Author: art rogers
Messy MO
Saturday, December 16th, 2006 @ 11:17 pm
Mo. Baptist board forms investigating committee - (BP)
Let me say first that my heart breaks for the MBC. The disunity and strife with which they struggle is nauseating - the kind of sickness that stems from watching people who are hurting, but for whom you can do nothing.
The stuff with The Journey is puzzling. Some disjointed thoughts… Questions of autonomy are beginning to arise. You can’t turn a website over to someone else (especially a secular someone else) and then fail to enforce content controls. The men in the meeting that are critiquing this church, no longer a “plant” at 1,400, are probably pastoring churches that are not nearly so innovative at engaging a lost culture.
My chief concern is that this state convention could be the national convention and I sense is on the road to exactly that.
Back to The Journey, this story is a good lead in to my next editorial on cooperation among Baptists. Let’s get the discussion started before I post, though. That’s a new twist.
What level of control does any convention have over any of its member churches? Is autonomy absolute? What solution is there if someone “gets out of line?”
Here’s another thought line, if that one doesn’t suit:
What obligations do you have to your local Association, State and National Conventions? If they are “out of line,” then what?
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
December 17th, 2006 at 1:12 pm
Art,
Why the witch-hunt? The pastor clearly says they don’t encourage alcoholic consumption. That is good enough for me. This is very sad.
As one who has planted a church, my heart goes out to the Journey. There are way too many lost people to worry about a group that meets in a brewery.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I will pray for the Journey.
December 17th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
Sounds like The Journey church is in the crosshairs of the established church scope. Will it really matter how the “investigation” turns out? Simple word association with “alcohol” will probably be problematic enough.
The BP article said: “Edwards told Baptist Press that the alcohol-related issues include The Journey’s association with Acts 29, an association of emergent churches of which Patrick is vice-president, and which, according to Patrick, holds a much more liberal view of alcohol use than does The Journey.”
Our own Dr. Ed Stetzer, Southern Baptist church planting guru and employee of the North American Mission Board, is on the Board of Directors of the Acts 29 Network … the last time I checked.
To answer your question, Art … ouronly obligation to any Baptist entity “above’ the local church that we send each month. If we sense that they are “out of line,” good stewardship requires us to invest those gifts elsewhere. Surely, Baptist autonomy is absolute.
December 17th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
Art,
Dave clippard, the Executive Director for Missiouri Baptists, is a friend and former member of the staff, for several years, of the church I pastored in Ft. Worth Texas in the late seventies and early eighties.
He and his wife Suzie, are like my own kids to me. I know them well and have ministered in churches where he has pastored, eaten meal after meal together, and ridden on day long trips on motorcycles with them. In other words, I know them well.
There is no finer person than is Dave. He is integrity with a capital I. His heart beats with pure evangelism and he will do anything short of things immoral, illegal, unethical, or unbiblical to win people to Christ. For even a hint left by anyone as to his character is a travesty. Dave and I do not agree on every theological point nor on every Southern Baptist issue perhaps, but, there is no validity to even a casting of doubt as to his integrity.
I hope that whatever issues that State convention faces, no one will attempt to blacken his name as to anything unethical because they will be wrong.
You can see, I feel strongly about this. I’ve had many occasions in the past year where I would have said the same about the character of another I know well, but would be charged, I’m sure, with being blinded by relationship. In deference to that one fighting his own battles, and quite well I might add, I have remained silent for the main. Here I will not.
It was, I believe, Plato who said, “A wise man speaks because he has something to say, a fool because he has to say something.” I have something to say about Dave Clippard and appreciate being able to say it in your comment section. Thank you for keeping us on top of this by the way.
December 17th, 2006 at 7:18 pm
Here’s what I don’t know: How successful has the Journey church been in making converts and keeping them (making disciples)? Are lost seekers the ones doing the drinking or church members/staff? What does this have to do with Dave Clippard? Is this an alcohol issue? A stewardship issue? An attempt to get rid of old leadership by any means necessary?
I’ve been puzzled and unimpressed by the actions of Missouri Baptists over the past few years. Law suits costing millions (and the interesting justification: the biblical injunction against law suits applies only to individuals not institutions), attempts to embarrass or get rid of the Executive Director, an unprecedented “single alignment” policy, and now this. Why would any young minister move to Missouri?
December 17th, 2006 at 9:24 pm
Because I am originally from Missouri, I am very interested in which part of Missouri this church called “the Journey” is in, since Journey is a common name for a church.
Does anyone know whether it is in St. Louis or in Kansas City (or Springfield, or somewhere else), and could someone here actually comment on the actual controversey, here???
December 17th, 2006 at 10:15 pm
Jonathan,
Which actual controversy are you talking about? The BP article was ripe with them. It was as if the people being “investigated” changed three different times. I still don’t know who’s being investigated!
I think the focus of Art’s post was to stimulate discussion about church autonomy, the authority of “higher levels” of structure, and levels of cooperation within the SBC.
By the way … I visited your blog tonight. Welcome to the world of self-revelation! I think you and I operate in radically different theological “universes,” but I look forward to reading whay you have to say.
God bless.
December 17th, 2006 at 10:16 pm
Sorry … “what,” not “whay.” Art, can’t you get a spell checker on this thing?
December 17th, 2006 at 10:55 pm
To add a note of clarification to Bowden’s comments, it’s quite interesting that the MBC used the argument that they weren’t violating Scriptures when they voted to sue the 5 institutions that opted to name their own boards of trustees because the suits were directed against institutions and not individuals. In their latest amendment to the original suits (I think the count is up to 5 amendments so far), the MBC does in fact name individuals and not just institutions as objects of their litigation. So much for consistency, but then inconsistency and half-truths have been the order of the day with the MBC in this whole process. The pledge was also made early on that no CP dollars would be touched to fund the litigation. That pledge lasted about a year before it was also rescinded. There wasn’t an overwhelming response to the appeal by the MBC to contribute to their Agency Restoration Fund to fund the lawsuits, so the Executive Committee okayed spending CP offerings to bring suit against fellow Baptists.
I will probably feel compelled to write a bit more about this issue in the coming days on my own blog. Ours was one of the 19 churches voted out of the MBC at the latest state convention meeting so some will claim I am far from unbiased in this matter. That’s a fair assessment, but the MBC’s pride in being the only state convention to this point to insist on single alignment with the state convention and the SBC in order to be in good standing clearly represents a commitment to the narrowing of parameters of cooperation far beyond anything witnessed elsewhere in SBC life. One reason I’ll probably comment on this in my own blog is that I’m not too adept at citing sources in comment strings and I don’t want to monopolize Art’s blog. There are some interesting articles in the Word and Way and Pathway that deal with these issues.
December 18th, 2006 at 12:02 am
Geoff,
I am really asking two questions in my post above. The first question is where this church is located (and what the name of the church is). The second question is what is the nature of the controversy, here, why does the MBC have a beef with this church?
Perhaps a link to the original BP article would suffice in answering these questions, please.
Thanks.
December 18th, 2006 at 6:48 am
The Journey is located in the heart of St. Louis. It started (I believe) about 4 1/2 years ago with roughly 30 people and today runs well over a thousand in worship. They are reformed in their theology and their elders are great preachers/expositors of the Word. Great church…
December 18th, 2006 at 7:10 am
Bowden…
Why would any young minister move to Missouri? Because Missouri is a GREAT place, full of wonderful people that are in great need of the gospel. Yeah, our state convention is a mess, but thankfully, it doesn’t usually affect the local church in major ways (aside from forcing some tough decisions about how to direct cooperative program funding).
All…
If any of you want to read what Missouri Baptists are saying about this, check out the Missouri Baptist Discussion List. A free subscription (via yahoo) is required. One word of caution… my experience with the list is that you’ll need to be prepared to combat a strong desire to beat your head against a brick wall after a couple week’s worth of reading.
December 18th, 2006 at 10:36 am
John,
I am praying for your head. Thanks for the link. Your comment to Bowden… I know of at least a couple who are considering leaving Missouri just to get away from this mess and still be Southern Baptist.
Geoff,
No spell check for the comments. Sorry. I, however, am using Mozilla Firefox as a web browser and I found a plug in that checks the spelling of everything I type in the browser. It works exactly like the one in Word. Ya’ll might check it out. I hear that my blog looks better in Firefox, too, but that’s just what I hear.
Jonathan,
The link to the article is the first line under the title.
There are two investigations ongoing and mentioned in the article. First, the MO Executive Director, Dave Clippard has been dogged by rumors and there is now an investigative committee formed to see if those rumors have validity. I was under the impression that the Bible didn’t ask for us to put much stock in rumors, but to verify things on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Now some might say that this investigative committee is verifying that the rumors are either true or not true. I firmly disagree. If someone has evidence or testimony concerning Clippard, they should come directly to the Executive Committee and present it. The existence of this committee validates the rumors before they even investigate them.
I want to say something else about the Clippard situation. I have now heard from several people that the root problem with Clippard is the suspicion that he is NOT a “true conservative.”
*sigh*
During the Resurgence, people openly accused others of being a “liberal” and a “fundamentalist” to each others faces across board rooms and in other places. Now, if you accuse someone who calls themselves a “conservative inerrantist” of being a “liberal,” you cause folks who have sense to look at you with one eyebrow raised.
Enter the whisper campaign. You can’t say they are “liberals,” and you certainly can’t do it to their face, but if you whisper behind their back to sympathetic ears that certain people aren’t “true conservatives,” the result is the same. People think they are liberals whether or not they are.
I don’t know Dave Clippard from a hole in the wall and if I met him on the street, I couldn’t say who he was. I have learned more about him from Paul Burleson’s comment here than anything else.
My point here is this: Dave Clippard may or may not be “liberal” or “conservative,” but if you have something to say about him, bring it to the Executive Committee and say it where you can look him in the eye. I mean, have some integrity and repent of your gossip. Righteous whisperers have been around a long time and many who are now participating in this activity when it concerns our Baptist leaders have shamed folks from the pulpits when it concerned others.
Moving on to The Journey. It seems to me that the problem with The Journey (that’s a common name?) is that they don’t fit the mold of a traditional Southern Baptist church.
It seems they are in violation of being actually Missional (not the buzz-word generic version), getting within 400 feet of alcohol in the achievement of being Missional and engaging the lost, contemporary, and even Calvinistic. *HORRORS!*
***Side Note***
Isn’t it interesting how the accusation that Calvinism is anti-evangelistic (hyper-Calvinism) is juxtaposed so nicely here with a Reformed church who is very serious about engaging lost people in conversation with the Gospel?
***/Side Note***
Well, if they were denying the authority of Scripture (questioning the Virgin Birth, etc.) or even seeking to ordain homosexuals to the ministry, I could understand investigating that. The alcohol issue, though, is a Sufficiency/Autonomy issue.
Understand, any investigation is toward an end of breaking fellowship. Geoff is right, autonomy is absolute. They can’t make The Journey do anything. They can only break fellowship.
Now, this means that they are seeking to enforce, as a test of fellowship, whether or not autonomous churches interpret Scripture uniformly on the issue of alcohol consumption. Their interpretation being the only legitimate interpretation and all others being heresy, of course.
This is a problem. A big problem.
Now what?
December 18th, 2006 at 10:52 am
Art,
Having absolutely no knowledge about what is going on in MO, I have absolutely nothing to say about it.
However, with regard to your more generic questions, I’ll be glad to opine:
“What level of control does any convention have over any of its member churches?” None.
“Is autonomy absolute?” Yes, so long as the church is self-sustaining financially.
“What obligations do you have to your local Association, State and National Conventions?” None whatsoever. Associations and conventions are creations of man and have no standing to obligate a church.
However, I will reword that question to suit me better (persnickity fellow that I am): “What obligations do you have to your sister churches with which you are joined in associations or conventions?” The absolute autonomy of those other churches includes each church’s autonomy to decide whether to be affiliated with one another. If the other churches in the group decide that they no longer wish to be affiliated with a particular church, they can exclude a church from their fellowship. They ought not to do so lightly, but in saying so I offer a wish rather than a command. They are free to impose any boundaries to their fellowship that they might wish to impose. So, to answer the question, the obligation you have to those churches is either to live up to the terms of fellowship or honor one another’s right to affiliate with the churches of one’s choosing. That’s absolute autonomy, and it sort of cuts both ways sometimes.
“What solution is there if someone ‘gets out of line?’
” Negotiation. If that doesn’t work, disassociation.
“If they are ‘out of line,’ then what?” If it is a severe enough occasion, shake the dust from your sandals and go elsewhere. If it is not severe enough, and if lobbying for change has been unsuccessful, then you overlook the differences in view of the commonalities.
There’s my opinion. Great questions!
December 18th, 2006 at 10:54 am
What Bart said.
December 18th, 2006 at 12:01 pm
Whenever we have drawn a line in the sand in our church, we have tried to make sure the Scripture drew the same line. Every time we have drawn a line that we could not support scripturally, it didn’t work. The no drinking policy hasn’t worked because it isn’t scriptural. I wonder, however, if anyone has ever done a study of churches that are reaching lost people to see if their position on alcohol consumption made any difference one way or the other.
December 18th, 2006 at 1:07 pm
I used to know Dave Clippard, but in light of these specific and serious allegations, well, I don’t even know who he is anymore. Okay, seriously, Dave and I didn’t always see eye to eye, but he is a good and decent person, and someone has gotten their boxers in a bunch over nothing, and they’re taking it out on a good brother.
Bart,
We teach kids to play nice on the playground, even if they are different from one another. Hopefully, we think long and hard before we would ever consider disassociation. Otherwise, there would be no association at all.
Clyde,
I have never done a study, but look no further than the church where I am a member. Our church’s policy is that we do not consume alcohol a church functions, and we discourage people from doing so at church-sponsored functions (like a Sunday School party). But that’s it. There are no other guidelines outside of Scripture our church has that pertain to alcohol. And we are reaching more people than any other church in Oklahoma, according to Outreach magazine. When a church doesn’t waste all its preaching time majoring in minors, they have more time for communicating the Gospel. Its amazing.
December 18th, 2006 at 1:44 pm
Darren,
I take it you are the pastor of the Journey? Even if you are not, is this the same church that formerly met in the Hanley Road Baptist Church building, or a different entity? I never visited the Journey church that met at Hanley Road Baptist, but I was familiar with it and saw the website. So, I’d like to know if that is the same church, please???
Art,
Thanks for your comments and clarification. This, to me, is sad. Journey Church IS a common name for a church… there is one in Norman, OK, which was planted by the mega-church LifeChurch.tv, as well. In fact, I just met somebody (my new hygeinist) who goes there with her husband. Journey or Journeys is a VERY common name… the young adult group at my church is entitled “Journeys” also.
What is sad to me is it sounds like the MBC does not really want to be missional, or at least fulfill the Great Commission in the “Baptist way,” which is not necessarily what Jesus would have done. Jesus dined with sinners and turned water into wine… like you said *HORRORS*. This is very sad to me.
December 18th, 2006 at 3:14 pm
Art,
Were your site hits getting so low that you had to mention the word “alcohol” again?
December 18th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Paul,
Actually, I was on a roll in a different direction. This is going to fold into my thoughtline pretty well, though. Bart’s comments and recent posts also help.
Art
December 18th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
JasonK,
I agree, which is why I said, “They ought not to do so lightly, but in saying so I offer a wish rather than a command.”
And the good news is, we generally have thought long and hard about disfellowshipping churches. In this whole, long season of conflict in the SBC (the 1979 one), how many churches did we actually disfellowship?
Art,
I don’t know whether to be excited or fearful!
December 18th, 2006 at 4:25 pm
No, the pastor is Darrin Patrick…
Great guy, and yeah it’s the church that meets at Hanley on Sunday night and the new Tower Grove park location on Sunday mornings.
December 18th, 2006 at 4:35 pm
Bart,
On many things we agree almost exactly. Your above conclusions on cooperation, for instance. That’s exactly what I think. I was hoping someone else would say it, and you did. I was hoping someone else would engage it, and there was limited success, so…
My conclusions, however, are predictably different than yours, though.
December 18th, 2006 at 4:49 pm
As a Missouri Baptist pastor who has been increasingly disgusted with the activity of the MBC I’m frustrated. Some time ago I decided that I didn’t have enough time to deal with every struggle and so I had to prioritize. The struggle with the IMB takes precedence for me simply because of its impact on the growth of the Kingdom. I chose, about 2 years ago, to simply do nothing with our state convention because of that. We send our finances to the MBC, although we have even cut that amount in half and now send the other half directly to the Executive Committee for dispersal through the CP, and otherwise we simply avoid convention activity. I recognize that some may accuse us of sticking our head in the sand, and that argument is legitimate - I’ll agree, but I simply don’t have the time.
I am glad John gave out the link to the mailing list but I would caution you that if you read it, it really will make you want to bash your head into a wall. I realized some time ago that the ongoing “conversation” with many other MO Baptist pastors was not edifying at all but rather was dragging me down and so I’ve stopped reading any of it for about 4-6 months now, other than when John sends me the occasional note.
John sent me just such a note as this was getting underway and when I read an email from an MBC executive committee member who was sharing how he began a “covert” effort to get “information” out of the Journey leadership while trying to not reveal his status with the MBC (in other words, a “secret” witch hunt) I got sick once again and quit reading.
Pray for the MBC. We watch as 75% of our churches are doing little or nothing for the kingdom in the sense of kingdom growth and many of these same pastors spend their days involved in political spats trying to strike out against pastors of churches who are actually being involved in positive kingdom growth in the name of “doctrinal purity”. I’m of the opinion that many get involved to simply cover the fact that they’re not doing anything themselves. Remember that in an argument that you are bound to lose ad hominem arguments often become the most attractive option. We are slitting our own throats, and we’re proud of it.
I apologize if this sounds like I’m venting, because I am. I am simply frustrated with our infighting and disgusted with our lack of kingdom unity. I fear the far reaching ramifications of many of our actions.
God help us.
December 18th, 2006 at 4:59 pm
On the Journey/alcohol issue: According to Director Clippard in a recent edition of the Pathway (MBC newspaper), churches receiving planting resources from the convention must agree that the church take an abstentionist position on alcohol. If this is true, and if the BP article is correct regarding the Journey borrowing funds from the Convention, then the Journey should have known about this beforehand and the Convention probably does have the right to inquire about it.
On the MBC and being Missional: As a new pastor of a new church plant in Missouri wanting to see the church be missional, I can attest that, while many of the Exec Board might be contrary, there are people not only in the state, but working with the convention, who are very concerned about being missional. I recently had the pleasure of sitting under the teaching of both Darrin Patrick and Ed Stetzer at an MBC-sponsored Young Leaders Conference. These men in the convention are the kind of guys who hate the political infighting and are concerned with bringing all kinds of people to Christ. It is the work of these men that make the MBC worth contributing to and, if necessary, fighting for.
December 18th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
As to the above: I’m not saying I agree with the Convention’s policy—our new church is not seeking MBC funds specifically because I don’t believe I as a pastor have the right to enforce a position on the congregation that exceeds biblical mandate (I might recommend or even urge it, but can’t require it)—and I reeeeaaaalllly don’t agree with covert operations to bring down a church that I believe is truly fulfilling the Great Commission. It’s just that I also believe in proper submission to authority, and, if the Journey did make the MBC an authority over it by borrowing funds from the Convention, then the Convention does have more power over it to enforce it’s authority (ya know, that whole “borrower slave to the lender” thing). It would be wonderful, however, if that authority was excercised in a far more gracious manner.
December 18th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
Abstentionist policy: the “Theology at the Bottle Works” may not violate that. They’re trying to reach folks and THEN teach them, is my bet. Kind of like Jesus did in going to the shindig at Levi’s and “eating and drinking with sinners”.
The IMB moved last year to exclude the apostle Paul. Looks like the MBC might be moving to exclude Jesus.
If He’s there.
December 18th, 2006 at 11:54 pm
Rich,
Blessings on your ministry. I feel the same way about the SBC, though we are not where MO is… yet.
Nevertheless, abstentionist policies applied as they are make the interpretation of Scripture on the Alcohol issue one which must divide even to another denomination. They are elevating that interpretation far beyond the Scriptural mandate.
One question that crosses my mind is, “What will the MBC gain be separating from a church that is winning lost souls and contributing more to the MBC than most other churches in MO?” (Just guessing about the giving - based on size of church and the whole 10% - 3 year plan deal.)
They will gain control of an otherwise decaying conglomeration of uniform thinkalikes that will not make it much past the excommunication of the growing churches. Just a guess.
December 19th, 2006 at 9:19 am
Rich, you made a comment that stood out to me. You mentioned that you “believe in the proper submission to authority.” That comment, if I am interpreting it correctly, stood out to me greatly. In fact, it is pretty scary. The Journey, if it really is a Southern Baptist church, does not have any denominational authority to submit to. And therein lies the whole problem with everything that is wrong with the SBC. Pastors from all over MO want to exercise authority over a church that is supposed to be fully autonomous. The SBC is trying to do the same thing with every SBC church in America.
I know what you’re thinking, The Journey borrowed money from the MBC, and that makes them subservient to the state convention until it is repaid. But I would respectfully disagree. Certainly the convention should have some say in the scriptural teachings of the church, as Art has already pointed out, but to insist that the church teach abtentionist philosophy is extra-biblical, and to go that far is to go too far, IMO.
Don’t get me wrong Rich. I respect your position, and hope for the best for you in your new church start. But do not lose sight of one of the greatest aspects of SBC life–the autonomy of the local church.
December 19th, 2006 at 9:46 am
Jason,
I never said that the Convention should have authority over doctrine. Autonomy does reign. The authority lies in the group and its willingness to associate together for a common cause. Either it associates, or it doesn’t.
On the other hand, when you enter into an agreement, you do submit to certain prerequisites.
The question now is whether or not The Journey misrepresented itself to obtain a loan from folks who require abstention from borrowing churches. If not, then they are who they are and the deal is on the MBC. If they did, then there is some problem.
I will say that I have received an email from a local pastor who claims to be close to the situation and he claims that the Journey never gave much to the MBC at all until they needed to borrow money and that they have grown, in large degree, by collecting a generation of disenfranchised young adults who have given up on the church. He hastened to add that The Journey also reaches lost people, but they haven’t just grown that way.
There is something to be said about reaching that generation of people, raised in church and sick of Tradition over Scripture. If someone isn’t doing it, who will?
We all need to be a little more honest about who we are and gracious to others.
December 19th, 2006 at 10:48 am
Thanks Art, although I wasn’t directing my comment about church autonomy toward something you had said, but toward Rich’s comment. Sorry for the confusion.
I agree that people need to be more honest in who they are, and who they want to be. However, we all know that there is a lot of stuff in the backs of peoples’ minds when negotiating a deal like this. I’ve heard more than one pastor say, “better to ask for forgiveness than for permission.” That may be the philosophy of The Journey as they meet in a brewery for conversations on theology. Who knows?
What I love about the Journey is that they are forcing people to leave their comfort zones and admit that there is more than one way to lead a person to Jesus. Good for them.
December 19th, 2006 at 11:48 am
Art and jasonk,
Thank you for your kind words regarding our new church.
Art,
You asked, “What will the MBC gain be separating from a church that is winning lost souls and contributing more to the MBC than most other churches in MO?” I agree that the Convention gains nothing from this kind of action and loses so much more. But having the opportunity to meet with younger and “young-thinking” pastors and convention workers from around the state, I have nothing but hope for the future, and see the current problems as storms we will be able to push through.
jasonk,
I truly appreciate the autonomy of the local church that comes with being Southern Baptist—it’s one of the primary reasons our church is affiliating with the SBC. I believe in it so much that I am willing to guard it from undue restriction. Whether or not the MBC “policy” is right is a fair question—I obviously disagree with it. I also don’t know that the Journey was aware of such a policy, but if Clippard was willing to state it this bluntly (see the third to last paragraph of the article at this address: http://www.mbcpathway.com/clippardcolumns/article11176.htm), I would assume that there was notice, thus giving those with the inclination to meddle the opportunity to do so.
December 19th, 2006 at 3:37 pm
Thanks Rich, for the link to the article. Very interesting. Dave is certainly towing the company line when it comes to alcohol use. I take exception to much of it–I believe in moderation, yet I have known many people who have had addictions to alcohol, including both of my own grandfathers. I know people who are addicted to sexual perversion–pornography, rampant adultery and fornication, even homosexuality. But we don’t determine that we will never engage is sexual intercourse, under the proper parameters, lest we are tempted to wander into the improper. At least I hope not :>0
Dave is wrong, I believe, but that’s okay. He’s just keeping the money flowing. That’s his job. Its just too bad he has to do it at the expense of others’ reputations.
Thanks again for the link.
December 19th, 2006 at 4:14 pm
Rich and JasonK,
First I am from Missouri, and the real issue in Missouri only involves The Journey in so much as it is being used by those who think that Clippard should be removed. These people have a list of complaints, of which have not been made public.
Clippard supported The Journey before the Executive Board in asking their approval of the loan, seemingly in confict with his previous public statments concerning alcohol. The issue of those on the executive board is: Did Clippard knowingly mislead the executive board concerning the subject of The Journey’s doctrine and practice concerning alcohol? In the loan process, which is different then recieving funds to support church plants, one is not asked to affirm an abstinence view.
I for one affirm that the Bible teaches against the abuse of alcohol but not its use.
TC
December 19th, 2006 at 4:38 pm
I was at the same younger leaders conference that Rich attended. I agree with him that Missouri’s future is bright, despite the rough patch we are in. I grew up in MO and I can say without a doubt that we are better off now than we were 5 years ago, and we will be better off in 5 more years.
Every state convention (and the national convention) had turmoil when it had its conservative resurgence. True, MO is not perfect, but who is (1 Jn 1:8)? Time takes care of many things, including turmoil. I realize that it make some want to jump ship (even me sometimes), but I have friends who have done so, only to find out that there is turmoil everywhere.
Blessings,
John
December 19th, 2006 at 4:42 pm
THIS JUST IN
I have been informed that the “Grab a View, Give Your View” slogan WAS NEVER ON THE WEBSITE FOR The Journey.
It was, in fact, on the Bottleworks website. I hope that everyone understands that to hold Darren Patrick or his church responsible for what the Bottleworks puts on their website is not appropriate.
Some would say that if the church weren’t in such a place, something like that could never be said.
That’s true. Maybe we could all move to South Carolina and form a Christian state, where we mandate our views by law. Or move into secluded communities where the world can never get to us. We could be the Bapt-amish.
Sorry. I struggle with this stuff, sometimes. Completely withdrawing from lost culture is a great way to assure them of Hell. they are not going to notice our retreat and then come running after us. They will be content in their hollow lives, not knowing anything better is out there.
I have a better response to the critique that if The Journey weren’t in the Bottleworks, lost people couldn’t say things like, “Grab a Brew, Give Your View.” It’s not mine. I got it from someone else.
“Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and falsely say every kind of evil against you because of Me.”
-Jesus
December 19th, 2006 at 5:29 pm
Art,
As I suggested above that I might post on my own blog about the issues in Missouri, I’m now shamelessly announcing that said post is posted. How’s that for a tautology?
December 20th, 2006 at 8:56 pm
All,
Since I am a Missouri Baptist pastor, and occasional poster on the Missouri Baptist List, let me give you some perspective from another corner heretofore unheard here:
Lawsuit: Currently the MBC is in litigation with five agencies who in the dark of night removed language from their governing charters which held that the MBC is a “member” of each said agency, and thereto has the right, responsibility, obligation, and fiduciary duty to provide trustees to each entity through the convention, elected by the messengers. When these entities broke trust with the convention and its member churches starting in 2000-2001, there were myriad of discussions between the parties in an attempt to reconcile the issues. As is necessary in Baptist polity, this problem was brought to the floor of the MBC and voted on by the messengers as to how things were to proceed - as a result a committee was formed to oversee the process - whose findings, reports, and proposals have been reaffirmed by the convention each year afterwards.
After much time and an impasse, the entities were invited to participate in binding Christian arbitration using the services of a ministry called “Peacemakers.” The entities declined arbitration, preferring instead a “compromise” that pretty much gave them what they already had. The committee felt that what was necessary was a finding of fact and law before a civil court judge. No person or entity is being sued for any monetary damages in my understanding. What is being asked of the court to decide is the same that would have been sought before any arbitrator - does the MBC have the exclusive right to select trustees of the entities, and do the entities have the power to change their charters without convention approval?
This problem would analogous if a set of trustees of a church decided to take over and sell the church property without consent of the church body - what recourse would the people of the church then have but to have their case heard by someone? In this case the entities represent around 250 million dollars in Cooperative Program assets that came about by the faithful giving of the churches. Churches and individuals have been placed in the suit at the insistence of the judge, not the MBC, and these represent the plaintiff side - currently no individual is mentioned as defendant in any court action (save perhaps in mentioning entity heads and trustee chairman, but only in their official capacities). Currently the judge has not ruled on the merits of the question before him - rather the case has meandered over every frivolous objection that the entities and their attorneys can think up. And what has further ripened the issue as of late is the judge who has been hearing the suit lost his election last November, so I really do not know what is going to happen to it. At the last annual report, the Convention’s insurers have provided half of the current costs of litigation to date - the rest has been donated for the cause by some churches and individuals. So far the Cooperative Program has been spared - so far.
I have been in a quandary about all of this myself. The issue with me is not power and control, it is accountability and stewardship. I do not believe that those who wrestled ownership in the night have been good stewards, and they have certainly placed themselves outside of fellowship with 2,000 Missouri churches. They refused the leadership of the majority of messengers of the Convention, who in Baptist polity are the leading voice of rule and direction, and decided that their own council was more important than the council of the duly elected officers of the convention.
At the same time, are we not admonished by scripture if we are wronged just to be wronged? The committee claims that good stewardship of the entities and their net worth of 250 million dollars requires the convention to ask the question of the government concerning the law - to get a ruling on the main issue, good or ill, and if after all the appeals are vanquished, if we are wronged, then we are wronged. The opinion concerning suing “corporations versus an individual” opinion came from all people the late Larry Burkett. The committee has been zealous in seeking wide input from various quarters before proceeding in the case. They have solicited and received help from all sorts of people, and in some cases pro bono support.
This is the important part - if, under the laws of incorporation, an entity can break away from any mother organization, or undermine any mother organization, then all non-profit corporations (including churches) are susceptible to the same type of shenanigans that have occurred here in Missouri.
In most discussions about these issues outside of Missouri I am amazed about all the badmouthing of that the convention and its churches who in the main try to seek the council of the Lord and do the “right” thing (even though they may be wrong) while saying little or nothing about the decisions of the entities who got us here in the first place, and have refused at every quarter to seek forgiveness, repentance, and restoration.
Missouri Baptist List: this list of pastors can be at times interesting, and often rancorous. You can sense sweetness, and yet often times you feel a mean spiritedness. It is not for the faint of heart. I understand the frustration of many when they read the list - that is okay - sometimes I feel the same. There is not a man on there however, who when you get face to face, are the most loving lot there is. Opinionated - you betcha - name me a Baptist pastor who isn’t. Hard nose - yes. Most of the guys on there are old school and unapologetic about it. Loving - yes, hear some of the responses to the prayer requests. Willing at a drop of the hat to help out? Yes. One of my antagonist’s on the list was looking for a buyer for some Royals tickets he had - I emailed him and said, “I’ll go.” The man did not know me from Adam (except for the fact that we often disagreed) yet he mailed me the tickets without receiving payment before hand.
My philosophy? Iron sharpening Iron is a hurtful affair, and pretty messy. All those sparks flying around seems to bring one to frustration. But my granddad used to say “You can’t get any feed unless you are willing to shuck some corn.” We can’t attempt to change hearts and minds in terms of the direction of governance in our state and national conventions unless we are willing to listen, debate, and yes argue about those things which are truth - for the truth we are told “will set us free.”
Pray for our convention of churches in Missouri. Yes 75% of us are not doing what we need to be doing - it is to our shame. But we don’t need your condemnation - we need your prayers that God will rise up leadership and workers for the harvest. Also pray for our convention - we are going through some tough times right now. I pray that everything will turn out right - I suspect that everybody needs to get on their knees and seek mutual forgiveness from the Lord and each other - from the Executive Director on down.
Shalom,
Rob