Autonomy redacted at SEBTS

[Gene Scarborough]

[Dr. James Willingham]

My view of this situation is that the majority vote carried the day unless the constitution called for a two thirds or three fourths vote. Baptist Church government is congregational which grew out of the understanding of the meaning of ekklesia as the Congregationalists and early Baptists understood the term from their studies. For a state convention to get involved was clearly an egregious error. The Convention and the local Association can determine their membership and exclude any who they think violate the rules for membership, but to drag the powers of the government into determine an issue in favor of what is clearly the minority is a violation of a clearly adopted doctrine of the church. The actions of the Moderates today reflect the reality that the Rocky Mount North Church majority was trying to maintain (even though they - the Rocky Mount majority - might be considered completely in error). Autonomy of the local church becomes meaningless, if another body can step in and over rule the majority vote. For about 10 years my life was dominated by ecclesiology and the study of church history. During that period I took about 3000 5x8 notecards. My aim in the beginning was to prove the Landmark sucession of the church. I proved it wrong, but I also learned a lot in the process. I learned that old J.R. Graves wrote the best exegesis of Acts 19 and the difference between ekklesia and ocklos that I have ever seen. In fact, I consider Karl Schmidt's article on ekklesia in TWNT to be seriously wanting due to the fact that he had never seen Graves work on Intercommunion. On the other hand, the answer of E.C. Dargan to the exclusivistic local church concept of the Landmarkers established beyond a doubt that there is a universal aspect to the doctrine of the church, and John Thornbury's work on the Church brought it up to date back in the 70s. Out in Missouri where I pastored for few years in he 60s we heard of the North Rocky Mount case and it was obvious that most Baptists felt the state convention was out of line with Baptist doctrine. Interestingly enough, the actions of the institutions of this state are exactly reflective of those of the North Rocky Mount church's conservative majority. Amazing how we switch poles, when the chips are down.

[Stephen Fox]

Gene's sojourn at SBC Voices for me at least is more evidence that the SBC got lost somewhere in a Dark Hole of the Semantic differential. Pressler and his acolytes and bystanders were able to take academic pursuits and McCarthy them in local church and the confusion became a boondoggle for GOP Strategy of 50% plus one Vote Majoritarianism.
So as genuine as Gene's attempts are, and exquisite as his presentation may be, it doesn't come to anything much when faced with the rhetoric of the SBC Takeover. Just look at how things play at SBC Voices. The English language doesn't persuade there. In the face of page 51 of Diarmand MacCulloch on the Book of Genesis, or no matter how logical Cecil Sherman is, if he isn't with the right party then he cannot win the vote. So Gene is tilting at windmills as I have done on many occasions.

Maybe he can take these links to SBC Voices and see what Wade Burleson can do with the brethren there; Wade having recently engaged the 7th round of the Inerrancy discussion there;

Mike Ruffin's testimony is pretty sound it seems to me. But in the end it comes down to something resembling the blood cult Newsweek magazine wrote about in 1974 when George Wallace had a political ralley at Noccalula Falls, Alabama. The SBC coagulation now is a matter of some bond outside rational discourse.

But for discussion sake, here is Ruffin in a sterling testimony:

http://onthejerichoroad.blogspot.com/20 ... ut_22.html

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: I do not have a dog in this fight but I am curious. Why is it being rehashed here 56/51 years after the fact? Is there some sort of lesson to be learned?
But now that we are here, I am wondering what became of the majority and the minority?

[Stephen Fox]

I think Ed asks a key question maybe two key questions.

At the end however the answer, the one of most realpolitik merit, where there is integrity, is best gotten at through the rubric of Susan Harding in her book of Jerry Falwell where she discusses double meaning.

Even so, I think Timothy George and Mohler have some stout questions to answer; have not to date gone through the SBC version of a Nuremberg trial in regard their role in the evolution of the Takeover.

Gene and now Ed would make better use of our time if they grounded their exploration in the heart of Susan Harding's lens

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/6781.html

[Stephen Fox]

Not yet in evidence but calling for Gene Scarborough as he brings his Emory Experience as well as his sojourn at SBC Voices to task on this matter:

http://www.religiondispatches.org/books ... mon_ground

[Stephen Fox]

http://books.google.com/books?id=V7hIui ... &q&f=false

Desperately need to read the postscript, page 270 in the link above

[Gene Scarborough]

The purpose of my post was to show clearly how you can turn black into white---given enough time and redacting! It is a partial answer as to why Hitler could take the most intellectually advanced Christians on the planet and con them into exterminating Gypsies / Jews / and mental deficients. It is a classic case of Rationalization gone amuck!

Ed --- The minority who re-occupied the church were made stronger in the conflict. The majority went up the road by 2 blocks and built a new church which has all the classic lines of columns and steeple from a Church Archtecture plan of the SS Board. The group which formed Falls Road Baptist Church is truely an independent church = its deed is in the pastor's name / they support their own missionaries / they have a Christian School / they always do what the preacher dictates.

It is a clear difference in the way each SBC church used to do it's business. Now both churches are in a transition community and are moving. N. Rocky Mount simply sold its facility and property to a growing black congregation. Falls Road has property about 6 miles north on the same road and is using it for recreation until their building sells. Neither church has solved the racial issue like most churches in the south. Megas and ghettos are not mixing!!!!

This is a classic picture of SBC doings in the 60's and it took place in the 50's. No one paid much attention to the "secrets for success" of a takeover:
(1) Count on over-strong "trust" to let religious liars sneak in.
(2) Charm and aggression hidden and presented in a proper fashion will get you conned.
(3) Some people just want to be told what to do to be happy.

The start of this whole mess was another preacher in the association. He was a Bob Jones graduate and wanted a buddy in another church to join him. That "buddy" was a dynamic preacher. A naive Pulpit Committee was told little or nothing about the Bob Jones education---and learned in the school of hard knocks that Bob Jones graduates go out on a mission to take over churches and mold them into the model taught at Bob Jones (it's located near Furman in Greenvile, SC)!

This religious/political mentality of Conseratism believes that '"the end justifies the means to it." Having won, they proceed in 40 years of leading people wandering in the wilderness while they do more background redaction to "prove" they were right in the first place. Like this SEBTS Professor out of Criswell College, he now believes his version of the church history is accurate and adds to it a theory that the NCBSC was sneaking in the background to "rule its churches." This is a total fabrication on the professor's part! He is giving "historical justification" to what is going on now in this state!

The main point I make is that people need to know their own history to the point they can detect a departure from a major point of reference. In this case it is AUTONOMY. NCBSC major decisions are now made in the Execuitive Committee and rubber-stamped at Convention time by the Messengers who used to have a strong say in such activity.

In more recent years the NCBSC has re-written their Constitution and By-laws into a Document of Incorporation. When it was presented for adoption, I pointed out from the floor that the former clear principle of Autonomy (Article III) is now hidden and it took me 3 times readings the document to even find it! A Financial Policy which allows the NCBSC to refuse funds from any church taking a homosexual in as a member allows the Convention or Association to rule a local church. The Georgia Baptist Convention is doing so with BF&M 2000 to kick out churches with female Pastors.

Yes Steve, I feel like Don Quihote! I feel like Dietrick Bonhoeffer as well. At the least, I know our history and stood to cry, "FOUL" If people and churches choose to destroy a basic principle of Baptist success and growth, then it is their own stupidity which led them further into Wilderness Wandering.

Mark my words: Our next national tragedy will be the elimination of Separation of Church and State, then we will be back in England and Europe where that combination doomed the average citizen to poverty----and no chance for moving up the social ladder to rise above their beginnings!

[Gene Scarborough]

Jim Willingham:

I totally agree with your assessment of Autonomy. Each church in the SBC has traditionally done as it pleased. Despite any resolutions made at the SBC or NCBSC we USED NOT TO BE TOLD WHAT TO DO IN THE LOCAL CHURCH!

This case in point has a feature you fail to address: What happens when a con job is in place???? That con job, in the N. Rocky Mount situation, was an Independent Baptist "chuking and jiving" to manipulate a group of church members into something he wants over something they truely understand and want. Here are more specifics of his moves:

(1) He started his antics with his constant criticism of the new RSV over his "inerrant" KJV.
(2) His rationale was full of pretended knowledge of what Bible translation is really about.
(3) He sounded as traditional as the "Inerrant" argument sounded to equally naive Baptists who still know little about the true nature of the Original Manuscripts (which do not exist), but are used as a "straw dog" of an "inerrant Bible" (which does not exist)---it is a figment of a "righteous theologian's" imagination!
(4) His calling of the Church Conference to do his dirty work was hidden rather than clearly published---with proper notice to the congregation. The traditional members found out at the last minute and it was too late to pass the word on his trick. The meeting was poorly attended with a game plan already in place by the Rev. Johnson!
(5) Found in his office trash can were valuable founding documents of the church which clearly showed he was wrong in what he was telling people about the need to separate and become Independent. Had these documents been present and read at the Called Conference, it would have been a "no brainer" for the average church member to see they were being conned!

A clear and clean approach to his moves would not have been a problem---and the case would have been judged in favor of his followers = end of story and the church made a "fair Autonomous decision" with all knowing what was involved! A major reason the court took up this case---where normally they would have said, "It's a church matter and we do not interfere with church matters"---was the deception involved in his leadership!

Does this ring any bells with the recent GCTF report having a 15-year moritorium on disclosure of their discussions????

Major changes used to have total transparency attached---in fact that was one of the main points of the Task Force presentation---and no one cried, "FOUL!!!" before the report was adopted???? Those few who did got ignored and are re-discussing it at SBC Voices! HOWEVER, it is now too late = the "bell has tolled" on that one. Strange how the dog which bit the behind of the "Old SBC" is now continuing to bite behinds of the "New SBC!" Closed-door moves in a democratic organization of church or government will surely destroy both! Democracy is built only with faith / trust / open coverage by a free press.

Tolestoy: "Ask not for whom the bell tolls---it tolls for you!"

[Stephen Fox]

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: Gene, thanks for the reply. I agree that Churches need to know their history. I am not however persuaded that a convention or an association is of necessity exercising control of a local church when they set up parameters for churches such as the two restrictions you mention. And BTW, I think you know that my wife is a pastor. My take is that the churches that have been excluded for either of the reasons you present are even more autonomous than ever. Further I am convinced churches who refuse to consider women in pastoral roles are only hurting themselves, while churches who accept practicing homosexuals into membership have the potential to corrupt an association. Now let me be clear, in my book, their is a difference in ministering to a sinner and in telling them they are OK. We can not always minister to folk on their terms. I could be wrong but it seems you would allow individual churches to control the larger body by insisting that churches being permitted to do what ever they please. Would that not include calling a Bob Jones Grad. Again let me quickly add that If asked I would generally caution against such a move, even thought I have known of a Bob Jones Grad who was a very good pastor, because he realized that neither Bob Jones Sr. or Jr. where God.

And Jim, some of us have rather selective memory such as when you say "I totally agree with your assessment of Autonomy. Each church in the SBC has traditionally done as it pleased. Despite any resolutions made at the SBC or NCBSC we USED NOT TO BE TOLD WHAT TO DO IN THE LOCAL CHURCH!" Did you ever try serving real wine in communion. Or allowing the young people to have a dance in the fellowship hall or in the 50's inviting the older youth from a black church to work in your VBS.

[Dr. James Willingham]

As to the issue of the con game, it is a local matter, the responsibility of that local church. One can't lay all blame on the schools. Ernest T. Campbell, the red-headed Campbell, was in school with my ordaining pastor at Bob Jones, Dr. Ernest R. Campbell, the black headed Campbell, who took his ph.d. from Bob Jones as did Ernest T. who went on the pastor Riverside in NYC. Ernest R. was no great supporter of the CR due to the issue of the manipulators about which Gene cries. Ernest R. and Dr. L.G. Meadows stopped one of the leaders of the CR in Fla, when he sought to take over that state for his own brand of eschatology which Ernest R. happen to believe and L.G. did not, but both stopped the other fellow cold. I voted for the CR due to the fact of being utterly disgusted with the French Infidelity being palmed off on the unsuspecting as "Higher Criticism." Besides, having been an atheist, it was dumbfounding to me that some of the scholars should pass off as the latest devotional doubt some of the slop I had spouted or had read about being spouted by atheists and agnostics. My big problem which eventually caught up with me was that the madness in man (Eccles.9:3) can masquerade under the guise of orthodox biblical beliefs as it did in the days of our Lord in his oppoenents, the Pharisees. Sadly, not many of the conservatives really recognize that as a problem though it is plainly set forth in Mt.22 along with the problem of the Sadducean fallacies, too, which the moderates failed to see. What is sorely evident is that neither camp is willing to pay the price of extensive mediation to work out differences to the point where they can cooperate...although it could be done. My studies and thoughts on I Cors.13 suggest the possibility. We could with time, planning and effort turn this set-to into the greatest transformation for advancement the world has ever seen, if we want the truth itself or should I say Himself to succeed. If we go onto fragment, there is another group in the wings, waiting to take our place. Historically, they have proven to be rather heavy handed in their methods. Our set-tos as in Bill Leonard's paper a few years ago might be quite repulsive to a peace loving Anglican watching from the sidelines (he was referring to events in the mid to late 1700s), but Baptists were getting ready to launch the Great Century of Missions. If so then, why not now look to launch the Greatest Awakening of all, the one that takes the whole earth for a 1000 generations. After all, there is a biblical basis for believing that God might be planning something better for the future of His people than our narrow little systems of eschatology can foresee.

[Dr. James Willingham]

Well, I did try to persuade one of the churches I pastored to serve wine, but it ran up against the problem of some the elderly ladies in the church were full of fear about alcohol, having had loved ones who had experienced drinking problems. I even tried to return a church to discipline, but the deacons handed me back the tracts I had provided for them to study (Dr. James Leo Garrett's The Discipline of the Charleston Association) and said they didn't think they would try it. The church liked my preaching and my pastoral work, but they did not want to step out in the areas mentioned. They did, however, get more involved in missions. It is a grief that we cannot win them all.

[Stephen Fox]

Dwight Moody nuances the territory Gene Scarborough and Dr. Willingham are taking the scalpel to here, in Moody's review of Greg Willis history of Southern Seminary you can find online in last years archive of Baptists Today.

Then again when Scarborough's friend at Voices, Dave Miller, hands down ex Cathedra Papal decrees on things like his current obsession, the Brick Wall Doctrines, then there is not much else to say other than making it clear at CBF minded churches the mindset of folks in charge of the apologetics of the SBC.

http://sbcvoices.com/brick-walls-picket ... st-divide/

AT Ethicsdaily.com Colin Harris, Brian Kaylor, and Richard Pierard are continuously taking a look at Scarborough's concerns about how fundamentalism is inflecting church state issues.

It is no secret the faultline now comes in the headset of Charles Pickering of the Alliance Defense Fund. Scarborough should probably spend some of his time boing up on the findings of Gary Laderman of his alma mater Emory, who with Sarah Posner at http://www.religiondispatches.org are on the cutting edge of that discussion.

Posner has already written about how hard wired SBC CEO Frank Page is hardwired to the Jim DeMint wing of the Tea Party. And just today Brian Kaylor at Ed.com wrote of concerns about Richard Land and President Obama's Health Care Reforms.

[Gene Scarborough]

Folks--

I'm not sure our discussion today has reached any results of merit. What I see is that we are on the verge of losing a precious concept which has allowed a wide range of theological and practical differences within local churches to get along with a "live and let live" approach to doing church. Autonomy was at the core of how so many styles of worship and reasonable differences could jointly work together. I have never viewed the theological differences to be more wide-spread than 20 points around the center of a scale from 1-100. 1=Conservative / 100 = Liberal. Baptists are basically a middle-of-the-road concensus group leaning to the conservative in theology.

Our problem has been the political charades on all sides. It is the same one Jesus had with the egos of the Disciples. Even at the Last Supper there was a fuss and fight over who would sit where in relationship to Jesus---to the point no feet got washed!

The so-called "Moderates" are gone to CBF. Still the "Conservatives" are not happy with one another and suspicions are growing everywhere. What is clear to me with current history redaction is that for 40 years SBC members have wandered in this wilderness. During that time Executive salaries have gone through the roof / disclosures of financial abuse abound / missions has suffered / now there is a rediculous attempt to claim CR just returned us to our roots. If so, those roots were briars fighting with one another for light and air and choking the weak ones out!

I am citing 2 basic approaches to church work:

(1) Simple and trusting with money sent as churches intended.
(2) Hidden and suspicious tactics bent on total control by a few mega churches and their Pastors.

Rev. Johnston who attempted a kidnapping of N. Rocky Mount used every trick in the books to con a congregation into thinking he was right. It went so far that the called Wednesday business meeting had no exact thing to adopt. The actual Resolution adopted by people trusting their winsome Pastor was written by him and presented without any preview with him as Moderator on the next Sunday morning. Anyone who raised any objections or Point of Order was ruled by Johnston to be "out of order!"

Thereafter, any SS leader or Deacon not in compliance was replaced by Rev. Johnston. He had a model of church taught him at Bob Jones which was ruled by the Court to be out of compliance with standard SBC general practices, written or unwritten.

My main source of NRMBC witness information is in his late 80's now. As we reviewed the recorded events today he told me something amazing: "I was a young and new Christian then and trusted Rev. Johnston and voted with him. After a few months of his ways, I discovered I had picked a leader I could not trust. Now I still know there are Pastors you can't trust. They just don't tell the truth nor live the truth I assumed they did!"

This is the saddest part of all this: A trusting new Christian was led astray and hurt. What was it Jesus said about anyone hurting a child--spiritual or physical--"he should have a millstone tied around his neck and cast into the midst of the sea!"

Tough talk, Jesus, tough talk and SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES!!!

[Stephen Fox]

In the New SBC Autonomy takes a second place to the Ex Cathedra Brick Wall, Non Negotiable doctrines.


Here are the Boundaries it seems:

http://sbcvoices.com/the-gospel-is-non-negotiable/

[Gene Scarborough]

This link is a marvelous book by SBC women and how their place in church is being redacted. On p.253 and below you will find the "official redaction" adopted in Antonio in 1988 relative to Autonomy and the Priesthood of the Believer:



Fair warning to anyone wanting to know what the SBC uses as a guid. It has become vastly different over the last 40 years. Those who do not know our history can be easily led way off into the Wilderness of ignorance and false trust!