We hustled inside to find a waterfall cascading from the light fixture over our breakfast table, splashing over papers, books, other miscellaneous items -- and two laptop computers that were, fortunately, closed.I ran upstairs to find half an inch of water on the floor of an upstairs bathroom with more gushing from the bowl of the toilet, which was running full steam ahead. I managed to slide through and turn off the water, then mopped up with towels and plunged the toilet while Jan sought to rescue our computers and clean up the mini-flood that had come through the ceiling.
For a while there, we were not happy campers. Eventually, however, we got everything under control. Amazingly, our laptops survived. There will probably be a stain on the ceiling, but no deeper damage.Meanwhile, in Louisville, KY, messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention voted out Broadway Baptist Church in Fort Worth for its perceived acceptance of homosexuals, and heard a raft of sermons insisting that brighter days are ahead for the beleaguered convention, if only it will be more committed to missions/the Bible/evangelism/the "Great Commission Resurgence" or whatever ax the particular speaker wanted to grind.
I'm missing that excitement this year, along with all the off-the-wall motions and resolutions common to such meetings. Come to think of it, dealing with a toilet fountain doesn't seem so bad after all.
[Cartoon image from ehow.com.]
10 comments:
Nice comparison of the overflow from the toilet to the stuff being spewed at the SBC meeting. Apt.
When I read the story, I had this image of SBC leaders confronting an overflowing toilet by continuing to flush madly in hopes of stopping the terrifying flood...
Let me ask a question for brief discussion here that is not meant to be rhetorical in the least:
Is there a theological/behavioral position a church can hold that would make it OK for its fellow associates (in an association such as the SBC) to dissociate itself from that church? If so, what might those positions be? Or, is a local church so autonomous that it can do/say anything it wants without comment/action from its fellow associates?
I agree....nice.....and funny.
DC,
I think it is certain that there are positions a church can hold that would make dissociations occur. The question is where is the line drawn between essentials and non-essentials of faith. I don't think there is a standard response one can give as to what positions these might be. It's a subjective exercise to say the least.
One problem I see, at least in Baptist circles, is that many Baptists believe the denomination exists in and of itself, denying the Historical traditions of Christianity that we come from. I would say the ecumenical councils and debates of the early church are certainly a guide for our essentials: The divinity and humanity of Christ, the Trinity, the goodness of creation of humanity, the necessity of grace, etc. But again...at one point or another it is subjective which is the hard part about it. We all interpret the Bible a different way and we all encounter it a different way. Finding the common threads is a constant and frustrating enterprise.
DC, I think Joshua responded well. For me, whether it deals with individuals in church membership or congregations in convention participation, I'd be inclined to draw lines only if forced to do so by persons or churches who acted hatefully and in clear opposition to the spirit of Christ, pushing exclusivist positions and creating enmity in the family of faith. In my view, individuals or churches who humbly and sincerely seek to follow Christ, even if they choose different doctrinal interpretations at some points, should be welcome in the family so long as they show the same courtesy toward others. I still adhere to a belief in soul competency and the priesthood of the believer (both singular and plural).
Maybe "Josephine the Plumber" could help them — as long as she's not ordained and works under the authority of a male plumber who has been licensed by a true plumber belonging to a true plumber's union.
(Of course, you have to be of a certain age to remember the old TV commercials with Josephine.)
Bravo, John.
The issue is the breadth and depth of the orthodoxy imposed by the church or by any para-church organization, such as a local association, state association (usually a convention), or national association (ditto, but there is the CBF). That is, how many things are considered critical and how much variation is allowed on those things.
Fundamentalism, of all stripes (Christian, Islamic, political, etc.) favors a broad orthodoxy that has explicit and invariant issues on which compliance is mandatory or one is considered an outsider (aka nanthema or heretic).
The SBC and many SBC affiliated associations and churches are clearly fundamentalist in this sense. The recent disfelloshipping of Broadway BC in Ft. Worth was based on the PERCEPTION,due to rumor and gossip, that by admitting homosexuals to membership and not expelling them, the church was endorsing their behavior.
By that standard we could probably get about a third of SBC churches disfellowshipped with a good private investigator and a really good blogger.
There are no brighter days for the SBC, but your toilet bowl will shine yet another day. The SBC is a pathetic shadow of its former glorious self.
In 1964(!), Carlyle Marney had this to say in The Charlotte Observer. (Look it up on page 23 of Mary Kratt's "Marney" booklet):
"A social revolution is going on, but we Baptists who are on God's right hand had precious little to do with it except when run over from the rear....There are hundreds of colleges and dozens of seminaries and scores of Baptist organizations which provide little kingdoms which little men just love to run. They won't give up their thrones for unity's sake....The Southern Baptist Convention is a Jesus cult dressed like Buster Brown and Little Lord Fauntleroy with a bowie knife handy to cut the throats of any who disagree with a regional point of view."
Post a Comment