Roni and I returned last night from the 2013 SBC Annual Meeting in Houston, TX, tired but happy.  It was, all in all, a good Convention that was encouraging in many ways.  I think I’ll just sum up my thoughts with some random bullet-point observations, in no particular order.

• Discussion panels have now officially become a fad.  Strangely, they seem to work well in smaller breakout sessions like the Baptist21 luncheon and Gospel Project breakfast, but not so well in the main hall, as in the discussion of ministry and family life in the Pastor’s Conference.  That’s my opinion, anyway, and the opinion of a brother I met in the exhibit hall who likewise decided to take a walk after hearing a bit of that particular panel.  (To be fair, however, my wife stayed and really enjoyed it, and I would definitely trust her opinion over my own.)

• I agree with whoever it was who tweeted that the Baptist21 lunch panel consistently creates the most interesting forum for the exchange of ideas at the SBC Annual meetings.  (I say “whoever” because I don’t want to point out the somewhat embarrassing fact that the one who tweeted it was one of the panel members.)

• Even so, a little diversity in the whole Mohler-Akin-Platt-etc. lineup wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.

• This Convention felt small, with just over 5,000 messengers in attendance (Barely up from just over 4,800 last year).  Here’s the breakdown by state, per BP:  Alabama, 258; Alaska, 12; Arizona, 186; Arkansas, 186; California, 112; Colorado, 41; Connecticut, 2; Delaware, 3; Florida, 256; Georgia, 311; Hawaii, 12; Idaho, 8; Illinois, 7; Indiana, 63; Iowa, 7; Kansas, 39; Kentucky, 226; Louisiana, 383; Maine, 1; Maryland, 66; Massachusetts, 3; Michigan, 10; Minnesota, 6; Mississippi, 293; Missouri, 181; Montana, 2; North Carolina, 276; Nevada, 30; New Hampshire, 1; New Jersey, 17; New Mexico, 45; New York, 28; Ohio, 71; Oklahoma, 195; Oregon, 2; Pennsylvania, 17; Puerto Rico 3; South Carolina, 144; South Dakota, 5; Tennessee, 379; Texas, 1,026; Utah, 9; Virginia, 173; Washington, 12; Washington, D.C., 11; West Virginia 15; Wisconsin, 5; Wyoming, 11. There were 24 messengers that were approved through the credentials process but were unaffiliated with a state convention.

• Want a little perspective on what that means?  Here’s the Annual Meeting attendance over the last 30 years:

• We were told numerous times and in numerous ways that SBC churches are in decline.  We are now baptizing at 1948 levels, when the Convention was half its size.  I kept thinking, though, that given the difference between membership rolls and actual attendees in Southern Baptist churches (as evidenced in the disparity in ACP reports) we are, in reality, half our size right now, so maybe 1948 levels is about right for the reality of how big we truly are.

• A friend emailed me playfully and said (he really was playing, by the way):  “So, you guys hate the Boy Scouts now?”  No doubt that is how this will be portrayed, though the actual discussion on that resolution reflected anything but such a caricature.  In fact, it seems to me that reading the actual resolution might be helpful for everybody, so here it is.  Please note what it does and does not say.

ON THE CHANGE OF MEMBERSHIP POLICY OF THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA

WHEREAS, For more than a century, the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) has been a values-based boys organization designed to “prepare young people for a lifetime of character and leadership,” equipping them “to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law”; and

WHEREAS, The Scout Oath contains language that is consistent with belief in God and biblical precepts that serve as the basis for Christian
faith: “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight”; and

WHEREAS, The leadership of the Boy Scouts throughout its history has restricted from membership and leadership those persons who would affect the group’s ability to advocate its viewpoints in regard to belief in God and His moral precepts; and

WHEREAS, In 1992, and again in 2000, the Southern Baptist Convention adopted resolutions affirming the Boy Scouts in their stand that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the obligations of the Scout Oath, encouraging the BSA “to maintain its historic commitments” (1992) and “to hold fast to its traditional ideals” (2000); and

WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the constitutional right to freedom of association allows a private organization, as part of its “expressive message,” to exclude a person from membership when “the presence of that person affects in a significant way the group’s ability to advocate public or private viewpoints” and that allowing homosexuals as adult leaders would interfere with that message (Boy Scouts of America et al. v. Dale); and

WHEREAS, In 2004, the Boy Scouts adopted a policy statement that said, in part, “Boy Scouts of America believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the obligations in the Scout Oath and Scout Law to be morally straight and clean in thought, word, and deed”; and

WHEREAS, In 2012, an eleven-person committee appointed by the
National Council of the Boy Scouts completed a two-year study and reported its unanimous decision that the Boy Scouts retain the current policy as outlined above; and

WHEREAS, NBC News reported in breaking news on January 28, 2013, that the BSA executive leadership, in concert with certain members of the BSAboard of directors, was poised to change the Scouts’ historic policy at its February 4–5 board meeting the following week to allow avowed homosexuals into membership and leadership positions within the Boy Scouts of America; and

WHEREAS, During the week between when news broke of this proposed policy change and the February board meeting, the Boy Scouts received an outpouring of feedback from Scouts, Scouting families, sponsoring organizations, and the American public; and

WHEREAS, On February 6, 2013, the BSA board determined that, “due to the complexity of this issue, the organization needs time for a deliberate review of its membership policy”; and

WHEREAS, The National Council of the Boy Scouts voted on May 23,
2013, to approve new membership guidelines that state, “no youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone”; and

WHEREAS, While those who embrace a biblical worldview are grateful that the leadership policy of the BSA remains unchanged, the executive leadership and certain members of the Boy Scouts board clearly signaled their desire to change both the membership and leadership policies of the BSA; and

WHEREAS, This decision of the BSA is viewed by many homosexual activists as merely the first step in a process that will fundamentally change the BSA, putting the Scouts at odds with a consistent biblical worldview on matters of human sexuality; and

WHEREAS, This decision has the potential to complicate basic understandings of male friendships, needlessly politicize human sexuality, and heighten sexual tensions within the Boy Scouts; and

WHEREAS, Many Southern Baptist churches sponsor Boy Scout troops and many Southern Baptists are involved in Scouting; and

WHEREAS, The Baptist Faith and Message states that “Christians should oppose . . . all forms of sexual immorality, including adultery, homosexuality, and pornography,” and Southern Baptists consistently have expressed their opposition to the normalization of homosexual behavior in American culture through more than a dozen resolutions over the past thirty years; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Houston, Texas, June 11–12, 2013, express our continued opposition to and disappointment in the decision of the Boy Scouts of
America to change its membership policy; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we express our gratitude for the thousands of individuals within the Scouting family and the culture at large who expressed their opposition to the BSA executive leadership’s intent to change its membership and leadership policies in regard to homosexuality, leading to the compromise recommendation it presented to the BSA National
Council; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we express our gratitude to each voting member of the National Council who voted in opposition to the policy change for membership; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we express our well-founded concern that the current executive leadership of the BSA, along with certain board members, may utilize this membership policy change as merely the first step toward future approval of homosexual leaders in the Scouts; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we call on the Boy Scouts to remove from executive and board leadership those individuals who, earlier this year, sought to change both the membership and leadership policy of the Scouts without seeking input from the full range of the Scouting family; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we affirm the right of all families and churches prayerfully to assess their continued relationship with the BSA, expressing our support for those churches and families that as a matter of conscience can no longer be part of the Scouting family; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we encourage churches and families that remain in the Boy Scouts to seek to impact as many boys as possible with the life-changing Gospel of Jesus Christ, to work toward the reversal of this new membership policy, and to advocate against any future change in leadership and membership policy that normalizes sexual conduct opposed to the biblical standard; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we encourage churches that choose to sever ties with the Boy Scouts not to abandon their ministry to boys but consider expanding their Royal Ambassadors ministry, a distinctively Southern
Baptist missions organization to develop godly young men; and be it finally

RESOLVED, That we declare our love in Christ for all young people regardless of their perceived sexual orientation, praying that
God will bring all youth into a saving knowledge of our Lord
Jesus Christ.

• At the Gospel Project breakfast, I was surprised by my own unease over the fact that nobody on the panel discussing Christ-centered preaching was over 50.  The hermeneutical issues surrounding typology could have used the wisdom of an older scholar.

• I thought the discussion on the mental health motion was balanced and refreshing, and I was pleased to see the messengers vote down amendments that would, in the words of one messenger, set us on the path to becoming Christian Scientists.

• I am always struck, at these Conventions, by the fact that mega-church pastors are not used to being told no.

• There is a way to sound self-important in just the way one presents his or her name at a microphone.

• President Fred Luter did a good job, and it was great to be present at the historic moment when an African American Baptist moderated an SBC Annual Meeting.

• A Presbyterian friend of mine who was visiting noted that the exhibit hall was “a bazaar…that was bizarre.”  Touche!

• Thank the Lord for local church autonomy, that great distinctive that makes some parts of these Annual Meetings bearable.

• So great to see so many good friends!

• Again, those looking for a mega-fracas over Calvinism in the Convention were probably really disappointed by this gathering.  It seems that cooler heads are prevailing, and we may thank God for that.  A friend from my former church, after reading the report of the Calvinism advisory committee, emailed and suggested that the bottom line, as he saw it, was “Play nice.”  That’s about right.

• The Pastor’s Conference this year…meh.

• Houston is a HOT town.  This was my third trip to Houston, and I knew that, but my it can get muggy there!

• Finally, a prediction:  if no controversy rears its head between now and next June, the 2014 Annual Meeting in Baltimore will be 4,500 or less.