Southern Baptists helped found the Baptist World Alliance (BWA) in 1905. Since that time, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) has provided leadership and resources for the BWA that are unsurpassed by any other group.
Now as the BWA prepares for its centennial celebration in England in 2005, there is a serious question about whether Southern Baptists will remain a member of this worldwide body.
The catalyst for the question is the approval of a membership application for the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) by members of the BWA General Council in July.
The secret ballot vote for approval ended a three-year process that SBC leaders termed hurtful and embarrassing. As a result, the SBC annual allocation to BWA was reduced this year from $425,000 to $300,000. Now there is widespread concern that Southern Baptists will withdraw entirely from BWA.
During the SBC annual meeting in June, leaders assured messengers the SBC was not trying to punish BWA for considering CBF membership. When asked about relations with the BWA during his press conference, SBC President Jack Graham said the convention did not want to be an “isolationist” but desired a relationship with like-minded Baptists of the world.
But following the 75–27 vote to admit CBF, some SBC leaders said they would not be back to BWA. New Orleans Seminary President Chuck Kelley said in a press release that he thinks Southern Baptist involvement with the BWA should be “revisited.”
BWA President Billy Kim of Korea and General Secretary Denton Lotz said the “decision to accept CBF was based upon the facts that CBF met the requirements for membership. It was not a decision against the SBC. … We love our Southern Baptist brothers and sisters and want them to remain active and full participants in all our meetings.”
Southern Baptists responded by questioning the doctrinal correctness of the BWA. The vehicle for the questioning was a paper coming from a Summit on Mission in the 21st Century held in Swanwick, England, earlier this year. That conference produced a mission strategy paper called the Swanwick Declaration, which was presented to the General Council.
Southern Baptist leaders questioned why the paper omitted references to Christ as the only way of salvation. The response that the paper was a strategy paper and not a doctrinal statement did not satisfy. As a result, questions were raised about the BWA’s commitment to Christ as the only way of salvation.
In our judgment, the whole debate was needless. In an opening paper at the mission summit, Lotz declared, “Let it be very clear from the start that our message is Jesus Christ. We are here because we believe ‘that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow … and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.’ We believe that there is salvation in no one else for there is no other name under heaven given by which we must be saved.”
In the July issue of The Baptist World in a column titled, “No Other Name,” Lotz had written, “We preach Christ, not because we chose Christ, but because God chose to reveal Himself as Jesus the Christ, the Son of the living God! God’s self-revelation of Himself in Jesus and His death on the cross for the forgiveness of our sins is indeed the ‘scandal’ of the gospel. This has been the confession of the church from the first century until today.”
Lotz wrote that “All 150 leaders (gathered at Swanwick) were committed to the biblical faith that there is no other name by which we can be saved than Jesus Christ.”
That position is not a surprise for anyone who knows Lotz. He is a member of the board of directors of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, a position he could not have without a clear commitment to Christ as God’s plan of salvation. Of the BWA, Billy Graham wrote, “I enthusiastically endorse the BWA and pledge my support. I urge you to do so as well. I know of few organizations across the world which minister as effectively as the Baptist World Alliance.”
To publicly question the faith of Baptist brothers from around the world is not necessary. At the same time, when Baptists prepare a public statement about missions, it needs a clear Christ-centered statement at its core. The Swanwick Declaration, as presented to the BWA General Council, did not have that. Southern Baptists were right to seek its inclusion.
If Southern Baptists choose to withdraw from BWA, it will be a tragedy. Each needs the other. It also will be a poor example. CBF was one of three national Baptist bodies admitted at the recent General Council meeting that formed as dissenting groups from parent bodies. Also, approval came after attempts by BWA to help the CBF and SBC reconcile and after BWA spoke frankly to the groups about the tone of their rhetoric toward each other.
Still the SBC may withdraw from the BWA. If so, it will not be a doctrinal disagreement. Southern Baptists may conclude not to participate in any forum where CBF is present. If so, that could result in an ever decreasing sphere of influence and Southern Baptists could end up as “isolationists” as Graham warned.
Jesus said in Luke 12:48, “To whom much is given, of him much shall be required.” As the largest Baptist body in the world, that may include patience and longsuffering for Southern Baptists as we work out relationships with fellow Baptists at home and around the world.
Share with others: