Did anything of significance really happen at the Amarillo Convention of 2007? I expect that question will not be answered until the announcement of the new executive director of the BGCT. Today, I have little hope for a change of course. A good topic of discussion is what is the course of the BGCT?
The BGCT is set on a course to become a national convention. Herbert Reynolds, Paul Powell, and Winfred Moore were instrumental in setting this course years ago. They actually reserved a corporate name for this convention that could be chartered in Texas. There was an outcry over their actions and assurances were made that such a move was not in the works. Since that time much has changed. The BGCT is now made up of churches from multiple states. What churches from out of state cooperate with the BGCT is a hidden secret supposedly at the request of those churches. There is nothing like transparency. The BGCT was instrumental in changing the guidelines of the BWA and is now a recognized partner. Each year the BGCT moves closer to having its own mission sending agencies. The BGCT has three seminaries of its own.
Why all this slow movement and why did the leadership play down the idea of a named convention? Its all about money. If the BGCT leadership were to announce her intentions, many rank and file Southern Baptist Churches in Texas would immediately redirect their cooperative program funds. What makes me believe such a thing? The changes made in 2000 in supporting the SBC seminaries cost the BGCT millions in CP money and hundreds of churches left the BGCT to support the SBTC. This move to a national convention is what makes the CBF and the New Covenant so important to Charles Wade and David Currie. The die is cast under the noses of many Texas Baptist who have little clue.
The course is set to continue. The leaders who are quietly working to see this happen remain in place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
So what options are now available? It is obvious that TxBC will continue to drive a wedge between the leadership of the BGCT and the churches that want change.
So what is the answer? Join SBTC? Start a new convention? Marginalize your church’s suport for the BGCT? Make no mistake, there are going to be those that leave this convention for the other TX option. This will lessen the support for change within the BGCT.
If there is nothing to stop the left-ward drift of the TxBC, if there is nothing to wake up the churches to the peril of the currrent lack of vision, then the BGCT will make itself irrelevant for Kingdom work. What will then happen to the institutions that are left behind?
At the very least it is time to offer formal and organized opposition to the TxBC and take the convention back to the churches. It is necessary to define what is going on so that a light can be cast on the true state of the convention. It is time to expose the air-brushed image that is put up for everyone to see.
The options? You mention several viable options yet there is another that is often exercised. It includes diving into local church and even local association work and ignoring the state convention altogether. This is the option that has been exercised according to CP receipts and according to convention attendance numbers.
Brother Edwards made an insightful comment while discussing his motion about a vision for 2020. He pointed out that by that year the most faithful and capable financial giving generation will have passed away or will be rapidly passing away. He went on to say the BGCT is not prepared for such a drop in giving. The leadership will do well to heed his words.
I just can't accept that the answer is to isolate ourselves and our churches and ignore the disenfranchisement and the abuse of funds.
Admittedly, there is nothing that can be done for another year, but ignoring the situation will not make it go away. And isolation also means that godly men and women will not have the opportunity to be candidates for the EB or a trustee position in one of our universities. There is more to the BGCT than the votes taken in Oct/Nov.
It seems that the convention is making plans to address the decline in giving. This shortage of funds seems to be one reason why there is growing momentum to become an alternative to the CBF and the SBC. I just wonder when the first BGC annual meeting will be held in MN?
Baptist in General,
Although it may not be an acceptable alternative to ignore what is happening in the BGCT it is a reality. Falling annual meeting attendance and dropping CP giving are testimony to that fact. Many have chosen that course.
If one chooses to go against the tide, it should not be done in haste. The machine that really controls the BGCT is highly experienced in political, denominational warfare and any suggested changes in the course will be viewed as a threat. They will respond. The TBC once again was successful in filling every elected place with their choices. Evidenclty, they did not view David Lowrie as a threat to their plans.
In the eyes of the controlling parties of the BGCT they have not moved leftward, the SBC has moved rightward. What happens between now and next October will decide if anything significant happens at the annual meeting in Ft. Worth. My contention is this, nothing happened of any significance during the business sessions in Amarillo. It will take an organized effort to bring change and I don't see nayone organizing. I hear some discussion of change but I see no development of a guding coalition to make change happen. Those in power will not feel threatened until some organization develops in their opposition. What organization there was left and started a new conveniton 10 years ago.
Obviously, there are concerned messengers out there that want to see change. Otherwise, David Lowrie would not have garnered almost 49% of the vote. That kind of change has to start somewhere, either with a loose coalition of concerned messengers or an organized effort to promote positive influence.
All of this starts with a vision for the convention. It was easy for Texas Baptist to rally around the autonomy of the church and the autonomy of the convention. Unfortunately this is like my kids asking for $5 and when they see a $20 bill, they wind up asking for it as well. The current leadership has their sites on a national convention. Is that what we really want out of the BGCT?
So, to get started there has to be a positive vision for the BGCT that others can rally around. It is not something that should assign blame or be critical of current leadership, it needs to be a stated positive alternative. It should be an alternative that continues to rally around the independence of Texas Baptist. If anything, having a group that has a stated alternative vision for the BGCT will force current leadership to make clear their ultimate intentions for the convention.
The question is who can be the face of such an effort? Who can be the positive agent for change because it cannot be those that have fronted opposition in the past three years. Despite your pessimism, it can happen and it would be relatively easy. It just needs a respected name to give it credibility.
General,
I wish I could be more optimistic. My nature is one of optimism. I just don't believe the entrenched leadership is about to roll over and give it up because they meet opposition.
Who could be the face? Where could it start? The executive committee would be a good place to begin and not all who serve there are totally sold out to the current direction. Perhaps you could be the face. It will take a lot of work behind the scenes and much personal contact.
Did David Lowrie's nomination really accomplish what some think in terms of sending a message? It made the disgruntled feel a little better. In viewing the elections that followed, nothing changed. The 1st VP is well entrenched in the current direction and the second VP is the selection of FBC Amarillo, FBC Arlington, and Charles Wade. Need I say more?
Any vision that runs counter or contrary to that of TBC will be met with strong opposition and strong political maneuvering. Most of those with these characteristics left for another convention. I am not opposed to leadership groups and even ethical political maneuvering, these are necessary in organizations to provide necessary leadership. There has not been a network or coalition that could change anything the current leadership circle desires in probably 20 years. This will not change easily.
In this matter I am being more of a realist than optimist or pessimist. I would love to be wrong.
Gary, I appreciate the dialogue. And, I hear you. I think there is hope. And for the sake of the institutions of the BGCT, I will continue to hope.
For some reason, Currie feels even more emboldened after the convention to make statements of his vision for Texas Baptists in this Baptist Standard article.. These kinds of statements will make it easier for us to offer that positive alternative vision.
Good post Gmay. Here is how fast they wanted to "come out" from closed doors.
http://www.baptiststandard.com/postnuke/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=display&pid=7018
Post a Comment