Concerning the new policy that disallows dissent of any Trustee, remember that I said, in my last post, that it was essential to allow dissent to maintain a healthy Board and a healthy SBC. Let me come straight to the point.
I DO NOT THINK THE LEADERSHIP OF THE BOT IS INTERESTED IN A HEALTHY BOARD NOR A HEALTHY SBC. I THINK THAT THEY ARE INTERESTED IN CONTROLLING THE BOARD AT ALL COSTS. THE MOVE TO SILENCE DISSENT IS PROOF OF THAT.
Why is the move to silence dissent proof of a desire to control? Because there was never an issue concerning dissent that was worthy of being addressed before blogging came along. When Wade Burleson began blogging, dissent moved at the speed of electrons across the internet and the SBC. Our missionaries, on the other side of the world, are finding out about these issues by reading our blogs and Southern Baptists are finding out in the same way.
As a result of the reaction against the policies and the move against Wade, which was a result of EFFECTIVE DISSENT, the backlash threatened to wrest control of the Board from its leaders. To regain control, they felt they must regain control of the message that goes out. Instead of putting out sound words on the internet themselves – the recently published rationales, policies et. al. are proof that they do not have sound words to disseminate – they seek to shut down others from saying things that run counter to them or their actions, whether the forum is the internet or anywhere else. This action is short sighted, knee jerk and un-Christian.
To show you how much I have always thought this is THE issue, I have prepared a brief “reader” of my own personal thoughts on the issue over the last several weeks. There are two sections. Section I is those posts where I have touched on the issue in a broader context. Section II is where I made this issue the subject of my posts, at least in major part.
Section I – Tangential References to Public Dissent
Section II – The Whole Ball of Wax
Theme: Free Public Dissent [UPDATED]
Open Letter to the IMB Board of Trustees
Next Post: The repercussions of this policy: We are now in a battle for control of the SBC. This time, both sides are conservatives, though you will hear the word “liberal” thrown about – further proving that those who use it don’t understand what it means, but use it because it achieves the murderous assault on a person’s character that is their true goal.
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
Jeff Richard Young
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 4:52 pm:
Dear Art,
I didn’t want to believe it. These are pastors, professors, DOMs, and other respected Baptists. I thought it was beneath them to act this way. When they did act this way, I thought it was for some noble reason, and I just didn’t quite understand. Well, I believe it now!
Love in Christ,
Jeff
Kevin Bussey
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 5:21 pm:
I’d love to be called liberal. Jesus was! I will be liberal with Grace. I will be liberal with love. I will be liberal patience eventhough that is tough right now.
Anyway, anyone who knows me, knows I am anything but liberal when it comes to theology.
steve w
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 6:55 pm:
Art,
Can you comment a little more regarding control of the SBC? I understand the seriousness of the IMB trustees’ decisions regarding the IMB and our international missions efforts as a denomination, but can you touch on how what is happening with one of our entities (which theoretically shouldn’t have any influence on any other SBC entity) relates to control of the SBC? I’m not disagreeing with you, but would just like to hear your thoughts.
I think there are many problems in the SBC. I think what we are seeing with the IMB BoT is the fruit of power mongers outside of the IMB BoT gone wild (schemes that have been in motion for a number of years). You seem to see the reverse of that — power mongers on the IMB BoT now going after the rest of the SBC. But maybe I’m just misreading what you’re saying.
By the way, I’m thinking about producing Power Mongers Gone Wild DVDs and selling them in Greensboro. (just kidding) :)
art rogers
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 8:21 pm:
Yeah, Steve, good point. I don’t think that the IMB BOT is the root of conspiracy. Rather, like you, it is the fruit.
However, it is the fruit that sets the precident. By censoring dissent, they can further press the policies of exclusion concerning Baptism and PPL, otherwise known here at 12 Witnesses as the policies of charismatic-phobia.
Moreover, they are now assured of a cloud of secrecy to do whatever else is on their agenda. It has been widely rumored that Dr. Rankin is a target and the way they treated him last night lends credibility to those claims.
People who respect another person, as has been stated that the Trustees do by Dr. Hatley, do not treat that person the way Dr. Rankin was treated yesterday. I suspect that the IMB is the domino that sets the action in motion.
I am hoping for a reversal of fortune, though. I hope that we will be able to push back at Greensboro and cut the heart out of the beast. Or at least get it going.
I post tomorrow about that.
REWEST
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 9:23 pm:
Art,
Many of us are amazed that so many of the young pastors act as though this is something new. I see that you graduated from SWBTS in 95. Are the actions of the SWBTS BOT when they were preparing to fire Dilday any different than the actions of the IMB BOT toward Rankin. For that matter what about when Pressler and the SBC Exec Comm fired the editors of BP. Every BOT in the last 25 years has similar stories. Do you not see the real problem?
Kevin Bussey
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 9:30 pm:
REWEST,
Art and I both have been critical of the Dilday firing! We both were there and protested!
art rogers
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 9:44 pm:
REWEST,
Understand, this is not new to me. If you read through my blog and other posts you will see that I have had a front row seat for much of the political maneuvering since ’79.
That is not the issue. We are mobilized for a number of reasons. First, we are receiving the intimate details through our primary form of communication: electronically. Print it in the state Baptist paper and we might catch a glimpse, but we will spend little time reading it. It’s not right or wrong, it’s just who we are.
Secondly, this is the first time we have been in a position to do anything that matters. Up until now we have been observers because we could be nothing else.
steve w
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 10:18 pm:
Art,
Thanks. Now I understand what you mean.
REWEST,
I don’t know if “young pastors” think this is new. I think some blogging pastors today were not aware of all that was happening in the SBC in the 80s and early 90s. Age does have something to do with our understanding of things. I didn’t live through the Great Depression or WWII, so I don’t grasp those events the way those that lived through them do.
Do you think anything can be done to “take back” the SBC today (i.e., to take it out of the hands of those that seem to be consumed with the lust for power and control)?
I lived through the resurgence. I don’t think where we are today is where “they” were headed in the beginning (I know it’s not what I wanted). I think what we are experiencing is lust for power run amuck — a lust for power that was only gestational and perhaps unrecognized when Pressler first conceived the strategy; maybe Pressler was never consumed by this lust for power (but I could be very wrong about all this, and I certainly can’t know a particular individual’s motives).
So, do you think the ship can be righted, or will it capsize? And, can you put into a single sentence what you consider “the real problem”?
- Just a willing learner curious about your perspective
Alan Cross
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 10:59 pm:
I sure am glad that Paul didn’t keep lockstep with Peter in Antioch when the gospel was compromised by Peter siding with the Judaizers. He would have had to resign as an Apostle! You know, I don’t think the IMB BOT likes Paul very much, even though they preach from him every Sunday. He spoke in tongues, was baptized by “a disciple named Ananias” (Acts 9:10), and disagreed publicly with another Apostle! I think that the integrity of the gospel was more important to him than position or politics.
Ultimately, this is disastrous. The logic of this group is horrible and is so easily torn apart biblically in a matter of seconds by anyone who has read the Bible even once. It seems that God has turned them over to their worldly thinking and they cannot even see what is happening at this point. We need to pray very hard for the delusion of the enemy to be lifted and for individual trustees to come out of the fog to see what is really happening (I am not trying to personally attack the trustees – we battle not against flesh and blood). I am so grieved. But, what do I know? I’m just a Southern Baptist pastor educated in one of their seminaries AFTER the conservative resurgence, reading the Bible LITERALLY!
Anonymous
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 11:42 pm:
Can anyone explain all the conflicting reports floating around? It’s hard to understand what is happening. As IMB missionaries we received earlier this afternoon a glowing report of a wonderful meeting. On the other hand we read conflicting reports that contradict the official news coming to us from the Board.
art rogers
on Mar 22nd, 2006
@ 11:53 pm:
With the new policy, the “official news” can never again be trusted, in my opinion.
The trustees have insulated themselves from accountability to the SBC and that will not stand if I can do anything about it.
As to the attitude within the meeting, there is no need for the majority to be pergoritive. They won this battle without much of a flinch. Why wouldn’t they be “loving” toward Wade.
I think those at Tampa were so focused on whether or not Wade would be forced to jump through hoops that they didn’t focus on the policy.
Also, this has been my personal crusade for about 6 weeks now, but I don’t know that those in Tampa have focused on it as much.
Look at my Febraury post called the Hidden Issue. It is linked above. That will show you how long I have seen this coming.
Also, remember that the group in Tampa is unplugged from the blogoshpere right now. They are not picking up what we are picking up and won’t for another couple of days.
And remember that they are enjoying each other’s company which lifts their moods in spite of everything else.
Phillips Lynn
on Mar 23rd, 2006
@ 7:38 am:
Art,
Amen!!! You are correct in your statements.
The censoring of Pastor Burleson (limiting his service on the board) in my opinion affirms how upset the background players are with him and their inability to control him. I have seen this happen too many times over the years. People who could not be controlled or manipulated to play according to the agenda of those calling the shots were silenced by removal, censorship or “black-listing” of the person. The outcome is always the same the voice is silenced and as are those around him. The scenario usually plays out just as it did here. The report to the public from those pushing their agenda is always “there are things that you don’t about this person and when they come out you will understand our position.” Does this sound familiar? The effect is always the same. Those people who are standing with the individual usually always back off until “they get all of the facts” but “the facts” never come. After a period of time the issue has been silenced and is soon forgotten and the person who chose to stand is “censored” and the political machine rolls on to its next agenda and to further destroy anyone else who dares to stand in the way.
This is not an isolated incident. I have seen it happen too many times over the years. We must go to Greensboro to address this issue.
Ignoring a cancerous growth will never make it go away. It will soon spread to other members and we will begin to see our convention loose its focus and goal. No longer will our priority be to reach a lost and dying world for Jesus.
steve w
on Mar 23rd, 2006
@ 8:57 am:
Phillips Lynn,
Thank you for being involved in the blogsphere. I made a comment on Marty’s blog (sbcoutpost) yesterday about those that are older and wiser and Christlike. You are one of the people I had in mind when I wrote that comment. I also said somewhere (wish I knew where) that if this is our generation’s “hill on which to die,” I am committed. But we need to hear from people that were involved in the last 25 or so years in ways and to an extent most of us have not been involved all those years. So keep doing what you’re doing! I hope to meet you in Greensboro.
Alan Cross,
Your first paragraph struck me as somewhat humorous … the irony of it all. But you are dead on.
Art,
As usual, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
To all,
I’m not sure we have an accurate picture yet of what transpired in Tampa yesterday. It has been confirmed by a trustee that some significant changes were made to the trustee conduct or communication policy after excerpts were posted on Marty’s blog. Rick Thompson The Road We Travel (link) says there was a major accomplishment regarding trustee deportment. There is a positive comment about the meeting in the comment section of Marty’s blog yesterday.
Maybe…just maybe…the ship is starting to turn in the right (should I say correct) direction. I’m willing to take a breather until I get more information. No one is saying we have accomplished all that needs to be done. I just want to make sure I’m not reacting to miscommunication or acting on my own misunderstanding. If the trustees have just patched up some tears in their cloak of secrecy, we’ll know very soon. If they’re just trying to restore some civility among their ranks, we’ll know that too. Just my 2 cents for now.
6:57 AM, left coast time
steve w
on Mar 23rd, 2006
@ 9:18 am:
Sorry, Rick edited his title after I commented, so this is now the correct link:
The Road We Travel (link)
He also has a new, and very good, post today.
Thanks Rick.
CharlieMac
on Mar 23rd, 2006
@ 9:20 am:
I lived through the end of the depression and all of WWII.
I also saw the beginnings of this back in the 70′s. This control issue is certainly not anything new. From where I stand it began in Texas and was led by a couple of men with the same initials. They have accomplished most of what they set out to do. Those who disagree are either gone other ways or are silently going about the Lord’s business. Just a layman’s perspective look at history of the SBC.