I have a question. Are you pursuing God? I mean really striving after him? That is a question for you whatever your season in life. God’s desire is that we pursue Him and that as a result of that pursuit, we find our joy in Him and Him alone.

I’ve been thinking about the different places in life in which several people I know are. Some are facing a time of uncertainty, wondering how the present circumstance they are in will turn out. Some are in a time of suffering, going through a difficult situation because of physical or relational crisis. Some are in a time of transition, seeking God’s will and preparing for and anticipating the next stage of their life. Some are experiencing a season of blessing, where everything seems to be going great and the future looks bright. Some find themselves in a time of peace, where things seem to be doing just fine and there is nothing particular going on. Still others are experiencing personal revival as God is shaping their heart, convicting of sin, and renewing their passion for the things of God.

In whatever situation we find ourselves, I am more and more convinced that we must be in active pursuit of God and His glory. Every season of our life can either cause us to draw near to Him or to move away from Him. Both our suffering and blessing, our uncertainty and our security, can lead us either toward or away from Christ. God’s desire, in every situation, is that we pursue Him and find our joy and satisfaction in Him. What is true as individuals is also true as a church body. Churches go through different seasons – times of blessing, times of loss, times of transition, times where things seem to be just humming along – and all those seasons are times in which we must be in active pursuit of God.

God promises in Jeremiah 29:13, “You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.” So I ask again: Are you, are we, actively pursuing Christ? In whatever circumstance you find yourself, God’s desire is for you to earnestly seek Him – and not just to seek, but in that seeking to find Him and be satisfied in Him. God’s desire for your church as a body is to earnestly seek Him and in so doing to Glorify Him and make His Son known. Let us pursue Him!

Blessings,

Todd

In our ongoing discussions of important issues, one perennial problem is breakdown in communication. An issue where this problem seems to occur often is in our discussions about Calvinism. Just what do we mean when we use the term “Calvinist”? Because the term is used in a variety of ways we often fail to communicate and misunderstanding occurs. Unfortunately, such misunderstanding too often leads to unnecessary division and offense. For positive dialogue on this or any issue, both the speaker and the hearer have a responsibility to strive for understanding. The speaker must communicate effectively and the hearer must strive to discern what the speaker intends to say.

In terms of language itself, the term “Calvinist” has a number of different uses within a semantic range. As you look across the SBC landscape, the term is used in at least four different ways, depending on the context. Many of us have used more than one of these meanings at one time or another. Others use the term with only one specific meaning and must take care they do not misunderstand what is being said when other uses are employed — especially if we ourselves use self-descriptors that either include or exclude a particular view of Calvinism. Of course, “Calvinist” is not the only term where this problem exists. The same semantic problem occurs with terms like “Reformed”, “Evangelical”, “Arminian”, “heresy”, “missionary”, and even “Christian.”

The following is a list of ways the term “Calvinist” is presently used by Southern Baptists. Depending on its use, the term may mean…

1. All non-Arminians including any who hold to classic doctrine of perseverance regardless of their view on any of the remaining four points. In this use, anyone who believes that salvation once received cannot be lost is considered Calvinist. In broader evangelical world, classic Arminians commonly refer to all Southern Baptists as Calvinists. Historically, Southern Baptists have been a mix of strict and modified Calvinists. Thus in this usage, one might rightly say that Southern Baptists are Calvinist or Calvinistic.

2. Those who believe in Unconditional Election including all 3-5 point Calvinists. In this use, the key distinctive is that God chooses the elect based on His own sovereign purposes, irrespective of Divine foreknowledge. What one believes about irresistible grace or limited atonement is incidental. In this usage, we may rightly say that the “Abstract of Principles” is a Calvinist document and that professors at Southern and Southeastern seminary are Calvinists even though only some would adhere to all five points of TULIP.

3. Strict Calvinists/5-point Calvinist. By this definition the term is reserved for those who affirm the entire classical system of the five doctrines of grace most commonly presented as TULIP. Those who do not affirm irresistible grace and/or limited atonement would be excluded. As an example of this usage, then, we could rightly say that Mohler is a Calvinist while Akin is not.

4. Hyper-Calvinist. In this use, the person may affirm from 3-5 points but, as a consequence of their view of election, either neglect or reject the proclamation of the gospel. The problem with this use is that it nearly always conflates hyper-Calvinists with other forms of missionary Calvinism and thus is nearly always interpreted by the hearer as pejorative. In my view, this use is almost never appropriate without the accompanying prefix “hyper”.

________

So what is to be done given this broad semantic range and the constant danger of being misunderstood? Effective communication and Christian dialogue demands certain things from both the speaker and the hearer. The following are some guidelines for any who wish to dialogue on this issue.

For the Speaker:

1. Be careful whenever you use descriptors like “Calvinist” that it is clear which meaning you are using. If your intended meaning is not immediately clear from the context of the discussion, it may be helpful to use qualifying prefixes like modified-, strict-, or hyper- so that the hearer understands just whom you are including in the moniker.

2. Recognize that in the present state of our denomination, terms like “Calvinist” are loaded with a lot of prior thinking and emotion on all sides. Great care should be taken when using the term. Whatever the point we are making, no matter how legitimate, we must be careful not to alienate our hearers. Though we can never totally avoid this possibility, there is a responsibility to avoid unnecessary offense. For example, you will OFTEN get resistance from self-described non-Calvinists when you include them as Calvinists and you will nearly ALWAYS get resistance from self-described Calvinists if you even hint that Calvinism is inconsistent with evangelism and missions.

3. Recognize that your primary role as a communicator is to communicate. It does not matter what you meant to say if the hearer hears something different. You are responsible to communicate clearly, whether speaking to a group of academics, writing an editorial, preaching to your congregation, having a casual conversation with fellow pastors, or commenting on a blog.

4. Recognize that in this multi-media age, your audience is often larger than the people in front of you. What may be clear to your immediate audience may not be clear to the broader audience who hears your remarks rebroadcast on a podcast, blog, news article, or other medium. Be careful that your remarks are clear to this broader audience as well.

For the hearer:

1. While speakers/writers are responsible to be clear in their communication, hearers also have a responsibility to give persons a fair hearing. This means that we do our best to understand what a speaker is attempting to communicate even if they are not being clear in doing so or using language in a way that we would not use it. Being “quick to listen” includes an honest effort to understand a person’s position before responding to it or making a judgment. Being a good listener means that we must seek to understand what is being communicated.

2. We should default to seeing things in the best possible light, rather than the worst. We must act with grace toward one another.

3. We must treat other people’s views fairly; especially when we disagree. One of the least effective ways to debate is to set up a “straw man” argument by presenting another’s views dishonestly. Be careful to present a person’s position accurately and do not hide behind use of terminology to mischaracterize or malign the speaker.

4. Do not get upset over every disagreement or misuse of terms. God has put us together as a family of believers and has brought together for the cause of the gospel. We ought to love one another and love “is not easily offended” (1 Cor 13:5) and “covers a multitude of sins” (1 Pet 4:8). Let us approach each other on these issues, not as enemies, but as brothers.

________

Ultimately, our disagreements on the issue of Calvinism are nothing new. Southern Baptists have always held a wide range of opinions on soteriology within the limits of Christian orthodoxy. The BFM2000 sets clear parameters about our beliefs concerning election, salvation, and the Great Commission, while at the same time allowing for a diversity of opinion on tertiary matters like the extent of the atonement and unconditional election. Let us continue to allow for some diversity on these matters. Especially, let us not cause unnecessary division by either our careless use of terminology or our unwillingness to be gracious hearers.

It was our second day in Asia. The night before, I had experienced my first “English Corner” – an opportunity to meet students, speak to them in English, and share with them my culture, my experiences, and most of all, my faith in Christ. In our initial English corner, I was the first one Ellen chose to tell that she had become a Christian. Her joy was contagious! Others in the group had not yet believed. “I believe in myself,” one girl offered, but went on to describe her frustration that she could not reach her life’s pursuits. Another agreed, “I want to go forward, but I can only go right or left.” He went on to explain the emptiness he was feeling. From there I was able to understand what they were saying and moved to present Christ as the answer. As I shared with them, you could see the light of understanding begin to open their eyes to the promise of the gospel. They did not yet believe, but I could sense the Spirit at work drawing their hearts to him. My heart cried out to see them receive the Savior.

But this was day two. We men went to a local university to meet up with two college age workers there who were trying to meet students and set up their own English corner. Our task – to meet as many students as we could and invite them to the English corner that night. I suggested the library – partly because I knew there would be students there and partly because the library feels like a second home to me. As we went to the floor where students gathered to study and socialize, we were immediately surrounded by people curious to speak to a foreigner. I was able to meet several students and invite them to the English corner that night. None of these students knew our workers and, more significantly, none of them knew Christ. The energy was exciting. We were helping build intentional relationships with these students with the hopes that they would come to Christ. Many would come that night and new friendships would begin along with opportunities to share the message of Christ.

We were leaving the library when all of a sudden I was overwhelmed. A rush of emotion came over me and I stepped into a corner behind a large pillar. As soon as I was out of sight, the tears came. I could hear our team leader ask, “Where did Todd go.” Then he found me. “What’s wrong? – but I didn’t say anything, I just held up my hand with a gesture that meant “just give me a minute”. Immediately he knew. He too had had a similar experience his first time in country. What had come over me at that moment was an overwhelming sorrow – a sense of spiritual darkness knowing that all these students were without Christ, without the gospel, and thus without hope. Yes, we would begin making inroads with these few and maybe even have some impact for the kingdom – but for every student we met that day, there were tens of thousands of others without the gospel and with no one to tell them. How could I remain unmoved by so many sheep without a shepherd?

As I’ve reflected back at that moment, I have rehearsed it in my mind. What came over me that day? Why was I so moved? More importantly, why am I so UN-moved most of the time? Why am I not overwhelmed by the lostness around me? Why am I not compelled to sacrifice my time, my possessions, my very life to take the gospel to the nations and to my own community? Where is the passion for the gospel – not for an idea, but an overwhelming burden to be a light in the darkness? Something has to change – I don’t want to waste my life with vain pursuits, but empty myself for the cause of Christ.

I thank God for his promise that “Whosoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved!” But Paul went on to ask in Romans 10:14-15, “How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? How will they preach unless they are sent?”

Lord, I don’t want a temporary emotional response – I want a Holy Spirit anointing as a minister of the gospel! Lord, fill me with your Spirit! Grant me a burden to see the lost found! Grant me the boldness to preach the good news! Grant that we be a sending people and send us out with Your good news! Lord, raise up laborers for Your harvest!

How about a little change of pace and mutual encouragement? Answer one of the following questions in the comment stream:

What do you love about the SBC?

Or

What is something God is doing in your church, association, state convention, or other ministry?

Here are the guidelines  (for this post only and I know we can do it!):

• Positive comments only – if you don’t have anything nice to say, comment on a different post
• No hidden or subtle swipes at some other group or position
• No Convention politics
• No sarcasm, snarkiness, condescension, orneriness, or mentioning of SEC football
• Smiley faces are allowed

It is surprising to me how many believers go through their Christian life with little or no concern for reaching people with the gospel. In a former church I remember one member, a leader in the church, commented that he really did not have a burden for the lost. He admitted that he had never thought of evangelism as an important aspect of his Christian faith. I am thankful that he was candidly honest about where he was. Unfortunately, this man is not an anomaly. His viewpoint is far too common and in many churches is the norm. Multiply that perspective by 100 church members and you have a partial answer for why a church is not effectively reaching their community for Christ.

For a church to fulfill the Great Commission, it will require first that its members share the heart of Jesus for the lost he came to save. We must share the heart of Jesus who wept for Jerusalem (Luke 18:41). We must follow the model of Paul whose heart was for the salvation of his fellow Jews (Rom 9:1-3; 10:1). We must be compelled by the love of Christ for a lost world and take on the ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:14, 18).

If we are not careful, evangelism will be merely something we talk about and list among other Christian duties but never actually do. Until evangelism ceases to be a Christian virtue that we have not yet achieved and becomes the driving passion of our church and personal ministry, we will never fulfill the purpose God has set for us. To become an on-mission church, we must have a passion for the Great Commission – reaching persons with the gospel of Jesus Christ and leading them to a life of obedience to his commands. Jesus died for our sins to bring us to God (1 Pet 3:18). The gospel is the grand theme of Scripture. It should be our theme as well.

Passion for on-mission Christianity comes from the Lord. Neither you nor I can create such a passion in our churches, only God can. For that reason, the primary “methods” for creating this passion in our lives are prayer and the Word.

Let me challenge you: in your personal devotion, pray and ask God to create this passion in you and in the lives of every member of your church. At the same time, be intentional in praying for the lost, praying for missions, praying for unreached peoples, praying that God would give us a burden for evangelism, and praying that God would raise up more laborers in His harvest.

Pray and ask God to give YOU a burden for the lost and for his gospel. Pray and ask God for opportunities to evangelize. Pray specifically for lost individuals. Set aside time to tell people about Jesus. Rejoice when people come to faith in Christ. Expect God to use us!

My prayer is that our denomination will have a contagious passion for the gospel that saturates everything we do. God wants to use us for His Kingdom!

All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 2 Cor 5:18-21 NIV

Blessings,

Todd

My friend Raymond Dix is an African-American, Baptist pastor in a neighboring community. I asked him to read and respond to my post on “color-blindness“, knowing that he would disagree with me on some key points. I offer his careful critique with his permission to further this needed discussion.

Blessings,

Todd

___________

A Critical Analysis of Todd Benkert’s “A Color-Blind Denomination?” By a Black Baptist Pastor

Raymond C. Dix Jr.

Berean Fellowship Baptist Church

Gary, IN

Let me begin this analysis by stating two of the most important facts found in my response to this piece written by Dr. Todd Benkert.  First and foremost, Dr. Todd Benkert is my friend.  Over the course of numerous coffees and snacks he and I developed a personal friendship of which I believe to have basis in a mutual respect and admiration for one another.  Therefore, my writing finds root in our friendship and seeks to expand our mutual love and respect.

In addition, I believe it factual that Dr. Benkert writes from a heart filled with a desire to see the day arrive when men and women will find judgment truly based on the content of character and not the hue of skin.  After many conversations with Dr. Benkert on the subject of race, and after reading this blog; I remain convinced that he is pure of heart in his efforts to seek a remedy for the stain of racism that rest too visibly upon this nation’s soul and history.  This is why I felt compelled to respond to my friend.

The context of Dr. Benkert’s writing is the possible election of the first black president of the Southern Baptist Convention of America.  The SBC is on the verge of a historical undertaking for this religious body, especially in light of the fact that the racial history of this convention of churches closely connects and parallels America’s racial past.  Dr. Benkert deserves applause for his courage in writing this piece to his peers and all who would read it.  Believe me, as a black pastor who stands against government policies designed to create and maintain dependence among my people, I know firsthand the courage needed,  as well as the pain endured in writing from the soul on topics often ignored or considered taboo by one’s peers, community and even ethnic distinction.  For this reason I further admire my brother for his faith and conviction.

Yet it is within this context that I say Dr. Benkert’s assertions and theme deserves critical analysis.  I do not answer to condemn, as the “contrarian” that some label me; but to simply offer an alternative view that might spur the conversation a bit further along, with the goal of reaching the ever elusive common ground.

In his opening paragraph Dr.Benkert states, “When it comes to the issue of race, many today advocate that we take a “color-blind” approach. That is, in our interactions with people we should refuse to allow race to be a factor at all, whether we are interacting with a neighbor, talking about social issues, or choosing a Convention president. At this point in our history, however, a color-blind approach is counter-productive to achieving the racial unity we all desire.”  It is my belief that Dr. Benkert offers a very simple and easy to digest definition of color-blindness in order to make the larger point that such a position while ultimately desired is not the path necessary for this moment in the life of the Southern Baptist Convention.  My contention with my brother’s point is this; it is the road of least resistance.  Dr. Benkert suggests a path to racial unity devoid of the hard work necessary to achieve such a goal; true relationship building and cultural competence on both sides requires a deliberate and intentional effort greater than spiritual affirmative action.  The purposeful intervention in a matter that should resonate from the heart and not forced upon the head presents a myriad of difficulties while it achieves a visual goal.  If we choose purposeful intervention, we will see desired effects, yet what remains unseen possibly presents the greatest calamity.  The hearts and minds of those forced to accept intervention may never truly receive the light necessary to achieve the goal of true color blindness.

Dr. Benkert further writes, “We desire to be color-blind because we want to put racism to rest – relegate it to the past. The only problem is that racism is not yet past. We have not yet achieved racial reconciliation. Race still matters, especially to people of color who remain on the receiving end of institutional racism. As much as we want to move past racism, we dare not act as though the problem is already behind us.”  My response to this required me to think carefully before I wrote.  Many people may misunderstand, especially those with whom I share ethnic distinction.  I am sure some, maybe even most will believe my position naïve and short-sighted, ignorant of the devastating effects of racial injustice, past and present.  However, on Dr. Benkert’s point I realize that I cannot fairly judge his perspective as a white male speaking for white people.  However, as a black male liberated from the bondage of seeking the approval of others outside my ethnic group regarding my ethnicity or anything else for that matter; I can state that I am not now, nor ever have been a victim of institutional racism.  I have encountered discomfort among other ethnicities regarding cultural distinctions, and this is very different from institutional racism.  I have even convinced myself in times past that my failure to achieve was due to my color and not my competence because this was the easy means of assuaging my disappointment and hurt feelings over rejection.  I am not naïve enough to believe that many have experiences quite different than my own upon which to call.  I am merely stating that careful analysis of the times when I used my color as excuse for lack of achievement I experienced a sort of bondage that left me at the mercy of my skin color and how others perceived it.  I realized that there is little difference between perpetual aggrieved status and perpetual victim status.  The problem with assuming institutionalized racism in current times is that it runs the risk of keeping blacks in the cupboard of perpetual victims, needing some effort by the “oppressor” in order to be free of failure and enjoined on a path of success.  I am sure that Dr. Benkert means well, as I stated, he is my friend and I believe we converse enough on this particular subject for me to sense the heart of my brother.  However, it is a dangerous and historically unsuccessful path for blacks to depend on white efforts alone for uplift.  Black Americans must stand tall, address the negative images that are true in our own community and then watch with an indwelt dignity as the Lord moves upon the hearts of those not like us, and sets us on a path of true reconciliation with our fellow human beings.

Regarding the Southern Baptist Convention’s current disposition toward race relations, Dr. Benkert makes three important statements:

1.      “Like the systemic racism in the larger society, our Southern Baptist culture, left alone, prefers whites.”
2.       “…we have maintained a culture and system in SBC life in which whites have a privileged status and only whites have held the highest positions of leadership.”
3.       “Even though we don’t feel racist, if we accept a culture in which our race is preferred and in charge we are accepting a form of racism.”

To each of these observations I say that Dr. Benkert insists throughout this piece that racism is systemic in our larger society.  I realize that in a short blog there is hardly room for citing many examples of such an assertion, but examples are necessary for a view so often repeated and so seldom substantiated, especially among so-called black leaders who profit on the notion of pervasive and systemic racism.  Yet the need for persuasive evidence is necessary by the very nature of the assertion.  For if by some means that systemic racism is irrelevant or at least impotent in preventing the efforts of blacks and other minorities to achieve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; then the argument for purposeful intervention fails upon this point.  This argument requires that racism be systemic and perhaps even permanently woven into the fabric of the American experiment.  This is why it is important to weigh the evidence of real instances of racism against other factors which may contribute to the failure to achieve.  In essence, this was Bill Cosby’s argument before the NAACP in 2004, as blacks we must pay attention to factors beyond racism regarding our plight in America.

Furthermore, my friend cites a “privileged status” and a culture of preference for whites within the SBC.  I ask two simple questions.  Is this assertion based solely on the fact that the leadership of the organization does not reflect the ethnic demographics of the SBC? Also, is it reasonable to assume race as the reason when the leadership of an organization is mainly white while the ethnic demographics of that organization may be 90% white?  Giving my friend the benefit of the doubt, I am willing to say that race may be a contributing factor.  However, I would like to see the list of minority candidates for offices who ran and were rejected or the list of less qualified whites who won the elections.  It is this type of evidence that Dr. Benkert may be privy to, but does not state to support the assertion of race as a predominant factor in the lack of minority leadership in an overwhelmingly white organization.  A parallel example might be the NAACP, an organization that is overwhelmingly demographically black.  In fact, the entire executive board is black, with most of the board members being so as well.  Should we cite racism as reason for this?  Or is this simply an example of an organization electing leaders reflective of constituency?  One might even substitute any of the demographically black Baptist conventions and find the same reflection in leadership, despite some member white churches.

I believe that Dr. Benkert reveals the truly honorable intentions of his heart by writing, “In the end, our color-blindness will not be measured by how we feel about other races or what we say about racism. The true measure will be whether we have demonstrated in our actions what we believe in our hearts. The true gauge of a color-blind denomination will be when blacks and other people of color feel welcome, respected, included, and trusted as equal partners with us.”  I emphatically believe that this day has already come in the heart of my friend.  If one-quarter of pastors, both black and white possessed half of the passion of Todd Benkert, then racism and all conversations pertaining to it would be moot.  The profound nature of this statement demonstrates and sets the path by which we must walk.  It is a statement in which I stand in firm agreement with my friend.  This should be the goal of our efforts.  If each person applies themselves to this goal, then the integration of leadership within the SBC will happen without purposeful intervention.  The danger of purposeful intervention is three-fold: a) It addresses a symptom and not a/the causal agent; b) as previously stated, it relegates the recipient to the possibility of long term victim status; c) It historically created bitterness and resentment by those force to accept this intervention in practice long before the premise finds root in their hearts.

Dr. Benkert completes this offering by writing, “Our intentions may be honorable, but mere intentions are not good enough. We cannot afford to be color-blind if the end result is the perpetuation of a whites-only reality.  This reality is why I think that the election of black president is a needed step.”  Again, Dr. Benkert states a worthy goal but it is the same reasoning and logic that brought the United States the election of President Barack Obama.  Based largely on this argument, many admittedly voted for President Obama as an effort to demonstrate they were not racist.  The mainstream media refused, in my opinion, to properly vet Senator Obama because the prevailing wisdom said it was time for the United States to distant itself from its history of violent and oppressive racism; and the election of a at least partially black president would demonstrate a post-racial America.  In fact, opposing the President now has become the litmus test for being a racist.  Regrettably, this means his election has had quite the opposite of this intended effect!  Just after the President’s election I wrote that in my opinion, the election of President Obama would set race relations back in this country because many voted for his color.  That is not to say he is not qualified, I prefer to leave that to individual judgment.  However, voting for him based on skin color, in spite of the good intentions, results in an angry black populace feeling the need to defend “our President” against any criticism however warranted.  It also produced a segment of white America now exposed to the need to defend themselves against charges of racism simply because they do not agree with the President.  What have we lost in the process?  As a nation we set aside honest debate about the real issues facing this country in exchange for a defensive posture where our citizens remain at odds over race.  The SBC as a faith based, Bible believing organization must be careful not to adopt a process that could potentially leave the denomination in the same quagmire as we find this great nation.  The Church must lead the way into a new paradigm, no matter the level of pain and discomfort; and refrain from adopting a means that is simpler even for the sake of expedience and conscience.

In closing I would like to join with Dr. Benkert in passionately endorsing a real conversation on race amongst the people of God.  It is past time for pastors and teachers of the gospel to engage in meaningful and even sometimes difficult conversations and actions designed to build firm and lasting relationships across ethnic boundaries.  Let us look to a simple yet profound effort by the Church of Acts for inspiration.  The church in Acts built relationships by sharing meals.  Yes, simply eating together is an awesome way to break self-impose limitations that perhaps each of us, black or white, have stamped on our actions.  I am naïve enough to believe that a God that breaks the power of sin in our lives will also break and remove the power and stain of racism from our hearts, if we are willing to submit ourselves.  God will and indeed has replaced the indignity of racism with the capacity of love for all of his creation in the hearts of many.  It is to this end I believe that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke regarding character based judgment and it is to this end that I join my friend Todd in praying for and working toward.

When it comes to the issue of race, many today advocate that we take a “color-blind” approach. That is, in our interactions with people we should refuse to allow race to be a factor at all, whether we are interacting with a neighbor, talking about social issues, or choosing a Convention president. At this point in our history, however, a color-blind approach is counter-productive to achieving the racial unity we all desire.

Certainly, the sentiment behind a color-blind approach is a positive one. It stems from a desire to act in a way that is free from racism and achieves the dream set forth by Dr. King that we judge others not “by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” A worthy dream indeed! We desire to be color-blind because we want to put racism to rest – relegate it to the past. The only problem is that racism is not yet past. We have not yet achieved racial reconciliation. Race still matters, especially to people of color who remain on the receiving end of institutional racism. As much as we want to move past racism, we dare not act as though the problem is already behind us.

One reason many of us whites stumble, and why we don’t see racism where it exists, is that we view racism almost exclusively in personal, individualistic terms. As a result, we often deny or at least ignore the systemic racism that pervades our culture. We reject the idea of institutional racism precisely because we are not consciously engaging in discrimination and therefore do not feel racist. Yet, when we the majority unconsciously create systems in which whites have a favored status and white culture is preferred, we are indeed perpetuating a form of racism. Further, by keeping ourselves ignorant and thus silent about systemic racism, we give it our tacit approval and are passive participants in it. We are racist, even though in our minds and hearts we hold no racial prejudice.

We Southern Baptists are not conscious racists, but that does not mean that we have overcome racism as a denomination. Like the systemic racism in the larger society, our Southern Baptist culture, left alone, prefers whites. Now, I expect a statement that provocative will cause some to balk. After all, we do not intentionally exclude Blacks and other minorities from participation. Yet, collectively, we have maintained a culture and system in SBC life in which whites have a privileged status and only whites have held the highest positions of leadership.

Even though we don’t feel racist, if we accept a culture in which our race is preferred and in charge we are accepting a form of racism. We cannot claim color-blindness until our collective actions match our sentiment. If at this point we select our leaders and say, “I don’t see color,” we may think we are saying something noble.  What we are unconsciously communicating, however, is that it’s ok if we never include African Americans or other non-whites in the highest positions of leadership as long as we don’t have ill will toward them in the process. Everyone is white, but that’s OK, because we don’t see color.

In the end, our color-blindness will not be measured by how we feel about other races or what we say about racism. The true measure will be whether we have demonstrated in our actions what we believe in our hearts. The true gauge of a color-blind denomination will be when blacks and other people of color feel welcome, respected, included, and trusted as equal partners with us.

Color-blindness a worthy pursuit, but it is a pursuit that is premature. We must first pursue a culture in which all races are valued and represented as equal partners. Only then will we have the basis on which to truly move beyond the issue of race. We cannot shortchange that process. We cannot act as though race is no longer an issue.  Our intentions may be honorable, but mere intentions are not good enough. We cannot afford to be color-blind if the end result is the perpetuation of a whites-only reality.

This reality is why I think that the election of black president is a needed step. This is why I think that this first step should be followed by the continued selection of men and women of godly character and competence, of every race, to share in the leadership of our boards and agencies and be included among our entity heads. Until that happens, I will still see race – not because I don’t want to be color-blind, but because godly color-blindness is incompatible with a mono-color reality.

As a pastor, one of the greatest encouragements is to hear the words “I’m praying for you.” Truly, one of the great blessings of being a pastor is knowing that prayers are being lifted up on your behalf. Often, people ask how they can be praying for me. While there are particular needs that I have from time to time, here are some prayers for pastors that are always in season:

Pray that we stay vitally connected to the Lord in our personal devotion. Like everyone else, the tendency is for people is to drift. Pray that we would maintain a constant fellowship with the Lord, day by day, hour by hour, moment by moment.

Pray for our growth. Pray that we will continue to grow spiritually, to grow in wisdom and maturity, to grow in knowledge of the things of God, and most of all to grow in Christ-likeness. Pray that we will never be satisfied with our current state, but will continue to “press on toward the goal.”

Pray that we live and minister in total dependence on the Lord. It would be very easy to attempt to do the work to which God has called us in our own strength. Pray that we would rely on God to work through us as we are obedient to his call. Pray that we would minister in the strength God provides and not attempt to do things on our own.

Pray for godly wisdom as we lead. Pastors need the Lord’s wisdom as they lead in setting the direction of the church, prepare messages and teachings from God’s word, deal with conflict, minister to people in need, lead the church in evangelistic outreach, and serve as administrators of the church. Pastors need the wisdom that only God can provide. Pray that God would give us that wisdom.

Pray that we would be shielded from spiritual attack. Pastors are on the front lines of spiritual warfare. The devil has his eye on pastors to lead them into sin and disobedience to God, keep them discouraged and defeated, and keep them occupied with distractions. Pastors are often under spiritual attack. Pray that the Lord would protect us from the evil one.

Pray for their marriage and families. Ministry can be stressful not only to pastors, but also to their wives and families. Pray that your pastor will make his wife and children a priority as his first ministry. Pray that God will strengthen your pastor’s marriage relationship and protect his family.

There are many ways you can pray for pastors. These are just a few. If you are not a pastor, please know that your prayers for us are important and are used of God on our behalf. Please know also how much we appreciate knowing that you are praying for us. Thank you for continuing to lift up us and our families in prayer.

Recently, Dr. Fred Luter made the much anticipated announcement that he would allow himself to be nominated for president of the Southern Baptist Convention. With this announcement, Luter is poised to become the first African American to head our denomination.

The day Southern Baptists elect our first black SBC president will be an important moment for the history and future of our Convention. The election of an African American president will be a capstone for a series of strong statements of our Convention about our attitude toward race and our understanding of the gospel’s implications for racial diversity. Such a move is the next logical step in our denominations path toward ethnic inclusivism and holds great symbolic importance. Among the previous milestones of this journey, we have expressed our repentance for the sin of racism in an anniversary resolution, our theology concerning race in our statement of faith, our thinking about the practical application of that theology through a series of resolutions, and our purposeful intent to practice these values by adopting a report encouraging ethnic diversity and electing Fred Luter as first vice-president last year. Now, we will take our biggest step so far by the election of an African American to the presidency.

This election is not merely symbolic, however. When one considers the power of the president to effect change and the historical importance of the SBC presidency to shape the future of the Convention and its agencies, the election of an African-American president becomes even more significant. In electing a president, we entrust the direction of our denomination to his leadership. The president is the face of our Convention and has tremendous platform from which to influence our churches and agencies. Further, our polity empowers the president to shape the direction of our Convention through specific appointments. Namely, the president appoints the Committee on Committees that in turn appoints the Committee on Nominations who recommend trustees for our various agencies. In layman’s terms, that means that if the Convention is to see a diversity of leadership in its trustee boards, that process begins with the election of the President. In recent years our presidents have moved toward a more diverse leadership. The election and influence of an African American president combined with the report approved in the 2011 annual meeting should prove to increase that effort exponentially.

To illustrate this influence historically, the Conservative resurgence was won by the election of conservative presidents. The turning point came with the election of Adrian Rogers in 1979. Rogers and the conservative presidents that followed him used their influence and limited but significant power to reshape the Convention and its entities. The change in leadership and direction across our Convention began with the election of the president of the SBC. To elect Fred Luter is to elect another president for whom racial reconciliation matters and diversity in SBC leadership is a priority. Our commitment to racial diversity at every level of the Convention will be achieved in large part by the election of presidents who not only reflect our diversity, but champion diversity through the platform the position affords and the appointment process that is his real power.

This summer, we will have an opportunity as a Convention to make another bold statement of our intent and thinking about race and diversity and take significant action for real change. The election of an African American president, committed to racial reconciliation and ethnic diversity, will be a historic and important moment as we continue together to take the gospel to the world.

On Sunday, during the prayer time at my church (Harvest Baptist in NW Indiana), I shared a report of my participation in the SBC annual meeting and offered prayer for our cooperative missions efforts. Later, I was graciously asked by one of my church members why I talked so much about the SBC and was so loyal to a denomination. Here is my response…

_____

Dear XXXXX,

I love the SBC precisely because of its “community of churches collaboration.” The word “denomination” is an unfortunate label that does not accurately describe Harvest’s relationship with the SBC. Rather, we voluntarily associate for cooperative kingdom work — work that we could not do as a single church. We choose how much and to what extent we want to
partner. The Convention holds zero authority over us and is not “top down” in its hierarchy. The SBC is extremely church-centric. We are free to affiliate outside the SBC and do. I certainly do not hold up being Southern Baptist on par with being a Christian. Still, I think churches should work together and thus we choose to do so. Who better to partner with than to be
part of a group that we share theological and missional identity in common?

My first loyalty is to Christ and then to my local church. I (we) choose to be SBC because I truly believe it is the most effective way for Harvest to partner in Great Commission work on a global scale and with those whom we have theological and gospel agreement. On a personal note, I will continue to be loyal to my SBC family because of the personal investment they have made in me through subsidizing my education, supporting me financially as a missionary, and personal mentoring by fellow pastors and leaders. Many of my closest friends are pastors of sister churches and with whom I have worked
side by side in evangelism and missions work. To cease to be SBC would be like leaving my family — and I am not alone in this sentiment.

In any case, as long as we are giving 10+% of our offerings to the Cooperative Program, I feel like it is important from time to time to report on where that money is going and what decisions are being made — I hope to have many more opportunities to hear from our missionaries. However, let me know if I am being unclear on what our SBC affiliation does and does not
mean. We are here to exalt Jesus and are only SBC to that end. If our partnership with Southern Baptists does not lead to the furtherance of our mission — to glorify God and make His Son known throughout the world to this generation — then I will make the motion myself to leave the SBC. As of now and for the foreseeable future, however, I believe that our involvement in Southern Baptist life does indeed help us to fulfill our mission.

Blessings,
Pastor Todd