Rift on Gay Issue May End Baptist Autonomy Tradition

Southern Baptist leaders have moved toward a break with their historic principle of freedom for local churches with an executive committee proposal that would exclude congregations that fail to take stands against homosexual activity.

“It’s an absolute departure from all previous practice,” said the Rev. Duke K. McCall, longtime statesman-educator of the 15 million-member Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant body in America.

Congregational autonomy has been a distinguishing hallmark of the denomination since its organization in this country 147 years ago. As long as a congregation contributed, it could take part in national conventions. Other than such financial cooperation, member congregations were self-governing, free to set standards and policies without having to conform to any demands from the top.

The proposal to exclude congregations that fail to oppose homosexual activity “is a minor issue in comparison with what they’re doing toward altering the basic character” of the denomination, McCall said in an interview.

The dispute arose when the denomination’s 77-member executive committee, an interim policy-making group, adopted a resolution in reaction to two North Carolina congregations that were weighing measures sympathetic to homosexuals.

Members of Pullen Memorial Baptist Church in Raleigh were considering allowing a “same-gender union” sought by a homosexual couple. Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist Church in Chapel Hill is holding discussions about whether to license a homosexual for ministry.

The Rev. Fred Wolfe, a committee member from Mobile, Ala., said the two North Carolina churches had “laid down the gauntlet to the Southern Baptist Convention.” Baptist Press said several committee members indicated they were not afraid of lawsuits if some congregations were excluded from the annual meeting because of views on homosexuality.

The Rev. James Morton of Grass Valley, Calif., cast the only dissenting vote, arguing that denominational leaders should not take actions on congregations because they are constitutionally self-governing.