The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship recently updated their hiring policy based on a “two-part recommendation from the Illumination Project Committee, which has been working over the past 18 months to explore how Cooperative Baptists can strengthen their unity in the face of different beliefs and practices in matters of human sexuality.”
Here’s the text of the updated policy:
CBF employees serve as co-laborers with the Holy Spirit in God’s mission, striving to be Christ-like, innovative, authentic, globally focused, committed to hearing and respecting diverse perspectives and to pursuing excellence. Employees will also be committed to CBF’s mission of serving Christians and churches as they discover and fulfill their God-given mission while working together to renew God’s world by cultivating beloved community, bearing witness to Jesus Christ and seeking transformational development in the contexts of global poverty and global migration and in partnership with the Global Church.
Because of our compelling mission and vision, CBF will employ only individuals who profess Jesus Christ as Lord, are committed to living out the Great Commandment and Great Commission, and who affirm the principles that have shaped our unique Baptist heritage. Preference in hiring will be given to applicants who are active members in good standing of CBF churches as well as those who have demonstrated an active participation and contribution to the missions, ministries or other initiatives of the Fellowship and its partners.
CBF employees are expected to have the highest moral character, displaying professionalism and a commitment to the highest ethical standards. These include: acting with integrity, being a faithful steward of resources, speaking truth in love, embracing accountability, facilitating fairness, supporting and encouraging peers, nurturing a community of respect, and establishing collaborative relationships. CBF employees are expected to live out their Christ-centered relationship both inside and outside the workplace, serving as active members of their local church as well as through service to their community.
The policy also contains an implementation procedure which states, “Among other qualifying factors, CBF will employ persons for leadership positions in ministry who exhibit the ideals set forth in our hiring policy, have gifts appropriate to the particular position and who practice a traditional Christian sexual ethic of celibacy in singleness or faithfulness in marriage between a woman and a man.” This statement makes clear that leadership positions are reserved for celibate singles and monogamous heterosexual married individuals. The article on the CBF website goes on to state they for other positions within the CBF applicants will be considered who identify as LGBT Christians. Missionary appointments will be reserved for those who “practice a traditional Christian sexual ethic of celibacy in singleness or faithfulness in marriage between a woman and a man.” The rationale given for that is the practices of the overwhelming number of CBF’s global partners.
This updated policy created a predicament for two of our state conventions, the Baptist General Convention of Texas and the Baptist General Association of Virginia. Both served as intermediaries for funds given to the CBF in much the same way that they have historically passed along Cooperative Program dollars to the Southern Baptist Convention. BGCT and BGAV are the only SBC state conventions that related to the CBF in this way.
But the practice of sending along funds to the CBF has now changed for both the BGCT and BGAV.
The BGCT Executive Board voted on Tuesday, February 20 to remove the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship from its church giving forms. BGCT President Danny Reeves said, “I am very grateful for the consistent, steady way in which the BGCT has held to God’s Word. We lovingly say to all people the truth that marriage is to be between one man and one woman.” BGCT Executive Director David Hardage added, “Texas Baptists have consistently held to Biblical truth on marriage and human sexuality while at the same time loving and caring for everyone.” Chairman of the Executive Board Dennis Young said, “While we love all people, our love is governed by the Word of God.”
Then yesterday the BGAV released this statement from their Executive Board:
The Baptist General Association of Virginia (BGAV) at numerous annual meetings has affirmed and acted on its commitment to its orthodox and traditional view of biblical marriage and sexuality. The BGAV remains committed to respecting, welcoming, and loving all persons in the name of Christ while affirming an orthodox view of marriage between a man and a woman.
The Virginia Baptist Executive Board regrets it has had to address the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship’s (CBF) approval of the Illumination Project Committee’s report permitting the hiring of LGBT personnel for certain staff positions in the organization. Though the BGAV respects CBF’s right to change its hiring policy, such a decision has had a direct impact on the BGAV. The Executive Board has sought to respond in the most prayerful and prudent way to the effects of this impact.
Therefore, the Virginia Baptist Executive Board believes it must take action on behalf of the General Association to have all of BGAV’s CBF contributing churches send their CBF gifts directly to the CBF National Office as soon as this is feasible. The Executive Board believes this action serves the BGAV, while respecting CBF.
Executive Director John Upton said, “I want to express appreciation to the Executive Board for the spirit and heart with which they made this decision.”
Though my knowledge of Texas Baptists is limited, the response from the BGCT is not particularly surprising. They have seemed to be trending in this direction for a while now. It is nonetheless encouraging to see their commitment to the authority of Scripture reflected in this decision.
As a lifelong Virginian, I have quite a bit more knowledge concerning the BGAV. The church I pastor is no longer affiliated with the BGAV, but my previous church was. In fact, I proposed the original version of the resolution concerning homosexual behavior and the sanctity of marriage that was approved at the 2015 BGAV annual meeting. Despite the BGAV’s past position on marriage, I must admit that I am a bit surprised that they have taken this action. I truly expected them not to respond and to appeal to the autonomy of the local church. I am thankful that is not the course of action they have taken, and I commend them for this decision.
While these two decisions are important, this is likely still a developing story as individual churches will still have to make decisions concerning their relationship to the CBF and SBC. In fact, a prominent BGAV church’s pastor serves on the CBF board that made the hiring policy change. How will Richmond’s First Baptist Church relate to the BGAV going forward? These are certainly interesting days.
I spent 4 years pastoring in a dually aligned (SBC & CBF) church and tried explaining to the membership that the CBF’s standard for Biblical interpretation would one day lead them to the same place it is leading (and has led) the “mainline Protestant” denominations. My teaching the Bible is ultimately the reason I was asked to leave.
This quasi-affirmation of LGBTQ community by the CBF is unsurprising and will be only the beginning. Note the reason given for not hiring LGBTQ person or sending them as missionaries is because the policy reflects the decisions of over 100 ministry partners. Yet the main office will do otherwise and hire LGBTQ people. This is akin to “starting a conversation” about an issue knowing full well you intend to impose your values and listen to nothing on the other side. The CBF and her leadership have no mechanism to stem the tide of LGBTQ advancement and will ultimately fall.
In the meantime they’ll simply wait until the majority of their ministry partners change their policies.
“…reason I was asked to leave.”
^^^^^^^^^^^
BADGE OF HONOR
Didn’t feel like it at the time.
I always thought it was wrong for the BGCT to call “Cooperative Program” that which sent nothing to the national SBC, but rather to the CBF. They have been doing this for years. Not all their CP offerings were done this way, but a church could request it.
So, I am pleasantly surprised with the new BGCT position of no longer forwarding mission offerings and CP funds to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.
Meanwhile, the CBF moves further left.
David R. Brumbelow
The BGAV Did that too but have also announced a change similar to what Texas has done…
Interesting, and predictable. It’s virtually impossible to make a simple, clear explanation of the CBF’s stance on this. If I was pastor of a dually affiliated church I’m not sure how I’d explain it. You could call it a positive or a negative change, depending on which group in the church you wanted to please…or anger.
I believe it is generally a healthy thing for organizations to state their values clearly, and the organize and operate in a way that is consistent with those values.
It is plain to anyone who will look that the CBF would eventually get here, and it is equally plain where they will eventually end up.
The CBF, in my opinion, will not really be able to move forward until they admit and project who they are. This is, I believe, a step in the right direction – for them.
All of the “studies” “listening” “conversation” and other words that are used to mask or delay true feelings or desires are not psychologically healthy. They are also, in my opinion, not forthright.
This is not the direction that I care to travel – not even a step. I am so grateful that the churches of the SBC are not in the same convention with these folks. It is so ironic now looking back on how strong the denials were that this kind of a thing would ever happen. I knew people in the CBF at its beginning, and they were passionate that things like this would never happen. They were sincere, but they were not wise. They could not see what was there to be seen.
Those who refuse to see now will suffer the same disappointment if they live long enough. Or perhaps they will change their theological convictions to match their surroundings.
This is a lesson and a warning to being allied with people who do not share your convictions. And it is a warning to a strategy of papering over differences so as to never discuss some very important matters.
It’s all very sad.
And I would ask that we consider this.
Some are critical of the CR because it came at a time when “Bold Mission Thrust” was on the cusp of reaching the world for Christ.
But now we have to wonder if the SBC would have stayed on course with “reaching the world for Christ” when it had in its midst and in its leadership people who would allow a Christian denomination to follow the projected course.
Some would say that the presence of such a small minority would not have changed the direction of the SBC when the SBC was so culturally and morally conservative.
But those same people were saying the same thing when the CBF was birthed.
Eula Mae and John Baugh are turning in their graves. What a waste.
Let me say, like Adam, I am a former BGAV pastor and am pleasantly surprised by the Executive Board’s decision. However, like the CBF, the BGAV is a large entity (much larger than your average state denominations because of their affinity partnerships) and has to be careful not to offend the base.
The BGAV is composed of churches primarily in Virginia. The average membership has no opinion about much of these happenings because they are largely uninformed. When you attempt to inform them, few care to hear it. Fewer still respond Biblically. However, those committed to the CBF are well organized and can rally support. In 2013, representatives of a local association of Virginia (Adam will remember this well) had the opportunity to avoid the disaster that had happened in the Richmond Baptist Association by changing the Association’s Constitution to reflect marriage as between God, one man and one woman. While gathering a majority, it failed to reach a 2/3rds vote. As a Pastor involved in that Association’s life, I had the opportunity to visit many of the churches and meet many of the people. Most were uninformed. Most would have supported the amendment. The problem lied within the liberal leaders of certain larger churches.
And that is exactly how I see the BGAV as a whole and how I bet 2/3rds of CBF churches nationally are. The problem is in the leadership.
As Adam said, this is just the beginning of developments. I believe in time the leadership of the BGAV will reestablish official connection to the CBF.
For Texas, which convention is most aligned to the SBC: The BGCT or the SBTC?
As one who has attended seminary in the past and would like my church to give most funds to the CP, which convention should we be aligned with?
Nick,
Both conventions, the BGCT and SBTC, are aligned with the SBC. I would even say the BGCT is a little closer to the SBC than they were 10 or 15 years ago.
The Southern Baptists of Texas Convention (SBTC), however, is the most closely aligned with the SBC.
They subscribe to the Baptist Faith and Message, 2000.
They give about 55% of their Cooperative Program mission offerings to the SBC.
In contrast, the BGCT gives about 30% of their Cooperative Program mission offerings to the SBC.
You may also want to check out the SBTC newspaper, the Southern Baptist Texan,
and the BGCT Baptist Standard.
David R. Brumbelow
Southern Baptist Texan (SBTC)
http://texanonline.net/
David R. Brumbelow
Joseph Giles, do you know whether representatives to these conventions have a duty to report back to their churches? I was a member of a BGCT church and attended most of our business meetings, but don’t recall hearing much about convention business or developments. Our membership especially did not seem to know the BGCT’s actual stance on traditional marriage & gender, nor realize that the BGCT would not remain in harmonious cooperation with churches that took substantially different stances.
Karen,
Most churches sent the Pastor as the representative. The one church I pastored that had others go with me still didn’t care for a report.
It sounds harsh, but ignorance is bliss. What happens in Richmond has little to do with me. A few years ago the BGAV was confronted with a huge issue. A Richmond church ordained an openly gay man as a missionary. The local association didn’t sever ties, and now the state had a decision to make. Surprisingly (as was the decision in this post), they made the right decision. Yet I’ve seen every time this goes to vote, the majority is smaller and smaller.
I swore I’d never Pastor a CBF church. I will likely never Pastor a BGAV church again either.
Nick,
Some Texas churches are dually aligned with both Coventions to do missions and ministry with both groups. That is an individual church judgement call though. I only give this out for FYI purposes.
Thanks guys, is there something controversial in the BFM 2000? Why would the BGCT not accept it?
Nick,
The BGCT rejects the Baptist Faith and Message, 2000 and uses the older Baptist Faith and Message 1963.
The 1963 is a good statement, but has a couple of loopholes that some theological liberals find convenient. The Baptist Faith and Message, 2000 closed those loopholes.
While not using the word “inerrant,” the Baptist Faith and Message, 2000 says the Bible is totally true and trustworthy; so, in effect endorses inerrancy.
I have an article about this on my blog, but I don’t think I’m supposed to put a link here.
David R. Brumbelow
Thanks David. I found your website and read the post. Great information.
Thanks Nick. Glad you found the information helpful.
David R. Brumbelow
I’ve always belonged to BGCT Churches, and have been a big fan of the ministries and colleges that the BGCT supports. A prime example is Dallas Baptist University- a distinctively Christian Baptist College.
The important thing for me had been to align with a church that teaches the Gospel unashamedly and whose purpose is reaching the community and the world for Christ
My BGCT Pastor is a line by line verse by verse kind of pastor whose heart is for missions. You won’t find a more conservative pastor!
Thanks, Joseph Giles. Once I started looking, the info was easy to find, just not through church.