It is a fight between theological conservatives vs. ultraconservatives for control for control of the Southern Baptist Convention, which guides fourteen million people. A great ‘reckoning’ in the Southern Baptist Convention is about to take place (msn.com)
There are internal fights concerning systemic racism, sex abuse, and a growing exodus of African-American pastors, and the article I linked to indicates that no one is sure how this will all play out, only that it probably end up with more support for the Republican Party, no matter which faction comes out on top.
“The share of White Southern Baptists who identified as Republican was once the same share as White United Methodists who identified as Republican from 1998 to about 2008. Ryan Burge, an assistant professor of political science at Eastern Illinois University, said around 2008, Southern Baptists began to shift. The share of White Southern Baptists who identify as Republicans went from about 50 percent in 2008 to about 71 percent in 2018, pulling much further to the right during Barack Obama’s presidency and into Trump’s tenure.”
What do you think will come of this, and will it give Republicans enough power to overcome the current problems they have?
I don’t think that the leadership guides anyone much. That’s not the Baptist way. If the leadership swings a different way than the membership swings, the members will leave. What seems to be happening is that the membership has swung hard White, and the leadership is struggling to keep up.
It does seem that recent occasional isolated Baptist incremental movement to the left on issues like institutional racism, limited support for some social justice causes, and quietly giving some women authority over men in the church hierarchy has awoken and angered their core constituency. Big surprise.
Yeah, I saw a piece where the conservative (white supremacist, misogynist) leadership arm of the SBC said “we have to appeal to the base.” And my thought was “you lead a religious organization - you lead according to the principals of your faith. If the base moves away from that, then they aren’t you.”
But what do I know. I grew up Catholic and moved away from the principals of it, so I left. And the Catholic church doesn’t change much to respond to its members.
Didn’t the Southern Baptist Convention split off from the rest of the Baptist movement in the first place over the question of slavery? If someone specifically identifies as “Southern Baptist”, rather than as just “Baptist”, I have to wonder why that is.
There is some level at which a religious organization needs to appeal to people, to put its message in a way that people will understand and not cause unnecessary division. But talking about a “base” sounds like the organization is trying to function as a political entity. Or is just worshipping Mammon (i.e. they are willing to change their principles for money).
It would be one thing if they thought their theology was incompatible with this new stuff—that they thought God said no. But to say they’ll go along with the sins of their people seems to be saying the quiet part out loud.
Specifically, that preachers be allowed to own slaves.
The primary aim of co-operation was to financially support missions: the secondary aim was support training, and the tertiary aim was to support certification. If the North controlled certification, they would control the pool of preachers from which the South could select, and the pool of people eligible to become preachers.
This was partly the result of changes in southern baptist churches: the church had been freemen rather than capitalists, but as it grew, it included the wider community, including rich owners.
I still go by the name by parents gave me: it wasn’t a choice like @Melbourne.
But, having said that, traditionally many Baptist churches were ‘closed communion’: you had to be a member of the local congregation to fully participate. Many Baptist churches that are not SB are still closed-communion. So one of the many things that SB now means is that you are likely to be welcome in any SB church.
That strikes me as one of the biggest ironies. Religious conservatives are huge on the notion that “the right thing is the right thing, and public majority opinion doesn’t have a thing to do with it - we must swim against the flow when need be and stand alone when called for.” But ultimately, they really do depend heavily on majority opinion - it’s just whether it’s the majority of their flock (as opposed to the majority of secular outside opinion.)
I think that perhaps the reason the SB have swung hard White is because people are leaving the congregations so fast. Perhaps they aren’t going to be in a position to help anyone. I could be wrong.
“Baptist” is a generic term covering a range of beliefs, as this branch of Protestant Christianity has repeatedly split and schismed over issues ranging from Arminianism vs Calvinism to whether it is biblically correct to have musical instruments accompany the choir. Far more than just historical attitudes towards slavery separates the Southern Baptists, Primitive Baptists, Free Will Baptists, National Baptists, American Baptists, Missionary Baptists, Landmark Baptists, Full Gospel Baptists, Reformed Baptists, etc., etc., all of which fall under the umbrella term “Baptist.” Someone who identifies specifically as Southern Baptist is a person who adheres specifically to one particular statement of faith (the Baptist Faith and Message of 2000, which is an SBC document).
Yes, exactly, many denominations based on many issues. And the specific issue the Southern Baptist denomination is based on is slavery. You would think that, with so many Baptist denominations to choose from, a Baptist wouldn’t have any trouble finding one that suited their views, without the slavery part.
Heck, the Chicago Metro Baptist Association kicked out Cornell Baptist Church in 1978 for appointing a female deacon. Ironically, two of the association officers (treasurer and youth outreach director) were members of Cornell, so they also effectively fired two of their volunteer staff.
Here’s the current version of Baptist Faith and Message; I must have missed the part where it talks about slavery, so would you care to point it out?
Slavery WAS the issue that divided the Northern and Southern Baptists in the 1840s, but the two groups have developed along different theological lines since then. The American Baptist Churches USA (the major descendent of the Northern Baptists) are not “Southern Baptists without the whole slavery thing”; major points of difference between the SBC and ABCUSA today include biblical literalism, the role of women in the family and in the church, congregational autonomy, and sexuality/LGBTQ issues.
The Landmark Baptists split off from the SBC, as did the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, so if the SBC is forever tainted by the association with slavery, so are they. For that matter, the largest predominantly African-American Baptist groups, such as the National Baptist Convention and the National Missionary Baptist Convention of America, descend in part from black churches that (withdrew from | were kicked out of) the SBC during Reconstruction.
The Southern Baptists are likely to see more and more splintering. It’s what we are seeing in other denominations, too. I’m in the United Methodist Church. And currently, there’s a wave of disaffiliations in the UMC. Churches are leaving over the sexuality issue, mostly traditionalist churches who want to chart a more conservative path.
My own church is going to vote on disaffiliation in the next month. And I’m worried that our congregation will probably approve leaving the UMC, because our congregation is dominated by conservatives. I don’t want to be part of MAGA Methodist. So, if this disaffiliation happens, I’ll probably leave our church and find another place to worship. I’ve always like the UMC because it’s a big tent type of church. It allows some disagreements & leaves room for interpretation. And it doesn’t jam politics down my throat. I can be a Democrat or a Republican, and feel comfortable in the UMC. But like alot of our society, it’s becoming harder and harder to have a big tent in anything. People want to be clubs, churches, and consume media that puts them in proximity to people who think just like they do. So, the conservatives are leaving the UMC.
Religion sure ain’t what it used to be, is it? I think Obama becoming president pushed a lot of politics and race into religion, especially the Southern Baptists. The hard liners are almost a cult now, at least to me. They don’t seem to have learned much from that Bible they are always toting around. Trump just pushed them further down the road of racism, and race in general. Let’s not leave out the sexism inherent in these hard line religions either.
I think that when we talk about Southern Baptists, we have to differentiate between the White churches and the Black churches. I grew up in Mississippi and Alabama, so I know them well. As a Catholic, I thought the White churches were not at all for me, but the Black churches were great! Totally different vibes.
The Southern Baptists have been trending ultra-conservative for decades, even before Obama. But it appears that some of them are starting to push the envelope (at least relatively speaking). I predict that they will splinter. Might take a while, but they’ll find something to split over. It might be the women pastor thing.
Sorry to re-open it, but this fits much better here than in the religious threads in the Pit. I’m glad that it was voted down, and interested to see what happens next. It made me realize yet again that organizations are not monoliths.