GetReligion
Monday, April 07, 2025

doctrine

Podcast: Did the Southern Baptist Convention just become a different kind of 'Baptist' body?

Podcast: Did the Southern Baptist Convention just become a different kind of 'Baptist' body?

Bill Clinton and Al Gore? They were once Southern Baptists and I imagine that they remain generic Baptists.

The Rev. Jerry Falwell? An independent Baptist who led a church that became Southern Baptist. How about the Rev. Pat Robertson? He was Southern Baptist, but his second ordination was totally post-denominational (with one Episcopal bishop taking part, for what it’s worth).

President Jimmy Carter was a Southern Baptist, but dropped his ties to the Southern Baptist Convention. I think journalist Bill Moyers fits that mold, too. Come to think of it, so does political science professor and pastor Ryan Burge.

So what does “Baptist” mean, with or without that whole “Southern” thing? Is it up to the individual believer, the local congregation or some kind of affirmation at the regional, state or national level? After all, there are hundreds of different “Baptist” brands and thousands of totally independent “Baptist” congregations.

These questions loomed in the background during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in). The topic was press coverage of the national meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention, which was held in New Orleans this year.

As usual, the big SBC show drew lots of coverage — especially with the dramatic appeal by the Rev. Rick Warren, perhaps America’s best-known evangelical, for his Saddleback Church to be readmitted to the national convention, even after it plunged ahead and ordained women to various ministries.

Supporters of the ordination of women lost that move — by a wide margin. Also, the Rev. Bart Barber, the establishment candidate, was easily elected to a second term as SBC president.

That being said, what was the big news here? The best way to follow the crucial decisions in New Orleans is to dig into two Religion News Service pieces. Here is a key passage from the first, by religion-beat veterans Adelle Banks and Bob Smietana:

Warren and the Rev. Linda Barnes Popham, who leads the Louisville church, each argued that Baptists don’t agree on a range of matters — from Calvinism to COVID-19 — but that hadn’t halted their ability to have a shared commitment to spreading the gospel.

R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, argued against keeping either Saddleback or Fern Creek within the Southern Baptist fold. He said the idea of women pastors “is an issue of fundamental biblical authority that does violate both the doctrine and the order of the Southern Baptist Convention.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Who gets to pin labels on the armies fighting in those good 'ole SBC wars?

Podcast: Who gets to pin labels on the armies fighting in those good 'ole SBC wars?

Once upon a time, starting in the late 1970a, the Southern Baptists Convention had a big civil war — fighting about the authority of the Bible and “biblical inerrancy,” a rather inside-baseball term that was little known by pew-folks at that time.

There were two big armies, with the gray three-piece-suit players of the Southern Baptist establishment and on the other the rebels who, if my memory is correct, sometimes wore plaid. Cut me some slack, because it’s been a long time. But this background was crucial in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in), focusing on early coverage of strife leading up to the 2023 SBC meetings next week in New Orleans.

The good guys back then called themselves “moderates” because they tended to seek compromise stances on hot-button issues — such as abortion and the ordination of women. Thus, journalists called them “moderates.”

The bad guys called themselves “conservatives” and took strong stands on the big Bible issues (with the exception, let’s say, of economic justice). Thus, many journalists called them “fundamentalists” — including some rather ordinary evangelicals who didn’t fit that f-word term.

The right said there were “liberals” all over the place and the SBC left said “liberals” didn’t exist. Truth is, there were very few doctrinal liberals around (in a seminary chair or two) who were weak in defending ancient beliefs — think the Resurrection and the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Journalists were not interested in investigating facts related to these debates, since the “moderates” said that was all, well, disinformation.

Flash forward to the present. The few remaining “moderates” have mainline Protestant demographics and often have quiet disputes about mainline Protestant-style issues (think LGBTQ+ matters).

The hot-button SBC 2023 issues are (1) how tough to be on fighting sexual abuse and (2) the ordination of women (and old issue is back).

Everyone defends biblical inerrancy (while maybe offering slightly different definitions). Everyone stands together on the big doctrinal issues. In the background, however, is an important issue — when it comes to an issue like ordaining women, does the SBC have “doctrines” or “opinions”?


Please respect our Commenting Policy

United Methodist news in the Kansas high plains raises, again, some old questions

United Methodist news in the Kansas high plains raises, again, some old questions

You know the old saying that “diamonds are forever”? In my personal experience, western Kansas is forever.

That isn’t a complaint. I’ve been driving across the Kansas high plains since the early 1980s — with more cause now that I have family in Kansas — and I have grown to love the wide open horizons. This long drive also leads to our family’s old stomping grounds in Colorado, where I’m on vacation this week.

Kansas is a real place. There’s a there, there. I have lots of friends with ties to Kansas and they love its combination of Midwestern values and access to the Wild West.

I bring this up because of a story I read last week in the Topeka Capital-Journal, with this headline: “96 United Methodist churches in Kansas, including one in Topeka, are leaving denomination.” This is another example of newspapers at the local and regional level having to handle developments in a complex, global conflict that has been raging since the early 1980s. That’s when I started covering this story in Colorado — a flashpoint from the start. Here’s the Topeka lede:

The United Methodist Church is seeing the exodus of 96 conservative Kansas congregations over theological matters, including same-sex marriages and ordaining openly LGBTQ clergy.

The words “theological matters” are, of course, disputes about 2,000 years of Christian doctrines on a host of important, even creedal, subjects. But, as always, the only specific given is LGBTQ+ matters.

Later on, the story notes that a key vote in Kansas:


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Bonus podcast: Jimmy Carter plays a big role in 'evangelical' history in America (updated)

Bonus podcast: Jimmy Carter plays a big role in 'evangelical' history in America (updated)

Apparently, it’s time for people to start taking vacations.

The Lutheran Public Radio team that produces the “Crossroads” podcast week after week is taking some time off. Thus, there is no GetReligion podcast in this slot today.

At the same time, I am headed due west with my family for a week or more. However, several weeks ago I was a guest on the Engage 360 podcast created by Denver Seminary, the campus where I taught media studies classes in the early 1990s. The topic — the legacy of former President Jimmy Carter — was directly linked to many discussions on this weblog about evangelicals, journalism and American politics IApple podcast link here).

The question, of course, is this: WHICH legacy of Jimmy Carter?

In this podcast, we really didn’t spend much time on Carter the politician — even though his arrival as a centrist Southern Democrat was important. He has continued to evolve toward more progressive positions on moral and social issues (like his party), but not to the same degree. Hold that thought.

We talked quite a bit about Carter’s impact on American evangelicalism and, in particular, the role he played in forcing American journalists to wrestle with the complex world of evangelicalism. When many evangelicals rejected the reality of Jimmy Carter the president, as opposed to the candidate, he also helped fuel the creation of the Religious Right.

Let’s start with journalism. As I have written before:

I'll never forget the night when an anchor at ABC News – faced with Democrat Jimmy Carter talking about his born-again Christian faith – solemnly looked into the camera and told viewers that ABC News was investigating this phenomenon (born-again Christians) and would have a report in a future newscast.

What percentage of the American population uses the term "born again" to describe their faith? … I mean, Carter wasn't telling America that he was part of an obscure sect, even though many journalists were freaked out by this words — due to simple ignorance (or perhaps bias).

I was a student at Baylor University at that time and, yes I was active as a volunteer in the Carter campaign.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Thinking about post-Christian Europe? The Pillar looks for God in the Netherlands

Thinking about post-Christian Europe? The Pillar looks for God in the Netherlands

There is this old saying that when America sneezes, Europe catches a cold — or something like that.

That’s true, these days, when it comes to many issues in economics and politics.

But I have always thought that this equation works the other way around when it comes to issues of culture, morality and faith. The trends we see in the European Union seem to make it across the Atlantic sooner or later. If this is true, European trends in Catholicism, and other faiths, are worth watching.

This brings us to another “think piece” for journalists (and news consumers), this time care of The Pillar, a must-follow independent news and commentary site covering many things Catholic. The headline: “Finding God in the Netherlands.”

But, before we get there, let’s pause to recall a famous 1969 radio interview, or sermon, offered by Father Joseph Ratzinger, who would eventually become Pope Benedict XVI. Readers will often find the full text under this title, “What Will the Church Look Like in 2000?” Here are two large chunks of this famous, many would say prophetic, material:

From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge — a Church that has lost much. She will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning. She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes, so it will lose many of her social privileges. In contrast to an earlier age, it will be seen much more as a voluntary society, entered only by free decision. As a small society, it will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members.

There’s more, a few lines later:

The Church will be a more spiritual Church, not presuming upon a political mandate, flirting as little with the Left as with the Right. It will be hard going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek. The process will be all the more arduous, for sectarian narrow-mindedness as well as pompous self-will will have to be shed. One may predict that all of this will take time.

This brings us to the long feature at The Pillar written by Edgar Beltran, a philosopher and political scientist from Maracaibo, Venezuela, who is doing Philosophy of Religion graduate work at Radboud University in Nijmegen, the Netherlands.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Some Catholics still embrace confession, while many more ignore this sacrament

Some Catholics still embrace confession, while many more ignore this sacrament

In the movies, the penitent enters a confession booth, kneels, and whispers to a priest behind a lattice screen: "Forgive me father, for I have sinned."

This drama was, for centuries, at the center of Catholic life. But in recent decades, the number of Americans who go to confession has plunged to a shocking degree that church leaders have struggled to explain.

But Father David Michael Moses knows what happened during Holy Week this year, when he spent 65 hours "in the box" at his home parish, Christ the Good Shepherd in Spring, Texas, and at St. Joseph near downtown Houston. In all, heard 1167 confessions.

"We are talking about a lot of sin, and lots of grace," he said. "It's about offering people help and hope. In the end, Jesus wins all the battles that people bring with them into confession. That's what confession is all about."

The 29-year-old priest began hearing confessions at 6 a.m. on April 4, as Catholics made their way to nearby office towers. He continued until midnight, with a parish volunteer noting there were 100 people in line at 8 p.m. Another priest arrived two hours later, and everyone had an opportunity for the Sacrament of Penance.

"You keep thinking: 'Do I go slow and just do my best? Do I try to speed things up?' What you can't do is let anyone feel that they were turned away," said Father Moses, a Houston native who is the son of a Baptist mother and Lutheran father who converted to Catholicism.

Hearing confessions "is hard. It's exhausting. But there is nothing in the world that I would rather be doing, right now. This is what it means to be a priest. This is about salvation and the care of souls."

As recently as the 1950s and 1960s, researchers said about 80% of American Catholics went to confession at least once a year. A clear majority said the went once a month.

Then the numbers began falling – sharply.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Global South Anglicans cut their ties to Canterbury? Maybe that's a news story worth ink

Global South Anglicans cut their ties to Canterbury? Maybe that's a news story worth ink

One of the most depressing things about being a reporter these days is trying to accept the fact that we live in a split, divided, warped news marketplace in which stories that, in the past, would have been Big News for everyone are now “niche” news items that half of our journalism culture feels totally comfortable ignoring.

This happens on the journalist “right” as well as the journalism “left,” or whatever word people are using instead of “left” these days.

This just in: One of the world’s great Christian traditions — the global Anglican Communion — ran into a wall late last week. The big idea: Anglican leaders from nations that represent about 80% of all Anglicans regularly IN PEWS — as opposed to being names on membership lists that may or may not be relevant — voted to cut the ties between Canterbury and the most of the Anglican Communion.

I’ve been watching for elite media coverage all weekend. Here is a Google News file with logical search terms. Please click that search, which was made Sunday night. What do you see? Obviously, at that moment, this was a “conservative” and/or “religious” media story.

You see, the Anglicans in the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) represent the growing (in some cases booming) churches of Africa, Asia and the Third World. They do not, however, represent the zip codes in which the major newsrooms of the Western world are located. They also do not represent the world’s richest Anglicans. Thus, to be blunt, what these “lesser” Anglicans say is NEWS is not news until the New York Times says that it’s news. Right?

With that in mind read the top of this report — long, but essential — from the venerable Anglican publication called The Living Church: “GAFCON Rejects Archbishop Justin Welby’s Leadership.”

On April 21, primates representing a large majority of the Anglican Communion formally repudiated the historic leadership of the See of Canterbury.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New question in the worship wars: Why have many worshippers stopped singing in church?

New question in the worship wars: Why have many worshippers stopped singing in church?

Anyone who has visited a shopping mall understands the Big Idea behind a food court.

"If you want Mexican food, you go here. … If you want pizza, you go over there," said Kenny Lamm, the worship ministry strategist for the Southern Baptist state convention in North Carolina. "Then we sit together and eat whatever we want. …

“The question is whether a food-court approach works if you are seeking unity while leading worship in a church."

In the latest wrinkle in what researchers have long called the "worship wars," some church leaders are asking a blunt question about the decision to trade traditional hymnals for contemporary Christian music. That question: Has the typical Sunday service become a semi-professional concert instead of a communal worship experience for all believers?

As part of his work, Lamm hears from many pastors, musicians and church members. One recent letter – which he posted while keeping the writer anonymous – combined many hot-button issues in this debate.

After four weeks of visiting a church, the writer noted that he was constantly distracted during worship by "haze machines," "programmable lights that blind the audience," concert-level darkness in the auditorium, as well as musicians wearing "ball caps," skinny jeans, "Chuck Taylor" tennis shoes and other "stage" apparel.

Many of the new songs seemed to confuse the congregation.

"The melody is unmemorable. Very few in the audience seem to know the songs either; indeed as we looked around during one of the songs, we did not see one person singing – not one," noted this visitor. "Some of the songs are so high I cannot sing them. I wish the leaders would consider the average singer! … Why does just about every praise and worship song go up an octave and double in volume halfway through, then die back down at the end?"


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Yes, this is personal: Concerning the New York Times report on The King's College crisis

Yes, this is personal: Concerning the New York Times report on The King's College crisis

I have been on the road for about 12 days now, visiting family in Kansas after speaking at a journalism conference in Washington, D.C. During that time, I have received quite a few emails asking me to comment on the New York Times story about the crisis at The King’s College in lower Manhattan.

As longtime GetReligion readers know, I taught seminars at The King’s College for five years after the semester-length Washington Journalism Center program moved there in 2014. I have friends and former colleagues at TKC and, thus, writing about this topic is quite personal.

Thus, let me stress that the following is a GetReligion commentary about the Times report — which is an important story and, frankly, quite good. It’s crucial — here’s that GetReligion theme, again — that it was assigned to a religion-desk reporter. However, the story, in my opinion, does have an important “ghost” in it, one that could be spotted by anyone who has dug into the details of recent academic and financial trends in Christian higher education.

Hold that thought. First, here is the double-decker headline on this news feature:

The Second Life of a Christian College in Manhattan Nears Its End

The King’s College, which draws students from around the country to Manhattan, has not been able to recover from enrollment and financial losses.

As is the case with MANY private colleges, before and after the coronavirus pandemic, this small college has fundraising issues, enrollment issues and then budget issues that are directly linked to enrollment issues.

To be blunt, many excellent private educational institutions are overly dependent on tuition dollars and lack the endowment funds to survive severe drops in recruiting numbers. For two decades Christian college leaders have known that they would face severe challenges after the passing of a giant wave of students from the giant Millennial generation.

Thus, Christian college administrations have been asking hard questions about recruiting and fundraising. Here is one way to look at it: The concerns of donors, church leaders and parents are not (#DUH) always the concerns of potential students. However, a Christian college cannot survive without loyal donors, church leaders and parents willing to send their children — the ultimate investment — to a specific college.

The raises a painful question: Should small Christian private schools case a “wide net,” seeking as many students as possible (period), or focus on “mission fit,” seeking students from homes and pews that strongly support a school’s core values and programs?


Please respect our Commenting Policy