Latest News on CBF Listening Sessions

[Gene Scarborough]

AGREED!!!!

[Ed Pettibone]

[Ed Pettibone]

[Ed Pettibone]

[Tim Bonney]

[Neil Heath]

[Tim Bonney]

Thank! It has been a while since I picked up a spur!

[Gene Scarborough]

Most of the "policy stuff" is more an attempt to woo converts and be PC over anything of real value, in my view!

[Tim Bonney]

[Gene Scarborough]

People who would join any church----now give them entertainment and they are happy!!!

[Tim Bonney]

[Gene Scarborough]

The gay issue is always a "flamer." Only the courageous "cutting edge" pastors approach it.

It is like the racial issues of the 60's---courageous pastors spoke out and after so 30 years people realized they were right---most places except the deep South.

[Ed Pettibone]

[Sandy]

[Tim Bonney]

[Dave Roberts]

[Sandy]

[William Thornton]

Although I share Dave's revulsion at DOMS and others who insert themselves inappropriately in local church matters, I think Sandy answers the assertion of violation of autonomy well. When the SBC, or associations, or state conventions expel churches, even inappropriately, that is an exercise of their autonomy, not a violation of any church's. I feel sure that both Dave and Sandy have a highly developed sense of ministerial ethics concerning inappropriate interference with a local church's decisions.

[Dave Roberts]

I guess the truth is that it boils down to how we interpret a violation of autonomy. When the threat is, "If you don't do what I say, then you won't be allowed to do missions with us," that IMHO violates the local autonomy. I know several churches that have left associations over the heavy-handed efforts to enforce conformity meaning that they lost a chance to work in ministries they had supported sometimes for a century or more. But, they did allow the body to leave or booted them out to go their own way. I do know of a situation in which a church may enter into a lawsuit to recover their share of the appreciation of property they helped buy for a conference center. It is an unincorporated associational body, and I'm not certain what the courts may say in that particular state.

[Gene Scarborough]

[Haruo]

[Gene Scarborough]

This particular situation had some "side politics" I did not cite:

* The Business Meeting I cited was done in total disrespect to the proper announcement in advance required
* The Pastor was a sneak and did his best to hide the church's Constitution and ByLaws from the average member
* All the aspects of "power politics" used in the SBC in 1979 was used by him
* The minority of 48% was honored in the courts of NC---all the way to the State Supreme Court
* It was a precedent in NC---and was cited in the Encyclopedia of Southern Baptists as a historic decision

The Independent-minded folks of the majority started a new church just up the road and continue to be a choice for people who want an Independent / Fundamentalist type of church.

Why should the SBC-oriented minority be forced to give up the building and church they had worked hard to establish?

Unlike the "winner take all" succcess in the SBC CR takeover, this minority retained possession of that which they sacrificed to establish!!!!

[Jerry_B]

[Haruo]

[Gene Scarborough]

If there were any of the "old hands" who left with the fundamentalist, I am not aware of them as I pastored N. Rocky Mount.

Those who did leave were sucked into his slick mechanations from his Bob Jones perspective hidden from them when he was called. Rev. Johnson was a true "wolf in sheep's clothing" as best I could tell. His main gripe was that the RSV was evil and the KJV was true. Stoke people with "their new Bible is evil" and you get a bunch of mad people knowing nothing about translation.

Ignorance + stoking = church split / denominational split / big fight bringing no honor to followers of Christ!