QUESTION:

Is it time to rename the Southern Baptist Convention?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

As it looks toward the annual meeting in June, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), by far America’s largest Protestant denomination, faces difficult issues — new and old.

What tactics might halt its recent membership decline? Should women be forbidden clergy ordination even as assistants, educators, or chaplains? What steps might soothe racial tensions? Are churches too political this election year? And most important, how can the SBC cleanse itself from ongoing sexual-abuse scandals?

With all that’s going on, one matter is being ignored. But given the current squabbles and embarrassments, this would seem a good time for the denomination to re-brand itself with a new name.

For starters, the “Southern” monicker is no longer accurate.

Yes, some four-fifths of SBC members live in the traditional southeastern turf. But this church body is truly national, active all over the United States, and international, with many overseas staffers and connections.

Then there’s unfortunate history to overcome in which the name is enmeshed with slavery. The SBC was formed 179 years ago in a breakaway from U.S. Baptists who insisted slave-owners should no longer be appointed as missionaries. The southern branch was then steadfastly loyal to the Confederacy cause through the Civil War.

Yes, there were secondary factors in this split, including regional solidarity and the southerners’ desire to have a more centralized form of organization. But Baptists’ disagreement over slavery was the key.

Baylor wins a key victory (somehow or another) defending its stand (sort of) on sexuality

This has been true for decades: Journalists just love headlines that include Baylor University and anything having to do with sex.

More than two decades ago, it was Baylor coeds posing for Playboy. Two decades before that, it was student journalists getting fired for disagreeing with a Baylor policy that students shouldn’t pose for Playboy. Ironically, that controversy was an echo of earlier controversies about student journalists (including moi) publishing stories about sexual assaults near campus (and other hot topics).

The big idea is that sin exists at Jerusalem on the Brazos and that Baylor leaders are naive in thinking that they can do anything about that. Trust me: Some of these headlines are more important than others. Now we have this double-decker headline from Religion News Service:

Baylor University wins exemption from Title IX’s sexual harassment provisions
The private Baptist school argued discrimination complaints made by LGBTQ students were ‘inconsistent’ with the university’s religious values

As always, there are two questions that journalists need to answer when covering this fight and both of them involve religious doctrines that define this private academic community.

Question 1: Are Baylor’s “beliefs” backed by legal ties to a specific denomination and its teachings?

Question 2: Are Baylor students required to sign a “doctrinal covenant” in which they agree to support this private school’s “student code" or, at the very least, not to publicly oppose it?

The answer to both: Maybe, maybe not. Clarity on both of these questions is crucial to the Baylor left (and that is a real thing), the Baylor establishment and to Baylor’s conservative critics. It would help if journalists at RNS and other mainstream news outlets asked those questions and published the results. It’s no surprise that the best information can be found in niche Baptist-news sources.

Meanwhile, here is the RNS overture, atop a story that does not include a single sentence of material drawn from interviews with experts backing Baylor’s point of view.