BaptistLife.Com Forums.

Oh, and if the SBC had broken with the other Baptist over slavery just 50 years ago would that make them a more enlighten denomination? 50 is less than 167.

The perspective taken by virtually every American Christian group, church, or denomination during a long period of American history was segretation of races. It's there, it is part of the history, and some of what was history has carried over into the existence of groups that are still largely based on racial background.

This thread, and the resulting conversation, was launched by Ed's accusation that Baptist Press is "milking" the fact that Fred Luter is the first African American president of the SBC "for all it's worth," (whatever that means), and cited, as an example, the BP story about an award Luter had received, named in honor of George Washington Carver, for accomplishments that included his being the first African American President of the SBC. I am citing Ed's criticism of Baptist Press, and his choice of this particular example, as evidence of the fact that moderate Baptists, whether they be ABC-USA, CBF, or dually aligned, can't seem to pass up an opportunity to criticize Southern Baptists even when they are doing things that moderates have patted their own selves on the back for doing.

Southern Baptists are experiencing great growth in the Northeast, upper Midwest and far West, due to an aggresive and well planned church-planting effort largely led by African Americans in the inner cities. In addition to that, when the convention voted in favor of the resolution apologizing for their racist past, it wasn't just lip service, like a lot of "dialogue" between religious groups. They meant it. And they have taken steps to facilitate it. Many African American pastors are leading their congregations into affiliation with the SBC, in some cases remaining dually aligned with their African American based denomination, but in many cases, leaving it behind because the conservative theological stance of the SBC appeals to them, and some of them perceive their own denomination as being too liberal. SBC leaders were told that just passing the resolution, without including African Americans in genuine leadership positions wouldn't work, and they took that to heart. The same thing has been said about other ethnic minorities. I'm not sure how many trustees, committee members or executive board members across the various layers of SBC bureacracy are members of ethnic minorities, last I heard, about 25% and growing.

I don't know, but maybe the SBC becoming more ethnically diverse, and reaching into African American, Asian and Hispanic communities leaves moderates without grounds to gripe. The growth being what it is, it won't be long before ABC-USA won't be able to milk its ethnic diversity for all its worth.

Ed:Sandy in this thread you have made more than one reference to the gains made by the SBC race relations since the "resurgence" which you seem to date as having occurred in 1979. The fact show that a number of folk who where forced out of their Positions due to the resurgence/takeover within the SBC from 79 through 2000 laid the groundwork for those advances. I would suggest you find a copy of a pilgrimage of the autobiography of Henlee Hulix Barnnette who led the Lab for a counseling course that I took at SBTS in 1991.
In that book I suggest you look closely at Chapter 14 Titled Race Relations.

And Sandy since I honored your request for an an example of my position would you favor us with an example of there being "no shortage of self-back patting among certain Baptist groups when it comes to ethnic diversity, and the deliberate pains they've taken to specifically choose someone because of their gender or race, rather than their qualification for the job." It is true that in the ABC-USA we are proud of our #2 man who. "Since August 1991, the Rev. Dr. Aidsand Wright-Riggins III has served as the executive director of American Baptist Home Mission Societies. Additionally, he is chief executive officer of Judson Press, the publishing arm of American Baptist Churches USA. His passion has led American Baptist Home Mission Societies to commitments of encouraging discipleship, engaging in mission and transforming the soul of a nation. He says, "We are to be an incarnate community that affirms that Jesus Christ is Lord. In the midst of our cultural, theological, racial and ethnic diversity, we want to exhibit unity as a household of faith." And we have peole who unless they have seen him or his picture do not know that he is Black. http://www.abhms.org/leadership_team_li ... .cfm?DID=1

But Sandy, let me ask are you suggesting that the SBC took deliberate pains to specifically choose Luter because of his race, rather than his qualification for the job? I have heard no one in any other Baptist group make that charge. I will even go further, from what I have observed via the media for the first 7 months of his Presidency Luter had done a commendable job.

Tim:

Is it not amazing the SBC wants to think something big has been done by having one African-American President and this was an uncontested election? Maybe in next 167 years the number will rise to two. The standard of diversity is mighty low in the SBC IMO.

Tim:

It will quickly have been a year that Fred Luter was elected President of the SBC and what has his leadership accomplished in the SBC world? What stands has he boldly taken, what new initiatives has he been leading? Maybe someone can help me on this?

Ed: Sandy, what is it that you think disturbs me? I do hope Luter has a number of qualified minorities among his nominees and I hope the convention accepts them. I have been working toward the end that racial and ethnic designation not be a major consideration in the selection christian leadership, for close to 60 years.

I would also be interested in why you think Tom needs to review his lessons on Baptist polity and how all of this works. I am not at all sure that Luter's election itself is at all, a clear signal to African American Baptists that the barriers are down, and that race is no longer an obstacle to their involvement in, or cooperation with the SBC. And neither are are the handful of blacks that I have heard talk about it. And no none of those are in the SBC.

And please give me some concrete examples of how " The fact of the matter is that the SBC, under conservative leadership the past 30 years, has moved itself to the cutting edge of racial reconciliation and cooperation".

So far I remain persuaded that you you are only blowing smoke as do many other many historical revisionist who support the takeover of the SBC.

Blake:

I agree with you: Luter's election was symbolic. What has been accomplished in SBC life over the last 8 months because of his being elected President as it relates to race relations, or anything. Did no one have a plan for how he would be "used" after he as elected??

Blake:

The SBC has been in decline for a long time but none of the power brokers in the SBC want to admit it. Electing an African-American President is not going to fix what ails the SBC.

Ed: Blake, I do think you raised a good question when you asked about the non existance of a Presidents page under Luter. And I agree with your view of Sandy's "cutting edge" descriptor". How ever I am not persuaded with your thought that, "If they were milking it for all it was worth they'd still have the President's page" . If there where still a presidents page. Those in control of the convention would have to control that page and I am not sure that with Luter in the presidency that would have been possible. I have some idea as to why the page was dropped, but no one other than Luter and the power brokers really know. And Blake please keep in mind that when I spoke of those milking Luters presidency for all that it is worth I referred specifically to BP in response to Haruo's comment.

I would also suggest that you give a little more thought to Sandy's reminder of the SBC presidents responsibility for making appointments. That appointment power was the hammer used by the Pressler crowd to bring about the CR/TO.

And when you say "The more progressive minded in the convention get to talk about and hope for change in race relations while the silent (possible majority) don't have to say anything to continue to support a system and culture of inequality that won't be meaningfully affected by a black man's election." I see the second part as having some validity, but I am not sure of whom you are you are speaking of as "The more progressive minded in the convention". I do not think the the more progressive are the ones bragging about Luter's election. That is not to say that they did not play a significant part in his election.

There is a deep inconsistency in this, and I am speaking anecdotally, but most African-American churches affiliating with the SBC in the Mid-Atlantic area are doing so in dually-aligned status. That means that they are retaining their affiliations with other national bodies while affiliating with the SBC. Therefore, are members counted twice? The perfect example is Dr. Mark Crostan, last year serving as president of the BGAV at the same time he served as president African-American state body. The other question then is why the SBC frowns on White churches being dually aligned with the ABC, CBF, or Alliance?

I'm not aware that the SBC "frowns" on churches being dually aligned with other Baptist denominational bodies. I think you may be confusing a couple of state conventions with the SBC. The Missouri Baptist Convention did pass bylaws which requires its member churches to be affiliated with the SBC, and restricts membership in any other state convention, or in CBF. Some of the churches historically aligned with both the SBC and ABC-USA in Missouri got their panties in a wad and pulled out. The bylaw included the provision that churches which were dually affiliated with a body that had a fraternal relationship with the SBC were exempt, and that included those churches affiliated with the National Baptist Convention, the largest African American Baptist group, because it has had a long standing fraternal relationship with the SBC.

I don't really see why there should be any kind of distinction made between existing African American churches that join the SBC and either remain affiliated with their historically black denomination, or uniquely align with the SBC. They're only counted once as far as I know. But the fact of the matter is that they are joining, qualifying as "cooperating churches" and contributing to the Cooperative Program. That makes their members eligible to be messengers to the convention and be elected as officers. But a lot of predominantly African American churches are uniquely aligned with the SBC, and many of them were started as church plants supported by CP funds. Fred Luter's church in New Orleans is a good example. There are a number of African American megachurches in Houston which are all uniquely aligned with the SBC and never were part of another denomination, such as Brookhollow, Brentwood, Fort Bend Church, Southwest Community Baptist, and perhaps a dozen others. There are many in the Dallas area as well. I think we've discussed Dwight McKissic and Cornerstone Baptist in Arlington, which has over 3,000 members. Someone said they thought his church was affiliated with another denomination other than the SBC and SBTC, but if that's the case, they are giving 12% of their undesignated receipts to the CP. A lot of these churches are "home grown," having been church plants supported by the CP in their early days. So I'm talking about both. And you'll also find a lot of African Americans in predominantly white churches. Or I should say, ethnically diverse churches. The last SBC church I belonged to, in Houston, did not have a "predominant" racial group, but had a mix of hispanics, African Americans, Asians and Whites.

We will see what happens when Fred Luter's committee nominees are presented. That will give us a good idea of how open the SBC is to including members of ethnic minorities in leadership. I think a lot of moderates and liberals will be surprised, and proven wrong in their assessments.

As usual, Sandy, your only frame of reference seems to be TX. My frame of reference is of KY, NC, VA, and service with the old HMB in Utah/Idaho. In those days in the West, an ABC/SBC church would not be accepted into the Utah/ idaho Convention. There may be a few African-American church starts in VA, but looking at the list of BGAV churches from that background in the online annual, most are not listing their membership which is reported elsewhere.