12 Witnesses

After more than two years of what has become frustrating and painful opposition, Wade Burleson has announced that he will willingly do what the powers that be inside the International Mission Board of Trustees have wanted, called for, attempted and thus far failed: the removal of Burleson from the trusteeship of the IMB.

Several observations.

First, Wade is probably past due for this. He kept trying to work with people who didn’t want to work with him. In the end, if people in authority want to shut you out, they can. The IMBOT can and did. It amazes me that he still desires to INCREASE his church’s cooperative efforts and continues to encourage others to do the same. The more they shut him out, the more he wants to cooperate.

Secondly, I would not expect the IMB to be less under the scrutiny of the SBC, but more. Wade offered to shut down his blog. I suppose they stood on principle in asking that he apologize for intentionally breaking the anti-dissent policy passed last year, and in so doing repeatedly rejected his offer, though it was their cheif complaint. Nevertheless, Wade has exposed that he has gone a long way toward them and they seemed unwilling to move toward him at all. Thus, they’ve finally “martyred” him to the ultimate level and now he is free to discuss the IMB without any restrictions.

Thirdly, as a result of Wade’s freedom from restriction, you might expect the infamous notebooks containing evidence of wrongdoing to surface. I know of just a few tidbits of information contained therein, and they are pretty explosive. Wade, treasuring the SBC as he does, may withhold them. I think this is, and always has been, a mistake. However, contrary to the constant assertion that there was a tight coalition of “reformation” minded bloggers that were structured and in lock step, we never were anything but independent thinkers going in a similar direction - which explains why Wade never listened to me or anyone else (Marty) when we encouraged him (and Ben and CB) to let the people know the truth about what is going on and release his (their) evidence.

Fourthly, there will be a slew of people begging Wade to run for President of the SBC. I think this would likely be a mistake as it would create a race between two galvanizing forces: Wade and Al.(1) It would not be helpful to the convention, and I don’t think he can win. Name recognition alone would carry Dr. Mohler. If another, more palatable option arises(2), Wade will be H. Ross Perot and suck away enough votes to guarantee a win for Dr. Mohler.

Fifthly, I think, despite Wade’s encouragement to cooperate MORE with the SBC, many will choose to cooperate less. That is not to say everyone will leave altogether. Those not happy with the status quo will most likely begin to diversify their cooperative dollars among other networks as well as the SBC and will no longer be satisfied with only sending CP dollars and taking up Special Offerings for SBC mission efforts. As a result, CP giving and the Special Offerings will decline, per capita, though they may continue to slowly rise overall, for a time.

I said it many times over the last several years, but it is still unheeded. In this battle, if “they”(3) win, they lose. To quote Bowden McElroy, “The SBC will survive. What it will look like is not yet determined.”

_____________________________________________________

1 - While I think Al Mohler is a scholar of the first rate and is highly qualified to be the President of one of our Seminaries, I object to his becoming the President of the SBC in that there is a conflict of interest in his appointing those who appoint those supposed to provide him oversight: the SBTS BOT; he has repeatedly focused on, and spoken out for, things not central to the mind of the SBC: Public School Exit Strategy (frequently dismissed in the form of a resolution at the annual meeting), the idea that a Christian couple’s decision not to have children is “sin,” and the recently revealed piece of information that, although the Southern Baptist Convention was founded and thrives on missions, Dr. Mohler has never taken the Gospel beyond his local context. No, I don’t count appearances on news shows, even nationally televised ones, as mission work. “Speaking prophetically” to our culture is not missions.

2- I do not consider Bill Wagner a viable alternative. He is a Seminary employee, thus raising the Conflict of Interest objection,[edit: Wagner has moved on, as noted in the comment section. My apologies.] He is not well known and I don’t think he stands a chance against almost anyone else. No one from “the other side” is taking him seriously, or they would be trying to discredit him. That should say something in itself.

3 - The “Powers That Be,” the “Inner Circle,” or those who still seek to narrow the parameters of our cooperation to a standard that is comfortable for them, but intolerable to the rest of us.

Posts with related content

• No Related Post

SBC

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.