SBC Executive Committee disfellowships four churches

The wonder is more that the situations with these churches have been known for years (at least one case since 1998), but only now did the Exec committee take action (in the case of much older statutory rape or sex offender claims, I wonder if a church would be expelled if a known self-admitted accessory to murder were serving as pastor, i.e. the apostle Paul himself).

What would be more telling would be a SBC disfellowshipping of all the CBF churches out there who don't support the SBC Cooperative Program, who set up their own giving system and mission board, and who similarly advocate much the same regarding homosexual acceptance as well as feminist pastoral leadership and many other liberal/social viewpoints.

 

right on the SBC website:

FAQs - SBC.net

"Frequently Asked Questions
.....
Can women be pastors or deacons in the SBC?
.....
The Baptist Faith and Message (BF&M)...says...'the office of pastor is limited to men'....The Southern Baptist Convention also passed a [no woman pastors] resolution in the early 1980s....However, the BF&M and resolutions are not binding upon local churches. Each church is responsible to prayerfully search the Scriptures and establish its own policy."

 

This seems to mean, at the least, that whoever answered that question would say that churches could not be disfellowshipped for having women pastors and/or deacons. At least that is how I read the statement that each church can establish its own policy.

Is it just me, or does it seem odd that the SBC cannot/does not make their doctrinal statement binding upon local churches, while they can make a proposed amendment binding that has not actually been affirmed by the messengers (i.e., not official according to their own rules since it must be passed in two successive annual meetings, but has only been passed in one)?

 

Back in 2000, SBC messengers approved changes to the Bapt. Faith & Mess. with the understanding that it was NOT to be "a binding or governing document on Southern Baptist churches and their members":

Baptist Press June 14, 2000

"In answer to debate coming from the floor, members of the study committee repeatedly defended the preamble, as well as the entire document, as a statement of belief and not as a binding or governing document on Southern Baptist churches and their members."

"Committee members cautioned the press against misunderstanding...noting that the convention's vote is not binding on local churches. 'We don't have the right, the authority or the power'...[Adrian] Rogers noted....'It is not a creed. It is a statement of what most of us believe'."

 

The Kentucky Baptist Convention had previously already disfellowshipped the pro-gay church in Louisville in 2018, long before the Exec Comm just acted.

 

Aren't each of these independent in their own sphere? They are not bound by the actions of the SBC EC, are they? Or maybe that is just an assumption on my part.

 

I appreciate you’re keeping us apprised of information on the SBC. Thanks, Rev.