by Sandy » Fri Dec 23, 2011 9:57 am
It's dialogue, which, in the world of religious groups and Christian denominations, is a very low level way of drawing minor denominational media attention to some kind of nebulous activity to give the image of "doing something" without really doing anything or accomplishing anything.
Press releases can talk about how many Baptists are "represented" by the BWA by collectively adding up the total membership of the various Baptist groups that drop a tip in the jar. But the very nature of Baptists precludes a claim of "representation." What this looks like, straight up, is that the BWA is having cash problems since their largest contributor moved on.
I don't really think the SBC needed to take their BWA contribution and pay Bobby Welch to try to set up a parallel organization. Most national Baptist unions and groups around the world depend on the SBC's IMB for missionary personnel and theological education already, and that's not going anywhere anytime soon. It's not really necessary for them to make some kind of "statement" by signing on to a worldwide, SBC-backed alliance or to replace the BWA. Some did follow the SBC in withdrawing, but overall, little has changed. What this looks like is that the BWA may be feeling a little bit pinched for cash and their own constituency, despite the lofty numbers, isn't providing it.