A SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION PASTOR’S PRESENCE AMONG PREACHERS OF LA
One Size Does Not Fit All
BY WM. DWIGHT MCKISSIC, SR.
Materialistic; Immoral; Egotistical; Prosperity Preachers; Pulpit Pimps, Soft on Homosexuality; and Celebrity Seekers; are among some of the nicer descriptions tossed about relative to the “Preachers of LA.”
The debut telecast had one million viewers—the second highest ranked cable TV show that aired on that Wednesday evening—which is historically a church mid-week worship night. With an audience of that magnitude, church goers and non-churchgoers were watching.
Many are asking the question: “Will this show be a boom or bust for the Church?” It is generally believed that this show will do a lot more harm than good for the Church universally and locally. But God has been known to flip the script (Gen. 50:20).
The family life, financial life, and spiritual fitness readiness of pastors at mega-churches are under the scope in this TV reality show. The mere fact that this show exists says something about the influence of the Black Church in the Black Community. The Black Church has often been called the most important social institution in the Black Community. Because the plethora of Black mega churches that exists today is unprecedented and is a phenomenon of modern history (the past 30-40 years)—this show is a wake-up call to the fact that today’s church is not our grandfather’s church. The state of the Black Church is a matter of concern for many of us who love it. This show is simply revealing some of our challenges, weaknesses, failures, and strengths. Hopefully, as this show forces us to evaluate today’s church, it will also lead to reform and renewal in today’s church.
There are six preachers featured in this “reality” show that primarily centers around Black preachers and the Black Church. I’ve never met Noel Jones, Ron Gibson, Deitrick Haddon, and Jay Haizlip —the only Anglo preacher featured. I briefly met Clarence McClendon twenty plus years ago. We simply exchanged names, greetings, and well wishes. There has been no follow-up communication between the two of us.
There is one of the six LA Preachers that I know quite well and consider him a close friend. He gets the least attention among the six—which is good. God is keeping him covered, so that really soon, he will be discovered.
Although, Pastor Wayne Chaney is getting the least amount of attention at the moment, he will emerge from the pack as a leader of monumental significance that will impact our nation and this world for God’s Kingdom in a mighty way. He will also constructively and redemptively address the pathos in the Black community and will be a major force in the revitalization and renewal of the African American Church.
My purpose for writing this post is not to condone or condemn the other five preachers. As I’ve already stated, I don’t know them. But I am here to write in support and defense of Pastor Wayne Chaney of the Antioch Church—a Southern Baptist Convention affiliated church in Long Beach, California. I know for certain, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Pastor Chaney does not fit any of the adjectives that introduced this Post. Thankfully, thus far, he has not been portrayed or depicted in the trailers or first episode as being materialistic, immoral, egotistical, or in any compromising manner. Pastor Chaney simply does not fit the negative and ungodly descriptions that many are labeling the “LA6” with—ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL.
Here is what I know for certain about Pastor Chaney. I met him on the campus of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in 2006, in a meeting with fellow Black Southern Baptist Pastors. Black SBC denominational employees had spoken highly of Pastor Chaney as a young man with great moral character and pastoring a fast growing dynamic SBC Church in the LA area. Upon meeting him I discovered that he was the grandson of two well-known highly regarded Black Pastors. His paternal and maternal grandfathers are highly acclaimed figures in the Black Baptist preaching community. I had recently been involved in a theological controversy on the campus of SWBTS and consequently I anticipated some level of aloofness from some of the pastors in attendance; but not Pastor Chaney. He affirmed and embraced me and expressed a heartfelt identification with my controversial theological viewpoint; at that moment, a friendship was born.
At the time I met Pastor Chaney, I was praying about whom to invite to preach a revival meeting on the subject of tabernacle worship at our church. Specifically, that was to be the focus of the revival preaching at this meeting. Very few preachers are equipped to address that subject. As I sat at lunch visiting with Pastor Chaney, I felt prompted to ask him if he’d ever studied and preached on Tabernacle Worship. Not only did he respond with a “Yes”! I could tell from the ensuing conversation that he was well versed on that subject. Therefore, I invited him to preach our New Year’s Revival in 2007. His preaching on tabernacle worship was classic. He has become one of the favorite guest preachers at Cornerstone. He has preached at our church approximately 12-15 times. Every message has been solid, scriptural and relevant. Not once have I heard him preach a “prosperity gospel message.”
Pastor Chaney and twelve other Black preachers spent a week with twelve White preachers in a week-long meeting on a mountain resort in Asheville, North Carolina, with the well-known SBC preacher and best-selling Broadman Press author—Jack Taylor. We were mentored by Jack Taylor concerning the Kingdom of God. I had five days of uninterrupted fellowship with Pastor Chaney. I can truly testify that he is a genuine man who is hungry for God and one who leads a life of integrity.
Pastor Chaney’s doctrine is sound. His life is unspotted. His family is intact; He is madly in love with his talented, gifted, and precious wife who has also ministered in song at our church; his church is exploding with growth—qualitatively and quantitatively. His spiritual maturity is evident in his preaching and living.
Given the magnitude of his ministry, visitors to his home have been impressed with the modesty of his house. It is not uncommon for pastors, who pastor much larger than average churches, to live in much larger than average homes; but not Pastor Chaney—at least not at this point. Therefore, it is shameful that Pastor Chaney is being judged because of the portrayal and descriptions that are being pinned on others. Regarding Pastor Chaney—One Size Does Not Fit All.
Pastor Chaney is the only Baptist pastor among these six pastors. He needs to be celebrated, not condemned, because thus far, and I believe it will continue—he is being depicted in a positive light. Wayne Chaney probably pastors the second largest SBC California church behind Rick Warren’s Saddleback.
I don’t bemoan or begrudge the kind of house, car, clothes, or any other material item that any believer or pastor has acquired through honest means. I have been privileged to be the guest for lunch at the President’s home at SEBTS and SWBTS while Dr. Patterson was/is President. I have watched Dr. Patterson being chauffeured in a luxury car that he owns. I’m told that Dr. Mohler’s current house was once the Music Building at Southern that was retrofitted/renovated to be the President’s home. Seminary Presidents and SBC pastors of large churches generally receive generous salaries and I know for certain SBC seminary presidents live in large palatial homes. I really don’t understand why Hollywood is placing the spotlight on the material attainments of those pastors of LA. This could as easily be said or shown of prominent SBC personalities. I celebrate the huge, palatial home and the luxury vehicle driven by Dr. Patterson; but none of that qualifies him to be a prosperity preacher. Neither does that make Pastor Wayne Chaney a prosperity preacher because he may drive a nice car and wear nice clothes.
If I had a regret, it would be that the pastors are allowing themselves to be exploited by the focus being placed on their material attainments. But, thank God, this has not been shown to be the case with Pastor Chaney. He simply does not fit the labels that the critics of this show have hurled.
Pastor Wayne Chaney is not materialistic, immoral, egotistical, a prosperity preacher, a celebrity seeker, or soft on homosexuality. One must be careful about generalizing regarding either one of those six preachers. That tactic is called guilt by association. Christians should avoid engaging in that activity. These scandalous accusations should not be hurled against Pastor Chaney unless you know for certain that they are true.
Pastor Chaney expressed a passion to take the gospel outside of the four walls of the church when I first met him seven years ago. God has answered his prayer and has created an opportunity for him to impact Hollywood and the world with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Let the critics—criticize. But I believe that this will truly be a case when all things working together for the good of them that love the Lord, because Wayne Chaney really, really, loves the Lord!!!!
I believe God is using and will continue to use Wayne Chaney inside and outside of Hollywood to impact His Kingdom for the Glory of God! And, therefore, I appreciatively applaud Pastor Wayne Chaney’s presence among the LA preachers. He will be a voice of righteousness, reason and Kingdom influence.
Will be praying for Bro. Chaney and those watching the program. May God’s flower blossom for His glory and result in the redemption of many.
May his tribe increase across our land.
Dr. Tribble,
Thanks. Your prayers & type of comment is what Pastor Chaney needs from the body of Christ at this hour. He is deeply convicted that Christians must have a presence in all influential spheres if society–media being one of them–in order to infiltrate & influence society with the gospel if the Kingdom of God.
Not that I have a specific purpose in agreeing or disagreeing with your point about the size of Antioch Church, Thom Ranier posted a list in January that included Antioch Church. It’s truly a minor note that Antioch isn’t the second largest but is one of the largest SBC-affiliated churches in California and I wouldn’t be surprised if it is the largest Black SBC-affiliated church. I was going to research that, but I don’t have the time yet.
I will articulate a bit of fascination that I hope plays out as this series progresses: if we are to be salt and light, then we should with prayer engage these kinds of opportunities in the media. I’m delighted you brought this to our attention. And I’ll express a SECOND delight: that among a group of pastors chosen for the purpose of “entertainment” there seems to be at least one who serves a purpose beyond entertainment in the list.
I pray that the Lord of the Harvest will bless this appearance and cause it to draw new followers to Jesus Christ and that the Lord of the Harvest will enrich Antioch with fresh and continuing portions of morning and evening dew so that those followers might grow in their field and be ready for the harvest.
Hi Pastor McKissic,
I do believe that any shepherd openly living in luxury, although he may be an excellent Christian person, may have some problem witnessing to Our Risen Lord.
Wade Burleson quoted this passage in one of his comments on his blog:
‘Peter said to the lame man,
“Silver and gold have I none, but that which I have give I to you.
In the name of Jesus Christ, rise up and walk.”‘
I suppose wealth sends a message to those who see it . . . one of accomplishment and power . . . but in St. Peter’s day, it was another kind of Power that witnessed to Christ.
What happened to St. Peter? The Church has held that he was martyred in Rome, and was ordered to be crucified. Upon hearing this, the humble man said that he was not worthy to die in the same many as his Lord, and asked to be crucified upside-down. And so the Church has told the story of a shepherd who honored his Lord even in the manner of his martyrdom. This, of course, is a traditional story. But the bones of a skeleton found beneath the Vatican in the catacombs in a niche marked ‘Peter is here’, those bones had the feet chopped off . . . as the Romans would have done, taking a man down from a cross who was crucified upside-down.
‘What I have, I give to you . . . ‘ perhaps we need to re-examine the role of shepherds and the ONLY real Power they have to give to the faithful
. . . thank you for your post.
Greg,
Thanks. I didn’t stop to research the rank of Pastor Chaney’s church, therefore I qualified my statement with “probably” it was the second largest California SBC church, behind Rick Warren’s Saddleback. Glad you did the research & I stand corrected. Your insights and comments were on point. Thanks again.
Mark,
You are saying because some of the other preachers may preach prosperity, then it is an acceptable assumption that Pastor Chaney does. He must be viewed individually, not by the other persons on the show. That was the whole point of my post: One Size Does Not Fit All
Sorry, that’s not what I said.
Mark,
I’m not trying to be argumentative but you most certainly insinuated guilt by association in your comment which is precisely what Dr. McKissic was addressing in his article.
I think what Mark meant, not that it was acceptable to reach that conclusion but that it was understandable.
Bill Mac,
It is not understandable, inasmuch as the name of the show is “Preachers of LA” not “Prosperity Preachers of LA,” ….then there is no basis for Mark’s comment being understandable.
Dwight,
We have to consider context here. There are a few shows called “Real Housewives of …………” The shows are not called “The real vapid, shallow, and immoral housewives of ………..” but that is what everyone knows it to be.
If you see a barrel labeled “Apples”, and when you look inside it looks like they are all rotten, it would be understandable if you were to think they were all rotten, even if there some good ones hidden away. If the bad apples on this show get the most air time, it will be understandable if your friend gets unjustly lumped in with them. I hope it doesn’t happen but it won’t be surprising.
Bill Mac is exactly right and I appreciate him trying to understand my comment instead of seemingly taking it in the worst possible light which two pastors have done.
It is almost not worth following up….
A doctrine of separation can be built from Scripture whether though everyone may not agree that such a doctrine should be applied to Preachers of LA. Therefore, it should be understandable that some might lump Chaney in with the other preachers, especially, if the theology of the other preachers line up with each other.
The show is on TV and many unbelievers may watch. Even the unbelieving world holds to positions such as “birds of a feather flock together.” They may not have enough discernment differentiate between the LA preachers.
Just imagine if I were on a TV show of German American Christians because of my strong German heritage. Then, imagine that the other five on the show were part of some German Nazi “church” and held to racist doctrines. It would be understandable that viewers would lump me in with the other racists. Of course, I would not participate in such a show. And if the racist beliefs some how got past me, I would quit immediately and would make public statements that I am not one of them.
Bill Mac & Mark,
Generalizing & profiling have led to many problems in the history of our nation. I don’t think believers should engage in profiling & guilt by association. I am surprised that the two of you are in support of these practices.
If there were five SBC preachers featured on a show, I would hope that I would not label all of them Republicans, Cessationist, Hyper-Complementarians, or Anti-Affirmative Action simply because they are in a picture or line-up together.
Dwight: You are missing our point. We are not in support of profiling. All we are saying is that we understand it.
Per your example, if there were a show with 5 SBC preachers, all of them might not be Republicans, but I could understand how someone might reach that conclusion. Understanding is not approving.
Rainer’s list show Antioch to be the 399th largest SBC church ranking 21st out of 25th in size for California SBC churches.
Can you blame people for questioning whether or not Pastor Chaney is a prosperity and/or word-faith preacher because of his affiliations on the show?
Chaney should’ve been reminded of 1 Cor. 15:33. To put himself in such a negative light regardless of motive isn’t wise at all (Rom. 14:16). If these two principles were implemented, his name wouldn’t be identified as one of the false teachers of PLA.
Saikowoods,
I have committed the cardinal sin of dropping this post, while in Hawaii celebrating my 37th wedding anniversary. Therefore, my commenting time is very limited. Your comment deserves a much longer response; almost an entire post. Suffice it to say though, if Christians aren’t allowed to spend time in the presence of those that we may not totally agree with, or if we can’t use the media to represent the Kingdom of God, how then do we carry out the mission of Jesus, outside of the four walls? We must be in the world, but not of the world. My whole point is that Pastor Chaney is not a materialist, immoral, a prosperity preacher, celebrity seeker…nor does he fit any of the labels that are being tossed about relative to these preachers. Why then can’t he represent a Kingdom worldview & lifestyle on this show? The Scriptures that you referenced don’t prohibit that if his motives are pure.
A little more precisely: Antioch is 21st out of 25th among California churches listed in the 586 churches with self-reported worship attendance of 1,000 or more. There are many, many, many more California churches that didn’t make the list. 😉 My curiosity was where Antioch stood with relationship to a church I’m familiar with–Immanuel, Highland–which is why I dug up the list. I still feel that Antioch being on that list of 586 1,000+ in worship attendance fell neatly into Dwight’s intent to illustrate that Antioch is a congregation of a noteworthy size in California.
I’d add a thought that Rob Zinn (the pastor of Immanuel, Highland, CA as well as a former chairman of the Executive Board) often has made from the pulpit–and even from the lectern at the Annual Meeting form time to time–California churches live within the culture that sets the trends–often via movies and television–for the nation. Understanding where that culture is heading is a critical aspect of modern discipleship and having representatives of our faith depicted in television shows like this–even if it isn’t our favorite depiction–is helpful.
We must engage culture in order to be salt and light. We can’t run or hide from it.
What preacher would spend this kind of time defending another man’s decision for coming on a “Reality TV” Show. Its a show. What is the real motive here, Chaney can speak for himself and obviously he has. Just like the rest of these selfish ambition preachers looking for “bigger” platforms to be seen. Looks like McKissic is either posturing for a Preachers of Texas or Chaney got him on pay roll. This is a waste of time.
Shaun,
Your comment makes me angry. Angry at you and angry at others who have not risen to defend Dr. McKissic. Your comment is a ridiculous accusation against a great man. It’s one thing to disagree with his article it’s quite another to try to judge Dr. McKissic’s heart and call his motivations into question. Dwight is a man of integrity who has been faithfully serving the same congregation that he founded for many years, no jockeying for position and no climbing the career ladder. Also, as a suggestion the next time you make such an asinine remark please at least be a man and give your whole name. It makes me want to question your motivations. 😉
“Looks like McKissic is either posturing for a Preachers of Texas or Chaney got him on pay roll.”
Shaun,
That is a bare-faced lie. Dwight McKissic does not posture. Dwight McKissic is not a man who can be bought.
Shaun, you should stand down on that statement and ask Dwight for his forgiveness.
I approved Shaun’s comment without really thinking. I wish I had not. But this kind of comment is usually a drive-by and the person never comes back or takes accountability for their comments.
I wish I had not posted it, but for now, will leave it up. Best to just ignore it.
However, Shaun, future comments of this kind will get you placed in moderation.
Thanks for the affirmation for Pastor Chaney. However, unless he will be the main pastor being depicted on this show, which it appears he may not, I’m interested to know why he even agreed to do the show? Unless Pastor Chaney is depicted in every scene as the one refuting/defending the heresy and WOF teaching of the other pastors, then I would suggest that he finds a better outlet to do ministry.
Ms. Gee,
Pastor’s Chaney’s goal is to be the yeast that infiltrates the dough for the advancement of the Kingdom. That is a biblical goal, in keeping with the parable of the leaven/yeast. Pray that Hod use him toward this end.
To turn this conversation, and to perhaps be a bit of a self-righteous jerk at the same time, allow me a question:
Are we honestly debating a show that is only available on paid-for TV and critiquing whether or not a person on it preaches prosperity?
Let’s assume that between Southern Baptists who watch Preachers of LA and Southern Baptists who watch Duck Dynasty, both pay-only shows, there’s 2 million of us Southern Baptists that are paying for cable or satellite. Assuming also that we all have great deals and are paying $25 a month in fees for that service.
Now, let’s do math. 2 million people spending $25 a month = $50 million a month. $50 million a month= $600 million a year.
How short was IMB in funding last year?
And we have the nerve to criticize someone else’s “Prosperity” teaching while we spend on luxury items? While we also criticize other people’s giving, commitment, or support of spreading the Gospel?
Who is living the prosperity instead of the Gospel, really?
The problem is not with *any* preacher on Preachers of LA. The problem is right here in our pulpits and pews.
$600 million. Based on the Lottie Moon material, it takes approx $51,000 to support one IMB missionary for a year.
That’s 11,764 missionaries. So that we can watch what, again?
Dust and ashes here…
You are so right, I shoulda never started calling my TV “Bentley” and my DVD player “my other mercedes”. lol
I think an internet subscription costs around $25 bucks also. May be a better starting point.
Doug,
This would fall into the top three comments that I’ve ever read on a blog. You have wisdom & insight beyond your years. Thanks for elevating this discussion to a another level & perspective.
I agree.
“I really don’t understand why Hollywood is placing the spotlight on the material attainments of those pastors of LA.”
I do. It’s anti-Christian propaganda. The oversimplified message is that there are basically two kinds of people: rich, conservative, Republican, Christian, businessmen, homophobic, polluting, sons of slave owners who want to oppress the rest of the people who are poor, liberal, Democrat, loving, oppressed (in one way or another) people who deserve better than they are getting. Nevermind that it isn’t realistic. As long as enough people intuit some aspect of this enough to think that they are one of the oppressed, then they can be led to help accomplish political ends.
Anti-Christian propaganda? Anti-Christian propaganda. Anti-Christian propaganda!!
Say it so, little Joe!
Biblical Christians on one side. And loving liberal Democrats on the other side?
Egads! What say thee, the mass of deep-thinking celluloid high-information voters and viewers of real life?
What!? You picked the loving liberal Democrats too? Why, who wouldn’t!
Keep up the intensity, Media Boys and Girls!! Let’s get more Biblical Christians to switch sides and denounce their former oppressors such as Jimbo Pembo!!
Perhaps I can debate the subject since I don’t have paid-TV. Well, we spent $40 for a box to make our antenna continue to work. I believe we get all of 5 channels! On the other hand if I didn’t pay a monthly internet fee I wouldn’t even know about this show.
When I first heard about Preachers of L.A. back in August, I thought it was a bad idea (another reality show alone is a bad idea, imo). The first thing that went through my mind was that Oxygen plans to make money and stereotype preachers. I still think that probably is their agenda. I can imagine more harm than good coming from this. But I am glad to read Dwight’s recommendation of the work of Pastor Chaney, who is on the show. With Paul I hope to say that if the gospel is preached — whether in the pulpit or ‘Preachers of LA’, “I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.”
Well, well, TD Jakes comes about against the L A Preachers, and Wayne Chaney says it will be redemptive and he calls the other ‘preachers’ men of God.
What is redemptive about a the shameful behaviors of these yelling God wants us all to be prosperous?
Where is Chaney’s discernment?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9vULDBeoWo
Just a quick question for you “Preachers of SBC Voices”…
How many of you have wives that are referred to as “First Lady” by your congregation?
Adam G.,
It’s a Black Church thing. In most Black Churches that I am familiar with the pastor’s wife is referred to as the First Lady. It is usually not an official title, but is commonly used. In traditional Black churches the pastor nor his wife are usually referred to by their first names. I kindly advise my Anglo preacher friends who call me Dwight, to refer to me as Pastor or Rev. while speaking of me in my pulpit. Why? If they call me Dwight from the pulpit it would be viewed by many, if not most in my congregation as disrespectful.
I was very surprised to discover that many SBC pastors are called by their first names by their congregants–even the youth & children. That would never happen in most Black churches.
I see. I too think we can be a bit too informal at times. I live in an area that still tends to call the pastor “Preacher” and his wife “Ms.”…but you’ll also find a bunch of “Apostles”, and “Prophets” and “Archbishops” around here too.