In Part I, we considered the current call to change the name of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). While today’s thrust appears to be generationally-driven (though not exclusively so), it would be a mistake to assume the age of the name-change advocate plays a primary factor historically.
To the contrary, neither age nor even the theological perspective (that is, whether conservative, moderate, or liberal) stood out as the primary motive for dropping “southern” from the official name of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Therefore, as a side-note I may pick up later, beginning in 1958 and ending with Dr. Jack Graham’s proposal in 2004, with no exception I can see, the name-change focused exclusively on “southern” in the SBC. However, the move to change the name today is so bound up with other issues, that it is virtually impossible to unravel them.
And, while I am not prepared to argue the point at this time, I believe a reasonable case can be made that not only do many name-change advocates desire “southern” expunged from the SBC, but also, when all is considered, they desire “Baptist” to be buried as well.
That leaves us with “The Convention”, hardly descriptive, mind you, but pretty cool, wouldn’t you say?
Even more significantly, “The Convention” surely holds no negative connotations, cannot be accused of regionalism, and best of all, it oozes exclusive, global unity: there’s only ONE convention--THE Convention.
With that, I am…