The news that @JawnO’s church voted to leave the SBC should serve as a wake up call to our convention. I don’t know John personally, but I’ve benefited greatly from his ministry.

In this thread I hope to address the situation in reference to the polity of the SBC. https://twitter.com/jawno/status/1279121990255853568

It’s easy to forget that the SBC isn’t technically a denomination because the word is used so frequently in conversation about the SBC. The SBC is a convention of likeminded, autonomous churches. We share similar theological convictions and partner together to advance the gospel.

This partnership (or cooperation) is voluntary. Likeminded local churches have the freedom to enter into and forego cooperation with the SBC as they please.

[This is, in part, what separates us from a denomination. The SBC has no denominational authority over its churches.]

Furthermore, the existence of these likeminded churches is not contingent upon their cooperation. Should a church leave the SBC, all they really lose are the formal benefits and permissions granted by their cooperation.

Don’t misunderstand me, I am a major proponent of cooperation and especially the CP. I believe we are better together and are more able to reach the nations with the gospel when we pool our resources.

But practically, not much changes for local churches should they leave.

So, what does it mean when a likeminded congregation such as John’s church ( @Cornerstone_ATL)
decides to forego formal cooperation & affiliation with the SBC?

Practically, as mentioned above, not much will change. Cornerstone will continue being a gospel light in ATL, and I’m sure they’ll continue partnering with likeminded ministries such as @9Marks.

Why then should churches like John’s that leave the SBC concern us?

It doesn’t take a lot to be a cooperating SBC church: 1) be theologically likeminded, and 2) financially support the SBC.

[There is much that could be said regarding the nuances within these two points, but this simple understanding will suffice for the purpose of this thread.]

So, if a likeminded church like John’s that is financially able to support the convention willfully chooses to withdraw from the SBC, Southern Baptists must reflect and ask themselves why.

Why is a Christ-centered, God-honoring church like John’s leaving us?

Again, I don’t know John personally. His thread suggests that there are specific reasons why they are leaving and I don’t pretend to know them.

But I do know that there is a long-standing and growing discomfort among many POC planters, pastors, and members in the SBC.

I remember a conversation I had with @mtbyrdsr this past February where he voiced many of the same concerns that John addresses in his thread. John’s in ATL, Mike’s in STL. Different cities, similar experiences in the SBC.

These two POC pastors are ministering in a predominantly white convention. Their frustrations with the SBC tell us that the battle for racial reconciliation is far from over.

And, they’re right. The water’s not fine. Our convention is severely flawed. The question is, when we see churches like Cornerstone leave, are we listening to them? Are we willing to change as to not lose another?

Even though individual churches do not lose much practically when they leave the SBC, Southern Baptists lose. We lose their voice, their perspective, their agency for change from the inside, and their formal participation with us.

This should grieve us.

I love the SBC. And, it’s because I love the SBC that I say it should be a *major* concern to us that churches like John’s are uncomfortable cooperating with us.

We must listen, change, and be better.