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!