Fridays are for a Semi-Christmas-Oriented Newspaper Article

Here’s my current week’s article in the Canyon Lake (TX) Times-Guardian.  Happy Birthday, Lord Jesus!

          

         “Preparing for the Xmas ‘Hangover?’” 

            I can still remember back beyond the 37 years I have been a Christian to the point at which I went to fraternity parties on weekends, got drunk and had, to one degree or another, a hangover the next morning (and, if it was really bad, I would be sick for the rest of the weekend).  From my vantage point now, what I was doing was really stupid.  Not only was I getting drunk repeatedly, but I knew just exactly what was going to happen: I was going to feel terrible after the fact, paying a price that was completely unnecessary. 

            Well, after becoming a Christian, I soon saw the error of my ways in regard to drinking.  I had made a fool out of myself enough and had lost quite a few days, lying in bed, moaning, with a pounding head or feeling sick in my stomach.  I had learned that lesson well.

            However, it was many more years before I began to realize that there is another kind of seasonably predictable “hangover” that many of us get this time of the year, year after year.  You can call it “Xmas hangover,” if you like.  That is nothing close to an official title, but, as you will see, it is a pretty appropriate description of what happens.

            No, by “Xmas hangover” I’m not primarily referring to overindulging in the spiced eggnog or hot rum toddies—although I’m quite sure that happens in many quarters.  Actually, alcohol has very little to do directly with this kind of very long-term “hangover.”

            Instead, an “Xmas hangover” is the phrase I use to get across the absolutely sick feeling that lasts through at least the first part of the New Year—sometimes for six months or more—due to overindulging the bank account or credit cards in buying gifts for Christmas.  You see, very much like the overindulgence of alcohol, when you over-shop, you feel a real “high” while you are doing it, but you pay an awful price after the fact. 

            Of course, I am in no position to point a finger at anybody on this front.  For many, many years I was just like almost everybody else in my chronic overspending.  And, no, it was not because I suddenly received a transfusion of good old-fashioned common sense that I stopped drastically overspending.

            What happened?  I found myself one year, not long ago, without either the funds or credit to buy much of anything for Christmas for anyone.  Yes, it was embarrassing—I was literally ashamed of what I left like was almost tragically letting certain family members down.

            But, something amazing happened.  Everybody survived and, as far as I have ever been able to tell, nobody got enraged at me or held a grudge.  Wow!

            Then, the next year, things were better financially, but I again held my spending way down.  Guess what?  Still, nobody got angry… and I did not face the typical paying down the credit card long-term woes from years gone by.  What a concept: keep your debt low!

            But, something even more profound happened that Christmas when I was basically unable to splurge on giving costly gifts to other people.  My focus shifted considerably from the bogus “Xmas” season sold to us by Madison Avenue to the first and greatest Christmas gift, Jesus Christ, as well as to the people that I loved and viewed as God’s gifts in my life.  So, as a result of being forced to cut back on spending for Christmas gifts, I can now focus on Jesus, the birthday Boy and loved ones… and there will be no secular “Xmas hangover” to suffer through the morning—and months—after.

            No, I’m not suggesting that you, the reader, suddenly turn into a “Scrooge” in your gift-giving next year.  But, I am very much suggesting that less emphasis on all the material angles, especially trying to buy bigger and bigger gifts every year, just might be enough to help you re-focus your family’s emphasis at Christmas back to Jesus, with the wonderful additional consequence that you would have more money available for other good things in your life for the next few months after Christmas.  Try it!  You might really like it.

Coming in early January: “Cracks in the Foundation of the Dominance”… then back to the focus on an SBC reform agenda

Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenda (VIII): “Beginning the Winnowing…”

I do not have much time available to write today for a number of reasons.  As a result, this post is going to be short and to the point.

After prayerful reflection on the historical context of the SBC Constitution and Bylaws, it appears that a lot of the reason things are the way they are is that, when things were set up, there was a theological assumption made that was short-sighted.  It was that everyone would see, and act upon, the various aspects of the Constitution and Bylaws with a godly, selfless spirit.

That, of course, is incredibly naive, given how much of the New Testament epistles, in particular, is given over to the sinful fleshly self-centeredness of many Christians in the churches being addressed.  So, why would we expect that people and churches in the SBC in the early twenty-first century would be any different?  We shouldn’t!

But, our SBC forebears apparently thought that they would all behave like godly gentlemen in everything that they did.  As a result, they built in no stated aspects of required spiritual maturity and absolutely no way to require accountability.

Now, in a more genteel era spiritually (i.e., the first century or so of SBC life), that may have worked fairly well.  But, then the Moderate-Liberal coalition decided to take advantage of this theological naivete and gain–and jealously maintain–control of the Convention and its entities.  Then, of course, the Conservative Resurgence organized and succeeded in beating the Moderates and Liberals at their own game.

For our purposes here, what had happened?  The Conservatives employed the exact same strategy that the broader coalition had to gain and hold control of the SBC.  Outside of the theological changes that eventually came about in the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, the strategy used and the overarching emphasis on power are very much the same.

Given the obviously fleshly manner (see Galatians 5:19-21) in which so much related to the Resurgence (now in Phase II: extending the BFM2000 through the entity boards, which can be predictably controlled, unlike Convention votes) has proceeded in recent years, it is difficult not to conclude that things that require working through the SBC Constitution and Bylaws have basically been reduced to “politics.”  There is only the slightest spiritual veneer left, with a notable example of this being the widespread complete ignoring of Frank Page’s heartfelt call to repentant revival (focusing on 2 Chronicles 7:14) in San Antonio. 

In other words, the spiritual side of the Convention meetings get lipservice, but nothing more.  It is sad to realize that what had intended originally to be truly spiritual aspects are now no more than “window dressing” for the political maneuvering.

I know that what I have just said is little more than stating the blatantly obvious to many, if not most, of you.  However, this reality is the primary reason why things need to be changed in the SBC Constitution and Bylaws: so that they cannot nearly so easily continue to be abused by the political desires of the flesh.

Having said these things, let’s briefly consider in general what needs to be changed, if the SBC Constitution and Bylaws is to be realistic about the depravity of even saved mankind:

1) Given how often churches and other ministries get burned when they don’t very carefully check the references/spiritual track record of those they hire, the SBC absolutely must do the same with all candidates and appointees.  To me, the passages that appear to be broad enough to cover most of what should be required are Acts 6:3 (“full of the Spirit and wisdom”) and Matthew 20:20-28, Jesus’ words on humble servanthood vs. “lording it over” God’s people.

2) Given how many pastors and others in ministry fall into various kinds of grievous sin largely because of lack of accountability, there simply must be realistic means of accountability built into the Constitution and Bylaws.  As it is, the only real accountability available would be to de-fund an entity.  And, what a bizarre alternative: to de-fund the innocent workers for what the guilty trustees are perpetrating while effectively thumbing their noses at the views of the Convention at large.

3) Given how much corruption has occurred in society over the centuries due to nepotism and cronyism, such practices in the SBC must be stopped.  Not just spouses,  but other family members and even multiple people from the same home church must be excluded, even if that is playing it safe to extreme.  All appearances of evil must be avoided… and cronyistic influence has so often been diabolical, should it not be viewed as an “evil?”

and 4) Given how long-term power tends to corrupt–and the greater the power, the more absolute the corruption–strict term limits, without the possibility of repeated service, should be instituted.  Way too often, the longer someone stays in office, the more comfortable they become and the more it becomes about staying in office, not serving the people.

Bottom line: In my opinion, these four general observations translate easily into a number of “common sense” changes that need to be made in regard to the SBC Constitution and Bylaws. 

What do you think? 

Coming Friday: “Fridays are for Newspaper Articles”

Note: I am taking the next two off from blogging to be with family and to do a lot of praying myself.  May each of you have a joyous Christmas and a blessed New Year!  I expect to resume blogging by the second week in January.

Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenga (VII): “The Priority of Prayer” (Conclusion)”

Well, the moment of truth has arrived.  The question of what should be prayed for in regard to a reform agenda for the Southern Baptist Convention must be addressed.  So, here we go, category by category (sorry for this being ‘bare-bones.  I’m a tad tight on time this afternoon):

“Who” Prayers:

- We need to pray for ourselves, particularly our wisdom, courage, consistency and compassion as we pursue reform.

- We need to pray for our current leaders and trustees.  If the Lord were to convict them and move mightily in their hearts to humble them, especially Drs. Patterson and Mohler, the difficulty of getting the needed reforms done would drop tremendously.  Why?  Because their perspective would change from protecting their power at all costs to seeking what is truly best for all Southern Baptists.  Pray!

- We need to pray fervently for those who work under the most powerful leaders in the Convention.  They know where the bodies are buried, so to speak.  If Patterson and Mohler do not repent (that is still the best way for such changes to be made–changes that should have happened when the Resurgence took over), it would only take a small handful of former or present lieutenants to, together, take courage, share what they know and topple the pedestals of “the Lord’s anointed.”  Nobody wants that to happen, but “God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.”  The primary reason that no more of what I have called “the secrets of the dysfunctional (SBC) family” have been spilled to this point is the fear of losing one’s job.  There is security in numbers, though, including a group who is telling the truth about an abusive boss.  Pray!

“What” Prayers:

- We need to pray for great wisdom in what needs to be changed in the SBC Constitution and Bylaws.  (I will be getting to the “wheat and chaff” process starting next post.)  From my recent “first look” at both documents, I can candidly say that quite a bit could stand changing.  However, some issues are more pressing than others.  So, we need to pray for the wisdom to know what are the most pressing issues for consideration by the SBC (in Indy, then Louisville).

- We must already start praying for candidates and appointees in 2008 (and beyond).  Will Al Mohler run for president, attempting to ignore his confessed, but unresolved, anger problem (i.e., not a word has been forthcoming on what he is doing about it, much less any real accountability)?  Who would run against him?  How is the Lord going to surprise us this year?  Pray!

Don’t forget the appointees to the various boards!  They will be the ones who succeed to leadership roles in the next few years.  Every one is very significant, especially in changing things with the IMB, NAMB and SWBTS boards.

“How” Prayers:

- We must seek the Lord in regard to whatever practical measures He directs to use.  I’m not even sure exactly what I mean here.  I have absolutely no desire to attempt to organize some sort of strategy in the flesh.  Much of the CR II agenda is fairly clearly being pushed in the flesh.  And, two wrongs never make a right.  So, whatever happens must be done in the power of the Holy Spirit.  Pray! 

- We must pray very strongly for the attendance at the meeting in Indianapolis.  Because of its proximity to Louisville, it will be essentially a “home game” for Al Mohler, much like SWBTS students and others from Fort Worth filled out such a large section of the meeting hall in San Antonio.  On the other hand, I think that as few as 1,000-1,500 extra messengers coming from reform-minded churches could potentially swing all votes in the right direction.  And, that is just a drop in the bucket, given how large the SBC is.  It would not take much at all to attract those numbers, if their hearts are open before the Lord.  Pray!

“When” Prayers:

- We need to begin and hang in there praying for the next six months (i.e., before the meeting in June in Indianapolis).  I have no idea what is going to happen.  I freely admit that.  But, as I said in a previous column, I’m ashamed that my tiny faith translated into prayer for the meetings in Greensboro and San Antonio actually were manifested in the election of Frank Page and the passage of both my motion (in Greensboro) and the Garner Motion (in S.A.).  (Why was I ashamed?  Because I prayed with no real expectancy!)  So, having seen the Lord at work in both situations, I am now motivated to focus for these next six months on what the Lord might want to do in Indy.  Please join me in prayer!

- But, finally, we must also begin to pray for the aftermath of next June’s Indianapolis meeting.  If Al Mohler is elected, we can expect more of the same as what has happened recently with several entity boards–and perhaps even more brazenly!  If, however, Mohler is defeated–which would be the biggest setback the CR has ever sustained, given Mohler’s power–the momentum for reform will pick up dramatically, as will the opposition to reform (since they will then be quite desperate and willing to stoop to just about any depths to maintain control).  Suffice it to say that, whatever happens in Indy, things will not be exactly the same as they are going in.  Pray!

What do you think we should be praying for?

Coming Wednesday: Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenda (VIII): “Beginning the Winnowing Process in regard to the SBC Constitution”

“Fridays are for Newpaper Articles… and Acknowledging a ‘Red-Letter Day’”

(Right after this word of joyful acknowledgement, you will find my weekly article in the Canyon Lake [TX] Times-Guardian).

I am a very proud father in regard to my own flesh-and-blood children.  However, today–Friday, December 14–I am particularly proud of one of my “adopted” kids: Emily Hunter McGowin.  She is receiving her Master of Divinity (MDiv) from Truett Seminary at Baylor University, Waco, TX, at 6:00 this evening.  And, I’m sure, as always, that they won’t have a set of academic honors with high enough standards to describe how bright and creative she is and what wonderful work she has done in that program.

Emily is, quite simply, both the most brilliant student I have ever had and the most brilliant human being I have ever known in my life… and I have had the opportunity to have known quite a few who would qualify as legitimate geniuses.  But, what sets Emily apart from almost all the rest of the scary smart folks is two things: 1) she is humble, having fought off the tendency to “grow” the massive ego that almost always goes with an astronomical IQ; and 2) she truly cares about the hurting people around her, not just theoretically, but with open arms and listening ears.  This is in stark contrast to many of the brilliant, who refuse to be bothered by real life and “the little people.”

I confess that one of the greatest honors I have ever had in a 30-plus year ministry career in which I have received more honors than I deserved (it’s called “grace”) has been to have Emily as a student and, on a number of scholarly papers, articles and published book reviews, as a co-author.  In my opinion, born out of quite a bit of observation and interaction, she is, and will further prove to be over the next 40-50 or more years (she is still in her earlier 20s, having graduated from both high school and college in three years), a one out of a small handful talent among her entire generation, if the Lord tarries. 

My prayerful best wishes go with Ron and Emily (I was also blessed to do their wedding, along with Dr. Ergun Caner, another of their former profs at Criswell) as they now get into their new ministry in earnest together!  My good friend, Dr. Rick Garner, is blessed that the Lord has moved them to Liberty Heights Church (SBC), between Cincinatti and Dayton, OH. 

        “What Has Been Your Best Christmas Gift?” 

            Though it is not the question I asked—I’ll get to that later, my favorite Christmas gift as a child was a first basemen’s mitt, which I received when I was 11 years old.  That was just in time to be able to play first base in Little League my last year (when I was 12).  To me, that gift was so wonderful that I don’t remember anything else I received that year or, frankly, for several years around it.

            Did you ever receive a gift that affected you that way, pretty much taking your breath away with the sheer delight that it brought?  Hopefully, you have each had that kind of experience.  In my opinion, it is somewhat sad if you have not.  There are few things in life that compare with the joy of receiving the kind of gift that is just right for you at the point where you are in life.

            Now, let me get back to my original question: What has been the best Christmas gift you have ever received?  Your answer may well be considerably different to this question.  Why?  Because seeing a gift from the world-centered-on-self perspective of a child is not the same as seeing it from the analytical perspective of an adult—assuming the adult is more than an overgrown child, of course!

            Your answers may vary wildly.  For some, it may be something very big, such as a car, some generous financial gift when you were in need or even getting into a new home.  For others, it may be keepsakes, such as a watch or a piece of jewelry that are not that valuable, but which mean the world to you, because they belonged to one of your parents or grandparents.  For still others, their best gift may be relational, getting to visit someone you love whom you haven’t seen in some time, or that person or persons coming to be with you.

            Among my older readers, I suspect that not a few of you feel your best Christmas gift was in this last category.  As you age, unless you are highly materialistic, most people tend to get to where the most previous things in their lives are their relationships with those closest to them.

            In my case, after having to spend Christmas away from one or more of my three children now more than once, I definitely have moved into that category.  In other words, I have come to the point of agreeing whole-heartedly that the best Christmas gifts are relational.  And, I am looking forward with great anticipation to having several days with one of my daughters—the other one can’t get off work (a new job) in Southern California—and at least getting to see my son for a few hours.

            However, in my opinion, the ultimate answer to my question (“What has been your best Christmas gift?”) is another kind of relational gift.  The Apostle John tells us about it in John 3:16: “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.” 

            Notice that God the Son coming into the world to be born on that first Christmas in Bethlehem took place because God the Father was giving the whole world an incredible gift.  It was—and still is—the salvation Jesus came to bring about through His death on the Cross and Resurrection from the dead.

            How do you receive the first and greatest Christmas gift from God Himself?  Ephesians 2:8-9 explains clearly: “For by grace you have been saved through faith; it is not of yourselves.  It is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast.”  In other words, if you simply ask Jesus into your life by simply trusting in His work on the Cross, you will, along with many millions of others, know by experience the reality of the best Christmas gift of all this year.

 

Coming Monday: Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenda: “The Priority of Prayer (Conclusion)”

Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenda (VI): “The Priority of Prayer (Continued)”

“Pray constantly” (1 Thessalonians 5:17, HCSB).  Do we really need any more of a biblical basis for concluding that prayer should be undertaken on a very regular basis in regard to the kinds of reforms that are needed in the Southern Baptist Convention?

In next Monday’s post, I will lay out what I think are the kinds of things that we should be praying for at this time.  And, no, even though it is still right at six months until the Convention meets in Indianapolis, it is hardly too early to start praying with great fervency.  The hardest part of the Christian life for me is “waiting on the Lord,” but I must be willing to put my “prayer muscle” where my mouth is for these next six months.  It is absolutely crucial to do so!

Today, as I have prayed about it, I have decided to take a different tack.  I am going to look at two passages of Scripture, one in the Hebrew Bible and one in the New Testament, which reflect striking answers to prayer.  In the case of one passage, there is a great victory, only to be followed by a failure at a point of vulnerability.  In the other case, there is a tragedy, only to be followed fairly quickly by a two-pronged victory.  Suffice it to say that the Lord was working in both situations–and, of course, however else He chooses to do so.  We do well to learn from both.

In 1 Kings 18 we find the great confrontation between Elijah and the 450 false prophets of Baal (18:22).  Hopelessly outnumbered, not to mention villified among the people for uttering the previous prophecy of the current lengthy drought (see 17:1), Elijah boldly proceeded to provide a great demonstration of the Lord’s power, against all odds.

While I would not recommend sarcasm you could cut with a knife in making fun of the opposition, Elijah did so in order to make it crystal clear to everyone present that Baal is a false god.  Then, he deliberately put himself–and the Lord–at a huge disadvantage in the way he set up the necessity of the Lord setting fire to his sacrifice. 

Was this a problem for God?  No sweat!  As 18:38 says, “Then Yahweh’s fire fell and consumed the burnt offering, the wood, the stones, and the dust, and it licked up the water that was in the trench” (HCSB). 

This is the great victory that led to the execution of all the false prophets (18:40)!  However, we must not overlook the way in which Elijah prayed, because it is very significant for where the SBC is at this point.

When Elijah prayed in front of all the gathered people, he said: “Answer me, Lord!  Answer me so that this people will know that You, Yahweh, are God and that you have turned their hearts back” (18:37, HCSB).  Wow!  In other words, that great show of power was never, in Elijah’s thinking, an end in itself.  It was for the express purpose of redirecting the thoughts and emotions of God’s people in the direction they should go.

In applying this to our current situation, I think it is fair to say that, at the last two Convention meetings, a couple of fairly amazing answers to prayer for reform have occurred: the election of Frank Page over two CR II candidates in Greensboro in 2006 and the passage of the Garner Motion in San Antonio in 2007.  But, both have been widely dismissed as aberrations.  So, there needs to be concerted prayer in regard to what the Lord wants to do in Indianapolis.  Might He have an “Elijah moment” brewing? 

Certainly, there needs to be a turning of the hearts of many Southern Baptists, who are great disillusioned by the abuse of power by some of the SBC power elite and among the entity trustee boards.  Sadly, not a few have completely given up.  Quite a few others are near that point.  Many others are terrified to say anything for fear of their jobs.  Others know that much that is very wrong is taking place, but, for whatever personal reasons, are simply unwilling to “rock the boat.”  Tragically, the passivity of each of these groups is substantially responsible for allowing the current abuses to take place and continue.

Why do I say that?  Because it has become quite clear at the last two Convention meetings that the voting numbers that the CR II group is able to sustain is not that large.  And, it is becoming more and more clear all the time that their hard-core ranks continue to shrink as they arrogantly insist on ramming through more and more shenanigans that brazenly thumb the nose at the Baptist Faith and Message 2000.

What will it take to turn their hearts to where the Lord can work through them?  What will it take to shake loose the increasing number of CR II foot soldiers whose eyes are individually opening to the fact that the leaders they have blindly followed for so long do not deserve to occupy unassailable pedestals as “the Lord’s anointed?”

Honestly, I don’t know.  But, if we pray for an “Elijah moment,” the Lord can certainly do something which cannot be laughed off as an aberration.  The bigger question, to me, is whether, we are willing to passionately and persistently seek His face in prayer, longing to see Him work, glorifying Himself and setting right much that been allowed to go askew in recent years.

What if God did answer our prayers with an “Elijah moment” in Indianapolis?  Would it end up being partly squandered, or minimized, by a reaction similar to that of Elijah? 

Remember that, after his great victory in 1 Kings 18, Elijah ran like a scared dog at the threat of Queen Jezebel in 1 Kings 19.  Yes, he was undoubtedly physically and emotionally depleted by what had just happened.  Yet, the point is still true that, in the wake of the greater victory, Elijah fell prey to vulnerability at a much less daunting point.  As is sometimes said, Elijah collapsed right after that “mountain top experience” into the “dark valley” of a deep depressive funk.

To apply this observation, what would happen if, for example, a reform candidate was nominated to run for SBC president vs. Al Mohler and won?  Then (to play out the analogy), the angry threats of Mohler, Patterson, et al, were leveled against the new president, to the effect that no matter what he did in regard to reform, nothing was going to change in regard to their power and way of doing things (i.e., kind of like what happened with the Garner Motion this past June, except moreso).

The question then would be whether the new president would cave in, “going along to get along.”  As disheartening as it might be, even after winning a huge, potentially direction-changing election, it would be very easy for a person in such a position to, like Elijah, lose your confidence in the face of such fearful pressure.

Thus, our prayers for the next six months must not stop with Indianapolis.  If we are going to ask the Lord to do something miraculous there, we must have the wise foresight to pray for whatever happens after that point also.

The New Testament passage is Acts 12.  The Apostle James has been killed in an attempt to discourage the church and Peter has been arrested and thrown in prison (12:1-4).

Embarrassingly, while Peter’s release was being prayed for earnestly (12:5), when the Lord miraculously freed him from prison, the believers who were gathered in prayer for that very thing were astounded when it happened (12:6-15).  Are we not the same way in regard to our prayers too often: we pray for the right things, but don’t really believe that the Lord is going to answer, at least not as quickly or strikingly?

My former professor, Dr. Howard Hendricks, used to love to say: “Let’s not get too convicting!”  Well, I don’t know about you, but this is highly convicting to me.  As I admitted in my last post, even though I was praying correctly for the meetings in Greensboro and S.A., I did not recognize a number of answers to my prayers that were staring me in the face.  Why?  Because I was not expectant… and I did not ask the Lord to give me the spiritual “eyes to see.”

But, there is another stanza to what happened in Acts 12 that we must not miss.  God acted “exceedingly, abundantly beyond” their prayers in taking the life of King Herod (12:23), who had been persecuting the church.  What is particularly interesting here is why the text says this happened: “The polulace began to shout, ‘It’s the voice of a god and not a man.’  At once an angel of the Lord struck him because he did not give the glory to God…” (12:22-23a, HCSB).

Now, there is nothing anywhere close to this blatant in the hero worship of the powers that be in the SBC.  But, make no mistake.  There are some massive egos that dearly love the adulation of their “fan clubs.”  But, this sad reality is in direct opposition to a crucial point cited by both James and Peter cite: “God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble” (James 4:6; 1 Peter 5:5).

What does that mean for the SBC at its current juncture?  Nothing less than that the Lord is in league with the SBC reform movement in “resisting” the arrogant leaders who are doing their strong-willed best to remake the SBC in their own image.  But, it also means that He will only look with favor upon reform efforts if they are done in humility.

So, as we pray, let us each make sure that our prayers are from a humble heart.  Human pride is a spiritual abomination.  No matter whether we are absolutely convinced that whatever goals for reform end up being pursued are far better and “more righteous” than what is presently being pushed by the power brokers, we are spiritually no better than them if we descend to their level of prideful self-interest.

Coming Friday: “Fridays are for Newspaper Articles”

Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenga (V): “The Priority of Prayer (Introduction)”

(An Up-front Apology: My web site would not open for me to get into the blog and finish writing what I had previously started until well after 3:30 p.m. Monday.  Sorry for the delay!)

Before proceeding to attempt to sift the wheat from the chaff in regard to the ideas that have been laid out so far toward a reform agenda for the Southern Baptist Convention, we do well to drop back and develop one of the repeated comments that is not directly agenda-related.  It has to do with the importance of prayer to this process.

I’m not sure why I did not jump on this earlier, other than that I was concentrating on attempting to determine what areas in regard to the SBC Consitution and Bylaws–including qualifications for candidates and appointees–clearly need reform and why.  After all, I have no excuse.  For my entire Christian life–now over 37 years–I have been told to “bathe” everything in prayer.  Thus, even though I have come late to the party (i.e., the needed emphasis on prayer), so to speak, I sincerely hope that “better late than never” is still in effect.

Let me begin with some relevant 20/20 hindsight in this area.  For example, when I was asked by the Deacons at First Baptist, Fairfield, TX to author a motion to make at the Convention meeting in Greensboro, NC, in 2006, I prayed that the Lord would use that motion to glorify Himself and to somehow clarify the need to somehow get across to entity boards of trustees that they were “out of bounds” in going beyond the BFM2000 doctrinally.  Of course, when I did not see anything happen immediately, I soon gave up praying that way.

What happened?  Months later, the Executive Committee acted upon my motion and provided the recommendation which became the basis for the Garner Motion in San Antonio.

Related to that, before going to the meeting in San Antonio, I prayed that the Lord would do something significant to clarify the true strength of the reform cause at the grassroots level.  I also prayed that He would give some indication that the facade put up by the most powerful of the SBC power elite was indeed just a facade. 

Both prayers were answered (though, as I will share below, I did not realize that about the second prayer for awhile).  The first answer was twofold: 1) the release of the results of the Lifeway survey on what SBC pastors believed about tongues and private prayer language just before the meeting in S.A.: with the 50% that think it’s legit outdistancing the cessationist group, who had 43%, and the IMB exegetical position (AKA the “semi-cessationist” view) trailing badly with 7%–which results were disputed by the CR II honchos, though they eventually gave up; and 2) the passage of the Garner Motion by a more than 15% margin–which undercut the angry argument that CR II apologists finally gave up on: that “many people” supposedly didn’t know what they were voting on. 

The second answer happened when so many of the CR II moguls who are entity heads got up and acted like spoiled children in abusing entity presentation time to deride the passage of the Garner Motion.  That abuse revealed their paranoia about retaining their currently virtually untouchable power.

Focusing on the second answer to prayer, I honestly did not realize how Al Mohler’s jaw-dropping display of anger would lead to later aspects of the answer to that second prayer.  Sadly, I did not keep praying about that either!

The mention of Mohler’s anger on this blog and elsewhere eventually led to Dr. Mohler going before a faculty meeting at Southern Seminary and admitting to having “an anger problem.”  Because it is still far from clear whether Mohler actually “repented” or not, or whether he has sought help for his admitted anger problem, this issue remains a major “crack in the facade,” given that the CR II bloc would have to be a little bit crazy to put up a candidate with an admitted anger problem, in regard to which absolutely nothing has been said as to how it has been dealt with, leaving the potential that he could explode at any time, causing great embarrassment to the SBC. 

Related to this answer to prayer, another “crack in the facade” occurred when five former Mohler lieutenants all refused to speak in his defense when asked about the truthfulness of allegations in an anonymous open letter to the trustees of Southern and Southwestern seminaries.  While it may be lamented that they did not have the courage to tell the whole truth, at least they had the integrity not to lie to protect Mohler.  And, that, my friends, is no small indicator that the power over their heads is not as fearful as many of us might have previously thought.

Further, the fact that Mohler concluded that it was necessary for him to undertake a preemptive strike of apologizing for his numerous angry displays–usually, but not always, behind closed doors–before the Southern Seminary trustees met speaks volumes.  The last thing Mohler wanted was a trustee investigation of the allegations, especially given that even more people now know the truth about those matters.

The same thing is true in regard to the laughably overstated defense of Dr. and Mrs. Patterson put out by the SWBTS trustees.  If they weren’t running scared, nothing would have been said.  They would have just stone-walled, the way they have done fairly successfully in other areas in the last few years.

I also consider my ongoing contact with a number of people in the SBC academic community to be significant.  Although they are fearful of letting their names be known in regard to how they view issues of reform, they have been clear that they and others around them do disagree frequently with what is being done and how it’s being done by the presidents of the schools at which they teach.  But, they have no “voice”–at least not one that will not make them completely vulnerable to being let go shortly after it becomes known where they stand.

As I prepare to conclude this post (with at least one more coming on the absolutely necessary priority of prayer for the undergirding and guidance of the reform effort in the SBC), suffice it to say that, as I look back over the last year and a half of my involvement, it has become increasingly clear to me that the Lord indeed answered “exceedingly, abundantly beyond” what I asked in my prayers.  He more than held up his end of the bargain.

No, the problem was not the Lord’s answers in any way.  The problem was that I was such a pitiful excuse for a “prayer warrior.” 

Yes, I did pray, but highly inconsistently and, frankly, without even the faith and vision to really ask for anything that far-reaching… like the needed reforms we have been talking about on this blog for the past two or three weeks.  How spiritually embarrassing it is to see reflected here the pygmy-like quality of my prayer life!

So, the question now is: What am I going to do about it?  I hope to get to that–at least to a significant degree–in Wednesday’s post.  In closing, I would respectfully ask you to please pray between now and Wednesday that the Lord will give me clarity and vision in this crucial area!

“Fridays are for–oops!–Movie Reviews”

It’s not a Christmas movie per se, but “Bella” is a very sweet movie with a biblical message.  And, like Mary and Jesus, it does include a young woman pregnant out of wedlock and a baby who becomes a great blessing.  The following two-part review is, as always, from my weekly article in the Canyon Lake (TX) Times-Guardian:

                     “‘Bella’: A Movie Review (I)” 

            For as many years as I can remember, I have gone to at least one movie during the immediate Thanksgiving period with loved ones.  And, this year was no exception.  I greatly enjoyed seeing a charming little film entitled “Bella.” 

            You may not have heard anything at all about this movie.  It was produced on a very low budget (about $3 million, from what I was able to find out).  However, for a shoestring budget, relatively short (91 minutes running time) film, it presented a very strong pro-life message in a non-preachy way.

            As you can tell by my ‘(I)’ after the title above, I am going to do this review in two installments, saving the actual movie review itself for next time.  As you will see, there are more than enough intriguing background angles to fill out the rest of this article.

            The star of the movie is Eduardo Verastegui, who once was known as the “Brad Pitt of Mexico” for his dark good looks, his singing and his roles in steamy Mexican soap operas.  However, several years ago, Verastegui re-committed himself to his Roman Catholic faith and concluded that many of his previous roles sent messages that were “poisoning society” and “offending God.”  This past May, in speaking to a pro-life dinner in Ottawa, Canada, he asserted, “I wasn’t born to be famous or rich.  I was born to know and love and serve our Lord Jesus Christ.”

            Strong words, yes!  But, he is backing them up with his actions.  After his re-commitment, Verastegui and producer Leo Severino collaborated to form Metanoia Films, to produce movies that present an alternate viewpoint from the standard fare.  By the way, the Greek word metanioa means “repentance’ and apparently that is the humble attitude with which they want to make and release their movies.

            To say that the making of “Bella” was a calculated risk is an understatement.  Not only had Verastegui left his high-profile former career behind in Mexico (the film was made in New York City), but the female lead and the director were also rookies.  Tammy Blanchard, who I had never seen or heard of before, did a fine job as “Nina” (which I will discuss more in the next installment).  In fact, the only actor in the film whom I had ever seen before in any media was Ali Landry, well-known as a former beauty queen and from several widely-aired commercials, who had a small part early in the movie.  The director, whose camera shots were quite interesting and effective, was Alejandro Monteverde, of whom I also had never heard.

            Suffice it to say that, in spite of the lack of experience, the finished product was well done.  And, I am hardly alone in that sentiment.  At the Toronto Film Festival earlier this year, “Bella” received a tearful standing ovation from the audience and garnered the People’s Choice Award. 

            I wish the best for Metanoia Films and their future projects.  If they choose as wisely as they did with “Bella” and continue to use their craft to present messages as worthy of an audience as “Bella,” they deserve great success.  That is especially true if Verastegui sticks by his guns and continues to view his career in acting and producing as service to the Lord Jesus Christ.

            More on the movie itself next time.

                    “‘Bella’: A Movie Review (II)” 

            Last time, I presented some interesting vantage points on the background of the late October-released movie, “Bella,” which I just saw on the Saturday after Thanksgiving.  As I said then, it has already won the “People’s Choice Award” at the prestigious Toronto Film Festival and, in my opinion, is deserving of more honors as we get into that part of the new year.

            What I found interesting about “Bella” was that the vast majority of the film’s narrative took place on one day.  At the beginning, there was a scene (in the hero’s car) that does not make sense until further along in the movie.  Then, there is one previewing scene (at an abortion clinic) along the way until things finally flash forward several years at the very end (to a scene on the beach).

            At the time of viewing, I experienced the flashes back and forward as being somewhat choppy.  But, in retrospect, by the time the movie was over, it all hung together pretty well.  In other words, while it was happening, I was not at all sure whether I was able to follow the movement of the plot, though in the end I realized that I had indeed figured it out without much trouble.

            What am I talking about?  Here is the basic plot of “Bella.”  An international soccer star, Jose, who had just signed a multi-million dollar contract to play in the United States, is driving to a public relations event when he hits a little girl and kills her.  As a result, he forfeits his contract and serves four years in jail for accidental vehicular manslaughter.

            When he gets out of jail, Jose does not go back to soccer.  Instead, he becomes the chef at his older brother’s restaurant in New York City.  In that context, he comes to know and, purely as a friend, gets to know Nina, a waitress with personal problems.

            Nina’s biggest new problem is that she has just found out she is pregnant.  Because of her morning sickness, Nina misses several days of work and, as a result, gets fired from her job by Manny, Jose’s older brother.  When Jose finds out what has happened, he skips out on work for the day in order to be there for Nina in her turmoil.

            There is an odd simplicity and humility in Jose moving around New York City in his white chef’s coat and Nina being dressed all day in her bright flowered waitress’ dress.  But, the movie is like that.  It puts on no airs.  It picks up the characters where it encounters them, as they would be living their lives, and it does not try to make them larger than life or melodramatic in any sense.  In that regard, it occasionally feels as much like a true-to-life documentary as a regular movie.

            The sense of “justice” and healing coming full circle in the movie is because Jose, who had unintentionally killed one little girl, in the end, adopts Nina’s baby and raises her, Bella, as his own.  The clear pro-life stance of the movie is that any woman who is alone and pregnant in difficult circumstances can make a huge difference in the life of someone who wants to love and raise a child by giving birth to that baby, instead of choosing abortion.  The other “loud and clear” message of the “Bella” seems to be that, instead of judging women in such circumstances (or, perhaps anyone who is in a very difficult and confusing position!), those around them should listen lovingly and support them, so that they can make better decisions and not do something that will later be deeply regretted, because of feeling trapped and desperate.

Coming Monday: Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenda (V): “The Priority of Prayer”

Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenda (IV): “How Things Got the Way They Are”

(Prefatory Note: No one has come forward to vounteer to write anything on the SBC Business and Financial Plan.  I will try to get back to it sooner rather than later.  However, I have not had the time to get to it so far.  Sorry!)

As I have been thinking through what needs to be changed in regard to the SBC Constitution and Bylaws, a “random” (no, I’m not a postmodernist!) thought popped up, which I stopped to consider: “How did the situation in regard to the Constitution and Bylaws get this way?”  It seems to me that, before we proceed further in attempting to think through an SBC reform agenda, it might be enlightening to review things to make sure we are on the same page historically–even if this is so simple that it virtually insults the intelligence of some of my esteemed readers/commenters.  (If you are in that category, please accept my apology, but also realize that not everyone who is interested in the SBC has your background.)

How did things get the way they are?  Simply put, in the late 1970s, the Conservative Resurgence decided to beat the Moderate/Liberal coalition at their own game and thus take over the Convention.  And, whether simultaneously or at some later point, they decided to also play the same game as the Moderate/Liberal coalition had played in running the Convention.

How do we know that?  It is fairly obvious because so little else changed other than the Baptist Faith and Message (in 2000), well after the Resurgence gained control.  Yes, there is now sole ownership of the entities.  But, which of the many gaping “loopholes” that have been pointed out in the Constitution and Bylaws, which allow for rampant fleshliness among candidates and appointees and no actually meaningful accountability for trustees or administrators to the Convention, has ever been seriously addressed?

Think about it.  When the dust settles, the Constitution and Bylaws are the way they are primarily because the powers that be want them that way.  The present system enabled them to gain control and allows them to maintain control.  Given those realities, why would they have any desire to change anything?

No wonder the Bill Harrell-backed Georgia Convention anti-blogger resolution was done!  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the recent abuses propagated by certain SBC entity trustee boards could only take place with holes in regard to accountability that you can ”drive a Mack truck through” in the way the trustee system is currently set up under the SBC Constitution and Bylaws. 

Similarly, it has been widely asserted that trustee appointees are felt out in advance for their political perspective, and that has been viewed as all-important, with little to no emphasis on each person’s level of spiritual maturity and the consistency of his or her moment-by-moment walk with the Lord.  How does that happen?  Just think about it even for a moment.  What in the Constitution and Bylaws would mandate anything different?

Now, I completely agree with the thought of commenter Greg Harvey (presented in even more depth on his own blog–see his comments on my last past for the link) that, if the SBC were to experience widespead true Spirit-led revival, the Constitution and Bylaws as currently set up would be effective.  And, I continue to pray fervently for just such renewal in our midst!  However, while the Constitution/Bylaws in their current form would get the job done for a spiritually mature and Spirit-sensitized Convention, it must be admitted that, tragically, the SBC simply falls far short of that spiritual status at present.

To use a disconcerting, but true, example, every church that I have ever pastored (three), or worked with as a church planter or interim pastor (seven), was woefully ignorant of the qualifications for leadership in the New Testament.  As a result, every one of those churches heard me preach those qualifications–in one way or another–in order to better stabilize their leadership in the time ahead. 

Admittedly, some already had a clear, biblically-based listing of such qualifications in their Constitution and Bylaws and had just ignored them for years.  So, obviously, having them written down in the right place does not guarantee their being followed.  However, in each case, the dynamics of having them forcefully called to the congregation’s attention in regard to board elections and pastor searches and the like did make a real difference in each situation.

But, in several of the churches–all supposedly Bible-honoring congregations, nothing of any detailed consequence on biblical qualifications for leadership was found in their Constitution/Bylaws.  At finding this out in the first church I worked with like this, I was appalled at the silence.  But, I found it to be more common than I would have ever guessed.

And, why was it the case?  Mostly because a lot of new churches simply adapt their Constitution/Bylaws from the church that planted them (or some other signficant like church/churches nearby).  It simply never occurs to them to do anything different than the traditions they observed/inherited, at least in the Constitution/Bylaws.

As a result of not having such qualifications called to their attention, most of the people never think about them.  They just assume that church leaders should be chosen on the basis of their success in business and their natural (i.e., not spiritual) skill as leaders.  (And, if you are able to be truthful with yourself at this point, you know exactly what I am talking about here!)

Sadly, I believe that my experience is a microcosm of sorts of what takes places in Convention-wide elections and appointments.  Since there is nothing in the Constitution/Bylaws that requires spiritual maturity and a close walk with the Lord, those crucial criteria are simply overlooked in favor of political considerations.  The quality of candidates is considered at the level of the lowest common denominator, not in terms of the lofty spiritual ideals which, scripturally, should be the case.

At this point, we do well to remember the spiritual axiom that followers seldom, if ever, rise above the level of their leaders (see Luke 6:40 and its context–the “blind leading the blind” into the pit in 6:39 and the hypocrite with the log in his own eye in 6:41-42).  As a result, I firmly believe that this issue is critical to address–and keep addressing, until enough people listen and change things–if the SBC is to ever become Spirit-sensitized in the way it does things at the national level.

What do you think?  Since some of you have been at this at the national level a lot longer than me, I expect that you will have some very well-considered viewpoints in this area.

Coming Friday: “Fridays are for Newspaper Articles”

Serious Thinking toward an SBC Reform Agenda (III): “The Type of Candidates and Appointees Needed”

Up front, let me say two things: 1) I have learned a lot from studying the SBC Constitution and Bylaws, and you have helped me learn even more.  I hope this translates into the best ideas in regard to what needs to be changed and how to do it before this series is over; and 2) What should be considered in this series continues to grow.  I had not passed a single thought about assessing the SBC Business and Financial Plan.  But, why not?  It affects us all.  The problem in doing so, however, is that I am anything but an expert on that sort of thing.  Hence, if there is anyone out there who like to do a guest post with your thoughts on what needs to be reformed in the SBC Business and Financial Plan, please let me know as soon as possible.  I would be deeply grateful.  If no one with more background in this area steps forward in the next few days, I may or may not attempt such a post myself, almost totally depending on whether I can squeeze out the time and find the necessary research material to get myself up to speed–at least a whole lot more than I currently am.

Frankly, what I am posting today is little more than the thoughts I expressed several months ago in regard to the kind of candidates the SBC needed to put forward next Summer in Indianapolis.  In the meantime, however, I have broadened the scope of my consideration, only to realize that we need the same type of person, no matter what level of leadership role in the Convention that it is, elected or appointed.

At the risk of idealism and over-simplification, here’s my thoughts on the matter.  All in leadership roles in the SBC should meet the following biblical criteria:

1) Full of the Spirit and wisdom: In the passage that may preview the beginning of the office of deacon, the only qualifications that Stephen and the other six had to meet were: being of “good reputation, full of the Spirit and wisdom” (Acts 6:4, HCSB).  To me, those stated qualfications were considered to be a summary of the basic qualities needed for leadership in the church, period. 

Yes, 1 Timothy and Titus give more extensive listings of, in some cases, much more specific qualities.  However, none of those qualifications is any way contradictory to Acts 6:4, just more specific in regard to the specific leadership positions being discussed.

My point here is that Acts 6:4 seems to as close to a basic description of spiritual qualfications for leadership as we find in the New Testament.  Thus, I suggest it as the primary spiritual qualification for all leadership roles in the SBC.

How do we know whether a person is Spirit-filled?  The immediately ensuing description of the Spirit-filled ministry of Stephen (Acts 6-7) is the obvious place to start, as well as the charactristics of the life and relationships of the Spirit-filled person in Ephesians 5:18-6:9. 

You may also ask what is meant by “wisdom” in Acts 6:4.  Yes, “wisdom” is generally viewed as the practical ability to use knowledge.  But, in the context of Acts 6:4, the linking of wisdom to Spirit-filling almost surely requires that this is wisdom which comes from the insight of the Holy Spirit.  After all, any other kind of wisdom is going to be, to one degree or another, worldly wisdom (a la what Paul argues against in the early chapters of 1 Corinthians).

In the SBC, sadly, there are quite a number of veteran figures who are very wise indeed in the realms of politics and power.  But, are they also “full of the Spirit and wisdom”–of the God-given spiritual variety?  That is the perhaps the most pressing question before us.

2) Humble–not proud: This quality is closely related to the above.  There is no place for pride when a person is filled with the Spirit.  Pride is the elevation of self.  Being Spirit-filled is the submission of self to the Holy Spirit. 

In fact, the two states cannot co-exist.  There is no such thing as an arrogant person who is Spirit-filled.  Thus, when you see the swagger, the pride oozing out of certain leaders, as they move around certain conferences, you can be quite confident that their sizeable egos are not of the Lord.

In fact, quite the opposite is true.  As Peter says in no uncertain terms in 1 Peter 5:5-6: “God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.  Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God, so that he may exalt you in due time.” 

Thus, how do think the Lord feels about the massive egos that hold high positions in the SBC or some of our churches?  I’m guessing that He is anything but a happy camper–what else can “God resists the proud” mean?!  As a result, I’m quite sure it is His will that the SBC stop putting arrogant people in key leadership roles.

3) Servant Leadership: Again, this quality also unpacks from being the above.  Only Spirit-filled, humble people can be true servant-leaders. 

And, that’s exactly what the Lord Jesus expects in regard to his people.  In Matthew 20:25-27, Jesus stated ever so clearly: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles dominate them, and the men of high position exercise power of them.  It must not be like that among you.  On the contrary, he wants to become great among you must become your servant” (HCSB).

But, it is like that (i.e., lording it over), in way too many cases.  Sadly, many of our churches and certain entities of the SBC are run with essentially the same kind of dominating power and fleshly fear tactics as that which “strong man” non-Christian leaders have utilized throughout history. 

Peter–who had been very much a strong natural leader before he was Spirit-filled–thought this to be a huge issue in regard to Christian leadership.  In fact, it was so important in his thinking that he included it in his brief discussion of church leadership in 1 Peter 5-3: “not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.” 

What does this say about the spiritual perectivity of the SBC in regard to elected leadership?  Among other things it might say, it certainly does shout loud and clear that there are a sizeable number of people in the SBC who are bound and determined to keep electing and appointing those whose approach to power is exactly the opposite of that of Jesus and Peter.  But, since all they hear discussed is the political vantage point on the elections, why should we expect otherwise?

Brethren, this ought not to be.  Tragically, it may well be that the only way to even attempt to change the current fleshly, politicized system of electing and appointing leaders in the SBC is to doggedly point out the above spiritual requirements for leadership that are the Lord’s idea, not ours. 

And, yes, I know that it is nigh onto impossible to “legislate morality.”  However, it can certainly be prayerfully hoped that it might turn out to be somewhat more successful to, over and over and over and over, insist on spirituality (i.e., in the lives of SBC leaders).

Having said these things, it is important to note that persons possessing these spiritual qualities may be found in larger or smaller churches, in a variety of roles.  But, by focusing on these–and other similar–spiritual qualities, the focus is taken away from the things about a person that impress short-sighted humanity on the outside (e.g., the size of their ministry, the extent of their power or the length of their resume) and placed squarely on the internal and spiritual aspects that God truly values (1 Samuel 16:7). 

No, we will never be able to discern those qualities in people anything close to as well as the Lord does.  But, the concerted prayerful attempt to do so at least demonstrates that we are seeking as godly perspective on who He wants in leadership as possible. 

What do you think?  I very much look forward to your “takes.”

Coming Wednesday: Either an assessment of the SBC Business and Financial Plan or my first attempt to sort out (i.e., “wheat” vs. “chaff”)/prioritize what has been discussed so far in this series