“Neither fish nor fowl” is an old saying which means something that doesn’t fit in any category under discussion, doesn’t really fit into any one group, or is difficult to describe or understand because it doesn’t fit the concepts available.  In that sense Mainstream Alabama Baptists is neither fish nor fowl.

            I am still amazed that so many Baptists have a misconception of who we are or what we are about.  I was talking to someone last week that was convinced we are part of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.  We are not.  We aren’t part of any other Baptist group or organization. We are independent.

            In that so many have a wrong idea of who we are, we have considered changing our name.  But change it to what?  “Historic Baptists” would not do, for we are quite up to date.  We even use the Internet and blogs.  Likewise “Old Time Baptists” carries negative overtones of church discipline and blue laws.  “Traditional Baptists” is likewise out because that terminology has come to denote worship style, and we are across the board on that.  “Baptist Baptists” is nonsensical and redundant.  We chose the name “Mainstream” for we are where the majority of Baptists have been throughout 400 years of history.

I’ve looked favorably on “Generic Baptists” but that would not be correct either.  Individually, we all identify with one group of Baptists or another.  In reality, most of our directors attend a Southern Baptist Church, or serve as a minister in a Southern Baptist Church, churches which send money to the Cooperative Program.  So what kind of Baptists are we?  Look at the affiliations and you see that overall we are Southern Baptist people.

Some ask why then are we are critical of the Southern Baptist Convention.  Mainstream Baptists came into being after the adoption of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000.  We spotlight areas where the convention, or any other body of Baptists, or any high profile Baptist individual, departs from historic Baptist principles.  If that is perceived as criticism, we are guilty.  For example, Baptists have always claimed no creed but the Bible.  The BF&M 2000 claiming to be “an instrument of accountability” is a creed.  No matter how some seek to wiggle word around the fact, a document whose teachings must be accepted is a creed.  You must decide whether pointing out that the SBC has become a creedal convention is criticism

When a high profile Baptist such as the late Doctor W. A. Criswell declares that the pastor is the “ruler” of the church, we must insist that Baptists have historically taught that the congregation is the ruler of the church, based upon the Bible’s teaching of the priesthood of the believer and equality of all believers.  The pastor is a servant leader.  This may be cumbersome for some mega churches, but it is Baptistic.

When Baptist Chief Justice Roy Moore places a ten-commandment monument in the state judicial building, we remind everyone that the government cannot promote or “establish” religion. Judge Moore may “acknowledge God” as much as he wishes.  He may witness, preach, erect monuments on private property, and do all sorts of things because of the religious freedom we enjoy in this nation.  What he cannot do is use his high judicial position, granted to him by the voters, to promote a religion, although he and I both accept and honor the Ten Commandments.

Some express to me the idea that a “good” Southern Baptist will not criticize the SBC.  In truth, voices of dissent have been silenced by fear.  When a Baptist has no freedom to question the actions of his brothers in Christ, he ceases to be a Baptist.