Unfortunately, there is a sleeper in all of this. Whoever accepts an appointment must agree to biblical inerrancy and sign off on the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message. One always wonders what is really meant by biblical inerrancy. What about translation and interpretation errors? How can one agree to the total truth and trustworthiness of Scripture, given all of these translations and interpretations? I ascribe to the simple truth and trustworthiness of the Bible, especially its central message of redemption through Jesus Christ, but please don't ask me to sign on to somebody's translation or interpretation of some detail that might in fact be erroneous.
Moreover, there is the problem of a falsehood in the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message. This occurs in the preamble where it says not only do Baptist confessions of faith have the purpose of telling others about our faith but also are intended to serve as “instruments of doctrinal accountability.” The former purpose is well-known and true. The latter part about enforcing accountability is false.
In fact, we Baptists have traditionally abhorred the thought of anybody, including other Baptists, dictating to us what to believe. It is for us rather a matter of individual soul competency.
I believe the falsehood was purposefully placed in the BF&M to enforce fundamentalist beliefs upon the SBC. One such belief is the prohibition against ordaining women as pastors or, for that matter, as deacons, although the latter are not specifically forbidden.
The fundamentalist position is that the pastor is the ruler of the church and has authority over its membership. The traditional Baptist position is that the pastor has authority from his/her congregation to preach the Word and carry out his/her pastoral functions in recognition of a godly calling, but does not have authority per se over church members. Neither women or men pastors have authority over men and women.
Hugh W. Olds, Jr., Alexandria