The SBC has claimed for years that it has no control of the operation — and sometimes criminal behavior — of Southern Baptist churches because they are autonomous entities; they are not franchises, that is, but independent freestanding organizations which ‘cooperate.’<\/p>\n
Whether or not this is a valid claim, or a chintzy rhetorical dodge of responsibility, is hard to say. The SBC can<\/i> declare a church with LGBTQ sympathies out of cooperation and disfellowship it, and does the same if a church calls a woman pastor, but has so far failed to discipline churches which fail to respond appropriately to claims of sexual abuse at the hands of its pastoral staff. So, theology that doesn’t pass muster with the whole of the Convention is cast out, and criminal behavior is not.<\/p>\n
A Virginia lawsuit may soon decide the question.<\/p>\n
\n\u201cI have some concerns about potential liabilities,\u201d Joe Knott, a North Carolina lawyer, told fellow Baptists at an executive committee meeting in Birmingham, Ala., where the country\u2019s largest coalition of Baptist churches was conducting its annual gathering in June.<\/p>\n
The national spotlight was on the SBC as it debated how to protect its flock from sexual abusers. But Knott was also worried about a proposal for an SBC committee to conduct \u201cinquiries\u201d into how churches handle abuse allegations.<\/p>\n
Such a proposal, he warned, could weaken the SBC\u2019s argument that it has no control over its member churches \u2014 an assertion that leaders have said gives the SBC immunity in sexual abuse lawsuits.<\/p>\n
[ … ]<\/p>\n
\u201cThis idea that everyone\u2019s completely autonomous is a facade and it\u2019s self-serving,\u201d said Kevin Biniazan, one of the plaintiffs\u2019 attorneys in the case.<\/p>\n
In an attempt to counter the claim that the SBC has little oversight of its churches, the lawsuit states the SBC has had no problem exerting authority over churches when it wants to, pointing out that churches that \u201cendorsed homosexuality\u201d were kicked out of the convention.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Meantime, more and more cooperating churches refuse to use the word “Baptist” in their name because the brand-name has been wrecked by the SBC’s resolute ignorance, fundamentalist-leaning theology, and sympathetic-to-Trump political activism.<\/p>\n
The SBC is in decline, and deserves to be. My guess is that it won’t be worth<\/i> suing long before the courts settle whether it can<\/i> be sued.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The SBC has claimed for years that it has no control of the operation — and sometimes criminal behavior — of Southern Baptist churches because they are autonomous entities; they are not franchises, that is, but independent freestanding organizations which … Continue reading