Congratulations to Bryant Wright on his election as the new President of the Southern Baptist Convention. He has a great deal of work in front of him, and with the new Executive Director of the SBC, Frank Page, and the impending new Presidents of the North American Mission Board and the International Mission Board, there is a new day dawning in the SBC. Hopefully it will be a kinder, gentler day with people focusing on the Gospel and not tertiary issues. Our prayers will be with President Wright.
I will be watching closely the vote on opening the "sealed" records of the GCR debate. I predict Chairman Ronnie Floyd, Al Mohler and Donna Gaines will speak against opening the records and the Convention will approve the Commitee's recommendation to seal the record for 15 years. I hope I am wrong because an organization is only as sick as the secrets it keeps, particularly a Christian organization.
The debate and vote to unseal the records is scheduled for 8:50 a.m. eastern on Wednesday.
18 comments:
Will actually matter to about .1 of all Southern Baptists.
Nothing else is as important as who he appoints to the Committee on Committees. He is not an insider of the CR. I would guess that Ted Traylor was the one favored by the CR hard liners. Will he try ingratiate himself to this group by appointing those who support the CR or will he appoint the best possible candidates? Only time will tell.
Hi Wade,
in March, you wrote a post about Pastor Wright at the time he announced his candidacy.
You highlighted part of something that he wrote. Something important.
It had to do with seeing that more of his Church's mission contributions went directly to the mission fields.
(Fifty percent given directly to Lottie Moon.)
That was pretty amazing.
I think you sound more hopeful now for the future of the SBC.
Perhaps tomorrow's vote on GCRTF records transparency will encourage you also. Here's hoping. :)
Respectfully,
Christiane
I would imagine that on Monday noone will even remember the GCR debate, or for that matter, even care that it ever happened.
The SBC is quickly making itself irrelevant to the Christian community.
My prediction:
The SBC messengers records will vote to keep the records sealed as recommended.
There will be some debate, but someone will say something to the effect of "If you pastors were meeting with your staffs having a candid discussion about the problems in your church and your plans to address them, would you want your congregations to know everything that was said, and who said it? Pastors want their churches to trust their vision and leadership as God's appointed leaders, so we should do the same for the God-appointed leaders on the GCR Task Force."
Since so many messengers are pastors and staff, and members who have been conditioned to consider questioning them a sin, they will vote to seal the records.
I hope I am wrong.
-----
Tom
Sorry Wade, promises were made that those who offered confidential testimony before the committee, those comments would remain confidential. Dr. Mohler stated that if the convention does not allow this secrecy and sealing then no committee will ever be able to work. Another speaker against said: If the vote had been to unseal it would have only served a short-term political agenda. The amendment was a good idea but the committee was set against it too. The amendment failed. The motion Failed. sad day
They remain sealed.
Tom Kelley rightly predicted the killer statement.
And there you have it... the motion fails. I think the title of this sums it up well.
From a previous comment. "You highlighted part of something that he wrote. Something important.
It had to do with seeing that more of his Church's mission contributions went directly to the mission fields.
(Fifty percent given directly to Lottie Moon.)
That was pretty amazing."
Does this mean that they take their regular budget and set up a missions fraction and then take 50% of that fraction and send it in with what ever Lottie Moon offering they collect? They could take their entire CP offering and specify that it all goes to LM or to the IMB. What that does is to give them the pride statement about their money going to missions--and it means that undesignated money has to shift to paying the "electric bill" and other unglamorous items. This often leads to more designated offering because we want “our money to go to missions.”
The principle of the CP was that the money would be given and then distributed wisely and efficiently to optimally serve the needs. Designated giving often supports an agenda or pride.
" Dr. Mohler stated that if the convention does not allow this secrecy and sealing then no committee will ever be able to work"
Mohler should know. Remember the article about him wanting to take Priesthood of Believers out of the BFM? When he could not get that, he insisted the "s" be taken off believers.
It is absurd for him to say no committee can operate unless there is secrecy. They are not developing a nuclear bomb.
For Christians they are not very enternity minded. All "secrets" will be made known. Better now, don't you think?
"Mohler should know. Remember the article about him wanting to take Priesthood of Believers out of the BFM? When he could not get that, he insisted the 's' be taken off believers."
I'm strictly going from memory here and could be mistaken, but wasn't it the other way around? It was "priesthood of the believer" in the 1963 version and failing to get that removed completely from the new version they settled on "priesthood of the believers," as in what "we, the high priests of the SBC" (the "believers") decide you should believe.
I'm strictly going from memory here and could be mistaken, but wasn't it the other way around? It was "priesthood of the believer" in the 1963 version and failing to get that removed completely from the new version they settled on "priesthood of the believers," as in what "we, the high priests of the SBC" (the "believers") decide you should believe.
Wed Jun 16, 02:25:00 PM 2010
Good catch, BBC
http://www.baptiststandard.com/2000/7_17/pages/bfm_meaning.html
Lydia,
Your link
Just curious. Have the records from the meetings of the BF&M 2000 committee ever been made available?
Lydia,
Your point is supported by the illustration.
The idea of modern SBC leadership is that the individual("the priesthood of the believer") cannot handle as much and cannot be trusted as much as the collective body ("priesthood of the believers").
This too will actually matter to about .1 of all Southern Baptists.
How can we continue to elect men to lead the Convention when they do not financially support the Convention? Not good, in my opinion.
Post a Comment