Header image alt text

Southern Baptist in NC

Keeping Christ central in the world of Southern Baptists

With the upcoming name change debate from now until June one thing may be overlooked and even intentionally not spoken about–the cost. There are three things that come to mind that may never see the light of day in this debate.

First, there is no way for anyone to accurately determine the cost in Cooperative Program Funds that churches, local associations, state conventions and various SBC Entities will spend in the process of changing documents and paying lawyers fees.  There is an estimate of $20 million floating around. However, it is really hard to accurately estimate this cost with so many entities, state conventions, associations, and churches needing to change their constitutions and bylaws. Second, the entire process of changing the names, even a DBA, could place into jeopardy the charters of various entities.  For example New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary is chartered under Louisiana law. From what we are told by those at NOBTS Louisiana law is based on the French legal system, which means there are slight nuances that calls for various differences. Remember the huge debate that ensued when the Executive Committee called for every entity to embrace Sole Membership? Three, a division that results will be between those that continue to call themselves Southern Baptists versus those that will identify with the DBA name. These three points are areas I want to explore in this post and I believe, if allowed a hearing, will lead us without dividing us.

Read more

Digg ThisShare via email

One of Aesop’s fables is making itself known within the ranks of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina (BSCNC).  In the fable there is a little boy that became bored watching sheep and wanted to amuse himself. This little boy decided if he would cry wolf then all of the people would come running to fight back the wolf.  When the people from the village came running up the hill there was no wolf, only the little boy laughing at the people.  The people told the little boy not to yell wolf unless there really was a wolf but the little boy did not listen and cried; “Wolf! Wolf!” again.  When the village people came back and found no wolf the little boy was warned again not to cry wolf unless there really was a wolf.  The little boy was amused that the people would come running just at the cry of “Wolf!” After a while the little boy saw a wolf prowling around the sheep and he cried wolf, but the people did not come.  When the time passed that the little boy was to return with the sheep the village people came to find him.  They found him crying and the sheep scattered.

In the past annual convention in November, 2011 there was a resolution that came to the floor of the convention from Jim Jacumin, messenger from the Board of Directors (BoD).  It seemed strange that this resolution was not presented through the Resolutions Committee instead of the BoD. However, it was presented to the convention and passed unanimously. As one reads the resolution the second “Be it Further Resolved” saiys it all:

“…the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina endorses the proposed Marriage Amendment to the North Carolina Constitution;”

Read more

Digg ThisShare via email

2025 and the Southern Baptist Convention

Posted by Tim Rogers on May 31, 2011
Posted in DoctrineERLCExecutive CommitteeSBC IssuesSBC Seminaries  | 17 Comments

As I look at my life in the future I challenged myself to assess the future, not only in the SBC, but in my personal life and church life.  Therefore, I want to examine, from my personal point of view, what I believe the SBC will look like in the year 2025.  Mind you this is not an academically researched piece and it does not involve any trends seen in any current factual statistics.  It is merely the musings of a pastor who has seen, and been in the background of, the SBC’s transition over the past 20 years. A disclaimer that I must make is a recent wrong assumption concerning the republican nomination race.  I predicted, after Huckabee announced he would not seek to run for POTUS, that he was positioning himself for a vice-presidential ticket with Donald Trump.  Of course Trump killed that prediction for me just two days later. Thus, I have been wrong before and I could be wrong with this outlook.  However, in this first part of a two part opinion, there is no conspiracy theory just the notation of some odd alignments. One of our leaders may even term these notations mere myths.

Seminaries

It seems that a trend is beginning to develop across the land of the SBC that merging groups make them more effective.  One can see it in the trend of church planting.  It seems that many churches are beginning to “take over” other smaller traditional churches and calling it “reviving traditional churches.”  Problem is there is nothing reviving about it other than a mere decision on the part of a mega-church pastor to “help” the smaller church only to end up sending people over there to vote for merging with the mega-church.  Do not get me wrong.  Smaller churches that have needed to merge due to economic necessity does not a trend make.  However at a recent conference here in North Carolina an independent group had a session on restoring dying churches.  While that is a great undertaking, there is only one question that begs an answer.  Who determines if a church is dying?

Well there seems to be a trend that will call our seminaries to either merge together making them regional in their reach or for the purposes of the economy some will merge.  We see the seminaries already expanding their campuses to other major cities and this will continue.  In a time we read about seminaries laying off staff and becoming leaner due to the down turn of the economy we still seem some opening new campuses.  As a result the question has to be raised concerning the economic value of laying off professors and staff in one area but extending the footprint of the seminary. Thus, hiring new professors and staff to man the satellite campus.

Therefore, I envision that by 2025 we will have only three of our six seminaries.  Why?  Each seminary will have such a large footprint with the various cities it will reach absurdity as seminaries will be walking on each other in these major cities.  For example, already there is a seminary extension of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Jacksonville, Florida and Atlanta, Georgia.  New Orleans also enjoys a similar extension in Jacksonville, and also Atlanta.  Before someone asks, I have not included the other seminaries because I have not researched their satellite campuses.  The question will eventually be raised concerning the use of CP funds by these seminaries to have footprints in the same metro area.

ERLC and Executive Committee

This will eventually become a no-brainer.  Why do we have two entities when we could be served as well by one?  Look for Dr. Land to retire and when that happens it will open this discussion.  The discussion will bring this to the point of questioning the ERLC as an individual entity.  Could it better serve Southern Baptist to move the ERLC under the auspices of the Executive Committee?  I do not know.

Also, look for the name to no longer be “Southern Baptist Convention.”  Who knows what the name will be in the future, but there is one thing I have serious concerns over when it comes to this debate.  If the name change for the convention goes the way of other name changes, “Baptist” will become memory of a by-gone era.  Something the convention, as a whole, will look back on with only a fond memory. Already we have a leading evangelical advocating that “Christendom” is in the past.  Not only are we now living in a post-modern era but we are now in the post-Christendom era. Thus, we will see “Baptist” left out completely of the new name.  Many may cry foul here but their voices will be nothing more than a muffled gurgle. The argument will be that we changed the name of “Baptist Book Store” to “Lifeway Christian Bookstores.”   Remember the purpose we did this?  It was in order to reach out with our doctrine into a much more diverse evangelical world.  This same argument will be used when it comes to the name change of the SBC.  One will hear that people cannot witness to people because they are from a Southern Baptist church.  However, we need to remember what has happened with Lifeway?  Walk into any Lifeway Christian Bookstore and you will note the evangelical world has their diversity splattered on the eye-level shelves. Instead of making an impact in the evangelical world with solid biblical baptistic doctrine we will have evangelical ecumenism change us from Baptist by conviction to Baptist for convenience. When all of this takes place one will better understand the concern of Dr. Morris Chapman in last years debate about the GCR.  Look for many of the younger, restless and reformed to be leading in these changes and combined entities

Doctrine

The Doctrine of the SBC in 2025 will have moved to a point that leaders will once again include, if not fully embrace, the Moderate views.  We will have to endure another Conservative Resurgence due to the inclusiveness of any view regardless of its doctrinal weakness.  Evangelical apologist, Dr. Norman Giesler, has said that all institutions veer to the left and one must maintain a constant resolve to conservative doctrine to maintain a conservative course. Thus, SBC Conservatives must clearly understand the definition of a Moderate and Conservative in Southern Baptist life.

The late Dr. Adrian Rogers left us with a warning in the book finished by his wife, Joyce.  The book Love Worth Finding tells us about the life and preaching philosophy of Dr. Rogers.  On page 165, Dr. Rogers was asked the question; “What is the impact of the inerrancy of the Word of God upon preaching?” Dr. Rogers launches into a clearly enunciated response that gives great insight into who he was and also who we are as Southern Baptist.  In this answer Dr. Rogers deals with the need for a preacher to be able to preach something he has a heart conviction about.  The preacher needs to give a sure word not one that expresses doubt concerning his subject matter.  In this answer Dr. Rogers expresses the difference in a Liberal Southern Baptist, a Moderate Southern Baptist, and a Conservative.

“A preacher cannot declare to a congregation “this may be true” and engender any real zeal.  Without an infallible word from God, we have nothing but a holy hunch, and that will not do.

Liberalism is a relative term, dependent upon where one draws the center line of this thing called Christendom.  I’d define “true inspiration” as being convinced that all Scripture is inspired by God.

That said, I’d define a liberal Southern Baptist as a person who does not believe in the veracity, the exactitude, the integrity,the infallibility and inerrancy of the Scripture.  Even if he believed that the Word was inspired in its purpose but not in its entirety, he may be right of the center in regard to Christendom but left of the center line in Southern Baptist circles.

The moderate is a person who may believe the Bible to be without error, but who also believes in inclusivism.  He is a person who maintains the position of accommodating the liberal view. I believe the moderate to be more inclined to opinions than convictions.” {Bold emphasis mine}

With that said, one can certainly see this shift slowly moving back toward the Moderate view.  I believe, we are seeing these steps already revealing themselves in the Southern Baptist Convention.  This recent silent announcement slipped under the radar screen of many people within the SBC.  The reason I say “silent” has to do with the title of the news release from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS).  To Baptist Press’ credit they did present a clear title concerning the article when they picked it up.  However, SBTS’s title was innocuous to say the least.  Upon reading the article one will find that a chair has been endowed at SBTS in the name of Dr. Duke McCall.  Dr. Duke McCall was the moderate leader of the SBC during the Conservative Resurgence.  Dr. McCall ran the SBC from the helm of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary during the time Moderates were leading the SBC.  This endowed chair of Leadership has with it a required series of Lectures to be given in chapel each year.  SBTS establishing an endowed chair in Christian Leadership, complete with lectures, would be akin to Baylor University establishing the Paige Patterson chair in Biblical Hermeneutics along with an annual Lecture Series on Moderate Biblical Interpretation and Why That Dog Will Not Hunt.

While endowing a chair at SBTS in Dr. McCall’s name does not make it moderate it does mean there is an inclusiveness attitude beginning to emerge.  Do not get me wrong.  Dr. Mohler is a very loud and strong proponent for Biblical inerrancy and  I do not see him in any way shape or form allowing anything less than inerrancy to prevail at SBTS.  However, with this step in 2011, by 2025 if it is not corrected we will have wholesale Moderates allowing for convoluted views of the Scripture.  Southern is the very seminary where neo-orthodoxy entered the SBC.  This type of inclusiveness, mind you, is the definition that Dr. Adrian Rogers established in recognizing who were and were not Moderates within the SBC. Am I saying that Dr. Mohler is a moderate?  No, I am not!!  Am I saying that his inclusiveness of this type of leader will lead the next generation into allowing for the full blown Moderate position?  That is exactly what I am saying.

In our next installment this writer will deal with the Mission Boards, Local Associations, and the Cooperative Program in 2025.

Digg ThisShare via email

It is not the Traditionalists!!!

Posted by Tim Rogers on May 27, 2011
Posted in Executive CommitteeSBC Issues  | 10 Comments

In many a comment trying to berate and call Dr. Brad Whitt into submission, one facet used was the “dress code.”  In an article by Dr. Ed Stetzer trying to invoke an apologetic argument for the Pastors Conference he said, concerning his assessment of past pastor’s conferences; “it has not been unusual that I have heard contemporary church pastors besmirched in these events (i.e., critical references to “Hawaiian shirt-wearing pastors.”  Dr. Whitt, in his article, merely referenced that he wore a suit and tie and from this Dr. Stetzer responds with his apologetic argument.

We have been told that “Traditionalists” need to loosen up the ties and allow others to dress as they desire.  I honestly have never been told by anyone the type of dress that is required of me. I have asked concerning various events what the planners of the event is wearing, but I have never been told I was supposed to wear certain attire.  If one desires to wear a suit and tie then one should have that freedom.  If one feels comfortable to wear casual dress then one should wear golf shirts and khaki pants.  Thus we are able to dress accordingly but, we are told,  “traditionalists” do not allow others to dress as they desire.  Let me first say that I would be classified a traditionalist by many in the SBC.  That is ok because I am comfortable being known as a “traditionalist”.  However, I have never told, or even suggested, to anyone what they wear at a meeting.  If we are having a special event we will express to the platform personalities that we desire them to wear a suit and tie.  Even then we express that I will be in a suit and tie and if others do not dress accordingly that will be fine.  We leave it to the individual to make that determination.

Well, you can no longer lay blame on the “traditionalists” for requiring/strongly suggesting a dress code.  It seems that our Executive Committee President, through his Executive Assistant has sent a notice to all Executive Committee Trustees. This notice is a reminder of Dr. Bryant Wright’s request that all Executive Committee Trustees wear casual attire to the convention.  It seems that everyone, except ladies, will be dressed in “business casual” attire.  When we enter the arena we will notice that our platform personnel will be dressed in open collar shirts, and maybe sport coats.

I could not believe this when it was told me.  I would not have said anything about this had it merely been a suggestion by Dr. Wright.  However, when it was placed in writing to remind people this would be the “official dress” I was stunned.   Feel free to read the email for yourself below.

Dear EC Members,

I just want to make sure you are aware that SBC President Bryant Wright has requested the official dress at the Annual Meeting this year in Phoenix be business casual.  Dr. Page and the executive staff here at the Executive Committee plan to wear a sport coat and shirt with no tie during the meetings, including the Executive Committee meetings on Monday.  Ladies, you’re on your own!

See you soon in Phoenix!

SBC Executive Committee

901 Commerce Street, Nashville, TN 37203

Well, it appears it is not the “traditionalists” that are requiring that people dress a certain way.  It is now revealed that our new leadership is requiring not only changes in the methods but also the dress.

Digg ThisShare via email

New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, whose president Dr. Chuck Kelley, found herself  some years back in opposition with the Executive Committee’s organizational interpretation.  The reason for such opposition was the interpretation of polity in the SBC.  Each entity is autonomous and as such make their own decisions.  Add to that legal matters and the involvement of lawyers interpretations of various state laws and you have a recipe for separation plain and simple.  However, we did not separate.  This matter was resolved the Southern Baptist way.  At the annual meting the Executive Committee presented its argument and NOBTS, through Dr. Kelley, presented its argument.  Dr. Kelley asked the convention to allow him to present an alternative plan and at the following convention a plan was presented by NOBTS.  After these debates New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary’s trustees voted on sole membership as the convention directed.

When the NOBTS trustees were gathering information concerning their position Dr. Kelley was asked to give them historical information.  The historical background for NOBTS’s  position was placed in a paper that clearly defines the polity that we as Southern Baptist operate within.  The Baptist Way: A Personal Perspective is the paper presented to the trustees for their consideration.  It is a fifteen page document that contains an excellent review of Southern Baptist history concerning the doctrine of autonomy.  One thing Dr. Kelley says that rings loud concerns the Priesthood of Believers.  Dr. Kelley laments the brevity of the paper concerning the omission of this important doctrine.

Enjoy the paper, it certainly is something worthy of all Southern Baptists attention.

Digg ThisShare via email

Nepotism and the SBC

Posted by Tim Rogers on January 17, 2011
Posted in Executive CommitteeLifewaySouthern Baptist Convention  | 40 Comments

Merriam-Webster defines nepotism as; “favoritism (as in appointment to a job) based on kinship.”  Some expand that definition to include close friends.  Thus nepotism, for those defining it to include friendship, would certainly be correct and something, if taken to an extreme, that could be harmful to the SBC.  However, for this post I will remain strictly focused on the kinship definition as defined by Merriam-Webster.  One may ask the reason I do not use the “friendship” part of the definition?  That is a fair question.   I do not use that because of the nature of appointments and convention positions within the SBC.  Many appointments and recommendations are made based on relationships made within the process of meeting one another through the educational institutions of the SBC.  Thus recommendations to various pulpits and other convention positions are based on friendship.  I merely would like to point to some positions that seem to be given solely on the fact that someone was kin to someone else.

Lifeway

Dr. Tom Rainer has done a tremendous job at Lifeway.  I do not know of anyone that is disappointed with the progress of that company.  There are some serious concerns with Lifeway’s direction of headlining authors that have questionable theological views at best, but if the bottom line is financial stability and viability, no one can complain about his tenure.  Having said that, there remains some concerns with the nepotism that seems to have embedded itself in that organization.

Read more

Digg ThisShare via email

GCR Results in Executive Committee Downsizing

Posted by Tim Rogers on December 13, 2010
Posted in Executive Committee 

“Will has been a faithful employee of the Executive Committee for over ten years,” Page wrote. “His desire to serve the Lord and Southern Baptists has been manifest in many ways over the years that have revealed a life-style of integrity and competence. This has been accompanied by a kindness which is deeply profound. He will be personally missed.”

“Bob is a layman who has a passion for the things of God. Having served the Executive Committee since 2005, he is a man who has served faithfully and brought to our Convention a deep desire to see individual believers as well as churches fulfill the commands of our Lord. He is a delightful human being whose presence will be sorely missed.”

The above statement was released in a memo to the Executive Committee’s elected Officers by Dr. Frank Page, Chief Executive Officer of the Southern Baptist Convention.  Dr. Page began his duties on October 1, 2010.  If you remember Dr. Page was elected by a reported 60% margin, hardly a clear mandate especially bringing Baptist Press back into the perceived Public Relations arm of the SBC.  After this move it appears that Marty King’s motion to re-form Baptist Press with its own Board of Trustees was not a bad motion.  Not simply because Will Hall suddenly finds himself without a job, but that Baptist Press is now positioned to be nothing more than the public information arm of Dr. Frank Page.  However, Dr. Page has publicly assured us that Baptist Press will not be a public information service of the Executive Committee.  But, I digress.  I want to look at this move from the words of Dr. Page, the vote of the SBC in Orlando, and the timing of this matter.

First the vote of the SBC in Orlando.  According to the vote concerning the Great Commission Task Force Report, it was suggested to the Executive Committee that they perform two duties.  One duty was to present a budget that moved 1% from them to the IMB.  The 1% asked to be moved basically took one-third of the EC budget from them.   This move basically assured that offices and duties would be combined.   Thus Dr. Page went into that position October 1, 2010 with a clear understanding that things had to give and he was responsible for carrying out this vote. However, there is something called Baptist polity that Dr. Page is a stickler for.

Read more

Digg ThisShare via email

Philippians 3:17
17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

As the Apostle Paul penned these words to the Church at Philippi he reminds us that we must be examples to those we lead.  Isn’t it interesting that the Greek word (??????????–symmim?t?s) for “followers together” is the compound Greek word that means “co-imitators”.  One of the Greek words that is compounded is where we get our English word “mimic”.  Thus, Paul is telling the church that they are to “mimic” the actions they see of their leaders.  This same scriptural principle can be applied in the leadership of those we have within our state convention.

We have been trying for years to regain leaders that will lead, standing firmly on the platform, of a position of an inerrant Scripture.  These “conservative” leaders adhere to and promote principles and ministries that have, as a Core Value, that the Scriptures are inerrant.  The conservatives have held a majority on the Board of Directors, formerly General Board, since 2002.  It would be fair to say that the Executive Committee has had a majority and been led by these conservative leaders since 2005.

Why then do we still have churches giving around the North Carolina Baptist State Convention directly to the Southern Baptist Convention in Nashville, Tennessee?  I asked this question privately to some of the conservative leaders of the Carolina Conservative Baptist  back in 2005.  I was told that we still had moderates within leadership and it was causing many conservative leaders to shy away from giving through the CP because the NCBSC was funding some of these more moderate causes/agencies.  I accepted this as a fair reply and was assured that when conservatives were in positions of leadership and could influence the budget process this would change drastically.

Well, there are some things that just do not seem to pull together.  Here is just one example.  The Budget Committee  Chairman, the same one for the past two years and now appointed to serve for a third year, serves as Missions Minister in a church that reported on the 2009 ACP a gift to the Cooperative Program of $122,000.00.  Quite an impressive gift with the economy doing what it is doing.  That same ACP reveals a Lottie Moon Christmas Offering of $564,000.00.  WOW!!  Another very impressive gift with the economy like it is.  What a great celebration of giving we see in this church that is led by one of the SBC Great Commission Task Force members.  We celebrate this giving as it certainly is impressive in the amounts of dollars that are forwarded to the NCSBC and the International Mission Board.

However, the Budget Committee Chairperson has much say over the various areas of spending for the NCBSC and the % split for NCBSC  and the SBC.  In 2008 the Budget Committee Chairperson’s church gave $300,000.00 through the CP.  That means that our Budget Committee has for its Chairman a person who is from a church that gave approximately 60% less in CP giving than the previous year.  My question is not why this person is serving on the Budget Committee, but why is this person serving as Chairman?  I mean, sarcastically speaking, if his church cuts another 60% in CP giving are we going to move him to Dr. Butler’s position?

That is just one example.  Another example is that we have serving on the Board of Directors three people who are from churches that are giving significant amounts of dollars around the CP in order to give to the SBC in Nashville.  Every church, as an autonomous body, funds whatever entity they deem appropriate.  This is not about whether a church decides where to send their funds.  It is, however, about leaders in the NCBSC funding around the very convention they are elected to serve.  In serving this convention these people are called to make decisions that affect North Carolina Baptist Churches but they give significant amounts around the NCBSC to the convention they do not have any direct decisions.

Certainly no one believes that just because we give to certain conventions we should all have direct say into the priorities of ministries.  However, when one is sitting in leadership positions we should, at the very least, see their commitment to the convention through their giving behavior.  I still remember the uproar of conservatives when we had leaders giving significant amounts to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and serving on the General Board (Board of Directors). Also, should there be special audience given to one person on how to prioritize ministries?  It seems that is the direction our Executive Committee has taken.  In their recent meeting the Executive Committee invited the maker of the motion at a recent Board of Directors meeting to address them as to the motive of the motion.  Pastor Rammel raised some very good points and I agree that we need to prioritize various items on the Budget.  My point is should it be a pastor, sitting on the Board of Directors, that came from a denominational position but directing his church to give less than the average NC Baptist church to the CP.  I am sure Pastor Rammel is doing an excellent job leading his church.  But, I wonder how many people he has making decisions about the churches direction and priorities that are giving as much to outside ministries as they are to the church’s ministries?

What does this mean for NCBSC?  We call on our leaders to lead by example.  Hey, I want to follow our leaders, but it becomes hard to not question the commitment of some to the NCBSC.  I believe that we have Godly men and women serving on the Executive Committee and the Board of Directors.    I call on our Nominating Committee to present persons to our convention that are from churches that support the Cooperative Program first, then the other ministries that our various entities and agencies promote.  That is what it means to affirm the Cooperative Program as centralized giving for a Great Commission Resurgence.

Digg ThisShare via email

Racism: A double-edged knife

Posted by Tim Rogers on April 18, 2008
Posted in Dr. Dwight McKissicDr. Paige PattersonExecutive CommitteeRacismSWBTS  | 19 Comments

One thing that happened to me when I received Christ at twenty-nine years of age was my attitude toward people of various ethnic background changed. I was extremely racist in my attitudes and thoughts and I realized a love for people of opposite skin color that I never knew existed.

There was one item that caused me considerable floundering on my racist attitude and that was the racist attitude I experienced from people of the opposite race. I did have some friends that were African American before I got saved and all I heard them speak about was getting a ‘white girl’. I saw in military service the attitudes from some African American soldiers that African American girls were not even on their radar screens. They wanted only to be with ‘white’ girls. When I got saved this was an area that God had to deal with me on and I still find myself asking forgiveness for various thoughts that come into my mind.

However, I also believe that racism is as much alive within the African American community as it is in the Anglo community. It seems that some argue that African Americans cannot be racist because to be racist you have to be in a majority and African Americans are not in a majority. I am not sure how one would define racism but I believe I will use the definition found in Websters: “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

According to this definition, it seems that Senator Obama received a pass on his recent racial slur. Notice what he says about his grandmother who is Anglo.

The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity,” he said. But she is a typical white person. If she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know. . .there’s a reaction in her that doesn’t go away and it comes out in the wrong way.

Notice that Senator Obama fell into the classic definition of exhibiting a racial attitude. He believes, according to his statement, that because his grandmother is ‘white’ she displays certain traits that make here inferior to him. The Senator got a pass from the media on this and it seems that he has dodged this statement because I had to look to find it in a Google search.

What does that have to do with me as a Southern Baptist. It seems that Southern Baptist have taken a negative hit on racism in some of the post on the blog world. My friend and fellow blogger Bart Barber had some hurtful comments directed his way when he honestly said ‘Yes’ to the question; “Does racism exist in the SBC.” I am not one to place words in another’s mouth but what I understood Dr. Barber to say was that we all had racists thoughts to some extent. If an African American jokes that someone cannot sing or dance because they are white, then that is a racists statement. I am not offended by the statement, because I know I cannot sing or dance. I do not know if it is because I am white, but I know it just is not in me. However, after watching Dancing with the Stars, I must admit there are some dancing white boys on that program. :) I say that comical statement to point to you that the statement itself can be perceived as racist.

As we can go back and forth with the various racist statements that really are not offensive, I must confess that in Southern Baptist life I do see a place we can improve and make certain that our actions match our words. Brother Dwight McKissic pointed something out about his visit to the Executive Committee in Nashville. The highest ranking African American employed at the Executive Committee is the Head Custodian. According to the Richard Cliff at LifeWay we have 823,208 African American; 185,223 Hispanic; 75,937 Korean; and 23,743 Chinese members of our 16 million members. That means that the SBC is made up of 20% minority church members. I must admit that when I saw these numbers I was a bit embarrased that the highest ranking African American at the Executive Committee was the Head Custodian, when African Americans make up the largest minority population in the SBC.

I believe it is time for us to call on our convention leaders, in some way without developing a quota system, to bring balance to this discrepancy. Do I believe we have this imbalance because of racism? No, I do not. We all know how people get positions and it is mainly due to relationships formed in Seminary. Our seminaries have attracted mainly Anglo students. Our convention must take some blame for this. This resolution passed in 1995 certainly has not helped to recruit students to our six seminaries. I believe this correction can begin in our seminaries, in the recruitment of minority seminary students. According to this press release it seems that SWBTS is getting it. But, it must not stop there. I believe that our committees and entity heads must be open to moving minorities into various positions of leadership. I pray that as we move forward, we as a convention, will grasp that minority relations is more than just words presented at an annual meeting in the form of a resolution. We are Brothers and Sisters in Christ and we should trust the Christ living in all of those who profess Him.

Digg ThisShare via email