Virginia Baptist

[Clint Kritzer]

http://www.vbmb.org/vbrcnewsdisplay.mgi?id=2452375.51672454.1498

The Baptist General Assembly of Virginia has called a special meeting on Friday, May 10th to discuss a proposal by their Executive Director, John Upton. I will be in attendance at this meeting as a messenger as it is a proposal to shift the direction of the Assembly's direction in missions. The Assembly has traditionally been a link in the pikeway to Nashville for my church.

I would very much appreciate all of you taking a moment to glance over this article and see what red flags you may see. I appreciate it.

- Clint

 

[Squire Robertsson]

"For those who can sign the Baptist Faith and Message statement, there is a wonderful organization [the International Mission Board] where they can serve,” said Upton. “We should encourage them to do so. For those who are called to the 10/40 window [the so-called “World A” region that is a primary focus of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, plus other CBF ministries to marginalized people] there is another wonderful organization for them to serve with."

"But what happens when you can’t sign the statement or if you're not called to the 10/40 window (or there are other variable factors)? Upton asked. “Are we going to raise up emerging leaders and offer them nothing?"

Bold type added by me.
My question is if you cann't agree to the BF&M why be a representiative of the SBC? This seems to be a venture in inclusivism. Not necessarily the best path to follow.

 

[Clint Kritzer]

That was also one of the red flags for me. The other statement that pointed to that was

“People tell us,” Upton said, “‘Please help us find a way out of the denominational mess we’re in. Is there a place for us [all factions in Baptist life] at the [denominational table]. We need something to bigger than us to belong to.’”

Bigger than the SBC???

If neither the CBF nor the SBC include these missionaries' faiths, what exactly are we supporting?

I appreciate the feedback. I plan on going into this meeting with a rather cynical view.

I should add that these "special meetings " are VERY rare for this organization. That in itself pointed out to me that I should be a messenger to this. I wish TomVols were around...

 

[Roy]

Hello Clint:

Feel free to take what I say with a grain of salt, because I have been a working stiff most of my life; not an implementer or shaker and mover.

I have to AMEN what the Squire said and also, I want to let you know that I looked over the article that you posted. At a glance, it appears that this group may be straying from the traditional Baptist concept of Divine Guidance in church leadership roles.

Have you ever heard of "TQM" (Total Quality Management)? The subject of your article looks as if it may be structured according to TQM concepts. I have mixed feelings about TQM. It could possibly be OK in the work place(the Japanese swear by it), but I don't think it should be in the church, because it focuses on group concensus. In a TQM session, there won't be an instructor to to teach and allow individuals to absorb information and to use that info in ways that they see fit. Instead there is a facillitator, who already has a goal which he wishes the group to arrive at. The group is guided in the direction that the facillitator wants them to go, and once they reach the goal they are all made to feel that they are all in agreement and have reached a common goal on their own.

Among the negative things that I have heard about TQM are that it is New Age and Socialistic. Individual concerns are tossed out in favor of a group consensus. Empowerment, and Vision are two terms with both a Biblical and New Age perspective. TQM, being a secular concept, is not likely promoting these terms in a Biblical way.

I have put a link here with a TQM model for you to look at. There are likely better illustrations to be found. Just type in TQM in your favorite search engine and see what you find.

http://www.skyenet.net/~leg/tqm.htm

Anyway Brother Clint, that's my two bits.

Roy

 

[Rev. Joshua]

Originally posted by The Squire:
Bold type added by me.
My question is if you cann't agree to the BF&M why be a representiative of the SBC? This seems to be a venture in inclusivism. Not necessarily the best path to follow.

The problem is that many Southern Baptists feel that the SBC no longer represents them. It's not that they've suddenly become more liberal, but that the organization has been taking huge strides to the right. In those states where the majority of the churches are no longer represented by the new SBC, many of the churches want a broader umbrella of cooperation than the SBC model. (In other words, they don't want their state conventions to be subject to be as narrow a fellowship as the SBC. Since the state conventions are not subordinate to the SBC, this is their right.)

Why should the SBC's increasing fundamentalism be allowed to splinter state conventions that are not fundamentalist?

Joshua

 

[Clint Kritzer]

I understand what you are saying, Joshua, but my retort to that is that the SBC is an INCREDIBLY slow moving machine. Turnovers in leadership are not accomplished in years but rather in decades. The only way that the SBC will be brought back into a balance is from within its infrastructure and the appointment and education of the messengers sent to the floor.

If we leave the ship first, does that make us rats?

 

[Clint Kritzer]

Also, I'm glad you joined this discussion, Joshua. Is the Alliance of Baptist aware of this movement to your knowledge?

 

[Rev. Joshua]

Clint,

I'm not sure that state conventions can be considered to have ever been fully "on the ship." Coming up with multiple giving/mission plans for constituent churches strikes me as more of a compromise to meet the needs of as many churches as possible.

As for the Alliance, very very few Alliance churches (if any) are still affiliated with the SBC. Almost all of them are CBF or ABC churches, or simply solely Alliance churches. There is also a new move toward dual-alignment with the UCC.

(I wonder how many other Three-Letter-Acronyms I can use here?)

Joshua

 

[TomVols]

Clint,
I only have a few moments as I'm in my "blender" month (Explained on the moderator forum) but I find it difficult to support any so-called Baptist or Southern Baptist endeavor that refuses to be confessional. Moderates and Liberals have reacted bitterly against the 2000 BFM because it is a conservative confession, not that people must sign it or teach in accordance with it. It appears that the predictions are coming true about Mods/Libs in Texas and VA attempting to find ways to funnel monies to people who will spread their message as opposed to the missionaries of the IMB or NAMB. (A similar move is afoot in Kentucky that reaks of political power plays among the moderates who are still have the state convention under clenched in its iron fist). As in all things, my question goes to motivation and purpose. Why this new group? Why can they not support the IMB missionaries who share Jesus Christ? Why do they oppose the solidly Biblical 2000 BFM?
I'll check back in a day or two. Take care.

[ May 06, 2002, 12:26 PM: Message edited by: TomVols ]

 

[Clint Kritzer]

Well, we had our meeting today and the turnout was incredible: 2,452 messengers and 110 visitors. We assembled at the First Baptist Church of Charlottesville, the same church where Lottie Moon was Baptized.

I was in the minority voice today. Dr. Upton's vision passed with a large majority. As was feared from the article I had shared with all of you, this is a move towards ecumenalism. There were a few of us who stood at microphones and questioned the doctrine that this proposal would endorse. I and a pastor from a Charlottesville church, Pastor Jeff Riddle, did at least pen Upton to saying that the movement would adhere to the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message of the SBC, but the whole goal of the proposal is to create a wider umbrella under which to operate, Upton even saying that "we need to work with the other 70% of Christians in the US and Europe."

I believe today that I was involved in a gathering that established a new denomination and I am an unwitting participant. One fellow who was in favor of the proposal suggested that the word "Baptist" be added to the title of the project but his suggestion was never acted upon.

One young lady stood up and announced that she would be graduating from Richmond seminary in two weeks and wanted to urge that the program endorse women pastors, which, though debatable, I am neither here nor there on another autonomous church's decision, but then she went on to say that "we have much to learn from our Hindu and Muslim friends." I turned to my travelling companion and asked, "is this what Richmond is producing now?"

Upton began his sales pitch (and yes, he is a remarkable salesman) with a talk of the dry bones in Ezekial and compared our denomination to them. He says he feels that we can bring life back into the Virginia Baptist with this program.

It's a sad day for me. History will show this day as a turning point for the Baptist faith. Unfortunately, it will show as a day when we left the true course.

Someone hand me an IFB membership application, please.

[ May 11, 2002, 02:21 AM: Message edited by: Clint Kritzer ]

 

[Rev. Joshua]

Clint,

We obviously have a very different perspective on ecumenism, so I won't even try to debate the results of that meeting with you.

Regarding BTSR, it should probably be noted that it was founded by the Alliance of Baptists, the only explicitly theologically liberal denominational body in the U.S.

Joshua

 

[Essene]

I was one of the 2452 registered messengers at the specially-called "off-month" meeting of the BGAV. I correctly surmised that the purpose of this meeting was to rubber-stamp a "new vision" of the Baptist General Assoc. of Virginia's (BGAV) new Executive Director, John V. Upton, Jr. (JVU).

Now that I have said that, I must say that I was favorable impressed with JVU. Having been on the job less than 5 months, I would have expected him to be in what I call "reaction mode", i.e. waiting for fires to pop up and then putting out the fires. This is a man who is an ACTor, not a REACTor. He is developing a plan.

"Everyone's got a place at the table!" I stopped counting after I heard JVU say that 8 times. It was obvious to me that he was trying to make it clear to those aligned with Southern Baptist Conservatives of Va. (SBCV) that their input was welcomed, and that it would be considered. He mentioned that at least three of the day's speakers would be from WM-1 churches. [Without going into a full explanation, suffice to say that these are the Va. churches that wish for their Missions monies to be sent thru SBC.]

I felt an atmosphere of "peace" in that meeting that I had not felt at the previous two BGAV meetings I had attended. One layman noted,
"Not a word has been spoken about who we're against....". That peace would not last for the entire 5 hours however.

One messenger asked JVU a question about dealing with "those who fall into doctrinal error...", and asked him to be specific about some "criteria." JVU replied that the "criterion is the 1963 BF&M." He made no reference to the 2000 BF&M, but he later would be wrongly accused of attacking the 2000 BF&M.

When discussing the "planting" of new churches in new residential developments, you [Clint Kritzer] asked a question about determining the desire of the community to fill these churches. It was a valid question. I'd like to compliment you on the non-confrontational way you made your point, and even went out of your way to compliment the Chair.

The guy who soon followed you, Pastor of Calvary Baptist Church, Charlottesville, on the other hand, was not in a conciliatory mode. He had a prepared (obviously written before the meeting started) statement he was determined to read. Even though it took him more than the "three-minute limit" to read it, the Chair was kind enough to let him do so. Up to this point, we had prettty well stayed out of "denominational politics". It's a shame this gentleman had to ruin it. However, if he felt led by the Holy Spirit to make this prepared statement, I wouldn't have denied him that platform. I only wish he he stuck to the agreed-upon limit, and done it with a nicer demeanor.

I felt inspired by the "Glocal Missions and Evangelism" section of the program. I will retire in about 4 years, and I felt led to volunteer my services in one of JVU's proposed volunteer opportunities.

This was my first encounter with JVU, and I am very impressed. Let's (Virginia Baptists) try to keep an open mind as we move ahead under his leadership.

One other thing that will stay with me a long time was the statement made by Reginald Warren. "God has more money to give us than we can spend, on the things He wants us to do."

 

[Essene]

Originally posted by Clint Kritzer:
[QB]
I believe today that I was involved in a gathering that established a new denomination

Essene: If I recall correctly, you indicated BEFORE the meeting that you feared Mr. Upton was trying to start a new denomination. If that was your pre-conceived notion, I don't know how you could still have that "fear" after attending the meeting. I was there. That was not the thrust of the meeting. There was not even a hint of "new denomination."

Herb Reynolds (Texas Baptist) IS trying to start a new *denomination. John Upton is NOT.

*I wish Herb would hurry up. I want to join it.

 

[Clint Kritzer]

Hi Essene -

I appreciate your response and comments. As I had stated the majority was rather overwhelming at this meeting and I recognize that. I think it's fair to say that even though denominational politics was not mentioned (except by the pastor from Calvary, I wish I had caught his name), denominational politics was at the core of this proposed plan. Yesterday we established the Alma Hunt fund to be used in the same way that the Cooperative programs would be used, for world, national and state missions. That vote was NOT as lopsided as the first.

As I stated, my REAL concern was , and still is, that we have opened the door for our contributions to be used to spread a dubious doctrine. If we had been talking about disaster relief, I would have been for the proposal. I would stand right beside any Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Episcopalian, etc. to stack sand bags against a flooding river or carry litters to ambulances. But we were not talking about this type of operation. We were talking about the implementation of the Great Commission.

As Dr. Upton's proposal stands, in November we will be agreeing to a program that supports missionaries that will have NO accountability to the local churches for FIVE years! That, in my mind, is ridiculous. If you peruse the other religions forum on this board you will see that there are doctrines that are not only contrary, but exactly opposite of our's (Baptist). Yes, we all want to spread the Gospel, but what gospel will we be supporting?

Please note that at this meeting, the Associational heads had developed a carefully planned presentation. The graphics were beautiful, huge black and white photos of smiling minorities and sihloetted chuches, a corporate quality logo and a highly enthusiastic motivational speaker. Not a single statement or concern from the floor was taken into account on the votes that we made. In fact, to the contrary, the votes were carefully written out and displayed on the big screen and were not presented for consideration until 15 minutes before the actual vote. I think that we were railroaded. The natives were shown the shiny trinkets and they gave up their goods.

Back to the denominational politics, I have stated before and those on this board that know me can attest to the fact that I am no fan of the ultra-conservative right wing of the SBC. In fact I think the terms "conservative" and "right wing" are contradictory when speaking of the Baptist faith. I am, however, PASSIONATE about the Word of God as presented in the Bible. The Bible warns us in 1Timothy chapter one that false teachers would come among us. This philosophy of "everyone has a place at the table" is in direct violation of this warning.

No, we did not specifically NAME a new denomination yesterday but I sincerely believe that one was established: the Virginia Baptist Assembly. Let's face it, the meeting in Charlottesville yesterday was about the allocation of funds. I still in my mind cannot imagine what possible agenda of any missionary would not fit under the CBF's 10/40 windows. I am highly suspect of what teachings will be taught in the name of the Baptist faith by these new participants "at the table."

Finally, I appreciate your compliment of how I addressed the speaker. I was raised in a Baptist home, saved in a Baptist church, attended a Baptist military school (the same one that General John Jackson heads), and am a proud member of the Baptist family. Of course I was polite. It's how I was raised. However, I was also raised to believe in firm convictions and I feel that this is what this program lacks.

I will be closely watching this new vision of Dr. Upton. Don't be suprised if you hear my name again. If I have any talents at all, watch dogging is on the list. I plan on writing the Religious Herald regarding this mater as well, so I appreciate your comments and insight on the matter. I believe that we are on the same team, Essene. I am staunchly proud of the heritage that we have here in Virginia as Baptist. I am slow to approve anything that erodes it.

May God bless you

- Clint

 

[TomVols]

Clint,
Don't go IBF. Become part of the SBCV, the conservatives Southern Baptists in Virginia. Leave the Death Star behind!

 

[DocCas]

Originally posted by Clint Kritzer:
Someone hand me an IFB membership application, please.

Clint, you have put your finger squarely on why so many have left the SBC and founded IFB churches. In an IFB church you have total control of where your mission money goes. You have control of all aspects of your church's doctrine, practice, and testimony.

Try it, you, and about 100,000 other disillusioned Southern Baptists, can't all be wrong!

 

[Bob Alkire]

Brother Clint, Way back in the 50's Col. Cosby at Hargrave Military Academy told us that liberals would take over public education by getting the christian facts of history out of the text books,how? By just not putting it in them, no putting down just leave it out. See you look better when you avoid negative statements and you look as if you are open to all. Look in public shools and see what is said of family, father, mother, indivdualism and christianity. They didn't take god out only Jesus, God the Father.
Col. Cosby said at the rate baptist were going,weak on doctrine and not wanting to stand firm they would compromise themselves right out of business. He said they would do it a little pice at a time. Take over the education and in time you will take over, it is working. No or few negative statements, but look at their doctrine.
I came out of a liberal back ground, went to their schools and know how you are to show a mouth full of teeth and never be or say anything negative, but exclude ones who are in disagreement with you by saying they are just a few and they are wrong. When you have the schools you have the young minds and all they will know is what they have been taught.
I left the SBC years ago because of their schools(Wake Forest, U of Richmond and Baylor) but some good leaders didn't such as R.G.Lee, W.A.Criswell and Adrain Rogers. I wish you well. Sorry for this being so long!
The best I can do for you is pray that the Holy Spirit will lead you.
Bob

 

[rhoneycutt]

Clint
Obviously I am from the other end of the Baptist spectrum than Cassidy and Alkire but it seems to me from what I have read and heard this is simply a funding mechanism for those who can't stomach the SBC anymore but want to support missions. The article in ABP presented overwhelming support and that there were only a few dissenters. I would encourage you to look at it a little closer. Being a Baptist formerly of the Southern persuasion I would welcome these choices in Georgia!

Peace
Russell

 

[Clint Kritzer]

The follow up story as reported by the Virginia Baptist Mission Board News:

http://www.vbmb.org/vbrcnewsdisplay.mgi?id=2452418.49866898.1641

I am awaiting the report by the Religious Herald, the Baptist state newspaper, to come on-line.