Last week, the Southern Baptist Convention held its Annual Meeting. Gathering in New Orleans, LA, there were nearly 19,000 in attendance. Of these, 12,737 were registered messengers (messengers are similar to delegates) from 4,423 churches. During the two days of meetings, the messengers worked through a packed schedule that included changes to the doctrinal statement of the Convention and a constitutional amendment, among many other things. Southern Baptists are unique in that we have our debates over critical issues in public with the opportunity of any registered messengers to speak. This does not always make for flattering soundbites in the news and sometimes leads outside observers to think that we are contentious and in constant conflict. For those who attend the meetings and participate in the decisions, even in greatly debated issues, we generally depart the annual meeting more encouraged in the work and cooperation of the SBC. Below are some of the more significant decisions of the messengers to this year’s annual meeting.

Next week, the Southern Baptist Convention will hold our Annual Meeting. On Tuesday and Wednesday, thousands of Southern Baptists will gather in Anaheim, California, to make decisions concerning the direction of the denomination. To the outside observer, the Annual Meeting of the SBC is often misunderstood. The SBC is unlike other denominations that are governed through hierarchical authority. The SBC is comprised of over 47,000 autonomous churches that have cooperated to advance global and North American missions, theological education, and other related ministries. We voluntarily associate and are bound together by our cooperative support of missions and our adherence to the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, which is our doctrinal statement.

Each cooperating church can send messengers (similar to a delegate) to the Annual Meeting. The ultimate authority and control of the convention rest with the messengers. There are many advantages to this governance structure, not the least of which is that the messengers can act contrary to the denominational leadership when corrective action is needed. However, the messenger model also means that our disagreements, deliberations, and discussions are all done publicly. In a world where many get their news from social media, these open debates often overshadow the actual final decision of the messengers.