New Structure

[pastormikejordan]

[Haruo]

[pastormikejordan]

[pastormikejordan]

Also remembered this old site, which regrettably appears not to be updated anymore:

http://abcviewsfrommiddle.blogspot.com/

Always appreciated Rev. Stinnett's take on things and this is helpful in understanding the new structure. Any other links/info?

[Ed Pettibone]

[pastormikejordan]

[Ed Pettibone]

[pastormikejordan]

Hi all--

Found this on the abc-usa website



An exhaustive (and exhausting) tour of the proposed changes.

Would be really curious about your feedback. Of concern to me is what we talked about above in this thread, that passing any sort of statement on social issues will be well-nigh impossible if nine regions can block it.

Also am a bit uneasy about the national nominating committee. As I understand it, the General Board would be disbanded and replaced with a board of general ministries, 30 members total.

Instead of the current situation where regions directly elect GB representation, eighteen of those members will be selected by a national nominating committee from a pool of applicants suggested by the regions. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but couldn't a national nominating committee essentially stifle dissent, insisting on a certain reading of American Baptist history and identity?

Just seems that all that power concentrated into ever-smaller circles, and removing the decisions one level further away from the local church (from regional to national), might not square with a Baptist spirit which depends on ordinary Baptists like us knowing that the money we are responsible for stewarding is going into Kingdom work. At the same time, I realize that $ constraints mean that the circle of decision-makers just can't be as big. But it seems like letting regions elect their own representation would only be fair, rather than taking that power out of the regions' hands.

My sense in all of this is that there are a lot of denominational types worried about a takeover by fundamentalists; but as the good Democrats on this board remind us, we should be careful how we fight our enemies, lest we become something we don't want to be in the process. I'm not sure this idea is really the best way forward...

...but as always I would be interested in hearing from others. I'm always open to being convinced by a good case...

Mike

[Haruo]

[pastormikejordan]

[pastormikejordan]

[Ed Pettibone]

Mike Jordon wrote in part "And it is regrettable, I think, that such a question will be put to a vote at a biennial which is so far distant from many ABCers who may dissent. (Please note: I don't think anything sneaky or underhanded is happening, it's just an unfortunate coincidence.)"

Ed: Mike do you really think that this is "just an unfortunate coincidence" ? It could have been delayed two years and have been brought back to a more central location, say Wichita, Kansas.

[pastormikejordan]

[Ed Pettibone]

[Ed Pettibone]

[pastormikejordan]

[Ed Pettibone]

TIm Bonney writes in part; [quote] "While you might blame controversy in the ABC for lack of mission giving, Christians fighting over social issues is part of what has kept mainline churches from growing to be able to give more.

Conservative Churches are attracting conservatives but, mainline churches have stopped attracting our own progressive/liberal base because IMHO our churches are refusing to deal with the emerging culture."
[/]quote]

Ed: According the the long time research of our retiring Ex Minister, Dr. William Carlsen ABC-USA churches give well to to things they are motivated to support. He has as I said above, stated that The average ABC member gives some where around 1 to 2 % of their income. He maintains that American Baptist do not as a rule lack for money. He seems to suggest they just do not feel compelled to give it to a church or a denomination.

And Tim, why are Mainline churches not attracting conservatives. Could it be that they are out of touch with the fact that there are many fine reliable responsible conservatives, I would bet (if I where a betting man) that you have several in your church. I will suggest another reason "mainline churches have stopped attracting our own progressive/liberal base" is because that base has been pretty well exhausted when it comes to individuals willing to commit to Christ. Churches that fail to welcome conservatives are signing their own death warrant.

Conservatives are often cool to me when they learn that. I have been divorced. 2. My wife is a pastor. 3. I am willing to make room for therapeutic abortion. I am pro reason rather than pro-life.
4. I am not an biblical inerantist. I am a biblical realist. But when we become acquainted we generally are able to do Church and Missions together. I am well enough received by folk in our association primarily progressive conservatives, moderates, and liberals that they selected me to Represent them on the NYS Board of Missions. Dec. 3rd I will start my final year of this term.

Friday and Saturday of this week Trudy and I as well as one member from our parish will be attending the "Regional" World Missions conference to be held in Suffield Connecticut and from the promotional material I am expecting the audience to be rather evenly divided by Conservatives on one hand with moderates and liberals on the other.

Regional is somewhat misleading, especially when this one is being billed as "The Fall Connecticut World Missions Conference", It is in infact being hosted by the Connecticut Region of ABC-USA but has been designed to draw from several regions including all three in the State of New york (NYS, R/G, NYC) New Hampshire/Vermont, Massachusetts and New Jersey, Road Island.

[pastormikejordan]

Ed--I think I am in general agreement with you--I think conservatives in increasing numbers are finding other ways to spend their mission dollars than supporting a denomination that they feel--rightly or wrongly--is out of step with their mission concerns for the world.

Baptists, because of soul liberty, know that they alone bear the responsibility for making decisions about which associations will serve the Kingdom and which won't. So they know their responsibility to steward their money as they understand God wants them to, and one cannot fault them for wanting to put their money and efforts elsewhere. I do think that in an effort to maintain a total lack of theological boundary in the denomination, the ABC is of course losing many many dollars from conservatives who feel the need to steward it more wisely.

To me that's a far more likely reason for the $ shortfall than the idea that there's a whole bunch of people out there who would just love to join the ABC but don't like the infighting.

Still, like Tim, I would like to discuss the issue at hand. My impression--again, I'm not a legal scholar--is that this proposal makes no pretense of representing the majority of American Baptists. Instead, it leaves the future of determining and proclaiming ABC identity in the hands of a board of thirty people, eighteen of whom are chosen by a national nominating committee--and of the 12 people on that nominating committee, 8 are already on the board of thirty people. My wife is a mathematician, but even I can see the odds aren't good for that group to experience change--it can be entirely self-sustaining and easily suppress any dissenting view of the denom.

So my advice, whether you're liberal or conservative: if you want to have a say about the future of ABC identity, better get on the Board of General Ministries now. Odds are if you don't, nobody who thinks like you will anytime soon.

Again, just my $.02 and would like to hear other's thoughts on the document as my vision--and especially my by-laws-interpretation--is far from inerrant...

Mike

[pastormikejordan]

Tim--thanks for this. I wasn't clear---do you know that all Exec Mins are behind this or just all that you've talked to? Just curious what you meant--

MJ

[pastormikejordan]

What do you mean by that, Tim? "Get out of the theological infighting..." I mean, I wish we could too but I'm not exactly sure what you mean.

Mike

[Ed Pettibone]

[Ed Pettibone]

[Ed Pettibone]

[Ed Pettibone]