Header image alt text

Southern Baptist in NC

Keeping Christ central in the world of Southern Baptists

Apr 08

8

Roosting Chickens

Posted by Tim Rogers on April 8, 2008
Posted in East Taylorsville Baptist Church • Mrs. Ruby Fullbright • Women's Missionary Union of North Carolina  | 3 Comments

In the rural area that I grew up there was a saying that meant something for us. Whenever we would do something that we did not know what the outcome would be my father would always say, “The chickens have not come home to roost, yet.” This saying meant that it was too early to make an assessment of a situation because everything was not completed that would affect the outcome.

So it is with the new move of our Women’s Missionary Union in North Carolina. According to this report it seems that one former WMU-NC Executive Director has taken issue with the leadership of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. The author of this report seems to purport a falsely held understanding of reason WMU-NC left the Baptist Building in Cary. He reports that the Missions Extravaganza was WMU-NC’s “first meeting since the group was required to give up its office space and all Baptist State Convention (BSC) support in order to retain its autonomy.” What is a falsely held understanding is that WMU-NC was not ‘required’ to give up its office space. The ‘requirement’ of office space came when WMU-NC chose to leave the Baptist Building. The former executive director makes a reference to the unnecessary task that is before the BSCNC and that is beginning another women’s ministry organization. The task is completely unnecessary because had the WMU-NC grasped the truth of the role of the BSCNC executive director their autonomy would have remained intact along with their payroll, fleet car privileges, office space, and their place in the annual NC Missions offering. Read the arrogance of this statement by a former executive director made at the previous Missions Extravaganza; ““Some think we no longer need WMU,” she said, “that some other women’s program can take our place.” This appears to be a reference to the newly established task force, headed by former WMU-NC President who was also former NCBSC 1st VP Phyllis Foy.

In another article on the latest WMU-NC gathering we see more of this rhetoric from the current executive director.

Some things have been said that are absolutely not true,” Fulbright said, things that have caused hardship in some churches. “We want to express our apology for any difficulty you have gone through or may be going through,” she said, “and to remind you that WMU was born in adversity.

Notice something about that first phrase–is does not identify what has been said that is not true. This is the same problem the leadership of the BSCNC had in trying to resolve the issue that led to the WMU-NC leaving the building. In the meeting that was held at East Taylorsville Baptist Church back in October, everytime Dr. Brian Davis expressed what was taking place, Mrs. Fulbright responded with, ‘you are correct but that is not how we see it.’ She even acknowledged that Dr. Davis correctly assessed the impasse and wanted to state the WMU-NC’s side and was given free opportunity to express their differences. The only things she said were not correct was issues concerning who the WMU-NC wanted to partner. Something she acknowledged did not come from the leadership of the BSCNC. It comes a time that someone needs to ask; “What things have been said that are not true?” It seems that if an untruth has been stated that caused autonomous churches hardship, please release this information and let’s get to the bottom of it. This, my friends, is a serious charge.

Another item of importance seems to be overlooked. According to the WMU-NC, they would need approximately $1.2 million in order to accomplish their task. Of this $1.2 million, the BSCNC was supplying approximately $900 thousand through the NC MIssions Offering and the rest would be supplied through the BSCNC budget. Well, the WMU-NC stepped out and re-established the Heck-Jones Missions offering. This Offering was promoted and received in churches throughout NC and has $336 thousand coming into their coffers so far. Mr. Fulbright said;“It’s not enough, not yet, but God is providing for our needs in other ways”. One-third of the WMU budget was received in one offering and she is espousing that God is providing for needs in other ways. I am not saying that God is not going to provide, His word tells us He will. In Psalm 37:25 David writes, “I have been young and now I am old, I have never seen His seed forsaken or the righteous begging bread.” I am questioning that $336k is sufficient for their needs at this moment, where was the other $600k going when they were in the baptist building, and their payroll, office space, printing needs, insurance, and salaries were being paid from the BSCNC budget?

One other item of interest has to do with something reported. It seems that the WMU-NC has had a great year even though there was such controversy within their organization. It seems that the WMU-NC added 138 new mission organizations in the past year. This seems to have been a great addition. My question concerning this report would be who the organizations are? According to the WMU-NC website there are currently six mission organizations that WMU-NC is together in partnership. Now, they are telling us that they have added 138 new missions organizations and they are over $900k in making their budget. There appears to be one of two things that are at work in this announcement. Either these 138 new missions organizations are associated with WMU-NC in name only, or WMU-NC is living off of excess funds that they have received. If the former is true, then we have a serious problem concerning this announcement. If the latter is true, then the BSCNC was presented a false concept by former executive director/treasurer Dr. Roy Smith when he presented his motion on Wednesday AM of the convention meeting arguing that the WMU-NC was in desperate needs of the $500k that he recommended go back into the NC Missions Offering. Either way, whether the former or latter, there seems to be some issue concerning financing the ministry of the WMU-NC .

Of course, the WMU-NC is new in their endeavor and I do pray that God will bless them as they proceed. I do like the song played as the ladies walked around thanking those in attendance. I also would like to call their attention to the first verse in the song.

Run your car off the side of the road
Get stuck in a ditch way out in the middle of nowhere

It seems that if one accidently runs one’s car off the side of the road in a ditch your true friends will be there to bail you out. The BSCNC has been there, and is still there, to get the ladies of NC Baptist Churches out of the ditch, but the WMU-NC leadership has gotten in the car with others and driven off, leaving this car loaded down with NC Baptist women who love missions for the rest of us to get out of the ditch. The BSCNC has organized a task force and it appears that a recommendation may be before the convention in October. When it comes before us this car, left there by others, will have been pulled out of the ditch by their friends. As for the future of the WMU-NC, it is still to early to tell as the chickens have not come home to roost.

Digg ThisShare via email

Mar 08

3

What Does it Mean?

Posted by Tim Rogers on March 3, 2008
Posted in Alliance of Baptist • Baptist State Convention of North Carolina • Cooperative Baptist Fellowship • Dr. Bill Leonard • Dr. Tony Cartledge • Ethics Daily • Mainstream Baptist • Mrs. Ruby Fullbright • New Baptist Covenant Celebration • Robert Parham • Wall Street Journal • Women's Missionary Union of North Carolina  | 16 Comments

When I was younger in my BC days, I went to a beer joint/pool hall called the “Blues Bar” along with my cousin and his friends. When daddy found out that I have been to this place, he questioned me as to my intention of doing something like that, as the bar was known for being a place where shooting guns was as common as shooting pool. I tried to dodge daddy’s questions by referencing the friends I went with were more friends of my cousin than friends of mine. Daddy responded with words that ring in my ears to this day. He said; ‘You may not be able to pick your family, but you can certainly pick your acquaintances‘. Which brings me to the point of today’s post.

During my time of sitting up with my mother at the hospital recently, while she was asleep, I would peruse the Google search engine for various items. One such item of interest to me was the connection of North Carolina Baptist with the New Baptist Covenant Celebration recently held in Atlanta. What peaked my interest was the advertising of this event in the Biblical Recorder, the state paper for the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. I began this search out of curiosity and the more I searched the more I began to see connections that most NC Baptist may not be aware.

First allow me to lay some basic ground work. Before anyone tries to attack this post saying that I am presenting this from a biased perspective. I do admit my bias as to my suspicions that this celebration was not what it was billed to be. Let us look to an independent news agency for their explanation of the event. I, for one, have always stated this celebration was not about getting Baptist together for expanding the kingdom as much as it was for getting them together to expand the Democratic party base. As Naomi Schaefer Riley stated:

The New Baptist Covenant is officially apolitical. But with Mr. Gore and former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton on the roster of speakers at a meeting jammed last week between the Florida primary and Super Tuesday, one might be forgiven for doubting this claim.

It seems that an independent news agency such as The Wall Street Journal, would be one that is unbiased. However, it appears that Robert Parham, Editor at Ethics Daily, disagrees. He said her article had too many errors. In a response that is classic liberal smack down, he addresses her title at the Wall Street Journal in a degrading way. What Mr. Parham forgets is that an Editor for Friday’s Taste page, in the Wall Street Journal would have more readers than the Editor of Ethics Daily.

Therefore, from an independent news agency, this celebration was about politics, not Baptist politics mind you, but secular politics. Does that mean that those involved were there to promote the Democratic Party? No, that is not what I am saying. I do believe that many people involved in this event were there simply to do the various duties within their convention. This celebration was planned, with different motives other than uniting Baptist to move forward to overcome poverty, aids, global warming, promote civil rights for gays and other issues it seems that conservatives are accused of not caring for. Allow me to note two other items and then draw some connections of North Carolina Baptist that many may not be aware.

If this celebration was about bringing everyone together, where was everybody on Thursday and Friday? You see we heard about the expected 20,000 people and then the count of over 12,000 people that attended on Wednesday evening at the opening ceremony. But we have never been given any other numbers for the attendance when the other Baptist meetings closed out their conventions. It seems that most left and went back home. One example is the Al Gore luncheon. I am not going to try and argue the purposes of the the media not being allowed into his luncheon. I am not going to even try and argue how he presented our responsibility of God’s creation when he is an avowed evolutionist. But 2500 people attending a luncheon, at $35 a head mind you, does not make a grand statement to me as to the 12,000 Baptist reported at the Wednesday opening ceremony. Also, it seems that 2500 people paying $35 a head could have used that $87,000 to help feed these poor that this celebration was supposed to unite the Baptist that were present. It also seems that the food to feed 2500 people at $35 per plate was a bit extravagant. Certainly paying $35 for rubber chicken, uncooked green beans, hard dinner rolls, unsweetened tea, and carrot cake could have been better used feeding the homeless in Atlanta–where most were right outside the World Congress Center.

Also, with this celebration promoting unity among diversity, I have to ask a question. Where were the invitations for two groups? Everyone knows that the SBC was not invited. There never was an official invitation sent to the SBC. Therefore, there was no way for the SBC to decline to be involved. The SBC probably would not have accepted the invite, but the fact remains they were not invited. And you can now understand why, as you peruse the speakers manuscripts you find the the SBC was the favorite ‘whipping boy’ of many speakers. If President Carter believes this is an official representative of the SBC, then he has another thought coming.

The second group that was not invited were the Gays and Lesbians. According to this news article the diversity that the New Baptist Covenant calls for was not even allowed a voice in the arena. How pious and even hypocritical of Former President Carter in his opening talk to point to things that have divided Baptist as “He cited a laundry list of issues that have divided Baptists-the role of women in ministry and marriage, varying accounts of creation, legalized abortion, civil rights for gays, separation of church and state, and the death penalty.” This opening talk came a year after the Alliance of Baptist were not given invitations to be at the celebration. We certainly want to promote civil rights for gays but we will not allow them to be part of this celebration, because it is not politically expedient. Of course this did not seem to bother the Alliance churches because many of them already have a voice as they are connected to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. The Fellowship is strongly connected with the celebration and thus, the Gays and Lesbians are represented through this group.

Allow me to now make come connections that should cause NC Baptist to pay attention. As you look to the committees that were structured for the planning of this celebration you will notice some very well connected NC Baptist. First I want to point your attention to the Program Committee and you will not that Dr. Bill Leonard is a member of this committee. Dr. Leonard is the Dean of the Divinity School at Wake Forest University. You will remember that this is the divinity school that would not take a stand against receiving Gay and Lesbian Students to study for the ministry. It is not about the students themselves, but the fact that we have a Divinity School that does not support the scripture as speaking to the issue of homosexuality. Second, I want to point your attention to the Finance Committee. You will note that Dr. Mike Queen, Pastor of First Baptist Wilmington being involved in that committee. Dr. Queen, you will remember is a former President of the Executive Committee of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. While this does not really concern me as Dr. Queen is a pastor of an autonomous church, it would concern me if he were serving in a leadership position within our state convention at present. Third, there are 2 other NC Baptist connections serving on the Communications Committee that does concern me. One is Mrs. Ruby Fulbright. Mrs. Fulbright, as you know, is the Executive Director of WMU-NC. The same WMU-NC that recently left moved out from under the umbrella of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina because they wanted to ‘do missions with other groups’. It seems that Mrs. Fulbright may have found another source of funding outside of NC Baptist by taking part in this celebration. Also, it concerns me to find Dr. Tony Cartledge listed as a member of this committee. It does not surprise me, but it does concern me that we have a professor teaching in a NC Baptist college/divinity school that will attend a celebration that puts down bible believing Baptist as being some fundamentalist idiots. Why does it concern me? Campbell University has a desire to still have access to the students in NC Baptist churches. These NC Baptist churches have repeatedly voted to align ourselves more fully with the Southern Baptist Convention, and we are sending our students to a school whose professors, at least one, openly plan a meeting to speak against the very rallying cry of the SBC.

I know that some may try to point out that Richard Brunson was a presenter in a break out session as reported by the Biblical Recorder. (The Recorder’s coverage of this event is another subject for another post. Suffice it to say when a state paper gives more coverage to an out of state meeting that the BSCNC was not participating, than to the Ex.Com. meeting going on the same week, it seems a little out of kilter.) As I understand it, the Baptist Men of North Carolina Director was invited to express to those that wanted to know, how we involve ourselves in Disaster Relief.

Which brings me back to my opening story. As NC Baptist we may not be able to choose those that God leads to become part of our fellowship. We certainly need to hold high the blood stained banner while lovingly and firmly communicating that we will not allow anything to compromise our doctrine in that banner. But we also need to remember we can choose those with whom we associate.

Digg ThisShare via email

Oct 07

20

Is it Time?

Posted by Tim Rogers on October 20, 2007
Posted in Baptist Retirement Homes of North Carolina • Baptist State Convention of North Carolina • Cooperative Baptist Fellowship • Fruitland Baptist Bible Institute • Giving Plans • Missions • Mrs. Ruby Fullbright • Southern Baptist Convention • Women's Missionary Union of North Carolina  | 6 Comments

Recently I was called by the editor of the Biblical Recorder to question if there was forthcoming a motion from me concerning combining the giving plans of the North Carolina Baptist State Convention (BSCNC). In the course of the interview I made it abundantly clear that this motion did not hold with it the intention for anyone to leave the convention. While some may offer comments otherwise, I promise you my heart is clear on the intent of this motion. I honestly believe that if we are going to be united in North Carolina we must unite the giving plans. Uniting the giving plans unite NC Baptist in three ways.

Intention

What is the intent of those giving to the various plans? There are different ideas all across the state about who deserves what and how much each entity should get. However, as you look at the plans you find that it is more than just a disagreement on who gets what. The plans were developed and designed out of vengeance. The first division of the giving plan came because some desired to hurt SBC causes due to the Conservative Resurgence, but they did not want North Carolina affected. That plan is now called Plan B. When that plan was not doing as much as some thought it should there came forth a new plan that placed nothing in the SBC coffers and helped fund a new start-up denomination called Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, but they still did not desire to hurt North Carolina. That plan is known as Plan C. When conservatives came into leadership prominence, there was decided that another plan was needed in order to keep the conservatives from doing completely away with Plan C. This plan is known as Plan D. This plan allows for lest to go to North Carolina, but more to in-state pet projects of the Conservatives. Fruitland Bible Institute is a huge recipient of this plan. Once again, notice how this plan came about. It was done to keep the conservatives from deleting Plan C.

Which brings me to a question. What is the intent in our giving? Do we give because we do not like something? Do we give more because we like something? In 1 Corinthians 8:3 the Apostle Paul writes under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that the Macedonians gave to a poverty relief fund out of their own poverty. I can imagine some in the churches there in Macedonia saying, we are just as poor as those in Jerusalem we are not giving to help them. No, they gave above their ability and the Bible goes on to tell us that they pleaded with Paul to allow them the opportunity to give. It seems that we in North Carolina need to return to our intention of giving. What is the reason I lead my church to support our Cooperative Missions Giving Offering? What is the reason that you lead yours? Returning to one giving plan will unite North Carolina Baptist on intent.

Insinuation

What does four giving plans insinuate about North Carolina Baptist? Not only that, but what do giving plans that give directly to CBF insinuate about North Carolina Baptist? According to CBF website the BSCNC is listed as a Congregational Partner. Who knows exactly what that means. If you follow this link on Congregational Life it says the CBF will fund up to $20k of certain projects. I do not believe the BSCNC is receiving any funds from CBF. However, the insinuation that we are Partners with CBF tells the world that BSCNC is supporting the CBF in their mission through our budget.

Let’s not leave Plan D out. What is the insinuation of Plan D? Well it tells the world that there are things going on in the BSCNC that is not acceptable. Plan D has grown the most in the past couple of years. Shouldn’t that say something to our leaders? What is going on that makes churches move their giving from Plan A to Plan D? Plan D gives less to the BSCNC but gives the same amount to the SBC as Plan A. Plan D insinuates that there is not enough votes for me to change something at the convention level so instead of pulling out altogether, I will give a nominal amount. But I do not want to hurt Fruitland and by giving to this plan I can still have a voice in the convention.

Multiple giving plans insinuate to the world that we are not together in North Carolina. The insinuation further brings about division within the local associations and also even comes to the church. Some churches giving to Plan C do not realize they are not supporting Southern Baptist causes. Plan D was presented as a plan that would allow more SB causes to be funded. However, most churches giving to Plan D do not realize they are giving no more % to Southern Baptist causes than a church giving to Plan A.

The insinuation of a united front is the first thing that is brought to light when you call a budget consultant to your church. I had the opportunity to use a consultant from the BSCNC to help our church make certain that our budget was doing what we desired it to do. The first thing he pointed to was the various “love” offerings we involved ourselves in. He commented that a church was not united in cause when there were small groups of people pushing for a love offering for their pet projects. What a unique concept.

Therefore uniting the giving plans into one plan insinuates to the world that we are united. We are together in what we are about and that we plan to accomplish our tasks under a united banner.

Mission

What is our mission as a convention? According to our Articles of Incorporation we see two purposes of our formation.

A. To assist the churches in their divinely appointed mission; to promote missions, evangelism, education, social services, the distribution of the Bible and sound religious literature; and to cooperate with the work of the Southern Baptist Convention; and

B. To do any and all acts and things which may be deemed desirable or expedient for the benefit of the programs of the Convention.

This mission should be funded through one budget. If we relegate our responsibility of education to the CBF, then let the schools be under the banner of CBF. We should not set up a separate budget in order to accommodate our purpose for education.

I will not try to explain how we are able to have a budget designated to the CBF when our mission plainly states we are “to cooperate with the work of the Southern Baptist Convention“. Suffice it to say that a study in 2001-02 produced a decision by lawyers that this statement did not restrict us from setting up a plan giving directly to the CBF. However, I still ask the same question.

We need to focus on our mission and it is evident from the WMU-NC’s latest move that we are not united on mission. Mrs. Ruby Fulbright, Executive Director of the WMU-NC, said in a meeting that BSCNC was focused on Evangelism and Church Planting and WMU-NC was focused on Evangelism and Social Ministry. This statement was a shock to many in the meeting. However, if you look at our budget one can see how these various mission visions compete with one another. If we had one budget then we would be able to clearly define the mission because it would be reflected in the budget. If an entity or auxiliary were then to say their mission was different we would be surprised for a reason.

Conclusion

Will we lose congregations if this motion passes and the study committee returns a recommendation to return to one budget? We probably will. Will we lose congregations if we continue with separate giving plans? We most definitely will. This trend has already been noted especially among churches giving to Plans B & C. Many are wondering aloud the reason we are bending over backwards trying to salvage relationships when we are constantly getting bombarded with walk outs. I have also spoken with some that desire to see these issues settled in court. What many do not realize is that the Baptist Retirement Homes of North Carolina did not allow the new trustees chosen by the BSCNC to attend their first trustee meeting. Why? BRHNC does not recognize BSCNC’s right to seat trustees. This is wrong, but I do not believe court action is the answer.  If we have one giving plan will this keep these incidents from taking place in the future? Probably not. But, if we have one giving plan we will certainly tell everyone that takes money out of the pot that those placing money in the pot are united.

Thus, the time is now for the BSCNC to begin the process to return us to one giving plan. Whoever we lose I bid them Godspeed in their endeavors. Whoever we gain I praise God for their addition and desire to seek God’s will through their participation in the BSCNC.

Digg ThisShare via email

Oct 07

17

Looking at Fact or Fiction

Posted by Tim Rogers on October 17, 2007
Posted in Baptist State Convention of North Carolina • Cooperative Baptist Fellowship • Dr. Roy Smith • East Taylorsville Baptist Church • Mrs. Ruby Fullbright • Women's Missionary Union of North Carolina  | 13 Comments

Mrs. Ruby Fulbright has posted a response to much of the back-and-forth that we find ourselves facing during these days leading up to our North Carolina Baptist State Convention. I met Mrs. Fulbright at the East Taylorsville Baptist Church meeting and found her to be very friendly and engaging. She engaged me as a gracious Christian lady as well as one that stands on what she believes. I believe that she loves Jesus and desires service for Him. I happen to disagree with her on the issues before us, and while she has much more insight into the particulars of these events, I have found her responses to be lacking in clarity.

I have copied her position taken directly from the WMU-NC website. I have responded to the areas that I understand to be the case.

  • The Gossip: WMU NC is leaving or resigning from the Convention.
  • The Truth: There is nothing that WMU has said or written that would indicate that we are leaving the Convention. Our decision to relocate our offices is not a departure from our commitment to supporting and promoting missions through the BSC. We intend to continue working with all churches and associations; we intend to keep praying for, promoting and supporting the offerings, as well as providing missions education resources and training. We are only changing the location of our office.
  • My Response: It seems that while the WMU-NC desires us to believe that they are not leaving the Convention, we still perceive it differently. The reasons? First, they are moving out of the building because they say they do not desire to be a liability for the Convention. However, they are going to need approximately $400 thousand from the churches for what they receive at the Baptist Building at no cost. This means that the first $400 thousand that comes from the churches to the WMU-NC is for administrative costs. Second, while they desire to continue to pray for, and promote the offerings, Mrs Fulbright has made it abundantly clear that they desire to partner with other denominations and para church organizations that do not hold to the same theological center as North Carolina Baptist. Thus, if they leave the Baptist Building they become more free to partner with organizations that promote theological positions that North Carolina Baptist would soundly defeat. If moving from the Baptist Building gives one more autonomy, which in this case the WMU-NC has clearly stated it will, then one is leaving the NCBSC. It is the same as the CBF-NC withholding their contributions to the SBC but still saying they are Southern Baptist.
  • The Gossip: WMU NC will have no accountability.
  • The Truth: First and foremost, WMU NC has never been under anyone’s authority except the Lordship of Jesus Christ. And, WMU NC has a very good system of accountability. As a grass-roots organization, WMU NC is accountable to you, our WMU members. WMU NC Staff is accountable to the WMU NC Executive Board. This Board is made up of five officers, 2 members from each of the 10 regions in the state plus 5 additional members. These board members are elected each year at our annual meeting in the spring. The Executive Board has several administrative committees that make sure the organization operates according to its Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws, that personnel are “doing their jobs” and that all finances are in order.
  • My Response: WMU-NC is under the authority of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. No one has ever denied that and that has never been the question. The question that has been evaded time and again is how the WMU-NC is accountable to the churches. While the WMU is organized and functions in a society format, the WMU-NC has always been accountable to the churches through there auxiliary relationship with the NCBSC. The churches allowed the WMU to collect funds because they knew the ladies in the church and the WMU-NC organization carried with it the auxiliary relationship with the NCBSC. In the historical relationship the way the NCBSC goes, so goes the WMU-NC. This veil of accountability is nothing more than the WMU-NC desiring to be closer connected to the CBF than with the NCBSC. Accountability is the key here. WMU-NC has made it abundantly clear that they are accountable to themselves and no one else. Dr. Roy Smith, in his failed attempt to say otherwise, admitted that while he was Executive Director/Treasurer he still signed off on new employees the WMU-NC brought on board. They have always been accountable to the BSCNC.
  • The Gossip: WMU NC wants to hire those who would be less than Christian in their lifestyle and witness.
  • The Truth: We have not changed the way we search for, examine and elect staff. We are extremely cautious when it comes to staff, both in the office and at Camp Mundo Vista. We want staff that are called by God, committed to Him and the task to which He has called them, who understand God’s heart for the world and desire to follow Him by accepting the challenge of the Great Commission.
  • My Response: First, I have never heard this said. I do know that a question was raised at the meeting that Mrs. Fulbright and leaders from other Baptist Universities along with WMU-NC leaders attended. The question posed was if she moved from the present hiring status (getting Ex.Dir. to sign) what assurance would NC Baptist have that they would not hire someone from these other denominations? It was presented that these other denominations that Mrs. Fullbright acknowledged a desire for WMU-NC to be working with, would not take Biblical stands concerning homosexualilty. Mrs. Fulbright never answered that they would not hire someone that viewed themselves as a Christian but was engaged in a homosexual relationship. She only said that at present they do not have anyone working in the WMU-NC that would consider themselves homosexual. Do not take my word for her lack of clarity, notice her response above to the very question she designed and says is gossip. What assurance does one have that the WMU-NC will not hire someone that is “less than Christian in their lifestyle and witness”? She only says the WMU-NC desires to hire people with the desires she has spelled out. Let me break it down. A person can say; “I am called by God, I am committed to Him and the task to which He has called me, I understand God’s heart for the world and I desire to follow Him by accepting the challenge of the Great Commission and I am a lesbian in a committed relationship. According to Mrs. Fulbright’s guidelines she will be able to hire the person without violating any principles she has spelled out.
  • The Gossip: WMU NC doesn’t follow the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message and “believes” in women preachers.
  • The Truth: WMU NC does not have a public stance on the 2000 Baptist Faith and Message or on women preachers. That is not our purpose for being nor our business, really. One of the things that Southern Baptists do say they believe is in the Priesthood of the Believer and the Autonomy of the Local Church. Those two beliefs indicate that who God calls and to what God calls them is an individual decision. And, each church must decide for herself what she wants to affirm or not to affirm. WMU NC does have as one of its core values to recognize the giftedness of women and girls and accept the responsibility to help them use their gifts in serving Christ.
  • My Response: Mrs. Fulbright’s understanding, or lack thereof, of the Priesthood of the Believer and the Autonomy of the Local Church completely negates 1 Peter 1:20. It is clearly written in the Scripture that the interpretation of Scripture is not a private individual matter. While each church does decide for herself whether the one called is in accordance to Scripture it is still Scripture that is the basis for the decision. Dr. James Sullivan, in his book Baptist Polity said;

Two Theological beliefs undergird every decision Southern Baptists have made about polity: the priesthood of the believer and the autonomy of the local congregation. Because we as Baptists believe these are clearly set forth in Scriptures, we are forbidden ever to violate the conscience of an individual believer or seek to coerce the members of an individual church.

This means that while we beleive in the priesthood of the believer we do not coerce one another to believe the way we believe. We believe the way we do based on Scripture.

Do I feel the WMU-NC should adopt the BF&M2k for their doctrinal position? Not unless the BSCNC does so. And even if that happens the WMU-NC must make their decision based on their conviction. However, if it is revealed that their conviction is different, then the BSCNC should reassess this relationship as an auxiliary. Thus, this item does not concern me. The proper response would be for the BSCNC to advance a doctrinal position and then watch the WMU-NC to see if they would follow. Of course Mrs. Fullbright could not adopt the BF&M2k because of the point that women, according to Southern Baptist as a whole, believe Scripture limits women from being ordained as Senior Pastors.

  • More Truth: It was clear from the beginning that WMU was a missions organization that believed women could lead the way in the local church in missions activity and missions giving. When you read the history of WMU you see evidence of how our leaders shaped and guided the work of this organization that, at various times, could have splintered and lost its missions purpose.
  • My Response: It is true that the history of the WMU proves how women lead the way in the local church in missions giving. You can talk to Dr. Roy Smith and you will hear about women selling chicken eggs in order support missions. There are some great stories of sacrifice in giving of time and income that it will bring tears to your eyes. However, note with me how they did this. It was through the local church, through the local association, through the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina, through the Southern Baptist Convention. While we are not connected in polity (each entity is autonomous of the other) we are connected in heart. The WMU-NC moving in this direction is a movement to divide the heart of North Carolina Baptist.
Digg ThisShare via email

Sep 07

20

Has the Fat Lady Sung?

Posted by Tim Rogers on September 20, 2007
Posted in Baptist State Convention of North Carolina • Executive Committee • Milton Hollifield • Missions • Mrs. Ruby Fullbright • Women's Missionary Union of North Carolina  | 38 Comments

There’s an old saying that I heard growing up; “It ain’t over until the fat lady sings.” This saying was a redneck way of referencing the opera. It seemed that all operas had rather large ladies to sing their closing song. Therefore when you saw this large lady walking on stage and begin with that soprano voice, you knew the opera was closing. This was the final farewell and you could rest assured that you were leaving and would not return for that opera again.

This is what I would like to ask about the WMU-NC and the BSCNC; Has the fat lady sang? Is there no way that the two can sit back down at the table and negotiate some way to resolve this stalemate? There are Godly people on both sides in this situation and it does seem that we should be Christian and adult enough to resolve this difference of opinion.

I was at the meeting this past Tuesday evening when information was given out about our situation. I met Mrs. Ruby Fullbright and others in the WMU-NC leadership. All of the ladies impressed me as being Godly women who desire to see God’s will accomplished. Mrs. Fullbright sought me out and introduced herself to me. I was very impressed with her as she was very pleasing and easy to speak with. She encouraged me with my blogging efforts and we shared a couple of laughs. As I listened to her address the group I remember thinking as she spoke; she is very articulate and certainly conveyed what she felt those present needed to hear. While Dr. Brian Davis answered questions he referred various ones to Mrs. Fullbright because it pertained specifically to WMU-NC’s position.

Various reports about this meeting seemed to imply that this meeting was put together by mean old preachers that wanted to kick the WMU out of the BSCNC. Mrs. Fullbright, along with a former Executive Director/Treasurer of BSCNC and even representatives from our universities made their way to East Taylorsville Baptist Church. I believe they were pleasantly surprised when they were received as they were and were asked and even received well when they addressed various issues. Some of the information was new and some information received was already old news. I know that the WMU at the ministry I serve was very pleased they were in attendance.

Some of the issues that I found at the meeting is something I would like to address here. Mrs. Fullbright was able to respond to various concerns and some I agreed with while others I do disagree. First, is the decision to distinguish between Evangelism and Ministry. She pointed out that evangelism was a part of their focus but they were more focused on ministry than church planting. I disagree with her assessment of this because she basically presented a point that it is okay to evangelize but their emphasis was not starting new churches. I agree with the need to evangelize and use ministry opportunities in this endeavor. However, if we are going to evangelize, why not partner with the Mission Growth and Evangelism department of the BSCNC? Mrs. Fullbright gave the impression that WMU-NC desired to be in this by themselves.

One other thing that she said that raises a concern for me is that appearance of this move. Mrs. Fullbright clearly stated that the WMU-NC was not leaving the BSCNC they were merely changing addresses. I certainly do not desire to dispute her assessment and only she can tell you the heart of the WMU-NC. Brother David MacEachern passionately stated that the appearance of this move says differently. While I do not believe Mrs. Fullbright’s or anyone associated with WMU-NC has any intention of leaving the BSCNC, I must admit I have to agree with Brother David. This move screams that we are leaving and we do not desire for BSCNC to hold us accountable in any way.

Why would I say this? It comes down to the reason for leaving. Mrs. Fullbright stated that the reason for the WMU-NC making this decision had to specifically do with the hiring practices that Brother Milton Hollifield interprets. Mrs. Fullbright does not desire to have Brother Milton to sign off on anyone the WMU-NC hires. WMU-NC has their own Personnell Committee, which is different from the BSCNC. That brings me to another question. Why are we duplicating Human Resource departments? This entire move does not have anything to do with missions strategy, theology, or even conservative leadership vs. moderate leadership. This entire move centers around the fact that WMU-NC wants the BSCNC to pay their employess, issue them the same benefits as BSCNC, and give them space to operate, but does not want them signing off on who gets hired. Even Dr. Roy Smith, who was at the meeting, confessed he had to sign-off on who was hired by the WMU-NC.

After assessing this meeting, I confess there was one item that concerned me greatly. Mrs. Fullbright was asked; “The BSCNC has made it clear that they have not left the negotiating table. Would the WMU-NC return to the table to work out these differences instead of leaving the building?” Mrs. Fullbright responded that she could not say what they would be able to do. That was a decision of their Executive Committee. She pointed out that she is a hired employee and that she would defer to their Executive Committee. My concern stems from the fact that as Executive Director she has the authority to return to the negotiating table. She cannot make any decisions at the table, just as Brother Milton Hollifield cannot make any decisions to stop any funds going to WMU-NC. These decisions must be made by their respective Executive Committee’s. However, there is one small hick-up with BSCNC. When the BSCNC Executive Committee decides anything, they must make it in the form of a motion to the Board of Directors. When the BoD make a decision it must come in the form of a motion to the convention in annual session. For the WMU-NC it only comes as a discussion before their Executive Committee and these 30 women decide for the entire state WMU. No one else gets a vote.

Which brings me to my orginal question. Has the fat lady sang? As far as the WMU-NC it appears she has finished singing and sat down, because they do not appear to have a desire to return and work out differences. That is extremely sad.

Digg ThisShare via email