Candle in Search of Darkness

[Dave Roberts]

I think a lot of his Texas Baptist CBF brethren are still leans a bit more toward belief in a literal heal, a real heaven and a sure-'nuff Satan, as well as a virgin born Jesus who was a real sacrifice for sin.

I'm curious as to what you mean in the terms you used. "Literal heal," "real heaven," "sure-'nuff Satan," and "sacrifice for sin" presuppose a lot of interpretation--often volumes long. I would love to know what you mean by the terms you use. Virgin born, that one I'm pretty sure I understand, but the rest need lots of interpretation.

Ed: Uh, Dave! I am pretty sure he meant "Literal Hell"

I am too, Ed. But, since Sandy often uses terms like this without definiition, I would like to know how he defines them.

[KeithE]

Interesting thread and great article by Bean (who I have never heard of before).

Antagonists (like poverty, mass incarceration, fundamentalists, ecological ruin, income inequality, homophobia) can be a rallying points no doubt. But I’m wondering if they can be expressed in corresponding positive goals (“give us today our daily bread”, rehabilitation, “the Spirit gives life”, sustainability, sharing community, equal rights) that will play better with people (young or old).

My son has voiced his opinion on this matter and has found positive feedback from his well-to-do, mostly conservative Methodists congregrants when he expresses his social issue concerns positively (he’s the associate minister and does a lot of preaching lately). He is also the head of the Board of Directors for the Interfaith Missions Services (IMS) here in Huntsville. There he says expressing the issues more head on and negatively is the best approach there.

[Sandy]

I think "A Candle in Search of Darkness" can be translated as "An Organization in Search of an Identity."

When you walk through the door of most Baptist churches, the denominational affiliation is usually pretty easy to locate. There are logos, programs and ministries, literature, and sometimes even posters on the wall that link the church to whatever Baptist organization it belongs to, from the Southern Baptist Convention to ABC-USA. And if you can't tell from those things, you could probably ask the first person you encounter in the hallway, and they will know. My wife and I, in our travels and visits to churches when we were involved in a CBF supporting congregation, had trouble finding that evidence in the vast majority of CBF supporting churches we visited during that time. A church might be listed as a supporting congregation on the CBF website, but there's no logo or specific literature to identify the church as such, and the various partner ministries are not always part of an individual congregation's network of support. We also found that in most CBF churches we visited, few members of the congregation are aware of that. In churches that also remained supportive of the Cooperative Program, we found that to be the predominant identifying factor. And other than the church we belonged to at the time, I'm not aware we visited another that had severed its ties from the SBC.

The "Texans" in the CBF often get unfairly considered and blamed for pushing the organization to the right. First of all, the Texans in CBF are not the only ones in the fellowship who are conservative on social issues. Second, the core group which was involved in founding CBF was led by Texans, and the executive leadership of the Fellowship since its inception are Texans. As budget support has dropped off steeply, dependence on large, individual contributions has developed, and most of the heavy hitters who have dropped a lot of cash are Texans. All of that is going to have an effect on the philosophy of the organization when it comes to social positions and theological perspective. Texas Baptists have a structure in which they can operate denominational cooperation and even theological identity while still remaining conservative and yet distanced from the SBC. The BGCT is three times the size of the CBF nationally, is conservative socially and theologically, and yet offers churches a way to place their identity at some distance from the SBC if they so choose. If CBF moves too far to the left, it will lose most of its Texas support, and I don't think it can survive in its current form without that.

How long will the "progressives" (for lack of a better term) stay with a CBF that doesn't appear ready to move to the left on issues such as homosexuality or even into primarily a social ministry as opposed to missions and evangelism, which seems to be what the Texas Baptists are pushing for? What I'm hearing, and reading, is that there seems to be a push to move more to the left, and that sitting on the fence where it is now is increasingly becoming unacceptable.

[Dave Roberts]

Maybe it's time for someone other than a Texan. Of course, Cecil Sherman spent much of his pastoral career in Georgia and North Carolina before returning to Broadway, so he was only a Texan by birth, education, and a bit ot his life. Dan Vestal had also been outside the state of Texas to serve in Georgia. I like to visit Texas, but I certainly wouldn't want to settle there forever.

[Big Daddy Weaver]

It's not really fair to speak of "Texans" as if they are a monolithic bloc.

Texans are diverse.

Many key leaders in the CBF serve churches and organizations located in Texas.

And yes, some of the strongest critics of the CBF (or "cautious CBFers") are Texans. Some were quoted in the Baptist Standard article that Sandy linked to.

The Texas landscape is complex, no doubt. The Standard article doesn't really hint at that complexity and diversity.

The dividing line might be revealed in what Baptist organization do you primarily identify with?

Some identify primarily with CBF. Others identify first with BGCT, then CBF. OR, BGCT first then CBF or SBC second.

My wife and I, my parents and many of my friends are members of DIFFERENT churches in Central Texas that identify first with CBF and are not overly involved in BGCT. At those churches, you're not likely to hear a critique of CBF. And I don't know how we're defining "progressive" these days. But not one single Baptist church in my area is "welcoming and affirming" or liberal in any meaningful sense.

The CBF isn't moving to "the left." I don't know what that even means. As I've said earlier, I think eventually CBF will change its policy. But, I don't think that's on the near-future agenda. It seems doubtful that there will be much change over the next year or two.

I don't see a push to the left. The Sexuality Conference came and went. Where's the push? Where's the movement? The coalition to address some issue?

I hope these recommendations and task force report that were adopted in Fort Worth turns out to be a positive thing. I hope we get an Executive Coordinator that has the experience and ability to inspire, challenge and lead. My personal favorite for the job is Suzii Paynter. But there are other candidates that would be great fits too. I think the committee will recommend an excellent candidate.

I do hope thought that we can get a Coordinator and get a successor to Rob Nash sooner than later.

[Stephen Fox]

Great job helping with the coruscation of Vestal's pilgrimage. I too had concerns, aesthetically with Bean in a cursory read of his misgivings.
BDW has done well gettin to the greater truth of the matter.

As an aside to BDW, see my note on Truett Camp in another forum at this site. I am encouraging my Independent Baptists brethren to get a copy of Durso's bio of Truett. I think they may do it.

[Sandy]

http://www.baptiststandard.com/index.ph ... &Itemid=53

Apparently, some Texas Baptist leaders involved with CBF see things just a bit differently than BDW does.

To retain the support of Baptists west of the Mississippi River, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship must focus on missions, not become distracted by divisive hot-button issues such as gay rights, some Texas Baptist pastors attending the CBF general assembly noted. And they see the selection of the organization’s next executive staff leader as pivotal.

The only issue mentioned in the lead paragraph to this article in the Baptist Standard is gay rights. So there is apparently a perception, at least among "some" Texas Baptist pastors associated with CBF, that there is a movement afoot to move the Fellowship in that direction. Is that just talk to lay down a warning, or do they really see this taking place?

Dedication to missions and commitment to Baptist distinctives such as soul competency, the priesthood of all believers and separation of church and state attracted some Texas Baptists to CBF initially. But any significant movement toward embracing “unbiblical practices” would drive them away, said Michael Evans, president of the African-American Fellowship of Texas.

So as he works his way through the story, the author, Ken Camp manages to equate "gay rights" with "unbiblical practices." He also draws a clear distinction between Texas Baptists in CBF, and those in the Southeast, on this particular issue. It seems to be fairly clear to me that this is perceived to be an emphasis of CBF's "East Coast" brethren in the minds of their Texas counterparts. Having served for so many years among Texas Baptists, I also understand the hints that are being dropped here. The phrase "some influential Texas Baptist pastors" can be translated into "we're the big dogs, and we're not going to stand for anyone else leading the pack."

My guess is that they've got someone in mind for the coordinator's position, and the lobbying to make it happen has already started.

[Dave Roberts]

If you look at the SBC as well, Texas lobbies for its share of everything, especially for officers and for executives. Nothing new here, and the CR was a Texas event as well--Pressler and Patterson came from where?

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Journalism that relies on "some" to make a very strong, authoritative statement is not the best form of journalism.

Read the conservative GetReligion website - which offers critiques of religion coverage in the media - and you'll see many instances where that type of reliance on "some" to support an argument is chided as low-quality.

Like I said in my previous comment, the Texas landscape is complex and CBFers in Texas are quite diverse on this and various issues.

I'm pretty sure that prominent CBF leaders from Texas (not BGCT leaders) would likely disagree with the tone and implications of some of these statements coming from Texas Baptists (some of which are not invested in CBF in any meaningful way if at all...)

In light of that complexity and diversity, but the Mississippi River (East-West divide) narrative is misguided and overly simplistic.

The person hinting that there's a movement afoot is not even CBF.

There's simply no movement afoot. And if there is a movement, it's pretty sorry movement. I heard little if anything about gay rights while in Fort Worth beyond reaffirmation that the Sexuality Conference went well.

I do agree with you though Sandy about the "we're the big dogs." There's a bit of Rove-esque quality to what's going on here with gay rights being used as a wedge issue.

But I will say, I don't think CBF is going to be bullied. Look at the search committee. It's a good group - not the types that can be bullied other than perhaps by the Baugh family

[Stephen Fox]

Baughs are good people. Thank about it every time you walk the steps of Truett Seminary in Waco.

BDW; I think it well past time for the Baylor Folks to be takin a strong look at the tension between Charles Pickering Allied Defense Fund and the BJC.

WEave it through Rove's political incest with Richard Land and see what you come up with.

Also take a good look at the Sean Wilentz review of LBJ in tnr.com

Oh, I know what it was now.

See my LBJ thread in Public Policy or History and Heritage. We need to talk.

[Sandy]

There's simply no movement afoot. And if there is a movement, it's pretty sorry movement. I heard little if anything about gay rights while in Fort Worth beyond reaffirmation that the Sexuality Conference went well.

This author appears to think that there's a movement, it's not sorry at all, in fact, is quite unapologetic, and thinks that it is at the center of where CBF should be, or that, at least, in time it will be.

http://www.abpnews.com/opinion/commenta ... _zuG_XKe7I

[Ed Pettibone]

Aaron when I read where you wrote above, "There's simply no movement afoot. And if there is a movement, it's pretty sorry movement. I thought immediately of the many SBC pastors who in 79 - 80 - 81 and on, where saying of the
takeover " Oh it is nothing! Just a few malcontents from the right". And when those malcontents started changing things some of our moderate friends said "It's nothing really , just a normal pendulum swing, it will swing back soon." In 1990 some realized there would be no swing back, the oft stated analysis was "The pendulum is broken". Fact is the pendulum has continued to move - to the right. That movement gained strength by waving the flag of inerrancy, the movement forming within CBF to make homosexuality acceptable waves the flag of "justice", It is an attractive rallying point. I am not persuaded that they correctly define justice.

[Matt Richard]

So, it is my hope that the Texas Baptist brethren like CBF of Texas take a breather and not worry outloud so much. Also, it is my hope that we ignore voices in our midst who are not CBF. One pastor who was quoted EXTENSIVELY in the Baptist Standard article on the future of the CBF is - as far as I can tell - not even associated with the CBF!

BDW,

If I may ask... What are my Texas Baptist Brethren saying? Are there some blog posts out there? Maybe something in the Standard?

I dare not ask for names, because I know how my Brethren can get back at you. But, I would like to know what is being said. It seems that CBF TX likes to keep a low profile, always playing second fiddle to the BGCT. I can understand that, though I wish CBF TX had more of a presence.

Anyway, just thought I would ask.

Tim

http://www.baptiststandard.com/index.ph ... &Itemid=53

That's a summary of what some of your Texas Baptist brethren are saying. I'm not sure which pastor BDW was referencing who made comments but isn't involved in CBF. Perhaps Michael Evans, who is president of the African American fellowship, is who he is referencing. Evan's church is not CBF, but in an organization like the fellowship, he could be there on his own. Jerry Carlisle, president of the BGCT, is pastor of FBC Plano, which is CBF affiliated.

From Alan Bean:
As the CBF and the SBC have drifted apart, both groups have redefined themselves. The SBC has embraced the old “heaven and hell” Christianity so characteristic of frontier revivalism. The evangelistic mission of the SBC may have been interpreted in softer terms by moderate SBC leaders between 1950 and 1975, but the kinder, gentler evangelism had been thoroughly eradicated by 1990. Since then, preachers who believe in a literal hell, a real heaven and a sure-’nuff Satan have had the stage to themselves.

If Vestal’s final sermon on the glory of God is anything to go by, the CBF loves the light but would rather not talk about the darkness. Using every rhetorical tool in the preacher’s tool kit, Vestal tried to get his audience fired up about the glory of God. He was only partially successful.

The CBF has always been unsure about the darkness. Do they believe in a real Satan and a real hell? Some may and some may not; but it hardly matters since hardly anyone affiliated with the group is comfortable with these dark concepts.

Interesting that he's a current resident of Texas, Arlington, I believe. I think a lot of his Texas Baptist CBF brethren are still leans a bit more toward belief in a literal heal, a real heaven and a sure-'nuff Satan, as well as a virgin born Jesus who was a real sacrifice for sin.

I like this article and can really relate to it. And for what it is worth, I meet monthly with Truett Seminary grads who are all pastors in the Central Texas area that would say the same thing.

It DOES seem to me that CBF mentality varies by regions. I remember attending the General Assembly in North Carolina (2010?). I was pretty confused when Lauren Winners spoke and mentioned "not shopping at Wal-Mart" and "legalizing homosexuality" as things she simply assumed everyone in the room would agree with 100%.

I agree that the CBF does not seem to have a "darkness" it is striving against. But why can't that be missions? If we decide to make it social issues, are we really all that different from the SBC folks who make combating homosexuality and Obamacare their Jihad?

[Haruo]

I agree that the CBF does not seem to have a "darkness" it is striving against. But why can't that be missions?

I think this needs rewording. I'm fairly certain you don't mean to suggest CBF should strive against missions!

[Matt Richard]

I agree that the CBF does not seem to have a "darkness" it is striving against. But why can't that be missions?

I think this needs rewording. I'm fairly certain you don't mean to suggest CBF should strive against missions!

Right. "Why can't missions be the mechanism by which the CBF combats darkness."

[Haruo]

Much improved.

[Tim Dahl]

I wonder if the "perceived movement" isn't coming primarily out of Mercer.

When I think about the (very few) liberal baptists I'm friends with, they seem to come out of the southern east coast. I would say they remind me of a "President Carter" model of being baptist. Sure, some of them may be ministering in TX now, but this isn't where they started.

Personally, I would like to see a strong commitment to church starting at home, and invigorating a stronger emphasis overseas missions partnerships between churches and unreached people groups. I think the second part has been done fairly well. However, maybe not so much on the first.

I too would like to see a stronger emphasis on evangelism. Going thru Howard Payne, then Truett Seminary; it wasn't until I reached the pastorate that evangelism really began to take on meaning. Not only are people going to hell, but they are living in a very real hell at the present time. Their need for Christ looks as a gaping wound as I see them go about their day to day routine around me.

I used to hope that the CBF would take a lead in the missional movement, but not so much anymore. I remember speaking with one CBF representative (a couple of years ago, I'm sorry I forgot his name), who was taking a lead in that area. First he told me that he originally wasn't that thrilled about it, and then secondly he told me that he often told churches that being "missional" was what they were always doing anyway. For those in the middle of the missional movement, that sort of stuff makes us cringe.

Personally, if the CBF goes the way of welcoming "and" affirming, that would be to much for me and my family. I would end up with no true national identity as a baptist, and just stick with being a texas baptist. I don't want that, but that is a very real possibility.

Tim

[Big Daddy Weaver]

Regarding Mercer, I don't think so.

Now, if you're more progressive theologically and/or politically, you're going to definitely be more at home at McAfee than Truett. I actually don't know many truly liberal Baptists involved in the CBF. Although, I do know liberal Baptists - some are involved with the Alliance and BPFNA. I'm personally left of you on sexuality questions, Tim. But I'm familiar enough with liberal Baptist groups like Baptist Peace Fellowship to know that folks like myself and others in the CBF would not fit in well there at all.

The Task Force Report - adopted in Fort Worth - made clear that CBF is going to take on a revised role in the future. We're moving away from any drift towards top-down. Based on the presentations I saw, CBF in the future will be an organization that serves primarily as a facilitator, linking churches and individuals with partners, etc. So, a CBF-wide programmatic effort on evangelism (or insert emphasis) seems unlikely and not necessarily congruent with the new revised mission/role as facilitator.

I know some wished that CBF would have been in the church planting business. But we haven't been able to offer funding to any of these personnel (missionaries) that we've commissioned in recent years. So, I'm not sure we really ever had the financial resources for that type of effort.

I think the CBF and its churches/partners will go a "Third Way" with regard to homosexuality. The old models of condemning homosexuals and disaffiliating with gay-friendly churches (BGCT, SBC) and public welcoming & affirming stances (BPFNA, Alliance of Baptists) are just that...old.

I think CBF will find a different way to address this issue and we'll have an easier time doing so since we're not a full-fledged denomination and are moving away from a centralized approach.

[Sandy]

I wonder if the "perceived movement" isn't coming primarily out of Mercer.

The author of the article I referenced in ABP is from Wake Forest. I think the "movement", those in CBF who seem to be most disconcerted by its hiring policy, is primarily the recent product of its partner educational institutions that have come into existence since CBF was formed, or who identified with it after it started handing out money. And many of those are graduate schools associated with universities already on the left fringe of Baptist life when CBF came along. From that perspective, it may be difficult to see that there are others who aren't at that point, and that there is still a lot of SBC influence, especially with so many churches still supporting the CP.

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: Aaron I believe you are very much on target with your view of the direction CBF is heading.

It has always been my understanding that CBF's purpose centers on facilitating (connecting churches and individuals with resources on an as needed basis) rather than on operations (designing and conducting long range programs).

I have been associated with CBF from it inception and in the first 8 years was affiliated with 5 different SBC churches as we moved around. Only one of those churches is still SBC, the others are CBF and CBF/ABCUSA . As of 1998 we changed denominations when we Joined and ABCUSA church where eventually Trudy was Ordained into the pastoral Ministry in 1992. This Sunday The Burnt Hills Baptist church is having a reception to celebrate the 10th anniversary of that event. During that time we have been active in the Baptist Fellowship of the NE and she served one year as the moderator of that group. Also we have attended all but one CBF national assembly in that time but have not been in a CBF church. In her send pastorate one couple did goo with us to a BFNE assembly. Last year the Church where she now pastors (the 227 year old, Burnt Hills Baptist Church in Burnt Hills, NY Note BHBC predates the ABCUSA) hosted the BFNE Annual Meeting. But we have only one denomination that is ABC-USA. We Tithe at BHBC but a part of our offerings go to CBF and CBF affiliated partners. Also we use Baptists Today's Sunday school lessons in our adult class. Our church has a tradition of making a yearly gift to the Pastors choice of an Educational Institution ( usually it has been the Seminary that the Pastor attended, the last two years Trudy has asked that this gift has gone to Central Seminary rather than the SBC School where we both graduated.)

We find CBF to be a great resource but should it go further toward becoming a denomination we would have to re-examine our relationship.

And Sandy, our immediate past National Moderator of CBF who has suggested a need to restudy the current policy is a graduate of SBTS. I am not sure where TiM D., may have gotten the idea the the movement he sees is coming from Mercer. We have attended three of their Preaching Consultations over the past several years and I have have heard no great emphasis in that direction. Not even any strong hint, although through other connections, I have been aware that some in the room where "Welcoming and Affirming" in the fullest sense of that phrase.

And while some of the other Seminaries, Baptist Studies Programs, and Divinity Schools with whom CBF partners may admit homosexual students Wake Forest is the only one that I am sure does so as a matter of official policy. I am not sure about Richmond but of their graduates whom I am well acquainted it seems to be a mixed bag.

[Sandy]

It has always been my understanding that CBF's purpose centers on facilitating (connecting churches and individuals with resources on an as needed basis) rather than on operations (designing and conducting long range programs).

But, it did "design" and it does conduct long range programs. International missions would be one. Passport camps, its Justice and Peacemaking ministry, and church starting are all directly controlled by CBF.

I'm not saying that all of those in CBF from the schools that developed out of the SBC controversy are pushing for a change in the hiring policy, and all those from the SBC educational background are against it. But that seems to be where some of the lines can be found. Pointing to the article by Chris Hughes, who is at Wake Forest, which is open to training gay and lesbian ministers, there's at least one influence. Mercer hosted the sexuality conference and provided some of the speakers from that perspective. There are others who want to see CBF make that personnel change outside of those at the schools in the Southeast. BDW would like to see it happen, though he doesn't appear to be interested in pushing for it now. There were obviously some individuals who thought they could move the fellowship that way once Vestal was gone.

We find CBF to be a great resource but should it go further toward becoming a denomination we would have to re-examine our relationship.

I think it is already down that road at some point. The last I heard anyone mention a number, there were somewhere in the neighborhood of 150 churches affiliated with CBF that had cut their SBC ties, or hadn't ever been SBC affiliated. If the church starting efforts are successful, there will soon be a bigger number of churches in CBF that have never known SBC affiliation, and that will increase the movement toward CBF becoming much more of a denominational identity for them, as individuals from those churches take leadership in CBF.

[Neil Heath]

Sandy, I'm pretty sure Passport is a totally independent entity, not CBF controlled in any way, although many of its participating churches are CBF affiliated.

Neil

[Ed Pettibone]

Sandy, I'm pretty sure Passport is a totally independent entity, not CBF controlled in any way, although many of its participating churches are CBF affiliated.

Neil

Ed: You are correct Neil. For those looking for a great Camping program see http://www.passportcamps.org/home/Inc._2011/Home.html

And in fact some of those Same CBF churches are still CBF/ SBC and SBC/CBF. Some church that utilize Pass port are not Baptist

NOTE: History

Founded in 1993, Passport, Inc. has developed a reputation for creative, high quality Christian programs for students; moving and theologically stretching worship; an energetic staff; and hands on mission and discipleship experiences for youth and mission education for kids. We value both a freedom to dream, as well as a respect for tradition.

PASSPORT’s Statement of Identity

Passport, Inc. is a nonprofit company whose goal is to work for integrated, ecumenical, inspirational weeks of summer camp that model important lessons like service in the name of Christ. PASSPORT’s theological perspective respects the various church groups that are represented (Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, The Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), United Methodist Church, Evangelical Lutheran, etc.) and affirms the call of God on men and women equally. Further, we understand the particular developmental needs of children and youth and will not allow any manipulation or pressure in any context during camp.

Funding and support

Passport, Inc, is a registered 501(c)(3). As a non-profit we seek grants and contributions in an effort to provide affordable programming to students. We offer financial assistance for youth and children from all over the world, especially those who would never have the opportunity to attend summer camp. Unlike many non-profit ministries, camp registration provides an economic base which allows us to project and plan for quality programming in many arenas. There are a number of ministry opportunities that generate no income, but that Passport feels compelled to offer. To see our full organizational profile, visit our Guidestar listing.

If your church or organization would like to help participate, you might consider the following.

•Funding the on-line devotional D365

•Scholarship a youth or kids! or college or international student

•Leadership training

•Capital needs related to administration, transportation and warehousing of camp supplies.

Please feel free to contact us directly at 800-769-0210 or email David Burroughs, President, Passport, Inc.
Register for Camp

3421 Sierra Drive, Birmingham, AL 35216 • 800-769-0210

© Passport, Inc. 2012 all rights reserved