I move that the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Orlando, Florida, June 15-16, authorize the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention to consider any church’s affiliation with the Alliance of Baptists to constitute an action to affirm, approve, or endorse homosexual behavior.

Some may try to call this “guilt by association”, but it allows the Executive Committee the authority to make a determination during the year instead of waiting six or seven months after an incident.  Also, it keeps precious business time from being consumed on the convention floor.

The catalyst for this motion was the  DC City Council bill that was passed legalizing same sex marriage.  The bill presented to the DC City Council was based on a Declaration that was authored by Clergy United for Marriage Equality.  This group has for its members an area DC Baptist pastor the Rev.  Dr. Amy Butler. Dr. Butler is Senior Pastor of Calvary Baptist church in Washington DC.  Calvary Baptist, while not sending messengers to the convention, is sending ACP information to the Southern Baptist Convention and thus is listed as a Southern Baptist Church. Also if you scroll down to the signatories of this declaration one will find  Rev. Stan Hastey, Alliance of Baptists.  Rev. Hastey is not just a representative of the Alliance of Baptists but he is Executive Director of this group   The Alliance issued a position statement on same sex marriage back in 2004 as follows:

“Affirming that our federal and state constitutions exist to protect the rights of minorities from the tyranny of the majority and in the context of the current debate over same-sex marriage, we of the Alliance of Baptists decry the politicization of same-sex marriage in the current presidential contest and other races for public office. We specifically reject the proposed amendments to the constitution of the United States and state constitutions that would enshrine discrimination against sexual minorities and define marriage in such a way as to deny same-sex couples a legal framework in which to provide for one another and those entrusted to their care.
As Christians and as Baptists, we particularly lament the denigration of our gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender sisters and brothers in this debate by those who claim to speak for God. We affirm that the Alliance of Baptists supports the rights of all citizens to full marriage equality, and we affirm anew that the Alliance will ‘create places of refuge and renewal for those who are ignored by the church’.”

While many in the Alliance openly affirm same sex marriage the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship is not quite ready for that step, or is it?

This recent article reporting a break-out session that was attended by nearly 300 persons is one reason we see a need for the Kenney motion.  While Kenney’s motion does not identify the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship it may not be long before a motion similar in language may be needed.  Why would I say such a thing?  Notice the position one of the presenters at the 2010 Cooperative Baptist Fellowship gathering takes.  George Mason, Pastor of Wilshire Baptist in Texas presented the following  thoughts in a break-out session of approximately 300.

“I can tell you that my mind has changed and I am seeing differently on this over time.” That has disappointed some people, he said. “As a pastor, I have known the pain of people who have left the church I serve because I was too conservative about the matter – and people who have left because I was too liberal about the matter.”

“A family conversation about same-sex orientation is not necessarily about behavior,” Mason said. “Some people think different orientations don’t exist, that there is only acting gay and sinning as a result. Others say people are simply born one way or the other.”

“I’m not certain about either position,” Mason said. “It seems that people are more on a continuum about their orientation. That’s uncomfortable.”

Mason noted that the few biblical texts that mention homosexual behavior are more likely to be about specific acts like rape or pederasty, and that “the Bible seems to be silent about orientation.”

It appears that now the position of non-committal is the favored position of the CBF.  There is only one step left for this organization to take and that is the position of orientation.  Orientation is the only viable position left for those that want to say they believe the Bible but be seen as scholarly by the academy.  In the orientation position the ungodly behavior is not the fault of the person it is the fault of the Creator.  If the CBF position of non-committal prevails, I believe, within five years the position on same sex marriage of the CBF will be the same as the Alliance of Baptists.

You can listen to the podcast using the player below, or you can subscribe in iTunes by clicking on the image in this post or on the link in the sidebar. Share in the comments here your suggestions for how we can improve the podcast, and take a moment to give us a rating or a review on our iTunes page. Thanks as always for listening, and we’ll be back for more podcasting fun next week.

We have had a Great Commission Resurgence Task Force chosen and meeting together since last August.  They have presented a progress report and have now issued a statement concerning the report.  I believe the quote that should raise everyone’s eyebrows is;

Additionally, our final report and recommendations are a commitment towards a future vision. While a future vision will contain matters that are occurring presently, there is no need for a future vision if all we do is replicate our present.

It seems that the report was merely a shot across the SBC Zion bow in order to see how much turn the convention could take.  It seems that the convention has seen a response that the GCR Task Force did not anticipate.  Thus, the purpose behind the issuing of a statement that the report was not a final word.

We have seen an unprecedented move by a task force to present items to the convention concerning changes at entities without even consulting the entities that were being recommended for change.  Of course some have asked about seminaries and with two seminary presidents sitting on the task force, it would have been very difficult to merge seminaries. Though there is rumor that was something discussed.  There seems to be a burning question as to the purpose of NAMB being the only entity that is recommended for change.  Does one believe that the IMB is operating at is best potential? As we move forward we see another unprecedented action has emerged.

Never have I seen presidents of entities openly and publicly shooting at each other.  Certainly we had the President of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary place a charge against the President of the International Mission Board.  However, two things I need to remind our readers.  First, Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary is not a Southern Baptist Seminary.  While the Thomas Road Baptist Church is part of the Southern Baptist Convention, the seminary is not supported and funded by the SBC Cooperative Program.  Second, Dr. Caner issued both a public and private apology to Dr. Rankin concerning his comments.

The situation we now find ourselves is an open squabble between the President of the IMB and the President of the Executive Committee.  We have seen differences between entity Presidents before.  As recently as 2003 we witnessed Dr. Chuck Kelley and Dr. Morris Chapman disagree over sole membership.  However, neither of the good Drs. publicly issued an appeal to the SBC constituency that  the other was being dishonest in their reporting.  And neither of the two ever questioned the others commitment to winning the lost.  But, we have that now.

Dr. Rankin has charged Dr. Chapman with being more concerned about cooperation than he is with the Great Commission.  This is like saying that Dr. Chapman will accept any and everything as long as we cooperate.  Of course this charge comes after Dr. Rankin publicly charged that leaders were living in denial and then calls into question the 45,000 churches with the 16 million members.  The churches that support the IMB, the lions share of the CP, as being disengenious in their reporting.  This comes from the head of the IMB, an entity that reported 500,000 baptisms, without any direct correspondence with Missionaries that planted these churches.  But, I digress.

What we have seen now is a response from Dr. Chapman, he said; “”I am saddened that Jerry so blatantly misrepresented my comments.”  Dr. Chapman calls it a ‘blatant misrepresentation’.  That brings to mind a question.  What exactly is Dr. Chapman accusing Dr. Rankin of?  I do not know, but Dr. Chapman goes on in his statement to summarize his comments with the following:

It grieves me that Jerry used this open forum to question my allegiance to my Lord and the mandate He has given me, to us as Southern Baptists, and to all who call on His Name. I pray he will retract his unjustified remarks. They do not befit a man of his position and stature.

Conclusion

It seems we are living in a time that we need to be united going into this years convention and vote.  We saw last year’s convention produce a 95% vote to form the GCRTF.  They have issued a report, that could be changed completely by May 3, 2010.  However, we have been told that when that report is presented it will be the final report.  For us to be united we need our leaders united.  It seems that if the council of presidents have this type of bickering going on between them publicly then there will be no Great Commission Resurgence.  One cannot call into question the motives of another, especially in public and expect the SBC constituency to be united.

I have a suggestion.  If our leaders do not resolve their differences by the time the convention begins in June, then I suggest a recommendation for the very first order of business.  I recommend that we authorize the Teller Committee to locate a room and direct the Committee on the Order of Business to corral the Council of Presidents into the located room.  I further recommend that these two committees be authorized to guard the doors and not allow anyone to leave that room until everyone in that room can work out their differences to the point that each one passes a polygraph that each would entrust their child’s spiritual development to anyone in that room.  No one would leave until all could pass such a test.

If the Southern Baptist Convention ever sees a Great Commission Resurgence, then the leaders are going to have to sit down and work through their differences.  People follow the leadership of those God has entrusted to those positions.  Leaders, we need you to lead!

***UPDATE***

Dr. Rankin has issued a public statement regarding this issue.  Praise God that he has seen his need in doing this.  He is as firmly committed to his position as before, but he no longer calls Dr. Chapman’s personal motives into question.

Listen to the podcast using the player below, or click the logo or sidebar icon to be taken to our iTunes page. After you subscribe to the podcast, do us the favor of writing a short review on iTunes, or just give us a star rating. These will help us greatly, and we appreciate it. Comment here with suggestions for how we can improve the podcast. And, as always, thanks for listening. We continue to add new listeners each week, and we’re grateful that you take the time.

Here are some links that came up during this week’s conversation:

• IMB leader Jerry Rankin announces retirement
• Morris H. Chapman announces Executive Committee retirement
• Blog debate on baptism
• The Acts 1:11 Conference

The Florida Baptist Witness has Logan’s complete statement.