"Sandy" It is very important to consider who makes up CBF, and who is supporting it financially to determine how policy decisions related to issues like this are made.
CBF was formed by Southern Baptists, many of whom had been high profile leaders prior to 1979, and who were generally opposed to the conservative leaders who were being elected and nominated to replace the old guard. Being opposed to the conservative resurgence does not necessarily translate directly into holding a more liberal, progressive theological perspective. The fact is that the main difference was over where to draw the lines with regard to missions cooperation, not over whether the Bible was inerrant and infallible. It isn't likely that anyone would have been able to hold a leadership position in the SBC, even prior to 1979, without open acceptance of the 1963 BFM, which clearly states the belief in a Bible that is "truth without any mixture of error."
But Sandy I believe that from 1963 up to 1979 it was well under stood that the belief in a Bible that is "truth without any mixture of error." Was open to private interpretation.
Sandy from prior post: The Alliance of Baptists represents most of the former SBC congregations that would be liberal and progressive enough to have the "welcoming and affirming" label which would go so far as to allow for hiring individuals living in an openly gay relationship. The Alliance has about 100 churches, of which fewer than 30 are also supporting CBF. On the other hand, about 90% of CBF's partnering churches still support the Cooperative Program of the SBC. CBF's leaders, for the most part, seem to be pretty happy with their position of cooperating with other Baptists, even though they disagree with their position on homosexuality, but they themselves are not going to ordain or call gays or lesbians to vocational ministry. It's pretty clear that most of them aren't going to call women as pastors, either.
Sandy where do you get the figures you have used here regarding Alliance churches. And the percentage of CBF partnering churches that " still support the Cooperative Program of the SBC" And again although CBF women seeing pastoral positions have
had a tough time the percentage finding pastoral is slowly improving. And I believe for some he openings for internships to some, to work with very well experienced pastors has been a blessing in disguise. We however have felt it is a bit unfair that only the under forty recent CBF affiliated seminary grads seem to be selected selected. And PK's still seem to have first dibs
Sandy: The argument about having to hold certain conservative theological positions to satisfy Texas Baptists who tend to be more conservative does not hold water. There are few CBF churches anywhere that are "welcoming and affirming" and few that would be persuaded to move CBF in a direction toward changing its hiring policy. CBF doesn't restrict its more progressive churches from doing as they please with regard to their vocational ministers and employees. Why are they insisting that CBF change its policy to be more in line with them?
Sandy, it is simple they to do not have enough places for their new seminary grads. And some new grads have fallen for the "you can't discriminate against homosexuals and complain about discrimination against women" ploy.