by William Thornton » Tue May 13, 2014 4:47 pm
Stephen, if you had read my blog back in February you would have been up to speed on this already. bob Terry agrees with me and thanks for the link.
exerpt:
1. Do we really think it necessary in 2014 to inform thousands of SBC churches that their communion practices are liable to cause them to be dismissed from the SBC? It is not allowed to say, "Nah, we will never wield this sword. It's just nice to have."
2. Is the CBF still such a problem that we think it necessary to find a clean, neat way to get rid of them altogether?
3. Do we want to invite scrutiny on this basis of all SBC churches that are happily supporting our work, missionaries, and entities which churches may not be adhering to the BFM in all of its entirety and subject to the varying interpretations of this SBC sub-group or another? While the BFM is a good guide for our employees, entities, and personnel, would it be better used as a club against churches that might tweak this or that part of it.
4. Aren't we happy to have considerable numbers of dually affiliated African-American churches who might differ in some small degrees from the BFM?
5. Will we have a call to further tighten the BFM or distill it for the essence of what being in friendly cooperation really is.
6. Do we want yet another Cooperative Program reduction plan and isn't Frank Page hopeful, finally, for a slight "uptick" in it?
Of several quirks about we Southern Baptists, one is that we all have two eyes, a nose, innumerable opinions, and pockets full of agendas. Whose agenda is best served by these changes?
My stray thoughts on SBC stuff may be found at my blog,