Next week is the Annual Meeting of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. Part of that meeting each year is a time for the messengers to vote on resolutions expressing the sentiment of the convention. This year, I submitted a resolution about the GCR Task Force for consideration, but the committee declined to present it during the meeting.

I haven't yet decided whether to try and introduce the resolution from the floor. Here's the text of the resolution. If you have feedback, I'd be glad to hear it. That may help me make a decision about trying to introduce it during the meeting itself.

Resolution Expressing Gratitude for the Work of the Great Commission Task Force

Submitted by Brent Hobbs, pastor, Severn Baptist Church, Severn, NC

WHEREAS, The Southern Baptist Convention, on June 15th, 2010, adopted the recommendations of the Great Commission Task Force; and

WHEREAS, Three leaders from the state of North Carolina were members of that Task Force; and

WHEREAS, Those and other members of the Great Commission Task Force spent many hours thinking and working together for the benefit of our cooperative work; and

WHEREAS, The goal of the Task Force was to seek how Southern Baptists, including North Carolina Baptists, could work together more faithfully to fulfill the Great Commission; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the messengers of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina, November 9-11th 8-10th, 2010, appreciate the many hours of labor by members of the Great Commission Task Force; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we are thankful for an ongoing discussion about how we can most effectively carry the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the lost in this world; and be it finally further

RESOLVED, That we affirm appreciate the work and recommendations of the Great Commission Task Force and the vision they have presented to our churches, both nationally and across North Carolina; and be it finally

RESOLVED, That we are grateful for the approval of the Task Force report in June and hope for greater Great Commission effectiveness as a result.

(EDIT: Updated resolution language with changes indicated by strikethrough and new portion by underline. See below for details.)

The committee's reasoning for declining the resolution for consideration? It (1) "did not seem appropriate" to "single out a particular committee for affirmation" and because (2) it was "directive in nature, calling on the Convention to take action".

At this point, I might point out one resolution that was accepted here. You might also note that it singles out a particular BSCNC employee for affirmation (paragraph 7) and calls the BCSNC to specific action, selecting leaders who have demonstrated support for the Cooperative Program (paragraph 6).

You can judge for yourself whether these are legitimate reasons for declining to consider the resolution.

EDIT (con't): After receiving some feedback on the resolution, I've decided to make a few changes as noted above. The biggest change is from "affirming" to "appreciating" the work and recommendations in order to make it sound less like an official endorsement. After making that change, I added the last sentence to make the resolution a little more clear that we are also thankful for the content of the report and its adoption.

I've also decided to go ahead and try to present the resolution to the BSCNC annual meeting next week. I'll do that by making a motion during the miscellaneous business session on Tuesday morning. It requires a 2/3 majority on a motion to "Suspend the Rules" so that we can consider the resolution. It's likely a long shot to even get it heard, but I sincerely want something to come out of our state convention this year expressing support for the GCR movement and vision.

Tags: SBC