Candle in Search of Darkness

[Dave Roberts]

[KeithE]

Interesting thread and great article by Bean (who I have never heard of before).

Antagonists (like poverty, mass incarceration, fundamentalists, ecological ruin, income inequality, homophobia) can be a rallying points no doubt. But I’m wondering if they can be expressed in corresponding positive goals (“give us today our daily bread”, rehabilitation, “the Spirit gives life”, sustainability, sharing community, equal rights) that will play better with people (young or old).

My son has voiced his opinion on this matter and has found positive feedback from his well-to-do, mostly conservative Methodists congregrants when he expresses his social issue concerns positively (he’s the associate minister and does a lot of preaching lately). He is also the head of the Board of Directors for the Interfaith Missions Services (IMS) here in Huntsville. There he says expressing the issues more head on and negatively is the best approach there.

[Sandy]

I think "A Candle in Search of Darkness" can be translated as "An Organization in Search of an Identity."

When you walk through the door of most Baptist churches, the denominational affiliation is usually pretty easy to locate. There are logos, programs and ministries, literature, and sometimes even posters on the wall that link the church to whatever Baptist organization it belongs to, from the Southern Baptist Convention to ABC-USA. And if you can't tell from those things, you could probably ask the first person you encounter in the hallway, and they will know. My wife and I, in our travels and visits to churches when we were involved in a CBF supporting congregation, had trouble finding that evidence in the vast majority of CBF supporting churches we visited during that time. A church might be listed as a supporting congregation on the CBF website, but there's no logo or specific literature to identify the church as such, and the various partner ministries are not always part of an individual congregation's network of support. We also found that in most CBF churches we visited, few members of the congregation are aware of that. In churches that also remained supportive of the Cooperative Program, we found that to be the predominant identifying factor. And other than the church we belonged to at the time, I'm not aware we visited another that had severed its ties from the SBC.

The "Texans" in the CBF often get unfairly considered and blamed for pushing the organization to the right. First of all, the Texans in CBF are not the only ones in the fellowship who are conservative on social issues. Second, the core group which was involved in founding CBF was led by Texans, and the executive leadership of the Fellowship since its inception are Texans. As budget support has dropped off steeply, dependence on large, individual contributions has developed, and most of the heavy hitters who have dropped a lot of cash are Texans. All of that is going to have an effect on the philosophy of the organization when it comes to social positions and theological perspective. Texas Baptists have a structure in which they can operate denominational cooperation and even theological identity while still remaining conservative and yet distanced from the SBC. The BGCT is three times the size of the CBF nationally, is conservative socially and theologically, and yet offers churches a way to place their identity at some distance from the SBC if they so choose. If CBF moves too far to the left, it will lose most of its Texas support, and I don't think it can survive in its current form without that.

How long will the "progressives" (for lack of a better term) stay with a CBF that doesn't appear ready to move to the left on issues such as homosexuality or even into primarily a social ministry as opposed to missions and evangelism, which seems to be what the Texas Baptists are pushing for? What I'm hearing, and reading, is that there seems to be a push to move more to the left, and that sitting on the fence where it is now is increasingly becoming unacceptable.

[Dave Roberts]

Maybe it's time for someone other than a Texan. Of course, Cecil Sherman spent much of his pastoral career in Georgia and North Carolina before returning to Broadway, so he was only a Texan by birth, education, and a bit ot his life. Dan Vestal had also been outside the state of Texas to serve in Georgia. I like to visit Texas, but I certainly wouldn't want to settle there forever.

[Big Daddy Weaver]

It's not really fair to speak of "Texans" as if they are a monolithic bloc.

Texans are diverse.

Many key leaders in the CBF serve churches and organizations located in Texas.

And yes, some of the strongest critics of the CBF (or "cautious CBFers") are Texans. Some were quoted in the Baptist Standard article that Sandy linked to.

The Texas landscape is complex, no doubt. The Standard article doesn't really hint at that complexity and diversity.

The dividing line might be revealed in what Baptist organization do you primarily identify with?

Some identify primarily with CBF. Others identify first with BGCT, then CBF. OR, BGCT first then CBF or SBC second.

My wife and I, my parents and many of my friends are members of DIFFERENT churches in Central Texas that identify first with CBF and are not overly involved in BGCT. At those churches, you're not likely to hear a critique of CBF. And I don't know how we're defining "progressive" these days. But not one single Baptist church in my area is "welcoming and affirming" or liberal in any meaningful sense.

The CBF isn't moving to "the left." I don't know what that even means. As I've said earlier, I think eventually CBF will change its policy. But, I don't think that's on the near-future agenda. It seems doubtful that there will be much change over the next year or two.

I don't see a push to the left. The Sexuality Conference came and went. Where's the push? Where's the movement? The coalition to address some issue?

I hope these recommendations and task force report that were adopted in Fort Worth turns out to be a positive thing. I hope we get an Executive Coordinator that has the experience and ability to inspire, challenge and lead. My personal favorite for the job is Suzii Paynter. But there are other candidates that would be great fits too. I think the committee will recommend an excellent candidate.

I do hope thought that we can get a Coordinator and get a successor to Rob Nash sooner than later.

[Stephen Fox]

Great job helping with the coruscation of Vestal's pilgrimage. I too had concerns, aesthetically with Bean in a cursory read of his misgivings.
BDW has done well gettin to the greater truth of the matter.

As an aside to BDW, see my note on Truett Camp in another forum at this site. I am encouraging my Independent Baptists brethren to get a copy of Durso's bio of Truett. I think they may do it.

[Sandy]

[Dave Roberts]

If you look at the SBC as well, Texas lobbies for its share of everything, especially for officers and for executives. Nothing new here, and the CR was a Texas event as well--Pressler and Patterson came from where?

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Journalism that relies on "some" to make a very strong, authoritative statement is not the best form of journalism.

Read the conservative GetReligion website - which offers critiques of religion coverage in the media - and you'll see many instances where that type of reliance on "some" to support an argument is chided as low-quality.

Like I said in my previous comment, the Texas landscape is complex and CBFers in Texas are quite diverse on this and various issues.

I'm pretty sure that prominent CBF leaders from Texas (not BGCT leaders) would likely disagree with the tone and implications of some of these statements coming from Texas Baptists (some of which are not invested in CBF in any meaningful way if at all...)

In light of that complexity and diversity, but the Mississippi River (East-West divide) narrative is misguided and overly simplistic.

The person hinting that there's a movement afoot is not even CBF.

There's simply no movement afoot. And if there is a movement, it's pretty sorry movement. I heard little if anything about gay rights while in Fort Worth beyond reaffirmation that the Sexuality Conference went well.

I do agree with you though Sandy about the "we're the big dogs." There's a bit of Rove-esque quality to what's going on here with gay rights being used as a wedge issue.

But I will say, I don't think CBF is going to be bullied. Look at the search committee. It's a good group - not the types that can be bullied other than perhaps by the Baugh family

[Stephen Fox]

Baughs are good people. Thank about it every time you walk the steps of Truett Seminary in Waco.

BDW; I think it well past time for the Baylor Folks to be takin a strong look at the tension between Charles Pickering Allied Defense Fund and the BJC.

WEave it through Rove's political incest with Richard Land and see what you come up with.

Also take a good look at the Sean Wilentz review of LBJ in tnr.com

Oh, I know what it was now.

See my LBJ thread in Public Policy or History and Heritage. We need to talk.

[Sandy]

[Ed Pettibone]

Aaron when I read where you wrote above, "There's simply no movement afoot. And if there is a movement, it's pretty sorry movement. I thought immediately of the many SBC pastors who in 79 - 80 - 81 and on, where saying of the
takeover " Oh it is nothing! Just a few malcontents from the right". And when those malcontents started changing things some of our moderate friends said "It's nothing really , just a normal pendulum swing, it will swing back soon." In 1990 some realized there would be no swing back, the oft stated analysis was "The pendulum is broken". Fact is the pendulum has continued to move - to the right. That movement gained strength by waving the flag of inerrancy, the movement forming within CBF to make homosexuality acceptable waves the flag of "justice", It is an attractive rallying point. I am not persuaded that they correctly define justice.

[Matt Richard]

[Haruo]

[Matt Richard]

[Haruo]

Much improved.

[Tim Dahl]

I wonder if the "perceived movement" isn't coming primarily out of Mercer.

When I think about the (very few) liberal baptists I'm friends with, they seem to come out of the southern east coast. I would say they remind me of a "President Carter" model of being baptist. Sure, some of them may be ministering in TX now, but this isn't where they started.

Personally, I would like to see a strong commitment to church starting at home, and invigorating a stronger emphasis overseas missions partnerships between churches and unreached people groups. I think the second part has been done fairly well. However, maybe not so much on the first.

I too would like to see a stronger emphasis on evangelism. Going thru Howard Payne, then Truett Seminary; it wasn't until I reached the pastorate that evangelism really began to take on meaning. Not only are people going to hell, but they are living in a very real hell at the present time. Their need for Christ looks as a gaping wound as I see them go about their day to day routine around me.

I used to hope that the CBF would take a lead in the missional movement, but not so much anymore. I remember speaking with one CBF representative (a couple of years ago, I'm sorry I forgot his name), who was taking a lead in that area. First he told me that he originally wasn't that thrilled about it, and then secondly he told me that he often told churches that being "missional" was what they were always doing anyway. For those in the middle of the missional movement, that sort of stuff makes us cringe.

Personally, if the CBF goes the way of welcoming "and" affirming, that would be to much for me and my family. I would end up with no true national identity as a baptist, and just stick with being a texas baptist. I don't want that, but that is a very real possibility.

Tim

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Regarding Mercer, I don't think so.

Now, if you're more progressive theologically and/or politically, you're going to definitely be more at home at McAfee than Truett. I actually don't know many truly liberal Baptists involved in the CBF. Although, I do know liberal Baptists - some are involved with the Alliance and BPFNA. I'm personally left of you on sexuality questions, Tim. But I'm familiar enough with liberal Baptist groups like Baptist Peace Fellowship to know that folks like myself and others in the CBF would not fit in well there at all.

The Task Force Report - adopted in Fort Worth - made clear that CBF is going to take on a revised role in the future. We're moving away from any drift towards top-down. Based on the presentations I saw, CBF in the future will be an organization that serves primarily as a facilitator, linking churches and individuals with partners, etc. So, a CBF-wide programmatic effort on evangelism (or insert emphasis) seems unlikely and not necessarily congruent with the new revised mission/role as facilitator.

I know some wished that CBF would have been in the church planting business. But we haven't been able to offer funding to any of these personnel (missionaries) that we've commissioned in recent years. So, I'm not sure we really ever had the financial resources for that type of effort.

I think the CBF and its churches/partners will go a "Third Way" with regard to homosexuality. The old models of condemning homosexuals and disaffiliating with gay-friendly churches (BGCT, SBC) and public welcoming & affirming stances (BPFNA, Alliance of Baptists) are just that...old.

I think CBF will find a different way to address this issue and we'll have an easier time doing so since we're not a full-fledged denomination and are moving away from a centralized approach.

[Sandy]

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: Aaron I believe you are very much on target with your view of the direction CBF is heading.

It has always been my understanding that CBF's purpose centers on facilitating (connecting churches and individuals with resources on an as needed basis) rather than on operations (designing and conducting long range programs).

I have been associated with CBF from it inception and in the first 8 years was affiliated with 5 different SBC churches as we moved around. Only one of those churches is still SBC, the others are CBF and CBF/ABCUSA . As of 1998 we changed denominations when we Joined and ABCUSA church where eventually Trudy was Ordained into the pastoral Ministry in 1992. This Sunday The Burnt Hills Baptist church is having a reception to celebrate the 10th anniversary of that event. During that time we have been active in the Baptist Fellowship of the NE and she served one year as the moderator of that group. Also we have attended all but one CBF national assembly in that time but have not been in a CBF church. In her send pastorate one couple did goo with us to a BFNE assembly. Last year the Church where she now pastors (the 227 year old, Burnt Hills Baptist Church in Burnt Hills, NY Note BHBC predates the ABCUSA) hosted the BFNE Annual Meeting. But we have only one denomination that is ABC-USA. We Tithe at BHBC but a part of our offerings go to CBF and CBF affiliated partners. Also we use Baptists Today's Sunday school lessons in our adult class. Our church has a tradition of making a yearly gift to the Pastors choice of an Educational Institution ( usually it has been the Seminary that the Pastor attended, the last two years Trudy has asked that this gift has gone to Central Seminary rather than the SBC School where we both graduated.)

We find CBF to be a great resource but should it go further toward becoming a denomination we would have to re-examine our relationship.

And Sandy, our immediate past National Moderator of CBF who has suggested a need to restudy the current policy is a graduate of SBTS. I am not sure where TiM D., may have gotten the idea the the movement he sees is coming from Mercer. We have attended three of their Preaching Consultations over the past several years and I have have heard no great emphasis in that direction. Not even any strong hint, although through other connections, I have been aware that some in the room where "Welcoming and Affirming" in the fullest sense of that phrase.

And while some of the other Seminaries, Baptist Studies Programs, and Divinity Schools with whom CBF partners may admit homosexual students Wake Forest is the only one that I am sure does so as a matter of official policy. I am not sure about Richmond but of their graduates whom I am well acquainted it seems to be a mixed bag.

[Sandy]

[Neil Heath]

Sandy, I'm pretty sure Passport is a totally independent entity, not CBF controlled in any way, although many of its participating churches are CBF affiliated.

Neil

[Ed Pettibone]