Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Plodder somewhat of a prophet

What's wrong with a little triumphalism in blogging? The SBC is all about that anyway.

SBC President: Bryant Wright

I incorrectly thought Jackson would be in the runoff but did pick Wright to win. The SBC still, clearly loves high profile megachurch pastors. The SBC small church outfit is DOA. Wright was the most radical of the four candidates...and was elected by a solid margin, even with a local candidate in opposition. They are all good guys but Bryant Wright is someone for whom I have a lot of respect. Glad he won.

GCRTF Report: Passed easily...

...as I predicted but it was amended but not in any way that looks substantial to me. The whole thing was rather confusing. The body was in a mode to move ahead with this baby step towards change. Cooperative Program ten-percenters got some language so that they can declare victory.

With Chapman out (and no one has had a clearer, more visible platform to take shots at the GCRTF than Mo...and he fired away until the very end) and Page in I surmise that we will move in a somewhat different direction.

The most salient news of the SBC2010 is probably captured here. SBCers might take note.


foxofbama said...

SBCvoices is pretty interesting.
I saw the afternoon session online andnot sure what to make of it.
SBCVoices.com SBCimpact and Wade Burleson will be the first line of analysis.
Had some other thoughts at bl.com but since you left seems nobody cares but maybe Ed Pettibone.
Jonathan may have found a home with David Rogers at Impact.

After the GCR vote and everybody left the Hall one Brother made a resolution all the colleges and institutions in the display area endorse Inerrancy and Creation Science.
That may be the New Doctrinal Test.
Where is Bryant Wright on that one?

Blake said...

I'm disappointed Leo got less than a fourth the votes of Jackson. I don't think Wright will do a single thing to bring about a GCR and I don't think people realize that they're not going to legislate their way to one like they did with the CR. This whole thing is a smokescreen and futile.

Lee said...

An attempt to table the report indefinitely, which Hunt had to allow for a vote after making it clear that to do so would effectively kill it, barely failed, as did an attempt to refer it to the executive board. I think the task force was getting nervous at these attempts and narrow vote margins, at which there was some grumbling and booing when the chair made rulings, and they were getting kind of grumpy and defensive when the amendment was proposed. That got botched as well, and a messenger pointed out that even though the task force had added some conciliatory language, there was no ruling on the vote total, and the amendment, as worded, hadn't been included. She called for a ballot vote by indicating that she felt the chair was trying to manipulate the convention and that prompted the team to more or less concede on the amendment and include the wording in the document. Like you, I'm not exactly clear on what the amendment does, though I think it is a statement that simply frowns on designated giving, and smiles on those who don't do that. It was what most of those opposed to the task force report wanted to hear. Though it seems benign, and is somewhat vague in the way it is worded, had it not been included, replacing the language that was in the original document, I don't think the task force report would have passed.

foxofbama said...

Lee makes a good point as does Thornton's link to USA Today's Faith and Reason.
Lee pretty much saw what I saw, but he helped me understand what I was seeing.
I'm no fan of Ronnie Floyd, among other things for demagoguing Bill Clinton in Houston in 93; but thought he was handling himself pretty well till the end when he got loud and kinda smartBalaam'sdonkeylike.
He didn't help himself there; but I think that is just part of his nature.
Within the world of SBC as it is now, GCR may have some merit, but folks like Floyd, Mohler and now even Merritt; don't help the way the rest of the world view them.
May be time for them to step aside and let others become the public face of the SBC.

William Thornton said...

Blake, I know you are disappointed that Engle got no more support than he did. Past patterns for presidential elections made it clear that lesser known candidates never get much support save for the VP positions.

Don't get too deep into despair. Wright was the most radically pro-GC of the three major candidates. He will do well.

Lee, I watched the lengthy, tedious, confusing GCR debate. Opponents were given every consideration. You can't complain about the result. The lady who in a cheap shot accused the chair of "bullying" was out of line and given more consideration than she deserved.

foxofbama said...

Mac Brunson has a strong word this morning for SBC Preachers.
As historical note, one that Greg Wills may want to investigate, Ithink Brunson was a classmate of SC Governor Sanford, but I could be mistaken.
Sanford an 83 graduate at Sanford.
Johnny Hunt I think is a Gardner Webb classmate '75 of the LA Times and NY Times celebrated novelist Ron Rash, whose Biblical themes of Exile in Serena may be in a movie of which Angelina Jolie has her eyes on for starring role.
Jolie wants to be Serena. The Biblical character is Rachel.

Lee said...

As far as the "bullying" goes, well, that's a subjective evaluation. There's bullying of an obvious kind, and there's bullying that puts on a smile and a pleasant voice. Throw in a few "Jawjuh" accents and it can sound like Sunday School. But the fact of the matter is that there had been three votes taken on various motions related to the task force report, all of which had been narrowly split, and the one to which the messenger from Ohio was referring had prompted a response from the task force to be accomodating. What had been moved was deleting of some of the wording and replacing it with new wording, and at least half of the convention had favored doing that. What the task force did was leave the wording alone, and add a couple of sentences of their own to tone down the wording, and deletion, of the amendment. This lady called them on it and pointed out, correctly according to parliamentary procedure, that the amendment was still alive and a vote that the chair could not determine required a ballot vote. Evidence of the "bullying" can be found in the fact that the task force reluctantly conceded the point and did what the amendment asked for.

One of the big problems that we have in the SBC is that when the big dawgs decide they are going to do something, they either run roughshod over the procedure and do as they please, or they assume that the lackeys will vote the way they want. Too few people speak up because, in the Christlike atmosphere we have in our denomination, they are afraid of intimidation. In watching the debate yesterday, and then again this morning on keeping the records sealed, I noticed that almost every person who spoke in favor of either the task force report, or of keeping the records sealed had a vested interest in the denomination because they get a paycheck from one of its agencies or entities.

Jonathan said...

The low point of the day was when Johnny Hunt compared those who were opposed to the report with the 10 spies in Num. 13. I understand that Hunt (and many other top SBC leaders) see a sort of personal validation in a "yea" vote but, goodness, no one who actually read the GCR report could honestly state that the thing is sufficiently radical to meet the current crisis in the SBC.

“Next to fried food, the South has suffered most from oratory.”–Walter Hines Page

William Thornton said...

I didn't listen to the sermons, not even Ronnie Floyd's sermonic presentation of the GCRTF report.

I'm sorry but I don't see that the floor debate, much longer in this case than one usually sees at the annual meeting, was anything but fair and considerate of all who spoke.

No. The report was not greatly radical and exactly nothing has happened yet other than the convention passing it.