Integrating Missionally | 2009

I was having dinner with Len Sweet last year, just my wife and myself. I suggested to Len that I was tired of being Southern Baptist. The lack of authentic leadership, the politics and the hyper-fundamentalism that exists have left me with no energy for the denomination as a whole. I even swore off blogging about it unless it was a missional issue. However, Len told me something that has come back to my mind in the last month. He said something to the effect of, “David, stay in and help the SBC become real Baptists again!” I have decided to engage the convention in a limited way. Thus the previous post, and this one.

Recently, Clark Logan was asked to resign from the Executive Committee of the SBC. Apparently, some did not like the fact that he was asked to resign and an attack on Morris Chapman ensued. Al Mohler, Danny Akin, and Johnny Hunt began the attack (among others) and Hunt via Twitter has kept up the attack. Morris was the ideal person to attack because he was not in favor of the GCR and said so publicly. They want him gone.

I am not a Morris Chapman apologist. However, when I see what is being done to him by the architects of the GCR, it is a reminder of the politics of the Conservative Resurgence. The charge is that Clark Logan was not treated fairly when asked to resign. Let me first address that issue. Regardless of how he was treated (and there are differing opinions as to how he was treated), in the corporate world, particularly for those who are in the financial areas, if a person quits or is fired, they are shown the door that minute. The reason they are shown the door is because that person is dealing with money. Documents could be shredded. Documents can be taken. Numbers can be changed. It can get dicey for the company if the person leaving wanted to leave his employer in a difficult situation. I’ve seen this happen. My mother worked in a bank for almost 40 years. This is standard practice.

Now I acknowledge that the church should treat people differently from the world’s standards. However, even in a non-profit, the leadership has to be careful how the finances are managed and in the financial industries, they generally ask the person to go ahead and leave. It can be done nicely.

I also want to say that I think it is great that Clark’s new friends are sticking up for him. They feel he was mistreated in how he was dismissed. That is admirable! However, I want to ask them one question. If the issue is that a person in a SBC entity was not treated fairly in their dismissal, where were those who are calling for Morris’ head when the following happened:

1. Sheri Klouda was dismissed inappropriately from SWBTS
2. Dwight McKissic was all but forced out as a trustee from SWBTS
3. Wade Burleson was unfairly treated and then resigned as trustee of the IMB
4. Ken Hemphill was forced out at SWBTS
5. Russell Dilday was unfairly treated in his removal from SWBTS
6. Conservative people in the convention were labeled and blackballed because they would not play politics
7. Jerry Rankin was being beaten up in the past five plus years?

Where were the calls by Al Mohler, Danny Akin, and Johnny Hunt (et. al) when these unfair treatments were going on? They held positions of influence and leadership during a large portion of that time. Why were there not calls for people to be held accountable for their actions? It seems that expediency and politics are at play again. The leaders in the GCR want Morris gone. This is the way to fan the flames of anger against him. Politics as usual? The excuse that someone was mistreated doesn’t really fly. It is politics.

It simply appears we have not learned our lesson. We are saying one thing and doing another. Our actions are not lining up with our words. Ethics, consistency and honesty are gone. The political machine is ramping up again.

Other evidence? In a recent article on Baptist Press, Ronnie Floyd said:

Floyd said it was a “great question” whether the “Great Commission Resurgence” declaration issued April 27 by Hunt and Daniel L. Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, would give total direction to the task or whether it was just a starting point. The declaration, which is posted at greatcommissionresurgence.com, sparked lengthy discussion of its clarity, tone and content, especially a section that called for restructuring the denomination “at every level.” Although messengers to the SBC annual meeting in Louisville, Ky., voted overwhelmingly in June to appoint the task force, the declaration itself was never presented for discussion and adoption.

“I can honestly tell you I don’t know the answer to that right now,” Floyd said. “Our group has to decide that. I do believe … the document served as the catalyst for the motion that received such a high commitment at the SBC. So to minimize the document would not be wise. At the same time, the convention did not vote the document in…. It will have a significant place. But I don’t think it will chart everything by any means.”

The only reason the task force got appointed was because of the GCR document. People were not looking to restructure the convention. People were signing on to the ideas present in that document. This reminds me of an old-fashioned bait-and-switch. It appears that some want to use this document to allow them to restructure the convention yet not use that document as a guiding principle. In other words, “Thanks for the ability to recommend changes, but we will do it our own way and with our own ideas of what should be the guiding principle.”

Is that really what the convention asked them to do?

They still have time to change what they do. Unfortunately, it will not change what they have done up until now. I believe the conversation can be shaped into a missional conversation. If not, all that will happen is that they will suggest a re-positioning of the deck chairs on the Titantic. And until I see otherwise, it all looks as if it is just politics.

Popularity: 6% [?]

Tags: SBC

The GCR is the Same Old Politics

David Phillips

– July 28, 2009Posted in: SBC

Live Out Loud? Really?

I am sitting in Starbucks this morning, reading a post by Todd Littleton regarding the tactics of the political machine that is the Southern Baptist Convention. The latest iteration of the squabbles surround the Great Commission Resurgence. In particular, it involves the politics going on between Johnny Hunt and Morris Chapman.

While I was not impressed with the report Morris gave at the recent Southern Baptist Convention in Louisville, his clarification of his report is to be commended. Some hated it, a la Timmy Brister (see here, here, and here). Some, like imonk Michael Spencer, thought is was right on target. [UPDATE: I have misrepresented imonk, for which I am truly apologetic. He states his thoughts on Chapman's clarification below. My frustration got the best of me. I should not have included him.]

However, Dr. Chapman is really being taken to task because he chose not to support the Great Commission Resurgence and is taking heat from Al Mohler, Johnny Hunt, and others in the state newspapers, twitter, and other venues.

What if, as Todd Littleton suggest, Morris actually discovered that what the GCR is nothing more than moving around the deck chairs on the Titanic and decided he didn’t want to play that game? Is it wrong for him to stand up? Actually, is it wrong if he just didn’t like it and chose not to support it? Are we really at a point where we can’t have differences of opinion and we are forcing people to conform rather than have an honest discussion on the topic? I feel like I’m watching an Obama administration trying to Rahm through policies and arm-twisting those who disagree.

The GCR task force is nothing more than some politicos trying to fundamentally transform our denomination. Oh there are some good people. Danny Akin is a good enough guy. But Ronny Floyd is on the task force as payback for not getting one of the entity spots or a term as the President of the Convention. Al Mohler has decided to align with the group that will get him the most money for his seminary and most influence in its politics. Jim Richards has been pushed as a perpetual nominee for any number of entity positions. The rest of the group – sans the 4 additions – are for the most part, leftovers form the CR. It shows it’s just all politics. Nothing new has changed. In fact, I’ve been told, it’s really all just a bunch of keystone cops running around.

What they are going to do, and this has been in the works pre-convention, is to close Golden Gate and Midwestern. They want to the money for the property these seminaries sit on. It’s in the 9 figures. Forget the presence and reputation these schools have in non-traditional Southern Baptist areas. The seminary presidents want the money for themselves. Some of the seminary presidents themselves have been trying to get a yearly offering, a la Lottie Moon. So far this has been resisted. This may be part of the increased attack on the Executive Committee and Morris Chapman. I’ve already shared with you my thoughts on the seminary situation. Close them all down except Southeastern and Golden Gate and fold them into the state conventions. That won’t happen, just like Danny Akin or Al Mohler will not allow their seminaries to be sold or disbanded. In addition, they will shut down NAMB, turn church planting over to the states and have one mission board whose main focus will be international missions. They also want to break the power of the Executive Committee.

None of this has anything to do with ANYTHING missional. This is not a philosophical and theological change. This is simply an attempt to fundamentally change the structure of the convention into a structure that second generation CR people can own. Might it save money? It might. But it will only put off the inevitable demise of the convention.

This is demonstrated by the lack of a great commandment resurgence. We are saying one thing and doing another. If Johnny Hunt really wants to know what was going on with Morris Chapman, he needs to be a man, pick up the phone and call him. Stop acting like a little girl! Quit talking about it in the papers until you call him. All you are doing is demonstrating that it’s politics as usual. This is straight from the CR playbook. This has nothing to do with how Christ would handle the situation.

The reason people are leaving the convention is because people are saying one thing and doing another. I have said it before, until the leadership of our denomination confesses of the blood on its hands from the CR and repents – including Patterson, Chapman, Hunt, Floyd, Mohler, et. al. – this denomination is heading for an iceberg and the leaders are so blind they cannot even see it.

Listen guys: Until your talk and walk line up, you have no credibility. If your talk and walk don’t line up – as it currently is not – then your hipocracy will be evident and the mass of people leaving will be even more pronounced. As of now, I see nothing to indicate any change in the way things have been done in the past.

Here’s hoping that a real revival will come to the convention – one that starts with a great commandment resurgence.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Tags: GCR, SBC