Blind Man's Fancy

The powers-that-be in Southern Baptist life have decided and will recommend that the convention retain its original name: Southern Baptist Convention.  However, they will also recommend for those less inclined to, hindered by or offended by the word “Southern” to use the alternative moniker “Great Commission Baptists.”  The chairman of the task force considering the name change even suggested getting a trademark on “Great Commission Baptists.”

Not much matters less than what I think about all this rigmarole.  But it matters to me and that’s what blogs are for, right?

Personally, I am grateful to retain the name for all it means for good and ill.  We tow a dangerous line when we hope to fudge historical truth by the stroke of a pen.  Companies and organizations change names in order to distance themselves from an unfavorable perception.  Rather than change the character and culture of the organization, they change the name and hope we won’t remember the old one.

Haven’t we been pleasantly surprised by Domino’s Pizza of late?  Historically perceived as bad pizza, Domino’s owned up to it and changed their pizza, not their name.  They could’ve changed their name in a cheap attempt to woo some new customers.  But it would’ve been the same old pizza.  Their pizza has remarkably improved and so has the perception of their name.

For what it’s worth, Southern Baptist churches should concern themselves with changing who they are rather than what they’re named.  Having drifted from our historic theological and ecclesiological roots, we’re simply putting out a bad product.  Generally speaking, we peddle gimmicky ministries trying to woo new customers without seriously considering what a biblical, new covenant local church looks like.  We “baptize” worldly methods of building capital and have created a consumerist culture in the church.  We care more about filling the pews with customers than filling the kingdom with disciples.  In the end, are we willing to admit that it might not be the name of the Southern Baptist Convention that’s the problem,  but Southern Baptists themselves?

One of the motivators for considering the name change was declining baptisms and membership (read: loss of market share).  Last year Southern Baptist churches baptized the fewest number of people since the 1950s.  Membership dropped for the fourth year in a row.  These harrowing statistics are seen as a trend of failure.

Declining baptisms and membership would only be of such concern in a market-driven, consumeristic culture.  It is viewed as a loss of market share.  Nowhere in the New Testament do we see a quota of baptisms or church membership.  Scripture does not command we baptize more people this year than last year.  Scripture does not demand a local church be bigger this year than last.  More faithful?  Yes.  Larger?  No.  Assuming so is a failure to understand the nature of salvation itself.  God alone makes Christians.  While we remain faithful to share the gospel with anyone and everyone, God assumes the responsibility for the response to that gospel (1 Cor 3.6).  Have we considered that maybe, just maybe, God might have something to do with the numbers?

Further, have we considered that declining baptisms and membership might be a sign of improving church health rather than failure?  Again, getting smaller is only bad in a culture expecting to control more of the market.  Have we considered that maybe more churches are returning to historic (i.e. 19th-century) Southern Baptist faith and practice, being careful stewards of baptism and church membership?

Perhaps fewer churches are doling out baptisms like VBS cookies and juice.  Perhaps churches are become far more careful with baptism so that demonstrable converts are baptized.  Perhaps we’re baptizing far fewer unconverted children in the name of making true disciples.

Perhaps a declining membership means more churches are taking regenerate church membership seriously.  The SBC regularly boasts of 16.2 million members.  Yet, only one-third are actively involved in local church life.  So we created “non-active” membership to keep the balance sheet numbers high while appeasing our consciences.  Boyce and Dagg roll over in their graves.

Perhaps more churches are repenting from lying about their numbers and doing the hard work of church discipline.  Maybe they consider healthy, regenerate church members are more important than bloated rolls that offend the gospel itself.  Perhaps some churches are simply understanding biblical conversion more faithfully and therefore what it means to become a member of the local church.

Some suggested their was too much racial baggage associated with the word “Southern” that it hindered ministry to the black community.  I’ll be the first to decry and denounce the racism laced in the early Southern Baptist Convention.  Again, let’s be honest about it and recover the name through repentance rather than change the name and hope to fool people.

However, I think this motivation is simply a straw man.  Did you know that the Southern University System in Louisiana is “the only historically black university system in America”?  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. started the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, which retains a proud legacy stretching far beyond its southern borders.  The Southern Poverty Law Center serves to address the civil rights of many black communities.  Apparently “Southern” is not inherently offensive in that context.

Can we say “Southern” is a legitimate, necessary and inherent offense to black people that would motivate changing the name of the Southern Baptist Convention?  We should indeed continue to recover the name, but simply changing it to make people think we’re not racist is disingenuous.  Any perception about “Southern” is informed by the behavior of southerners.  Change the southerners and you change the perception of “Southern.”

Further, introducing an alternative nickname for Southern Baptist will be more confusing than changing the name altogether.  But seriously considering trademarking the name “Great Commission Baptists” is arrogant.  Are we to assume Southern Baptists (a.k.a. Great Commission Baptists) are the only baptists concerned about the Great Commission.  Do we corner the market on the Great Commission such that we should own the rights to it?  Doing this will do far more damage than “Southern” will!

“Owning” the name Great Commission Baptists will communicate we really think we’re the ones who get the Great Commission right and only ones who really care about it.  Why not trademark “Lord’s Supper Baptists” or “End-Time Baptists”?  The Great Commission is for the nations–any and all who leave the kingdom of this world to pledge themselves to Christ’s kingdom.  Believe it or not, that includes those-formerly-known-as-Southern-Baptists.

Let’s finally put to rest all the wasted time and energy about changing the name of the Southern Baptist Convention.  Rather, let’s devote ourselves to changing Southern Baptists.  An article quoted Ken Fentress, a committee member, pastor of Montrose Baptist Church (MD) and proponent of the alternative as saying, “”Sound Christian theology takes precedence over geography and politics.”  I could not agree more so let’s recover the “sound Christian theology” of historic Southern Baptist life.  Then we will have churches who take the gospel seriously, promote regenerate church membership and will be known again for their Jesus rather than the breadth of their programs and height of their steeples.

Shakespeare’s Juliet opined in something of a different context:

‘Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;

Unless there is a serious consideration of changing the culture of Southern Baptist churches themselves (which involves their individual members) then a convention by any other name will still smell the same.  If we don’t return to the convictions of Boyce, Dagg, Mell, etc. then it doesn’t matter what we’re called we’ll still crank out the same ministries.    Only then we’ll have sullied the term “Great Commission”!

In the historical-theological sense, we’re not Southern enough.  Having recovered the inerrancy of Scripture in the “conservative resurgence” let us now recover the sufficiency of Scripture in all faith and practice.  For what it’s worth, I say we do far more considering what it means to be Baptist in the Bible than what it means to be Southern in the marketplace.

“Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance.  And let endurance have its perfect  (Gk. teleios) result, so that you may be perfect (Gk. teleios) and complete, lacking in nothing” (James 1.2-4).

“And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature (Gk. teleios) man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4.11-13).

We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete (Gk. teleios) in Christ” (Colossians 1.28).

God’s reason for saving anyone is to make them like Jesus so that Jesus is seen as most worthy to be like (Rom 8.29; 1 Co 15.49; Phil 3.21; 1 Jn 3.2-3).  And if that is God’s greatest desire then he puts that same desire in the Christian by the Holy Spirit.  Therefore, the Christian’s greatest desire is to be conformed to Christ in all spiritual maturity.  We want to be like Jesus because God is making us like Jesus.

We’ll not be perfectly like Jesus in this life.  Rather this life is a proving ground of Christ’s worth so that when we see him we will be most prepared to worship him for eternity (1 Peter 4.13).  Until then, God is in the process maturing us so that we stand more firm in the gospel.  We will find more strength in and need for Christ who has saved us.

In one sense, spiritual maturity is like our physical maturity.  It takes a long time, daily discipline and a thousand unseen progressions.  But in another important sense, spiritual maturity is not like our physical maturity.  Maturity in this life is growing more independent from those things we were once dependent.  We want our children to grow less dependent on us, able to make wise decisions on their own, provide for their needs with their own hard work and ingenuity.  We must not liken God’s maturing us in the same way.

God is not maturing us into independence and self-sustenance.  God matures us into greater dependence on him and all he is to us in Jesus.  (Of course, that is our goal as parents as well, but we guide our children prayefully hoping they’ll “own” the same convictions).  Spiritual maturity is not the growing ability to handle life on our own, without help from God and his means of grace.  Spiritual maturity is the growing dependence on God and his means of grace.  God matures us by the decrease of self and increase of Christ, his excellencies and provision.  We mature when we grow less fearful of this world, less wobbled by circumstances and more secure in Christ, trusting all the more God’s sovereignty to bring us home safely for eternity.

But, like phsyical maturity, spiritual maturity (completeness, perfection) doesn’t just happen.  As much as we’d like otherwise, we don’t wake up one morning complete or mature in Christ.  God uses means of completing or maturing his children.  And two of those means are identified in the biblical references above.

God matures us through trials and suffering (James 1.2-4; cf. Romans 5.3-5; 1 Peter 1.6-9).  If we want to mature in Christ (and if we’re Christians, that will be our greastest desire) then we will welcome anything that serves our greatest desire.  Therefore, we consider trials “all joy” because they serve our greatest desire: being made complete in Jesus.  And James is clear that trials themselves don’t necessarily mature us in Christ, but only insofar as those trials are considered ”all joy.”

How can Christians consider terminal cancer, fatal car wrecks, miscarriages, lost jobs and house fires ”all joy”?  Because they are God’s means of serving our greatest joy: conformity to the Lord Jesus Christ, of whom we are bondservants.  The reasons why we would not consider them “all joy” is because either (1) our greatest desire is not conformity to Christ, or (2) trials are undeserved or purposeless to serve joy.  All the while God is on record, like it or not, that in order to be like Jesus we must be forced to consider the worth of Jesus over all things.  And God will have his way in the Christian soul.  Considering any and every trial “all joy” is part of the working out of our salvation, the salvation God himself is working out in us (Philippians 2.12-13).

God also matures us through the church (Ephesians 4.11-13; Colossians 1.28).  The same word is used to describe the goal of trials and the goal of the church.  The Greek word teleios (complete, mature, perfect) describes the result of both trials and the purpose the church.  Trials and the church serve the same end: our completeness or maturity in Jesus.  God certainly uses other means (Scripture, prayer) but these two are probably the least considered in considering spiritual maturity.

In fact, most often when trials come up on us we try to escape both the trials and the church!  We don’t want the pain or letting anyone see us “off our game.”  And when we do so we abandon two of the primary means of God’s grace to make us like Jesus.  As long as we stiff-arm trials and maintain a weak view of the church we will perpetuate spiritual immaturity.  We want to be like Jesus but not if it means the Calvary Road in front of everyone.

Yet, God has provided trials and the church to help us become like Jesus.  The church helps us (or should!) let endurance complete its work (James 1.4) so that we enjoy maturity in Christ.  The church must refuse to let us give up, bail out or escape trials.  Rather our brothers and sisters come alongside to help keep pace in the journey.  We shouldn’t always try to help folks escape trial, but help them remain joyful as it serves their greatest desire:  being like Jesus.

Christ’s joy was to see the Father glorified for all he is and has done in the Son (John 17.1).   Jesus left us his joy (John 15.11; 16.24; 17.13), which means our joy is to see the Father glorified for all he is and has done in Jesus.  We rejoice to be made like Jesus so he will be made much of by all those he saved.  If Christ’s joy was served by the cross (Heb 12.2) then how will trials not serve the same for us?

Let us repent from retreating from trials.  And let us avail ourselves fully of God’s means of grace to make us like the Son.  Receive trials from God with great joy and do so in the community of faith whose goal is the same: maturity in Christ.  We are all part of the exilic community, traveling together in the wilderness until God brings us into the new heavens and earth.  Until then, as strangers and aliens in this world, this journey is one big trial in itself.  Let us endure well so that the Promised Land will be all the sweeter.

I love the church.  Jesus died for her (Eph 5.2, 25) and it’s good to love those for whom Jesus died.  But she is one messed-up group of people, in large part because I am one messed-up person.

Jesus gave himself up for the church not because of who the church was but because of who he would make the church to be.  Jesus knew full well his church would never be perfect in this life.  He would have to sanctify her until the last day, when he would raise up new bodies to present to his Father (Eph 5.26-27).  We serve an illusion if we think our churches will be spotless, wrinkle-free, holy and blameless before the day Jesus presents her on that day.  It was never Jesus’ intention to create the perfect church in this age,  but to preserve a faithful people who ride the ups-and-downs of sin, pain, sorrow and joy by faith in the One to Come.

In the meantime, we are one messed-up group of people running a difficult race of faith.

The Reformers identified the true marks of a church to be the right preaching of God’s word, the right administration of the sacraments/ordinances and the exercise of church discipline.  Any church trying to hit those marks will go through some very painful circumstances.  When Jesus came on the Galilean scene, demons came out of nowhere to go toe-to-toe with the one they knew would destroy them.  Likewise, striving for and maintaining healthy churches means meeting sin and Satan in the dark alleys of human hearts.  And no one comes away without scars in that fight.

Have you considered the reason why we have thirteen New Testament letters?  They’re all, in one sense or another, responses to church conflicts.  There were no perfect churches in the NT and, in fact, we’re surprised to see some groups of NT believers still even considered part of the church!  Jesus seven letters in Revelation 2-3 were to confront imperfect churches.  Until the end of time, Christ’s church will not be what she will be when Christ gets done with her on the last day.

The ministry of Jesus invited conflict.  Therefore, true gospel ministry invites conflict in the “best” of churches.  We don’t relish the conflict, but we’re not surprised or excessively despaired by it.  In fact, conflict is often the means of testing faithfulness (2 Cor 2.9) and reminding us that we’re not There yet and therefore must keep eyes fixed on Christ.

We can ignore conflict, wanting to avoid the hard work of communal accountability to the gospel.  We let folks slip out the side-door so as to avoid any confrontation and stain of scandal.

We can exaggerate conflict, assuming Satan is successfully destroying the church.  But Satan only has as much leash as God allows.

We can understate conflict, acting like it’s not there until the cancer takes over major organs.  Suddenly a group is “led by the Spirit” to start a new church.

We can fear conflict, running from it so much that we end up being with people who are exactly like us.

Or, we can consider conflict biblically.  In the best of churches, conflict will happen.  That’s why we have most of the New Testament.  Therefore:

• We should be honest about it.  The world doesn’t need to see a superficial billboard of smiling suburbanites.  The world needs to see a community of sinners who have found Living Hope in the gospel.
• We shouldn’t be surprised by it if we’re striving to be healthy churches.  Satan has declared war on the church (Rev 12.17) and when we poke him he snarls.
• We should see it in light of the big picture.  Christ is sanctifying a global community and we’re barely a sliver of it.  Whatever conflict we face in the American church should be seen in light of the persecution of Christians in most of the rest of the world.
• We should consider conflict part of God’s means of sanctifying his people.  We still need Christ to redeem, repent and restore.
• We shouldn’t consider a healthy church the one without any conflict.  The healthy church is one who deals with conflict in a Christ-exalting, saint-loving, purity-protecting way.

While conflict shouldn’t dominate a church’s life, it will be a regular condition in the life of the church.  Such is life in the age of groaning (Rom 8.22-24).  There will always be someone(s) giving into temptation, incubating wicked thoughts, hiding secret sins, etc.  The joy of Christian ministry is not making sure everyone looks perfect, but in making sure everyone is hoping in Christ and his perfections.

We live in the age of the hope of glory (Rom 5.2; Col 1.27), knowing the day is coming soon when we will finally, and in reality, be the glorious people for whom Christ died.  Until then “with perseverance we wait eagerly for it” (Rom 8.25).