificant.  Rather we read of God naming things from the beginning of creation (Gen. 1:5) and of the first man quickly following suit (Gen. 2:20), we see the Lord changing the names of key figures in salvation history to mark life-altering moments or to signal divine promises (e.g. Gen. 17:5, Jn. 1:42), we hear of God’s command that we should revere His name and not take it in vain (Ex. 20:7), and we cherish the promise that our own names have been written down in the Lamb’s book of life (Rev. 20:15).  Clearly, from a Biblical and Christian perspective, the substance of a thing and what you call it are linked – names indeed matter.

And so we come to the matter at hand.  Should the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in North America and my own denominational family, change its name?  With apologies to my many non-SBC readers who perhaps don’t really care, allow me to dig in.

If you are just joining us, let me try to get you up to speed.  Last year, SBC President Bryant White announced that he was forming a volunteer taskforce for the purpose of studying changing the name of our denomination.  Essentially, White called upon the taskforce to figure out whether or not changing the name would be a good idea, make suggestions as to a replacement, and determine the financial and legal ramifications of such an action.  A taskforce of 18 leaders representing various aspects of the denomination was assembled and set to work, completing their project and bringing a recommendation to White this past December.  That recommendation remains enshrouded in mystery for now, awaiting its “reveal” at the upcoming (Feb. 20, 2012) meeting of the SBC’s Executive Committee.

Meanwhile, Southern Baptists big and small are weighing in on the issue.  As you can imagine, a fair number of voices (often from the South) have expressed concern and, at times, outright opposition over the idea of changing what has been our denomination’s name since its founding in 1845.  The Tennessee Baptist Convention has even gone so far as to adopt a preemptive resolution opposing the idea.[1]  The concerns being raised essentially fall into three main categories. 

The first two have to do primarily with logistical issues.  There have been many voices criticizing the process that White has taken in raising the issue, a process they describe as “top-down.”[2] Fearing controversy, these critics proclaim that the proper place for this issue to be brought forward and debated is on the Convention floor.  However, as White has done nothing outside the parameters of his authority as the duly elected president of the SBC and since ultimately any action on a name change will indeed be decided at the Convention, this line of criticism appears rather moot.  Somewhat related are those who raise financial and legal concerns over the issue.  These fear that a name change would be terribly expensive and could force a dramatic restructuring of the denomination.[3] Of course, as I’ve already mentioned, studying such ramifications was a key part of what White had asked the taskforce to do in the first place.  Certainly whatever proposals are brought forward will consist of more than just a catchy name scrawled on a scrap of paper.  We can (and should) expect a thoughtful and detailed plan of action which Southern Baptists will then be free to either approve or reject.

The most passionately held concerns, however, seem to center on the idea that the term “Southern Baptist” has come to mean something of significance.  We are told that the label stands for Biblical integrity, conservative theology, an unwavering commitment to missions and evangelism, and strong family values.  One SBC pastor has declared that “to take ‘Southern’ out of our name would be to water down our theology.”[4] But this idea is simply incorrect. “Southern” means “Southern” and has no inherent theological significance.  In reality, it stands for the region of the United States in which our denomination was born and points unmistakably to the unfortunate historic circumstances that conceived it.

And this is what brings us to the reasons why the SBC should indeed change its long held name.  For one, holding on to a name that is inextricably tied to a region (i.e. the U.S. South) suggests a smallness of vision unworthy of the calling that we have received and effectively perpetuates missiologically shallow thinking which will pose severe limitations to our ability to faithfully participate in the fulfillment of God’s “Great Commission”.  We are not called to the South, we are call to the world.  We are not from the South, nor does mission today flow exclusively from South to North or from the West to the rest of the world.  We now find ourselves firmly enmeshed in a new era of mission from everywhere to everywhere and our denominational brothers and sisters are from every state and practically every nation.  We must come to recognize that the planting of Baptist churches in New York and Chicago, Duluth and Boise, Khartoum and Kathmandu that are “Southern” is not only difficult to achieve, it is antithetical to our cause.   We are called to incarnate Christ, to make disciples, to raise up indigenous leaders, and to bring the Kingdom of God to bear on families, communities, cities, and societies. The extent to which we instead try to import the “Southern” identity and heritage along with its assorted cultural and historic baggage to various non-Southern mission fields, is the extent to which we fail in our global missions mandate.

Rev. Michael Allen, Senior Pastor of Uptown Baptist Church in Chicago and member of the taskforce assigned to study the possible name change agrees, “We have long outgrown the regional geography signified by our name.  By God’s grace, a lot of hard work, and faithful giving to the Cooperative Program, we have grown into an international ministry.  We are one of the largest and best mission organizations – planting churches and making disciples all over the world; yet we find that many people outside the Southern states do not readily identify with the SBC and they tell us it is because of the ‘S’.”[5]

Indeed a recent Lifeway study seems to support this.[6] Most Americans believe that Southern Baptist Churches are not for them; only 10% would consider visiting a church if they knew that it was Southern Baptist; and the majority of unchurched people in the country have an unfavorable view of Southern Baptists. Beyond the American landscape, we must also bear in mind the connotations and implications of the term “Southern” in international mission frontiers such as Sudan, India, the Korean peninsula and elsewhere where loads of unintentional meanings might be brought to mind by the term.  And for my readers from the US South who still can’t grasp exactly why the term “Southern” might be an obstacle and hindrance for those outside the South, consider what one Alabama pastor confessed:

“Being a Southern Baptist isn’t a problem in Fairhope, Alabama.  It is a proud thing.  But if we were to say the ‘Yankee Baptist Church’ here, that would be a real turnoff.”[7]    

But Michael Allen goes on to point out that for some, the “S” in the SBC stands for our denomination’s “sordid past”.  The Convention, says Allen, “was founded in part due to the split between Baptists in the North who wanted to free the slaves and Baptists in the South who wanted to keep the slaves.” For Allen, the term “Southern” is a powerful symbol of past sins which should be removed.  “Isn’t it interesting,” he adds, “that whenever God did a great work in the lives of his saints he often changed their names?” Fellow taskforce member and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary President Dr. Albert Mohler agrees, “There is much to celebrate in the heritage of our beloved denomination, but there is also a deep stain that is associated with slavery, the nation’s sectional division prior to and during the Civil War, and the legacy of racism.  If these issues can be resolved, even to any significant degree, by a name change, a Gospel-minded people would never hesitate to consider such a proposal.”[8] Honestly, when the issue of slavery is brought into the equation, the name change question appears to be a bit of a no-brainer.  If the Southern Baptist Convention is serious about racial reconciliation today, the voices of our African-American brothers and sisters must be heeded on this issue.

When SBC President Bryant White assembled his name-change taskforce last year, the driving question for him was, “Do we have any unnecessary barriers in reaching people for Jesus Christ?”[9] That the retention of the term “Southern” in our denomination’s name is such a barrier is a fact beyond dispute.  As we have seen, it is descriptively inaccurate, missiologically limiting, and irreparably stained by a sinful past that we must not forget, but must nevertheless move beyond.  Writes Mohler, “No Gospel-driven movement of churches would want to retain any preventable barrier to faithful and effective evangelistic and church planting efforts.”  And with this, we cannot help but agree.  Even in the face of great costs or unforeseen consequences, prayerfully moving forward with a name change is the right thing to do for the cost of retaining such unnessesary barriers to our faithful participation in God’s global mission of redemption would surely be far greater. Names indeed matter, and the Southern Baptist Convention’s must change.

---

[1] Wilkey, Lonnie (Nov. 16, 2011). “SBC Name Change Opposed by Tenn. Baptists”, Baptist Press. http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=36581

[2] Smietana, Bob (Sept. 23, 2011). “Southern Baptists Consider a Name Change to Broaden Appeal”, USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-09-21/southern-baptist-name-change/50491954/1

[3] Lemke, Steve (Sept. 23, 2011).  “The SBC Name Change: Why and Why Not”, SBC Today. http://sbctoday.com/2011/09/23/the-sbc-name-change-why-and-why-not/

[4] Associated Press (Dec. 8, 2011). “Southern Baptists Study Possible Name Change”, Fox News. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/12/08/southern-baptists-study-possible-name-change/

[5] Lorance, Cody (Feb. 3, 2012). Personal Interview with Michael Allen.

[6] Lifeway Research (2011). “Perceptions of Faith Groups: Survey of Over 2000 American Adults”. http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_FOR%20EDIT/111207_FullSBCStudy.pdf

[7] Hoffman, Roy (Feb. 16, 2012). “Southern Baptists mull whether ‘Southern’ still fits” The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/southern-baptists-mull-whether-southern-still-fits/2012/02/16/gIQAqltKIR_story.html

[8] Mohler, Albert (Sept. 20, 2011). “Will the Southern Baptist Convention Change its Name?” Conventional Thinking. http://www.conventionalthinking.org/2011/09/20/will-the-southern-baptist-convention-change-its-name/

[9] Associated Press (Dec. 8, 2011). “Southern Baptists Study Possible Name Change”, Fox News. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/12/08/southern-baptists-study-possible-name-change/

The Illinois Baptist: Should the Southern Baptist Convention change its name?

Just by way of announcement, the most recent issue of the Illinois Baptist is out and features several pieces related to the possible Southern Baptist name change. My own piece is presented in a kind of point / counterpoint fashion in the issue. I encourage you to check it out and let me know your thoughts. Lord willing, you will hear more from me on this issue in the coming days/weeks.

The Illinois Baptist – February 13, 2012 : Should the Southern Baptist Convention change its name?: "Shakespeare famously declared, “A rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.” However, if we called them “poisonous death blossoms” I doubt many of us would venture a sniff. The point is that it is fundamentally wrong to claim that names and naming are insignificant. We read of God naming things at creation and of Adam quickly following suit; we see the Lord changing names of key figures in salvation history to mark life-changing moments or signal divine promises; we hear of God’s command that we should revere His Name and not take it in vain; and we cherish the promise that our own names are written in the book of life. Clearly, from a Biblical perspective, names matter. And so we must ask: Should our Southern Baptist Convention change its name?"

Building Bridges: Perspectives on Baptist Unity (Reviewed)

WARNING: If you are not a Southern Baptist, you might find the following very uninteresting.

Here from the seclusion of my secret personal retreat getaway, I was able to polish off the little book by David Dockery and Timothy George on Southern Baptist unity.  The book is entitled Building Bridges: Perspectives on Baptist Unity [link is to free e-book version!] and weighs in at a mere 64 pages.  In short, let me say that I found the book to be powerful, insightful, and the kind of thing that I hope and pray is embraced broadly throughout my denomination.

Why did I read this book?

Baptist Faith & Message

Ordinarily, many of you know that I spend my energies writing about missiology, contextualization, Hinduism, diaspora and the like.  So, you may be surprised to find me reading a book about Southern Baptist identity.  However, these days I find myself with more and more of a voice among my denominational brothers and sisters.  I train and supervise new SBC church planters; I help to lead one of the largest local Baptist associations in the country; and I pastor two Southern Baptist churches.  Very recently, I've also been invited to serve as a part of a new Southern Baptist North American Mission Board project called "Send Chicago".  Send Chicago consists of a coalition of about 18 missionaries, pastors, and other leaders who are tasked with seeking to develop strategies for church planting in Chicagoland.  I've been to a couple meetings thus far.  Actually, it was the most recent one that stirred in me a desire to read Building Bridges.

What does it mean to be Southern Baptist in Chicagoland?

During our most recent coalition gathering -- the first official one -- the question was asked, "What does it mean to be a Southern Baptist church in Chicago?"  After a bit of discussion, there was a followup question, "What makes Southern Baptists different from other Evangelicals in Chicago?"  This second question was immediately met with an answer from a member of the group that just about made me fall out of my chair, "We preach the word of God!" Astonished, I wondered if as a group we were actually suggesting that only Southern Baptists were preaching the word of God.

My contribution to the ensuing conversation was a challenge that we not make "planting Southern Baptist churches" the end for which we labor in mission.  Rather that we make our focus extending God's Kingdom, reaching people who don't know Christ -- you know, that which Christ actually calls his people to do.  We will plant SBC churches as a means to that end.  I shared with the group that it wasn't the building of our denomination that got me out of bed in the morning, but the building of Christ's Kingdom.

Well, I certainly didn't have the last word and the rest of the conversation around the room on the topic was anything but decisive.  We have much work to do -- that we must do.  Theological, missiological, racial, economic, political, historic, traditional, and ideological elephants abound, stomping around the room, begging to be talked about.  And the question that rang out in all of the discussion that day, that spontaneously emerged from the rather chaotic proceedings and then sort of lingered there was this, "Why are you Southern Baptist?"

For me, the answer comes very quickly from my heart.  It is a family thing.  Not that my biological family was Southern Baptist.  No, but I came to know Christ in the Southern Baptist context in Oklahoma.  Michelle, Jon, Becky, Boyd, Dan, Jim and many others who established, brought me up and mentored me in the faith were all Southern Baptists.  I was baptized, licensed, and ordained and sent out as a missionary by Southern Baptists. And, I should say, I love standing in the tradition of Lottie Moon.  So, it is my heritage and my family.  We live in a culture of leavers and I have been encouraged to jump ship many times over the years. But in spite of the many, many problems I see in our huge denominational family, I just don't believe that leaving is right, helpful, or godly.  I believe we must "test all things" and "hold on to what is good" (1 Thess. 5:21) and try our darnedest to fix the rest!

But, still, what does it mean that I am a Southern Baptist?  Are there reasons besides loyalty to a family and heritage that keep me Baptist?  The answer is yes, but I don't want to spend any real time on that today.  Instead, I want to point especially my Baptist readers to the book Building Bridges.  I commend it to you and believe that God would have the SBC embrace the message therein.  The call that Dockery and George have made is to renewal rooted in a "retrieval" of our historic roots as Baptists, as Protestants, and as Christians.  They call for a renewed Baptist unity (in-house) as well as a "candid ecumenism" of conviction in the service of unity in the universal Church for the sake of world evangelization.  Two quick quotes are due here.  First, regarding Baptist unity:

"We must recognize that Southern Baptists have historically reflected considerable diversity.  While we do not hold out doctrinal uniformity as a goal, we do call for renewed commitments to the inspiration, truthfulness, and authority of Scripture with an accompanying commitment to a hermeneutic of acceptance over against a hermeneutic of suspicion, as well as a re-establishment and reaffirmation of the Gospel center" (p. 33).


Regarding ecumenism:

"A model of dynamic orthodoxy must be reclaimed.  The orthodox tradition must be recovered in conversation with Nicea, Chalcedon, Augustine, Bernard, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, the Pietists, and the revivalists. In sum, our Southern Baptist identity must be rooted in the consensus fidei of the Christian Church . . . . We must take seriously the biblical call to unity in accord with the Nicene affirmation of the oneness and universality of the Church" (p. 33).


If you are a Baptist with an identity crisis, read this book.  It will help you.  If you are being bugged by Baptist elements that think you just aren't Baptist enough, read this and memorize some of its pithier quotes.  I think it is just right on at so many points.  For the record, there is good mention of issues related to the "Conservative Resurgence" and Calvinist v. Arminian disputes.  When you finish the book, you should feel that the conversation has just begun however.  Much more needs to be discussed.  The issue of race was barely touched.  Gender isn't really mentioned.  Sticky subjects like alcohol use, church polity, and "speaking in tongues" were not specifically referenced.  Again, we have much more work to do, but I am thrilled that Dockery and George have boldly and insightfully gotten the ball rolling.

[P.S. - Actually, I noticed that this book came out in 2007.  However, free copies of it were distributed at the most recent associational meeting of Chicago Metro Baptist Association.  That was the first time I saw it.  I'm happy to do what I can to give the worthy title a little more attention.]

How Different Denominations See Each Other (illustrated chart)

Just for fun today . . .

Southern Baptists are Considering a Name Change

Have you heard the news?

The Southern Baptist Convention is now considering a name change. At the linked to article points out, this isn't the first time. Motions have been entertained at the annual convention multiple times before. However, this may be the furthest into the discussion we've ever gotten.

I definitely support this idea. "Southern Baptist" is too regional. Nearly as bad as something like "Church of England in South Africa" or "The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod South Korea". It always has felt kind of silly to be planting "Southern Baptist" churches in Chicago, particularly among diasporas (migrant peoples). I don't even bother trying to explain "Southern Baptist" to most of the people I work with. It is difficult for me to imagine what this would be like in other nations. In particular, what is it like to be a "Southern Baptist" missionary in Northern Sudan or North Korea?

Further, I support the choice of bringing Pastor Micheal Allen on to the task force that will study the possibility of changing the name of our denomination. Micheal was a fellow on-site participant at Cape Town 2010 and is the pastor of the inner-city and multi-cultural Uptown Baptist Church in Chicago. I have a tremendous respect for Micheal and the ministry he leads and believe that he had a very good handle on what is going on both within our local and national denominational life as well as in the global body of Christ as a whole.

Now, what names will be suggested, if any, remains a mystery. I have read: "Orthodox Baptist Church" (which is kind of dumb), "Evangelical Baptist Convention" (which is better), "Worldwide Baptist Convention" and simply "The Baptist Convention." "International Baptist Convention" has actually been proposed and rejected in the past.

One person quipped in support of the name change: “I think they ought to change the name to the International Baptist Convention,” he said. “Then at some point - when we get ready to start mission work on other planets - we could switch to the Interstellar Baptist Convention. … That way, the initials would stay the same and we wouldn’t even have to change the logo.”

Well, the process should be interesting. If the name is going to change, it must be approved by two consecutive Conventions. That means the earliest possible change wouldn't be until after the 2013 annual convention. That's only if a proposed name is suggested and approved in 2012 -- which, let's face it, isn't going to happen. My prediction is that the name will change but not until 2015.

Here's the link to the news article:

Illinois Baptist State Association: Home: BP: IL Baptist appointed to SBC name change study committee

Highlights From Global Christian Blogosphere

Today I want to provide some links to some of the most interesting stuff I've seen posted around the web recently.  I'd like to start doing this regularly.  Let's see.  Let me get right to it:

• The Deity of Christ Debate (Pt. 2) - Produced by the Jewish Voice Broadcast, this four-person debate is between 2 Trinitarians and 2 Unitarians. Only brief clips are provided here and they're broken up by pleas for financial support by JVB, but what is there is good.  I particularly enjoyed one moment when James White whipped out his iPad and utterly silenced Sir Anthony Buzzard who had been misrepresenting the Hebrew of Psalm 110.
• Graham Crackers, Silverware & Rocking Chairs - Christian Historian Maxie Burch had a very interesting post a few weeks ago.  In it he shows how American Christian sectarianism has been responsible for giving us "Tony the Tiger".  Seriously.
• From the Lausanne Movement Blog - there is a seemingly never-ending stream of good, inspiring stuff coming from this blog.  I suggest checking out 3 brief videos. One is something you may find useful in your own church. It features several church leaders from around the world saying the Lord's prayer in their heart languages.  Another gives some behind-the-scenes insight into the table groups at Cape Town 2010.  I have had many conversations with Lausanne delegates and leaders.  Another yesterday confirmed yet again that the use of table groups at the congress was the most universally appreciated and valued component of the entire event.  I believe there is a tremendous lesson for the Church in this, so check that video out.  A third video is simply an inspiring highlight video from the congress as a whole.  Finally from this blog, if you have participated in the congress in person or online, I suggest taking a look at Jon Hirst's posts (pt. 1, pt. 2) about debriefing.  
• 10 Things I Learned About Myself at Cape Town - Mary DeMuth is a fellow U.S. Lausanne delegate that I met in Dallas and then saw again several times in Cape Town.  I like this post. She wrote another featuring 20 things she learned about God in Cape Town.  
• From the Lausanne Global Conversation - Just yesterday, my good friend and co-worker, Talargie Tafesse and I were commenting about how deeply impressed we both are with the missiology of Latin America.  Neither of us really have anything to do with Latin America, but the more I get to know about missions and missiology arising from that region of the world, the more convinced I am that God is doing a truly remarkable thing.  On that note, I commend to you this video of Samuel Escobar and Rene Padilla sharing at Cape Town as two of the great fathers of Latin American missiology.  Also, preparations are getting underway for the U.S. Lausanne follow-up meeting in Orlando, Florida in April 2011.  Information is posted here. I will also point you to one of the most powerful presentations of Cape Town, this one on the subject of HIV/AIDS.
• Cell Phones and the Brave New World of Hyperinformation - I'm always encouraged to see the Church engaging this incredibly important information .  John Armstrong shares some information stats here.  I also really like what John says about contextualization and Native Americans in this post.
• How to Plant a Church - Ed Stetzer featured this ironic video on his blog. I thought it was funny.
• From Answering Muslims - as usual, the Acts 17 folks have dug up some mind-blowing stuff to share with us.  Check out this article about British schoolboys who were punished in school for not praying in Islamic fashion.  And then there is the stunning "raisin-defense" from ABC news that David Wood capably responds to.

Okay, so that's what I have for you today.  Hopefully going to get some more posts written for the coming days.  I trust these will keep you busy on the web for a while.

Blessings!