SBC elects a black president

Discuss current news and trends taking place in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Moderator: William Thornton

Re: SBC elects a black president

Postby Tim Bonney » Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:58 pm

Dave Roberts wrote:Sandy, I'm not certain why you keep bashing the pre-1979 leadership on race.


Because Sandy has to justify the takeover of the SBC by vilifying those who were in charge pre-takeover. Otherwise the "resurgence" was really nothing but a naked grab for power and control. And he has to keep vilifying them to justify the general lack of progress in the denomination since the takeover.

I mean after all, the takeover leadership blamed the pre-79 leadership for lack of growth and claimed that if we all became inerrantists the denomination would be so much better.

Now, as predicted, the fundamentalist leadership fights among itself over who is conservative enough through the current New Calvinists controversy. The old guard fundies aren't Calvinist enough for the new super pure more theologically right wing leaders. So now the takeover crowd has to put down a rebellion on the right wing of the SBC after grabbing power from the left wing.

So if you keep blaming the pre-79 leadership you might not notice that the new emperors have no clothes.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5798
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: SBC elects a black president

Postby Ed Pettibone » Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:34 pm

Sandy: "Perhaps the one thing that pre-1979 moderates did for African American church growth in the SBC was to offer the same seminary scholarship to National Baptist Convention church members to attend the six seminaries that Southern Baptist students received. The conservatives continued that agreement, as far as I know it is still in effect, and that produced the current generation of African American church planters. "


Ed: Sandy I don't know specifically about the other five SBC Seminaries But on the fee Schedule presented at P31 of the 1995-96 SBTS Catalog The Base fee for Baptist Student * is $500.00 Maximum Fee for Baptist Student* $950.00 Also listed is Base Fee - Non Baptist student** $1000.00 and Maximum Fee for Non Baptist Students ** $1900,00

Sandy writes" [quote]

And on P 33 there is a box: with this text = Please note as of Aug 1, 1995:

* "Baptist will change to read "Southern Baptist."
** "Non-Baptist" will Change to read all "Non Southern Baptist"
User avatar
Ed Pettibone
 
Posts: 11963
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: .Burnt Hills, New York, Capital Area

Re: SBC elects a black president

Postby Sandy » Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:30 pm

Tim Bonney wrote:
Dave Roberts wrote:Sandy, I'm not certain why you keep bashing the pre-1979 leadership on race.


Because Sandy has to justify the takeover of the SBC by vilifying those who were in charge pre-takeover. Otherwise the "resurgence" was really nothing but a naked grab for power and control. And he has to keep vilifying them to justify the general lack of progress in the denomination since the takeover.

I mean after all, the takeover leadership blamed the pre-79 leadership for lack of growth and claimed that if we all became inerrantists the denomination would be so much better.

Now, as predicted, the fundamentalist leadership fights among itself over who is conservative enough through the current New Calvinists controversy. The old guard fundies aren't Calvinist enough for the new super pure more theologically right wing leaders. So now the takeover crowd has to put down a rebellion on the right wing of the SBC after grabbing power from the left wing.

So if you keep blaming the pre-79 leadership you might not notice that the new emperors have no clothes.


Why didn't that pre-1979 SBC leadership open the door to African Americans, in terms of both executive leadership and elected leadership? They certainly were in a position to do so. Blaming that on conservatives just doesn't wash.

It would have been virtually impossible for the conservative resurgence to win the votes necessary to completely change the leadership structure of the SBC without the elitist, exclusive narrowness of the pre-1979 SBC leadership. That, more than "theological drift to the left" brought messengers to the conventions with the intention of making changes. The tendency of Southern culture to drift toward exclusivity and elitism hasn't changed much, and essentially what has happened is that one entrenched bureaucracy has been replaced by another.

I believe one of the quotes from one of the pastors in the African American Fellowship was "We're finally sitiing at the table." Apparently, from their perspective, that's a new experience.

It is my understanding that the tuition and fee structure now in place at the seminaries is somewhat different than it once was, however, what I understand is that the fraternal relationship between the SBC and the National Baptists is still in place, and that students who are recommended by their National Baptist church can register and pay the Southern Baptist tuition and fee schedule.

From the news coming out of the convention, it appears that the moderate perspective of "fightin' fundamentalists" over the Calvinism issue is just not going to materialize into the brouha that they'd love to see. It doesn't appear that the term "rebellion," or even "fight" applies.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Shores of the Great Lakes

Re: SBC elects a black president

Postby Tim Bonney » Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:38 pm

Make up history all you want Sandy. The takeover crowd pulled it off because they were the best at secular style political brinksmanship. They figured out the system and the weaknesses in the system and exploited them shamelessly to their fullest. Moderates were out maneuvered politically. It had nothing to do with elitism. They bushed in votes, the plotted a takeover, they shut off mics, they pulled a right wing political style coup. And the crazy thing is that you are cool with that when it happens in the SBC but you have a cow when basically the very same people with the very same values and even some of the very same names do it in the Republican party.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5798
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: SBC elects a black president

Postby Sandy » Sun Jun 24, 2012 10:39 pm

Tim Bonney wrote:Make up history all you want Sandy. The takeover crowd pulled it off because they were the best at secular style political brinksmanship. They figured out the system and the weaknesses in the system and exploited them shamelessly to their fullest. Moderates were out maneuvered politically. It had nothing to do with elitism. They bushed in votes, the plotted a takeover, they shut off mics, they pulled a right wing political style coup. And the crazy thing is that you are cool with that when it happens in the SBC but you have a cow when basically the very same people with the very same values and even some of the very same names do it in the Republican party.


It is possible to use political tactics and secular style political brinkmanship up to a point, if a "takeover" is the goal. But if the SBC was "taken over," it has been affirmed by a massively overwhelming majority of its churches, pastors and church leaders since. The opposition, and the old guard set up CBF and the Alliance of Baptists in anticipation of a flood of churches splitting off from the conservatives, but it never materialized. Essentially, it wasn't a takeover at all, it was simply a rebellion against entrenched bureaucrats who had lost touch with the churches and their members.

All of that aside, the proof is in the pudding. African Americans are the discussion here, the SBC's new African American president and how that did not come about until after almost thirty years of conservative control of the convention. That precludes much, if any, influence or "ground work" done prior to 1979.

My own denominational experience of the last decade or so confirms that. I belonged to two prominent, well known "moderate" Baptist churches in Texas prior to 2005. Both claimed to be diverse and open minded with regard to cultural, social and racial minorities. In terms of women serving in the diaconate, both were good at that. In terms of ordaining women for ministry other than children and pre-school, not so good. In terms of Hispanic ministry, in that both congregations "sponsored" a Spanish speaking congregation, yes. In terms of including hispanics in the leadership of the congregation, not so good. In terms of including African Americans in congregational leadership, you have to have them as members before you can do that.

On the other hand, in the conservative church I served as associate from 2005 to 2010, half of the congregation were racial minorities, including Hispanic, African American and Asians, mostly Chinese, a reflection of the neighborhood we were in. During the time the church was pastorless, and I was the only full time staff member left, from 2007 to early 2010, we elected an African American as chairman of Deacons to a deacon body that consisted of a few old white men, several younger Hispanic men, two middle aged African American men, one Chinese and one Indian. I understand that the Indian is now chairman of deacons, and that the church added about 60 African American members through a merger with a church plant started on the property in 2009. That's an SBTC congregation.

If you'll look at the core values of the African American Fellowship of the Southern Baptist Convention, you'll find that they go beyond the BFM 2000 in their statement on the Bible, using the term "inerrant." I believe the open door to African Americans in the SBC has been facilitated, at least in part, by the conservative shift of the denomination. http://www.naafsbc.org/index_htm_files/ ... Values.pdf
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8599
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Shores of the Great Lakes

See Faulkner on Race

Postby Stephen Fox » Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:50 am

in June 28 NY Times.
"I'm the only sane {person} in here." Doyle Hargraves, Slingblade
"Midget, Broom; Helluva campaign". Political consultant, "Oh, Brother..."


http://www.foxofbama.blogspot.com or google asfoxseesit
Stephen Fox
 
Posts: 9093
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:29 pm

Here is a July 4 poem for Richard Land and Pressler and

Postby Stephen Fox » Mon Jul 02, 2012 3:47 pm

The SBC's Black President.

Heard it on Bill Moyers couple years ago and it stuck with me and bears repeating.

From Laurie Corzett for the SBC and July 4

Gospel

Sally, won't you go
downtown
Pick up some teabag party
clowns
We'll teach 'em tricks of trade
from streets walled in by
degradation
Ain't this nation grand
for glad hands raised in celebration
of shames we dare not name.

Hallelujah Hallelucinations
Hallowed ground baptized
in blood
Saved from the cleansing Flood
by sticking to our kind
however we're defining us today
If we were meant to live
a different way
wouldn't He have told us?
"I'm the only sane {person} in here." Doyle Hargraves, Slingblade
"Midget, Broom; Helluva campaign". Political consultant, "Oh, Brother..."


http://www.foxofbama.blogspot.com or google asfoxseesit
Stephen Fox
 
Posts: 9093
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:29 pm

Previous

Return to SBC News and Trends

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron