Voices: Response to editorial on constitutional amendment

Amid a sense of deep concern, I find myself smiling even as I write. Isn’t it interesting how we Texas Baptists can read the same document, whether it be God’s word or our organization’s constitution and bylaws, and come out with such differing viewpoints?

Respectfully, to Dr. Mahfouz’ comments and the latest Baptist Standard editorial by Eric Black, I would like to offer my perspective as the Executive Board chair and as a lay person serving as chair of the Constitution and Bylaws Task Force.

Opportunity to be fully informed

First, I appreciate the Baptist Standard reminding readers the Baptist General Convention of Texas has published an explainer and a redline version of the proposed amendments to the BGCT constitution and bylaws.

The editorial notes “the proposed changes are not being made in the dark nor are they being pushed through behind closed doors.”

To that end, I want to make sure all BGCT annual meeting messengers know the Constitution and Bylaws Task Force will be conducting a breakout session at 8:00 a.m. on Monday, Nov. 16, prior to the vote on the constitution.

The goal of that breakout session is to discuss the changes and to allow messengers to ask questions that will be answered clearly. This allows all messengers to cast a fully informed vote. This is the exact context where we can fully dissect and discuss these issues. I hope the breakout session will be well attended.

I also appreciate the editorial’s clarification that the authority of the Executive Board to remove a congregation from harmonious cooperation by a two-thirds vote is not new; it has, in fact, been the convention’s practice since the messengers voted for that to be the process a decade ago.

This is the first constitution and bylaws revision since that 2016 vote. The proposed updates to Article VII, Section 1 codify a process messengers asked the Executive Board to do and that has worked well for the last 10 years. I see the proposed amendment as a clarification and documentation of a process already approved by the messengers.

Where we disagree

I do not completely agree with the word choice describing the change of having the Executive Board receive churches into harmonious cooperation as an “expansion” of the Executive Board’s authority. At least, not in the way it is being described.

Currently, the constitution and bylaws are completely silent as to how a church is received in harmonious cooperation with others in the convention. Neither the messengers nor the Executive Board have a process for receiving new churches nor have they voted on receiving new churches. As a result, the onus of determining whether a new church meets the criteria for harmonious cooperation has fallen on BGCT staff.

The suggested revision would move that responsibility to the Executive Board and include a more refined and clear process for receiving churches.

It is the responsibility of the Executive Board to remove churches from harmonious cooperation by a two-thirds majority vote. Therefore, common sense suggests they should also be the ones to receive churches.

Currently, BGCT messengers do not have a direct say in employment matters involving BGCT staff. They do, however, have a direct say—and vote—as to who serves on the Executive Board.

The proposed revision to have the Executive Board receive churches into harmonious cooperation is not a transfer of authority from the messengers to the Executive Board, but a formal transfer of administration and responsibility from convention staff back to the Executive Board and, by extension, the messengers.

Heart of the Executive Board

The messengers give authority to the Executive Board to act on their behalf in many ways to oversee the governance of the convention, but the messengers are always the final authority.

The Executive Board is here to serve the messengers who represent our churches. From my perspective, the very heart of the Executive Board is to serve our churches. Most of us on the Executive Board serve because we feel called to do so; thus, our accountability is to the Highest Authority.

Finally, my thanks to the editor for his kind words about the Constitution and Bylaws Task Force and our work.

We look forward to thoughtful questions from Texas Baptists at the breakout session and want every messenger to know we are committed to being transparent and forthright about each proposed change. Every revision reflects careful consideration of our churches and the convention’s history and practices.

Thank you for joining us in prayer for God’s wisdom and discernment as we seek his direction for the BGCT’s future.

Suzie Liner is chair of the BGCT Executive Board and the Constitution and Bylaws Task Force and a member of First Baptist Church in Lubbock.