News & Events

Dear Editor,

 

            Thank you for the hard work you do in reporting the news of Southern Baptists throughout the state of Tennessee. You keep me informed, and for that I am grateful. I’m writing in reaction to your editorial, “Random Thoughts About the Baptist Faith & Message.” I’ve been pastoring in the TBC for five years now, and to date this is the longest editorial you’ve written in the Baptist & Reflector. I wish I could say that I concur with your opinions, but I must be frank by admitting that I don’t. For just a few moments, I’d like to run through your editorial and point out some areas of disagreement. 

My first point of disagreement came after reading this statement: “There are some within the Tennessee Baptist Convention who are gung ho on making Tennessee Baptists pledge allegiance to the 2000 Baptist Faith & Message.” I take exception with this statement for a couple of reasons. First, you employ the use of some military language by charging “some” with being “gung ho.” Your language seems to indicate a spirit of militancy among those whom you accuse, almost as if they were religious extremists. Further, I haven’t heard anyone asking Tennessee Baptists to “pledge allegiance” to the BF&M. That is simply an untruthful statement, and thus it is very regrettable.

            Also, I noticed that at least a couple of times you mentioned that there are some Tennessee Baptists who don’t want to “sign” anything. Again, I’m wondering who has asked any Tennessee Baptist to sign something. You may be using the word “sign” as a synonym for “affirm,” and if so then I think you have chosen another poor choice of words because the statement simply isn’t truthful. 

            Later in the article, you say that “there are some within our state who feel strongly that Tennessee Baptists who serve on committees or boards of trustees need to publicly affirm the Baptist Faith & Message.” I find it odd that someone would have trouble with this, especially in light of the fact that TBC messengers publicly affirmed their affirmation of the BF&M at the 2006 annual meeting. It seems to me that if Tennessee Baptists were to ask their leaders to publicly affirm the BF&M, they’re not asking those leaders to do anything that they themselves haven’t already done.

            You also correctly pointed out that some nominated for service by the Committee on Boards indicated a response of “haven’t read” when they were asked about the BF&M. After speaking with one such nominee who indicated a response of “not read,” I asked if he was encouraged to read the BF&M. After telling me that he had not been encouraged to do so by the Committee on Boards rep who contacted him, I told him where he could find a copy online (www.sbc.net). He assured me that he would download a copy, read it, and that he would call me back. Within one week, I got a phone call from that individual. He assured me that he gladly affirmed the BF&M and he even thanked me for encouraging him to read it. He even wondered why the Committee on Boards rep had not encouraged him to read the doctrinal statement. That is a question I’d like to know the answer to myself.

            You went on to say, “I don’t know most of the people who didn’t affirm the statement and I won’t even try to speculate as to why they didn’t. Neither should anyone else.” While I agree that brothers and sisters in Christ should not allow themselves to be governed by speculation and assumption, some questions do come to mind: Is doctrinal accountability a non-issue? If it is not, then is it wrong for Tennessee Baptists to ask those nominated for service about whether or not they affirm our doctrinal statement? I think not. In fact, asking such questions will help us to avoid speculation and innuendo.

            In your editorial, you also mentioned that seven of the names offered up by the Committee on Boards will be challenged. I’d like to know how the editor to the B&R is able to gather this type of information. Certainly, that type of information is not available to those of us who are rank-and-file messengers to the TBC. If there were substitute nominees being offered to the Committee on Boards, those names would’ve been given to that committee’s chairman. Has the editor of the B&R been in conversation with the chairman of the Committee on Boards? If so, one only wonders why the chairman would’ve felt compelled to share this type of information with the editor prior to the annual meeting. All of this suggests that there might be a bit of strategizing done behind closed doors in Brentwood. I hope that such is not the case.

            You also stated that “if anyone is challenged, it should be based on several factors, not just one’s refusal to affirm a confessional statement.” If that statement is true, then there are a multitude of individuals who would be eligible for service. For instance, a “Tennessee Baptist” who believes that there are multiple paths to God could very well be a candidate for service, so long as he/she comes from a church with a strong history of Cooperative Program giving. It is also quite possible that someone could be selected for service who denies the complete omnipotence and omniscience of God. One could also understand how a Baptist could be nominated for service who believes that God has called women to pastor local churches. If one can’t be refused a place of service based simply on the fact that they don’t affirm the BF&M, then any of the aforementioned examples could become reality. But, if it is acceptable to use the BF&M as a means of doctrinal accountability, then each of the potential examples would be eliminated from consideration.

            I also felt that mentioning the practices of the SBC in your editorial was an attempt at diversion. Simply stated, the messengers to the TBC can’t control what happens at the annual meeting of the SBC. When we gather together in Kingsport (or anywhere else for that matter), we can only determine what the course of the TBC will be. Maybe some changes need to be made in the way the SBC drafts individuals for service, but even if such is the case, it really has nothing to do with the annual gathering of TBC messengers.

            I must also take exception with one other statement in your editorial. Your opinion is that “our committee process in Tennessee works.” I have not always found this to be the case. For instance, since I’ve been in the state of Tennessee, I have submitted the names of 8 men for service on various committees and boards throughout TBC life. Having spoken with each of those men, none of them have ever been contacted about serving the TBC, though each of them come from Christ-honoring churches whose CP giving is strong. Several others have shared very similar experiences with me. Yet, during that same amount of time, I have watched as some have rotated off key TBC committees, sat out a year, and have immediately been placed on another influential committee or board. You suggest that there are “some” who “do not really want the process to be inclusive.” Any third party bystander can tell you that the process has not been inclusive for a long time. Many qualified and willing candidates have been overlooked as a small group of individuals have rotated on and off various TBC committees and boards. If anyone has not had an interest in inclusion, it would have to be convention leadership.

            After citing many points of disagreement, I will say that I agree with you on one thing: “There are no doubt thousands of Tennessee Baptists who have never read the Baptist Faith and Message.” That is a sad, but truthful statement. It is this lack of doctrinal disinterest that has helped to place us in the condition we are currently in. Just consider where we are – we are headed toward litigation with a school that we birthed, we have just witnessed the merger of our Baptist Health System with a Catholic organization, and we have heard several other charges of theological liberalism at our annual meetings over the last several years. Perhaps all of this could’ve been avoided had Tennessee Baptists taken more seriously the command to “take heed to yourself and to the doctrine” (1 Tm. 4:16).

            My conviction is that it is time for Tennessee Baptists to get serious about those doctrines that we claim to profess. If we say we believe God’s Word, then let us stand on its truths and stop hiding behind the smoke screens of “priesthood” and “autonomy.” Only then will we all be able to move forward for the glory of God for generations to come.

 

In Christ,

Rev. Todd Stinnett

Pastor, Grace Baptist Church

Morristown, TN