Not good news for SBC race relations

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

Moderator: William Thornton

Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Dave Roberts » Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:24 pm

Today, ABP reported on the refusal of a church to allow a black couple to marry in the church. It was stated to be on racial grounds. As much as Fred Luter's election is positive, this is an obvious negative.

http://abpnews.com/culture/social-issues/item/7658-church-refuses-to-marry-black-couple#.UBLZ62mXT-I
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7306
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Matt Richard » Fri Jul 27, 2012 4:57 pm

I remember a while back a story where a local association kicked a church out for calling a female pastor. I would hope similar action would be considered in this case, but I'm not holding my breath.
Matt Richard
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2011 9:32 am
Location: Gatesville, TX

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tom Parker » Fri Jul 27, 2012 6:37 pm

Matt:

It sure will be interesting as to how the local association deals with this unchristian behavior on the part of this Church. It will also be interesting to see if the state and national associations choose to speak to this item. If the association chooses to do little to nothing it will speak loudly as to how local associations pick and choose which items to kick churches out.
Tom Parker
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:34 pm

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby William Thornton » Fri Jul 27, 2012 6:42 pm

Let's see...47000 or so churches...one autonomous church...

What is important is what happens next - will the association, state convention speak...?
My stray thoughts on SBC stuff may be found at my blog, SBC Plodder
User avatar
William Thornton
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12098
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Mrs Haruo » Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:05 pm

I guess being autonomous also means the freedom to act like the southern end of a north bound jackass, but that is just my personal opinion. Oh, that puddle in the street? I think God just spit someone nasty out. :roll:
Don't despair if your job and your rewards are few, remember that the mighty oak was once a nut like you!
User avatar
Mrs Haruo
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 1:54 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Haruo » Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:21 pm

I'm trying to figure out what the "minority" in the congregation that wields such enormous and unpleasant power was about here. Do they believe it is the duty of "white" churches to ensure that their "nonwhite" congregants live in sin? I really don't get it. The most charitable notion I can come up with is "Uncle George and Edith were married in this sanctuary, and they would spin in their graves if they knew we let colored folks do likewise." If true, IMO George and Edith deserve all the dizziness they can acquire, if they haven't already been shown the error of their ways by our Lord himself. (But then of course I think similarly about gay marriages...)
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tim Bonney » Sat Jul 28, 2012 12:00 am

I'm afraid a not infrequent example of autonomy of the local church translating into autonomy of some loud mouthed bullies who know that no one really can call them on their bigotry. Sure the association could kick them out or something. But whom does that really hurt?

If the pastor is smart he is circulating his resume. Once a congregation starts using "if you don't do it our way you'll be fired" as a way to control the pastor, you can no longer really be the pastor. You've just become a hired hand.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5996
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Dave Roberts » Sat Jul 28, 2012 6:09 am

Tim Bonney wrote:If the pastor is smart he is circulating his resume. Once a congregation starts using "if you don't do it our way you'll be fired" as a way to control the pastor, you can no longer really be the pastor. You've just become a hired hand.


Sadly, Tim, that's the method most often used in Baptist life to control pastors. The backside of autonomy is that no one steps in to protect pastors unless they have a signed covenant and bring a lawyer to confront the bullies.
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7306
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Sandy » Sat Jul 28, 2012 11:46 am

I think what may be coming from Southern Baptists, individually and denominationally, may be reflected in this article and following comments:
http://sbcvoices.com/shameful-public-ra ... ciliation/
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8900
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Haruo » Sat Jul 28, 2012 6:57 pm

This comment in particular had me laughing and confused at the same time. How the guy can tell that story and then go on, with deteriorating quality of language, to make some of his own follow-up comments, is beyond me. But the part about the "Bull" deacon's exegesis of the invisible is priceless.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tom Parker » Sat Jul 28, 2012 7:19 pm

Haruo:

Did you notice he got into his rambling comment the association got it into their by-laws the automatic disfellowshipping of any church that calls a woman as a Pastor.

It has to worry some in SB associations endlessly that at any time a fellow associational church is going to call a woman as a Pastor. :brick: I bet they can not sleep at night.

But the issue of racism, since it is not specifically addressed in the 2000 BF&M rulebook, they just do not know what to do :?
Tom Parker
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:34 pm

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tim Bonney » Sat Jul 28, 2012 9:54 pm

Well Tom, what can they actually do? They can disfellowship the church. Big deal, that just saves money in their mission budget. They can verbally denounce the church. Again, so what? There isn't actually anything that they can do that actually makes the church repent. It is the dark side of autonomy.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5996
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Haruo » Sat Jul 28, 2012 10:02 pm

What I saw was a bunch of people saying "out d a m n spot" to the offending church, while a few people took their defense of the local church's autonomy and tried to browbeat the blogger with it, as if holding a position in an organization made it a sin to speak out against patent evil. It would be easy to assume that those folks were closet racists or apologists for racism, but I'm not sure that's the case. It's not my culture.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Haruo » Sat Jul 28, 2012 10:44 pm

Oh, that's right, Shakespeare is not acceptable English... ;-) Thanks, whoever bowdlerized me. Actually, "the D word" is quite acceptable in serious discourse about ****ation and its alternatives. And writing "Out, condemn spot" is poor English.

[on further investigation] Turns out it is a nanny spellcheck program that won't let one post naughty vocables here unless you p u t s p a c e s b e t w e e n letters. I'll bet d amn works, though, or dam n...
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Mrs Haruo » Sat Jul 28, 2012 10:54 pm

Heckfire and brimstone! This kind of lame brained racist nonsense makes me ****mned embarassed to admit I am a member of ANY Baptist church. :censored:
Don't despair if your job and your rewards are few, remember that the mighty oak was once a nut like you!
User avatar
Mrs Haruo
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 1:54 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Ed Pettibone » Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:58 am

Mrs Haruo wrote:Heckfire and brimstone! This kind of lame brained racist nonsense makes me ****mned embarassed to admit I am a member of ANY Baptist church. :censored:


Ed: Mrs. H. why should the bigoted action of a hand full of ignorant folk 2/3 of the way across the nation in a region where such thinking was the norm in my lifetime cause you to be embarrassed just because they claim the same name? Having sojourned in that areas for a brief time, four decades ago. I praise GOD that so many in their own denomination are censoring them. I have not heard of any other baptist supporting them, have you?
User avatar
Ed Pettibone
 
Posts: 11963
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: .Burnt Hills, New York, Capital Area

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tim Bonney » Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:31 am

Ed Pettibone wrote:
Mrs Haruo wrote:Ed: Mrs. H. why should the bigoted action of a hand full of ignorant folk 2/3 of the way across the nation in a region where such thinking was the norm in my lifetime cause you to be embarrassed just because they claim the same name?


I understand her embarassment Ed. People who aren't Baptist or didn't grow up Baptist don't know the difference between one Baptist group or church and another. So when I was in the ABC in Iowa I often had to explain to people that it was the Southern Baptists who were against women in ministry and not the church I was pastoring. Even the press didn't always know better. I got stopped by a reporter at an ABC event when some group in the SBC wanted to boycott Disney and was asked why we were involved in the boycott. I had to explain that we weren't and that he had the wrong group of Baptists.

It also stems from people not understanding the very autonomous nature of Baptist structure. If someone grew up in a connectional denomination you might not realize that a Baptist local church individually can do all kinds of things that the denomination as a whole would disapprove. In connectional churches there are limitations on how far away from the denominations doctrines a church or pastor can go without getting called on the carpet. So people who aren't Baptists are wondering why the SBC can't make this church tow the line.

So people may not hear "a single Southern Baptist Church in Mississippi didn't allow two black people to marry." They hear "Baptists didn't allow black people to marry..." Thats kind of thing that makes this stuff potentially embarrassing.

And to go even further, I hear criticism of Christianity in general anytime a Christian church or group does something bone headed like this. At some point I expect to read on a blog "well I can't believe how racist those Christians are." Anytime someone claims to be a Christian and does something stupid in public there is the potential that it will reflect badly on the rest of us.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5996
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tom Parker » Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:42 am

Tim Bonney wrote:Well Tom, what can they actually do? They can disfellowship the church. Big deal, that just saves money in their mission budget. They can verbally denounce the church. Again, so what? There isn't actually anything that they can do that actually makes the church repent. It is the dark side of autonomy.


Tim: My point was that there seems to be a trend where local associations disfellowship churches(I hate that word) based upon the 2000 BF&M, such as women pastors. But it is a selective removal of associational churches.

I have even some bloggers suggest that there are still some SB churches that are not living by the 2000 BF&M--no kidding.
Tom Parker
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:34 pm

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tim Bonney » Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:56 am

Tom Parker wrote:
Tim: My point was that there seems to be a trend where local associations disfellowship churches(I hate that word) based upon the 2000 BF&M, such as women pastors. But it is a selective removal of associational churches.

I have even some bloggers suggest that there are still some SB churches that are not living by the 2000 BF&M--no kidding.


Well and why should they live by the BFM 2000? Last I knew Baptists claimed not to believe in creeds. Right?

I'm just pointing out that from the local church perspective that being kicked out of a Southern Baptist association is next to meaningless. When I was last in the SBC years ago Associations were already on hard times and a lot of people didn't even bother to attend associational meetings. Most church members wouldn't even notice getting kicked out. Even if the SBC itself were to kick out this church it still doesn't change what this local church is doing. All disfellowshipping does is allow the denomination to wash its hands of the behavior of a local church. It doesn't actually change anything.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5996
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Haruo » Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:13 am

Tim Bonney wrote:
Tom Parker wrote:I have even some bloggers suggest that there are still some SB churches that are not living by the 2000 BF&M--no kidding.


Well and why should they live by the BFM 2000? Last I knew Baptists claimed not to believe in creeds. Right?

Maybe maybe not. Maybe AA has had that much influence on the rest of the spiritual culture. After all, the BF&M is the latest expression of the "group conscience" of the SBC, and AA theology refers to having "but one ultimate authority: a loving God as he may express himself in our group conscience"... Quite in keeping, too, with the LDS take on progressive revelation, where the living prophets (in SBC terms, messengers) can revise the D&C anytime they want to. Speaking ex cathedra on matters of faith and morals...
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12283
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tom Parker » Sun Jul 29, 2012 12:13 pm

Haruo:

The funny thing about the 2000 BF&M was several thousand voted it in and yet the 47,000 SB churches can choose to follow or not follow certain items in it without fear of being kicked out but if a church violates certain things out you go.

From where I sit the 2000 BF&M is used as a control device but it just can never work the way "they" want it to.
Tom Parker
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:34 pm

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tim Bonney » Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:01 pm

Tom Parker wrote:Haruo:

The funny thing about the 2000 BF&M was several thousand voted it in and yet the 47,000 SB churches can choose to follow or not follow certain items in it without fear of being kicked out but if a church violates certain things out you go.

From where I sit the 2000 BF&M is used as a control device but it just can never work the way "they" want it to.


Well that is the structure (or lack thereof.) That is why the SBC calls the persons at the meeting "Messengers" rather than delegates. There is no delegated authority given to the Messengers to speak for their church or bind their church to anything. So they get together and pass all kinds of resolutions and make decisions no one has to follow, other than denominational employees and agencies. That's the polity. So it has always made me want to scratch my head when then someone tries ot enforce a non-binding document.

If you want actual enforcable rules and church law you have go to another denomination.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5996
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tom Parker » Sun Jul 29, 2012 4:55 pm

Tim:

You said:"If you want actual enforcable rules and church law you have go to another denomination."

I often wonder if a valid study was done, how many members of the SBC have left since 1979 over all of the political shenanigans that have taken place.

IMO there are still lots of people in the SBC who wish it was a much different place than it is.
Tom Parker
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:34 pm

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tim Bonney » Sun Jul 29, 2012 5:00 pm

Tom Parker wrote:Tim:

You said:"If you want actual enforcable rules and church law you have go to another denomination."

I often wonder if a valid study was done, how many members of the SBC have left since 1979 over all of the political shenanigans that have taken place.


Good questions Tom. I was one of those who left the SBC in the early 90s for less fundamentalist pastures of the ABC/USA. And eventually, as you can tell from my signature, I decided I didn't want to be a Baptist of any kind.

I have anacdotal testimony from a number of women who were called to ministry who are now serving with the ABC, the UMC, and the PCUSA. It seems those three denominations have benefited the most from disaffected SBC clergy (or future clergy) at least.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5996
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Not good news for SBC race relations

Postby Tom Parker » Mon Jul 30, 2012 6:11 pm

From a CNN site:"A spokesman for the Southern Baptist executive committee told CNN the group would defer to local and state organizations for comment.

"We're not a top down organization," said Roger Oldham. "We're a bottom up organization. The congregation is the governing body."

So is this saying the 2000 BF&M from the top of the SBC does not have to be followed at the associational level?
Tom Parker
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:34 pm

Next

Return to SBC News and Trends

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron