Q & A about a Possible New Convention                                        

by T. C. Pinckney                                                                                      Vol. IX, No. 6, June/July 1996

     On 16 September at 2:00 pm conservative Virginia Baptists will gather at Grove Avenue Baptist Church, 8601 Ridge Road, Richmond, for the annual Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia (SBCV) meeting. Everyone with whom I speak expects that again there will be a motion, debate, and vote on whether to declare ourselves a state convention separate from the Baptist General Association of Virginia. Here are a number of questions which have been raised about that possibility, and my best shot at answering them.

Q. What approval is necessary from the Southern Baptist Convention?

A: Short answer, none. After the BGAV constitution was amended at the November 1994 annual Baptist General Association of Virginia (BGAV) meeting, the 200-plus most active and committed conservative churches found themselves largely disfranchised (for example my church was reduced from the maximum 15 messengers to 4 or 5), Baptists not being a supine people, it was clear that opinion favoring a separate state convention would grow and consequently I posed this same question to the president of the SBC Executive Committee, Dr. Morris Chapman. In turn, he referred the matter to the Executive Committee's attorney, Jim Guenther, who examined it in detail. After careful scrutiny of the SBC constitution and by-laws, the decision was that no formal action on the part of the SBC Executive Committee or the annual June SBC convention is necessary.

     That surprised me. It was not what I expected. Like most Banner readers (I suspect), I anticipated some formal acceptance would be required. Let me explain the rationale.

     When a new Southern Baptist church forms, the interested folks get together, discuss it, and take a vote. If the majority favors becoming a new church, they decide on a name, send a check for the Cooperative Program to their state convention and they are then eligible to elect messengers to participate in the business of the SBC. There is no vote by the state convention or the SBC accepting that new "member.”

Q: But churches do have to receive formal approval by the local association, right?

A: Right. However, a church does not have to belong to a local association to affiliate with the state convention or the SBC. On page 390 of the 1995 Virginia Baptist Annual is a list of twenty churches which are affiliated with the BGAV but not with a local association. It turns out that the process for forming a second state convention in the same geographical area is analogous to forming a new church rather than to a church applying for membership in a local association.

Q: But isn't there a formal recognition process to determine the number of trustees a new state convention receives on each SBC agency?

A: Yes, there is, and it is described in SBC Bylaw 32. (The constitution and bylaws are printed in every SBC Annual. In the 1995 Annual Bylaw 32 is found on pp. 17-18.)

Q: Then doesn't it stand to reason that the SBCV would have to fulfill the same requirements?

A: At First blush that would seem right, but let's look carefully at the wording of Bylaw 32. In section (1) the Bylaw reads, "When the cooperating Baptist churches in a state or defined territory have fifteen thousand (15,000) members, an initial application may be filed for representation on ..." Sections (2) and (3) deal with more representation as the total number of members of "cooperating Baptist churches" in the state or defined territory increases. Section (4) specifies that the application shall be filed with the Executive Committee. Section (5) instructs the Executive Committee to make a recommendation to the next annual SBC meeting. Sections (6) and (7) address the appointment of two members of the Committee on Committees and nominations to the Committee on Nominations.

     Note first that Bylaw 32 Section (1) does NOT say "When the cooperating Baptist churches in a state convention ..." but rather "in a state or defined territory".

     Second, note that the total number of members of Southern Baptist churches in Virginia remains the same whether those churches are organized into one, two, or half a dozen state conventions.

     Third, consider that if every additional state convention received full representation (one trustee on each board) when its total church membership reached 45,000 [see Bylaw 32, Section (3)], a state with a large Southern Baptist population could manipulate the process by dividing and subdividing into many "state conventions" until it came to dominate every SBC agency. For example, Virginia with approximately 600,000 Southern Baptists theoretically could subdivide into 24 state conventions and have 24 representatives on the SBC Executive Committee instead of the present three!

     Fourth, the SBC constitution Article III states, "The Convention shall consist of messengers who are members of missionary Baptist churches cooperating with the convention ..." The significant point here is that neither local associations nor state conventions send messengers to the SBC, but only local churches. Each level of Baptist polity is autonomous.

Q: Well, if there is no formal approval of a second state convention “in a state or defined territory," what would the process be and what kind of recognition would occur?

A: When and if the SBCV votes to declare itself a separate state convention [Note: Which occurred 16 September 1996. TCP], that declaration and the continued submission of our Cooperative Program donations to the SBC comprise the definitive act. It would obviously be appropriate to inform the SBC Executive Committee (EC) via a letter addressed to the President, Executive Committee, Dr. Chapman. As noted above, no vote of acceptance or approval by the EC or the June SBC meeting is necessary, but one would expect that Dr. Chapman would acknowledge our action. It would not be his function to approve or disapprove.

     Recognition of our new status would occur in various, often implicit, ways. For example, the SBC Annuity Board can only conclude agreements with state conventions. Thus, once the SBCV assumes that position, we can proceed to negotiate a written arrangement with the Annuity Board to handle the retirement contributions of staff members of churches affiliated with the SBCV. Once that agreement is operating, while it is in no sense a formal recognition, implicitly it acknowledges our new status. A similar, written arrangement is required with the Home Mission Board, and it will likewise implicitly recognize our position. There are other small ways which will reflect the change; for example, monthly the SBC EC issues a summary of Cooperative Program receipts. Currently, SBCV donations are included under the catch-all category "Churches/Miscellaneous." Once we are a state convention it would be appropriate for the summary to list "Virginia: BGAV” and "Virginia: SBCV" on separate lines. The Foreign Mission Board only concludes "partnership" arrangements with state conventions. Until we become a convention the SBCV can participate in "projects" but not partnerships. Once we are a state convention we will be able to engage in a partnership. All such acknowledgments would be the natural consequences of our being a state convention, not approvals. Nevertheless, collectively they would testify to our new status.

Q: what about trustees on SBC agencies; how would they be selected?

A: In exactly the same way as at present. The SBC president appoints two people from each "state or defined territory" to serve on the Committee on Committees. The Committee on Committees nominates two other people from each state or defined territory to serve on the following year's Committee on Nominations. The members of the Committee on Nominations are elected by the June convention. During the next year the members of the Committee on Nominations from each state (Note: NOT from each state convention, but from each state) choose individuals to nominate to the following June convention to fill all trustee openings from that state.

     In a state with two conventions, all the nominees could come from churches affiliated with convention A; all could come from churches affiliated with convention B; or some of the nominees could come from churches affiliated with A and some from churches affiliated with B.

     My view is that the personal qualities of the individuals should determine who is nominated, not the convention with which their church is associated. My recommendation would be that the Virginia members of the Committee on Nominations seek out qualified nominees some of whom would be members of SBCV churches and others of BGAV churches. It would be unfortunate and unwise were all BGAV (or all SBCV) church members to be ruled out by fiat.

Q: Won't it impose an unnecessary burden on local churches to have to make a decision between the BGAV and SBCV all at once?

A: This question is based upon an assumption (that the decision must be made “all at once") which is mistaken. Whenever the SBCV votes to become a separate convention, some churches will be informed and unified enough to decide right away to align only with the SBCV or to maintain their affiliation with the BGAV. Other churches will want to dually align by sending part of their Cooperative Program gifts to one and part to the other. Probably a number of churches will want to wait until the agreement with the Annuity Board is concluded before joining the SBCV. Other churches will need a longer period to inform themselves, learn about the issues, discuss matters, and vote; that may well take a year or more in some cases. Just as not all Christians make a profession of faith at twelve, it would be unrealistic to expect all churches to arrive at final decisions simultaneously. Whatever schedule is suitable for each church will, I believe, be fully acceptable to the SBCV.

Q. Can churches which want to join the SBCV continue to support those BGAV programs in which they have confidence?

A: Some churches which want to align with the SBCV may well support strongly one or more BGAV programs (for example, the Children's Home) and may wish to designate funds for such BGAV programs through the SBCV. That is perfectly acceptable. Upon receipt of each donation, the SBCV treasurer sends the contributing church a simple form to use with their next check. That form includes preprinted lines where the church may indicate any designations to the SBCV, the SBC, Lottie Moon, Annie Armstrong, The Baptist Banner, and "Other." A church may use the "Other" line (and add additional such lines) to specify other ministries compatible with SBC and SBCV mission statements.

     Hopefully the above Q's & A's are helpful. No doubt other questions will arise. If you pass them on to me, I will do my best to answer them.