SBC RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE “REVOICING RESOLUTIONS” -SUBVERTING SOUTHERN BAPTIST

I knew the SBC had fallen head first into the crapper when it reelected J.D. The rest is just sprinkles on top.

 

It is not uncommon for resolutions committees to rewrite resolutions, often watering them down in a way that makes them more likely to pass (or at least so it seems to me). BUT have they ever rewritten before to completely alter the meaning to the opposite?

 

Mark Coppinger has written a good article on what the committee did. Google.

 

Thanks, but I Googled: sbc resolution critical race theory and intersectionality mark coppinger, and got zilch. I have seen the committee explanation of the Revoice resolution (#5), but not regarding # 9.

 

Of course they can, and have.

Key to combatting this is to have a savvy and eloquent spokesperson that can get the messengers to override the resolutions committee's twisting of the resolution:

The Spiritual is Political: The Modern Women ' s Movement and the Transformation of the Southern Baptist Convention (pdf) p. 60

"Sappington was a mother of three who was very involved in the WMU and her regional Baptist association....Not connected to Criswell or other prominent denominational conservatives....Sappington was intimately concerned about the role of women in Southern Baptist churches."

"Tuesday afternoon, June 12 [the first day of the three-day meeting], Sappington stood before the convention to present a resolution....Anticipated resolutions were usually submitted in advance of the meeting, so the presiding officer, Owen Cooper, referred her to the Committee on Resolutions, with whom she met the following day. On Thursday the Committee on Resolutions reported on their deliberations and presented Sappington’s amendment. However, it did not contain the same wording as the original....was nearly the opposite of the sentiment Sappington had expressed....Horrified by this alteration, Sappington presented a substitute motion as an alternative to the resolution presented by the committee....In floor debate over her amended resolution, Sappington denounced the committee’s actions....her floor motions convinced messengers to reject the committee’s resolution and instead adopt her resolution"

 

Thanks, but when I go there, it says it is a closed group. Nevertheless, when I spelled Coppenger's name correctly I found this, which quotes something from Facebook:

Elsewhere I used the word "unethical" to describe changing a resolution to say the opposite (or nearly so) of what it originally said. Perhaps that is too strong a word, but such seems to me to be the wrong approach.

 

I found this, apparently he's a former seminary president:

9/15/99 • Midwestern Seminary trustees fire Mark T. Coppenger

"KANSAS CITY, Mo. (BP)--A majority of trustees of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary voted to fire President Mark T. Coppenger Sept. 14, concluding that Coppenger’s expressions of anger have 'irreparably damaged his ability to lead this seminary.' His dismissal was effective immediately."

 

Coppenger since then (20 years ago!) has rehabilitated himself in relation to anger management and is once more in the good graces of the SBC, though no longer a seminary president.

 

BOMBSHELL: Professor admits some in SBC promoting tools of Identity Politics

Coppenger says that the Resolutions Committee has never done this before.

 

From the linked article:

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary has invited speakers who praise anti-Semites. In February, SEBTS heard from a scholar who cited Obama’s pastor and notorious anti-Semite Rev. Jeremiah Wright as a great spiritual influence.​

Well, that scholar was not wrong in one sense; the devil is a great spiritual influence also—very effective, just in a very negative way. Wright basically gave us Obama, and Obama has had a great influence on the US and the world, but again, in a very negative way.

 

Committeeman Trevin Wax offered his take of it on Twitter

Trevin Wax explains #SBC19 Resolution Committee’s reasoning on Resolution 9

 

One responder at SBC Voices wrote about his experiences with CRT/I at work:

 

So untrue!
Can somebody point me to where exactly he said that?