UPDATE from Baptist Press Article. Church now says they did not fire the pastor because of racism. They said it was because of the message he preached on racism and the way he preached it. See link here. See below after the original article for the full BP article.
Original Article:
This morning, I was alerted to a story that seemed to belong to another era – but sadly it happened yesterday. A young pastor in a small Southern Baptist church in small town Alabama tries to lead his church to do outreach and invite children from the community to their upcoming VBS. The church is all white and the surrounding community is mostly black. Opposition arises from church members and they tell him that they do not want to reach out to black people and invite them to church. He persists and says the gospel of Jesus Christ demands it. They tell him that if he keeps going with this, then he will be removed. He says that he will take his appeal to the church and on the next Sunday, he preaches boldly against racism and calls the church to repentance. A vote is scheduled on the future of the pastor and he is voted to be removed immediately by a unanimous vote last night. As of today, he has no job.
I spoke with this pastor, Jonathan Greer, today for about a half hour. I asked him if there was anything else that happened. Did they give another reason? Even a public reason? He said no. They told him nothing. [Edit: In the news story released, the deacon says that Jonathan did not engage in enough visitation and did not work with the deacons]. He said that the problem was that they didn’t want black people to come to their church. A variety of reasons were listed, but they were all related to negative things happening if black people started coming. The church is in Alabama. It is a small church numbers-wise – around 30 people or so.
Jonathan Greer is a young pastor. But, he has a backbone made of steel and a love for Christ and a heart for the gospel and for all people. We need more pastors like him. He didn’t back down. Lots of people talk a good game about loving people of all races/ethnicities until their jobs are on the line. Then, they grow silent. Jonathan got louder. Even though the church was small, he was full-time there because they had people who could support him. He doesn’t have a job to go to or the means to support his family, and even though his job was threatened he did not bow the knee. He is trusting in God. I’d follow a guy who can stare straight into the threat of being fired for taking a strong stand and then stand firm anyway out of love for the Lord and people and a desire to be faithful to Christ. We need pastors like Jonathan Greer who will not back down but will continue to call the church to faithfulness, sacrifice, and engagement with their community for the sake of the gospel. Someone call this brother and give him a ministry job. The church-at-large needs him.
If you would like to donate to Jonathan for his support, you can give to Community Development Initiatives and I will make sure that he gets 100% of the funds. Just note that you are giving to Jonathan Greer.
Jonathan did not want this story to go public. He did not want to be named or to have the church named. When we talked earlier, we left it at that and I told him I would honor his wishes. It is his story, not mine. But, later, he called back and told me that a local TV station had the news story and they were coming to his home to interview him. He told me that the story was out there already so we might as well tell it. Only then did he agree to have his name mentioned. He didn’t disparage anyone or try to make himself look like a hero. He was pretty nervous after the news station contacted him. As far as I can tell, this was a young, small church pastor trying to be faithful to Christ and lead his church to love his community. He did not seek this situation. But, I told him that God knew that this day would come and prepared him to be a witness to Him at this time. I am challenged by Jonathan and have to ask myself and readers here: “What is God preparing you for? Where will you stand? Will you stand?”
There are always two sides to every story, of course. The news story says that the deacon said that Jonathan did not visit church members enough, he did not work well with the deacon, it wasn’t about race, and that is why they immediately fired him with a 31-0 vote with no severance. I called the reporter at the station who ran the story, Tom Williams at WTOK, and I talked to him about this. He was very forthcoming with me. You can compare the stories and decide for yourself.
NOTE: I reserve the right to update this post if/when more information comes in. I’ll mark the edit.
BUTLER, Ala. (BP) — A former Alabama pastor and the rural congregation that terminated him last Sunday (July 31) have offered varying reports to media outlets regarding the role racism played in the 31-0 vote to dismiss him.
Mt. Sterling Baptist Church in Butler, Ala., was the subject of news stories by WTOK television in nearby Meridian, Miss., the AL.com news website and other media outlets when it fired pastor Jonathan Greer, 26, over what Greer described as “pushback” against his intention to invite black children to Vacation Bible School.
Mt. Sterling member Norma Wimberley told Baptist Press the church “is not racist” and terminated Greer in large part because of a sermon marked by “anger and hate” in which he seemed to misclassify the congregation as racist. Terry Long, director of missions for the Choctaw Baptist Association, with which Mt. Sterling cooperates, told BP racism “probably” played “the most significant role” of any factor in Greer’s termination but other factors came into play as well.
An Aug. 1 post about Greer and Mt. Sterling on the SBC Voices blog received 6,500 likes in support of the pastor on Facebook during the first two days it was online.
Greer, who pastored Mt. Sterling a year and a half, told BP one of the church’s deacons informed him approximately two weeks ago the congregation “was in an uproar” over his plan to invite black children to VBS and suggested the pastor might need to resign. According to Greer’s account, he would not compromise and deacons told him the “core” of the church believed he should leave. They did not specify a number of people who allegedly held that belief or name them.
Greer preached on racism the following Sunday and a vote on his termination was scheduled for the subsequent week, in keeping with the church’s bylaws. Greer later apologized publically and privately for broadly classifying the congregation as racist in his sermon.
“I didn’t realize that there were more people in the church … that were okay with people [of all races] coming,” Greer said. “And in my sermon, I didn’t account for that. I kind of lumped everyone together.”
At least four people who voted to terminate Greer have said they are open to black people attending church events, Greer stated. Seven or eight members, he alleged, said they voted for termination explicitly because he wanted to invite black children to VBS.
Deacon Freddie Moore told WTOK the pastor was terminated for not working with the deacons and not visiting church members.
Wimberley, who has been a Mt. Sterling member 20 years, said the church has received expressions of “hate” since Sunday and that the termination was not about racism. The congregation long has had a black member, she said, though that member currently lives out of town and was not present for the vote.
“Our church is not racist,” Wimberley said. “We invite anyone that comes into our door to join us at any time. We welcome them. We ask them to be members.”
Greer “misunderstood what the deacons said or just didn’t listen,” Wimberley said. She was not present for his sermon on racism because of a memorial event for her late husband but later listened to a recording of it and cited the sermon when asked the reason for Greer’s termination.
“If you heard Jonathan’s sermon the Sunday before his dismissal,” Wimberley said, “it was not a sermon of love. It was a sermon of anger and hate.”
Long, the DOM, said Greer’s sermon “was biblically truthful and accurate” but added the pastor “came out swinging.”
“At the beginning of his sermon, it seemed a little overbearing to me and a little harsh,” Long said, “but he softened midway through the sermon and just got into the Scripture and basically told them what the Scripture said. And then he called them to repentance.”
In terminating Greer, the church “made a bad decision, in my opinion,” Long said. “Nothing that the pastor did was worthy of dismissal. He’s a young pastor in his first church. As with all of us, mistakes [were] made — when you’re young especially.”
Still, Long said, “he stood valiantly for the truth. He would not compromise and deserves our admiration and encouragement and praise for that.”
At the same time, Mt. Sterling should not be disfellowshiped from the association, Long said.
“Mt. Sterling Baptist Church, like every church, has people that are committed to Jesus Christ and the Gospel at different levels,” Long said. “It is a mistake to believe that every member of this church is racist. It is a mistake to believe that this church has any kind of printed or stated policy that excludes anyone … They have a documented history of having fellowship with other races.”
Greer, who says he has received expressions of support from as far away as California and London, plans to take a brief vacation with family then look for another pastorate.
_____________________________
My take:
If you outline the story that BP told, you can probably take what you want from it and make your case. The purpose of me posting this after I heard that the media already had the story and they were running with it was to point out that a pastor stood for what was right instead of it just being about a “racist Baptist church in Alabama.” There actually are pastors trying to do the right thing, even when opposed. When I heard that he was fired with no severance at all, I knew he needed to be helped.
I cannot picture anyone getting fired in such a manner for the reason of failing to visit church members.
I can’t either Jennifer. I’m sure it was because he wanted to reach out to and invite blacks to their church. It’s sad that he lost his job because he stood firm on the gospel. Jesus died for EVERYONE, not just one particular race!!
In just about every situation of firing a pastor I have seen, the issue of pastoral care is cited by those who wish to fire the pastor. It is a smoke screen for deeper issues, as is apparently the case here as well.
agreed
Absolutely. I have experienced this smoke screen. It is amazing how deceitful church leaders can be. I think I know why the church mentioned in this article is so small.
Unfortunately, pastors do get fired for not visiting church members. In small churches that’s one of the expectations. Many of these pastors are bi-vocational. I’ve been home bound for 11 years and not one pastor has visited from the church. Some pastors are administrators, some are actual preachers (not teachers), some are just teachers, some are mission minded, and some are evangelistic. I’m thankful for the great godly men I grew up under that did it all with a very large congregation. Rev Ed Cooglar, Dr (Papa) Sam Cathey, Dr Danny Watters and Dr Wayne Hamrick. These me were like my fathers and in the last 2 years they’ve all gone home to be with The Lord. I’m thankful we still have Dr Bob White at State and Wayne & Beth Robinson serving at Morningside. I wish they were closer.
I do understand the heart of the young pastor and he may be a better evangelist and soul winner than a shepherd of a small flock. We all have different gifts. You have to exercise the ones you’re not as proficient in.
I’m sure his 30 members are all over the age of 50 and their church has been their whole life. Maybe through generations. They don’t want to have to go look for another church at their age. Right now, the media thrives on division among Races so they’ll exploit that.
I know what’s like when the neighborhood changes around you. It happened at my home church. The membership did change and over half our membership left and went to the mega church down the road. My home church is coming back to life again but it took years and now it’s multicultural. More so than the mega church down the road. Pastors are there to shepherd the flock. Unfortunately, too many seminaries teach more on growing the offering plate and church attendance as a business with marketing classes. What would The Lord think? We all remember what Jesus did to those exchanging money for goods and services in the Temple. He tore the place up with his anger saying “My House should be called a House of Prayer.” Lift the cross high and let the Spirit will draw the people. That’s what Jesus promised. Do we trust him or a marketing firm? Shepard the flock.
Alicia, That was well written and not at all inaccurate. Scripture commands the shepherding of the flock. However, we tend to judge based on personal standards, rather than Biblical. There are many cases of mis-sheparding for sure. I only write because we just finished looking at this in my church. The day of pentecost 3000 people were baptized and added to the church (read mega church) and that number continued to grow dramatically. Here is my question: How did the apostles shepherd the flock of multiple thousands that were multiplying rapidly? Would todays standard of expectation (for most SBC church members) be met if were in that first church in Acts? Just food for thought;)
Randall, just lets take in consideration that the 3000 came to Jerusalem from many places (pilgrimage) and many of them when back spreading and sharing the Gospel and also the meetings of the church were in homes. So basically, no mega church here 😉
Randall has a good question. The deacons at this church do not seem to understand that the job of a deacon is to serve – esp. widows and orphans. This is like deja vu to 1989 when something very similar happened to us – and the first indication was a complaint about welcoming black visitors into our church. There must be many small, Baptist churches in the south that still are “run” by racist families.
Another issue, hinted at earlier, is that small rural, SBC churches can only afford Bi-vocational pastors. That is what I was, a bi-vocational pastor – the reality is that he may earn bi-vo pay, but the church still has full-time expectations. Preaching/Teaching better be “up to par”, Administration is expected to be flawless, Pastoral/Counselling ministry must be accommodating to the 24/7 needs of the church. He better have a model Family, marriage and kids. These expectations is the reality of many small church pastors. In one church I served, I had to make a decision: Do I pay my phone bill, or do I take my two year old to the doctor because of an ear infection. By the way, I was fired because I wanted to minister to Hispanics at my church in West Texas. Officially, I was not discharging my pastoral duties as “expected”,
I can tell you this is very common in rural areas. It is sad, but very true. I have been in ministry since the early 70’s. Within the last 12 months I was told that the people knew blacks had souls BUT, they did NOT accept them in THEIR church. It is almost always a family run church in a rural area. It will almost always have older people who are far more interested in tradition and prefer to follow the BY LAWS and CONSTITUTION that maw and paw put together rather than the Bible. They wlll always have a handful of people, that will be there until they die off and the doors are shut. As a matter of fact, seeing the doors shut, except in very rare circumstances, is the best thing that can happen. Proud of the Pastor. God knows he will stand, and if he will remain faithful and humble, God will send him to a church where he will see the holy spirit move and lives change and people come to worship and serve.
God Bless
I am from Alabama. My pastor, at a first baptist in a county seat town told me that were he to invite a missionary to come, and he brought with him an African who had accepted Christ, people in the church would fall all over him; but if he invited an African American from the “otherside of town” to come, they would fall all over themselves to fire him. When I was there in the early 1980s, attendance was 400 more or less. I visited there a couple of years ago, and there was still not a black face to be seen, but attendance was down to about 200.
The first church I served was in a rural area of northeast North Carolina. The first time I met with the pulpit committee, I said something about outreach; they replied, “Well, every white family close to here is either a member here or at the Methodist church down the road. And the black ones . . . well, they have their own churches.” I found out later one pastor had been fired for inviting African American children to VBS.
I met with a pulpit committee in Norfolk, VA about 12 years ago. They were an all-white church in an area that had transitioned to African American. After the weekend with them, they called me back and said they wanted to continue our conversation. I told them that my recommendation was for them to call co-pastors: either a retired or a bi-vocational white pastor who would minister to the elderly and declining congregation, and a younger past-time African American pastor who would appeal to the demographic. They informed me that “We are that desperate!”
Racism is alive and well, regardless of what excuses a church may give.
The scriptures are clear that all are created in the image of God without regard to race. I know that there are still cases of racism. However, it concerns me a bit hearing only one side of the story. As Christians, we are called to become involved in certain circumstances. I am not sure that this is the right time or venue until more of the details are sorted out. I say this with respect to both parties. If it were me, or my church, I would want a chance to be heard and not have my case tried in the media.
Matthew 18 tells us that if someone has sinned against us, to go to them. If they will not listen, take two or three that the facts may be established. (This would be the time I might ask a sister church to become involved). Then it says to take it before the church. (If the church is at fault and it is unanimous, they will not listen). If there is still no repentance, we are to hand them over to the devil and break fellowship. I wonder if the young pastor has taken others as witnesses to reach out if he feels he was wronged.
In all fairness, not enough details and only one side of the story.
Seriously?
Absolutely. If this were your church and you were in fact NOT guilty (not saying they aren’t), wouldn’t you like this to be handled in a manner that does not muddy your name in vain? Look, I don’t know anyone involved. But, what I do know is that there had better be proof from at least two or more people to start casting stone at a deacon or pastor. The scripture requires it.
If I attended this church and were not racist, I would not want to be lumped together. Perhaps, and I am not saying this is the case, there were other circumstances. I don’t know. But it sounds like no one else does either. Until we are fully acquainted with both sides of the story, I don’t think we should rush to judgement.
This is not the Christ-like way to handle a conflict. We must resist the temptation to jump in feet first.
Now, if you have talked with the church and its members/leadership and mediated this situation in intimate detail, by all means, if they are unwilling to repent after having been found guilty, start the flogging…
31-0 they voted to fire a pastor because he wanted to invite black children to VBS.
You want to defend that?
Dave, How do you know for sure that their vote was to fire him for voting to invite black children to VBS? What proof has been given? If I were innocent, but someone came out and accused me or wrong, I would shudder to think you might jump on their bandwagon. The bible is clear. We cannot rush to judgement, especially when judging the actions of elders and deacons. This isn’t my opinion, it is God’s word.
There could be some other facts involved. I am not saying the church is right on this, but maybe a couple of deacons of deacons did want to keep out blacks, but the others voted him out for different reasons? It could be any number of factors. I have been a member of a small church and seen much flesh torn for lesser reasons than not visiting church members enough.
Again, I just wonder if you have spoken to anyone at the church since they are denying this is their reason for his termination.
BTW – It irks me a bit that you asked me “31-0 vote to fire him for ….. You want to defend that?” I am not defending anything. I am trying to act Christ-like in my responses and reserve judgement against elders, deacons and a sister congregation until I have more facts.
All I have seen so far is hearsay. From a scriptural perspective, I am not respond until I have facts.
I don’t like how you twisted what I said. It was uncharitable.
I’m flabbergasted that you are going to bat for this church.
Every time racism rears its head in the SBC we not only have to deal with the racism, but the doubters, the deniers, and the apologists for those who sin.
I’ve communicated with Jonathan, and I’m convinced that a grievous evil had been done.
You do what you want. I’m calling this church to repent and to renounce racism.
Enough is enough.
Tiffany, you’ve left a bunch of comments. NOT ONE has expressed sympathy for a young man and his family who lost his job. NOT ONE has defended him in any way.
EVERY SINGLE ONE has defended a racist church and challenged those who called it to repent. I don’t know you or what your goal is. But your comments have ALL been on the side of defending the church and you’ve NOT ONCE shown any compassion for Jonathan.
The issue was not “tried in the media”. Greer didn’t even want the story to be made public. If you actually read the article with any integrity, you would see that.
Also, the “other side of the story” was given. It’s ridiculous and an obvious lie.
It is interesting to me that, any time an incident involving black people occurs, white self-professing Christians urge us to withhold judgment until there’s more information.
For some reason, my comment was not put in the thread that I replied to, but was relegated to an entirely new thread. It was in reply to Tiffany Long’s “wait and see” comments.
I’m a member of a church in UK, been a Christian since 1975 and made more than my share of mistakes in this life. I’m not going to say anything about this situation because I hope I respect the wisdom and integrity of local church leaders to deal with it. However, my gut feel is that an internet forum is the wrong way to be handling this, whichever side of the fence one is on.
Why when a church is reported/shown/discussed to be acting badly do the defenders of it come out requiring verification and substantiation from many highly respected and unimpeachable sources? Yet will willingly accept said church’s accusations against a person or organization they disagree with.
Tiffany – what proof or information do you possess or have access to that would disprove Rev. Greer’s comments? Typically the bigger party, and their allies, will want to wait until all of the info is available – hoping that the story will get buried and forgotten.
Given that the church congregation is white, is in Alabama and in light of the white privilege discussion being brought up in response to #BlackLivesMatter I, at this time, strongly believe and support Rev. Greer’s version of events and applaud him for his stand.
Dave – congrats on ‘irking’ Tiff. Maybe her irks will encourage her to press the “elders, deacons and a sister congregation” to address this openly and quickly.
I’d like to move on from Tiffany’s derailing of the discussion.
Let’s focus on what we can and should do as a denomination. How should we approach this? Let’s stop trying to play Johnny Cochran on the evidence – it is pretty clear here – even if not all has been made public.
Let’s keep the focus off of Tiffany’s arguments and on the big picture – a terrible thing was done here.
A church has sinned grievously.
Our denomination is dragged into the mud by that sin.
The witness of the church is compromised.
A young pastor is without a job because he took a principled stand.
Eyes on the ball.
Actually, Jonathan did go to other churches. He went to the local association. They were so convinced that they told Jonathan that they’d be scheduling a vote to disassociate with the church. The churches of a local Baptist association (which is the churches that make it up) know each other’s issues quite well.
I certainly hope that is true and they follow through with calling that church to repent.
I don’t know the details that Mark is sharing, but Jonathan told me in no uncertain terms that his association makes a priority of racial reconciliation and that Choctaw Association is NOT like Mt. Sterling Baptist.
I just posted sharing a little of that, with Jonathan’s permission. Choctaw is the opposite of Mt. Sterling.
Tiffany you have a lack of understanding as to how these things play out sometimes. We can quote Matthew 18 all we want. However, congregationalist polity can be a double edged sword. I am not denying the validity of scripture. However, in my own personal experience I have been in a situation similar to this. Congregational polity has no recourse for the party, which in many cases, is seen as the offender. What is the recourse for those who decide to claim that which is not “sinning” is? In many instances there is none. Instead what happens is a young, enthusiastic, Gospel driven pastor is left on the curb outside the church. Why? Because the power base of the church holds more sway than the Gospel. What does Mr. Greer have as a defense against the possible corruption? None! The association will do nothing in this case. Why? Because they have no authority. The church is the final say in such a system. We cannot blindly state Matthew 18 and then justify sin. Maybe the association will help him find another pastorate. I won’t hold my breath. Unfortunately, in many cases men like this will be marked as trouble makers. This is why so many young and gifted men are leaving the SBC.
I left the SBC years ago. The SBC in ’85 in Dallas made me sick. I also watched the sparring at the State and associational level. In my experience, unless you are the pastor of some First Baptist of some County Seat town pastors are not taken seriously if you are caring for a congregation of 40.
I was told by a pastor in the association I was a part of: “If you’re wunna those Calvinists, we don’t want ya” My wife and I gladly worship and serve in an Evangelical Presbyterian Church – I don’t miss the mess one bit.
Thanks Alan for bringing this to our attention. There are far too many people who think the sin of racism is dead in the church. This is just further proof that that is a lie sent from hell. My prayers for Jonathan and his family and also for the church that they would repent.
I hope and pray this story opens some eyes.
Amen! The SBC was founded on racist principles and has more repentance left to do on that sin, as do we all.
Jonathan contacted me today but I’m dealing with a crisis in one of my church families. I told him, “Don’t blow it up.”
I was wrong.
This us unspeakable evil and this church needs to be named and they need to be called to repent. If they continue in sin, they must be sent out of our fellowship in a decisive action.
I agree that IF these accusations are true, yes, they should be called to repent. BUT, we don’t have all the details and I doubt anyone saying this church has sinned has reached out to speak with both parties, together, as a mediator to establish the facts.
I have a difficult time calling another church, particularly a Baptist church, out for a sin when I was not a witness. Have any other witnesses come forward? Has anyone reached out to the church?
If this were my church, (It wouldn’t be because my pastor is the not at all racist), I would hope to have a chance to defend my position. We must take others at their word until there is proof that such a sin was committed.
I don’t know any involved, but the information in this story is not enough to charge someone as guilty. Based on the news story, it seems that there were a couple of deacons accused of saying not to bring in the black amongst the congregation. He claims to be ousted after following the commands of Christ rather than man. No one specified he was removed for this reason. They claim it is something else. This is a he said she said situation and requires more intimate details and involvement before pronouncing judgement.
Hey, I am all there is it is clear a sin has been committed. But, I wonder how effective the outreach will be now that it is so public. This could work against bringing a sinner to repentance.
In fact, I am not sure that the “public” should be involved at this stage because I don’t see that all the teachings in handling these types of issues was followed privately according to Matthew 18.
The bible tells us to handle our own issues amongst ourselves before we are taken to court. Even though it is not the same situation, I believe this spares the church in general and the innocent members from judgement and ridicule, protecting the name of Christ.
“Jonathan contacted me today but I’m dealing with a crisis in one of my church families. I told him, “Don’t blow it up.”
I was wrong.
This us unspeakable evil and this church needs to be named and they need to be called to repent. If they continue in sin, they must be sent out of our fellowship in a decisive action.”
Dave: We have had our deep differences but on this subject you, Bart, Alan and others have stood strong against racism. I have to say, for what it’s worth, that this statement and the one Bart made just sent my respect for you two men through the roof. The first time you spoke out against racism in our churches and elsewhere and the vote that happened at the Convention this year, I have hope that this can be eradicated or at the least no longer tolerated by the Southern Baptist church.
And the next time we raise issues of racism in the SBC, I assume that no one will say, “It’s all in the past.”
It’s not!
Here is the story my TV station did on the siyation tonight, FYI. this is near Meridian, MS.
Pastor suspects racial motivations behind termination
http://www.wtok.com/content/news/Pastor-suspects-racial-motivations-behind-termination-388889422.html
Situation, that is.
Should have read the post before I posted the link. See you already had.
Give a thank you to your folks for what seemed like a fair report.
Thanks, we certainly tried to do just that.Hope to follow up on it over the next few days.
Courageous and the right thing to do. I would like to have Pastor Greer’s e-mail and phone number. I am a director of missions in Missouri and I want to recommend him to a church in my association! Please send me his contact info. at rdnations@gmail.com.
Good article and I can tell you he is an awesome young pastor who God will continue to use.
It’s that deacon that needs to visit the church members along with all the other deacons. Maybe he and they should be fired. Unfortunately he won’t be. That’s just lame.
I don’t know whether the deacons have or have not visited church members, but we shouldn’t rush to judgement on this since we don’t know. We are spreading hearsay at this point.
Tiffany. He very much followed Matthew 18. It’s as the article stated.
Tiffany, you could be right and maybe I shouldn’t rush to judgment, but as my time as pastor, while serving with some stellar deacons who have fulfilled their ministry, but also talking with other pastors about their experience and my personal experience with deacons, I can honestly say that the norm are deacons who serve as some governing board who do not fulfill their biblical ministry. Again, maybe I should not have rushed to judgment, but experience tells me that the excuse of not visiting enough is lame as the deacons should be doing the majority of visiting and meeting the needs of the congregation while supporting the pastor.
But isn’t it a strange coincidence that the pastor preached a sermon on racism that very day and then that night was terminated? To say that we need to not jump to conclusions when it seems pretty obvious is a bit pollyannaish.
Frankly, if this is true (and I believe it is), this church should be disfellowed from the association, state convention, and SBC. If for anything, to fire a man because he did not visit enough and then not give him a severance? That is just hateful and lame.
Well said Robin.
Clearly stated and broken down — Thanks Robin!
There’s a pretty easy way to find out what’s what. Find out how many black people they invited to their VBS. If this isn’t about racism then the answer should be that they invited as many as they could. And that could pretty easily be verified.
That would probably be a good idea except that the church is so small I doubt they paid to mail fliers or anything with a big price tag. They probably just put out a sign or two for the general population. Maybe they announced it on their marquee sign. If they didn’t announce it to the public, it could indicate someone more sinister. It sounds to me like Pastor Greer went ahead and invited all people to the VBS.
It doesn’t cost them anything but time. If the 31 people who were able-bodied enough to show up on Sunday night to fire the pastor personally invited 5 black kids from the community to their VBS then that’s 155 kids. Again, this is easy to verify. Go ask African American families in that community if they or anyone they know got a personal invitation.
You could just ask them how many children they had period. Because the answer would be zero. And the reason behind it is that they cancelled VBS all together this year.
Is that so? That is sad.
When I was a pastor in a southern state, we had a basketball goal in parkign lot – we had a lot of “fellowship” out there with some of the young people.
One day, one of our more forward-looking deacons invited some young black kids to play ball in our church parking lot. The next day the basketball hoop came down. Better to have no hoop at all than to let black children play on our parking lot.
Fortunately, I think that church has changed over time, but it was a shock to me that people would be that way.
BOOM
I hate it when racism rears its ugly head. I especially hate the fact that it reinforces Southern stereotypes that are growing much less common over time.
On Sunday, three people joined our church. Two were black. The church’s reaction was nothing other than “amens” and applause. In fact, over 25 years of ministry, including three churches in Texas and two in Alabama, no deacon has EVER told me not to invite black people to church.
I hate that this happened. We still have work to do to eliminate this kind of nonsense. But I am thankful that it happens much less today than it did yesterday.
Rick, amen on your new editions!!! The Lord is using you in great ways.
I agree, it does happen much less today, but I had a similar experience in my first pastorate. I was not terminated, but I was still told that the blacks have their church. It broke my heart. But that did not stop me from trying to reach them. I pray this type of racism can be eliminated from our churches.
Having had a similar experience- this registered with me too.
When we were divvying up our small southern town for visitation I was told, “we don’t go to that part of town” (Black section) One Deacon said, “You know what the Bible says preacher? Birds of a feather flock together!”
Other than “God helps him who helps himself” and “Cleanliness is next to godliness” – that’s my favorite verse.”
As a former Alabama Southern Baptist pastor myself I sadly identify with this story. When serving two Alabama congregations it was placed on my heart to reach out to those who were in need. Specifically, I saw this through both churches benevolence ministries. Each church chastised me for bringing up such an idea and both made it very difficult for me to lead. In fact, the at my second church I had a rally of support towards creating “food bags” for people who would drop by our church for the basics. It was never meant to be a food pantry, rather, just a show of compassion that not only do we say Jesus loves you, but here is how we show you Christ’s love too. As a result, I found myself under review by the personnel committee who claimed I was being considered for termination. The charges were two fold with one being that “I did not visit people enough.” During the deliberations with the committee I found myself asking, “how many visits are enough?” My question was rhetorical as I was already seeing 15 people as week due to a continuing education requirement I was pursuing at the time. Their response was, “Well, we can’t give you a number.” In other words, churches use the visitation charge as the ever dangling carrot to always critique a pastor when they are unhappy. However, there is good news.
After a period of 1.5 years of wandering I’m not involved in ministry as a chaplain and in three distinct areas: Corporate, Hospice, and Military chaplaincy. It took far longer than I wanted to reach the stride the Lord has brought me to, but it really was a result of His sanctification from these two churches and through my 1.5 year drought of uncertainty. Despite this dry spell I’m not in a season where I’m busier than ever in ministry, but more fulfilled. It’s also a season where I’ve pointed more people towards local churches than ever before, even when I was a pastor. Lastly, it’s a season where I get to meet people where they are, which is a unique opportunity like no other.
In conclusion, while far too many of the churches exist like the ones Johnathan and I have pastored, there is life and ministry in unique places when we are willing to let God take us to new places. Now as I look back at those churches I see that their frustrations were experiences that God used to sanctify me in areas where I desperately needed growth. To be fair, I know the growth is not finished either, but I now look back at those churches as almost a point of “salvation” than desperation because God wastes nothing. How He recycles things may take longer than desired, but when his molding takes form it’s a journey that few get to experience.
Mike, thanks for your testimony. Helpful in many different ways.
Sadly this situation exists ( probably) across our convention. About fifteen years ago I fell to an eerily similar situation. Except it was a mid- sized church in North east Louisiana. Biggest difference was I got wind of what was going to happen and resigned the morning of.
Most amazing thing? The association felt it necessary to “chastise ” me for simply walking off without “giving notice”. Sorry but, how much notice would I have been given ?
I pray for this young pastor and all others ” on the front lines”.
Amazing testimony as to God getting us where He needs us. Thank you for your candor. I hope I would be able to have a similar attitude in difficulties.
“In other words, churches use the visitation charge as the ever dangling carrot to always critique a pastor when they are unhappy. ”
Yes.
I seriously rolled my eyes when I read that in Alan’s article. That is a bogus charge. If it is REALLY true, then let the pastor know and help him do better. I would argue it isn’t a pastor’s job anyway, but that of deacons, and deacons should stop trying to run churches and start serving churches. But that is neither here nor there, and I’m not going to be able to fix SBC polity issues in a comment stream.
I just find this particular criticism to be the “go to” in the playbook of bad deacons who are using a power play. I have heard it a million times and it never makes sense. Ever. It is absurd. If it is enough to fire a pastor over, you better have a clear expectation laid out and a clear means of evaluation. If they do not have those, then it is complete and utter malarkey to fire a guy over that issue….after an emergency called business meeting. Anyone that buys that line is crazy.
Man, this just gets under my skin…for so many reasons. The racism of this group of people is disgusting and sinful. The way they treat a man of God preaching the Word of God faithfully and then slander his character with such a meaningless and juvenile critique is absurd. Hard to see evidence to call this place a church.
In the past—roughly 25 years ago—the Alabama state convention disfellowshipped a church for the very same action. It’ll be interesting to see what happens this time, and who takes the lead.
Sounds like that is what the Local Assoc should do…if they truly disagree with what the church did.
Thanks for keeping us updated Alan. If the story as told here is true, I’ll bring a motion myself at next year’s convention to disfellowship the church involved and have them officially removed from the SBC.
You can second my motion. I called dibs.
Racism makes me sick.
My heart goes out to Pastor Greer. We should be faithful to pray for him for a man’s identity is wound into his occupation, this is especially true of pastors. To wake up not being a pastor is difficult. Even when you know you are right depression often sets in and a pastor feels he needs to defend himself even to his friends.
It is also good to remember when dealing with a church in the Deep South to ask the search committee if the church has an open door policy. It’s sad it is necessary but there is wisdom in doing so.
Grudem is looking at Trump through the rosiest of rose colored glasses. Talk about spin.
I wondered where this comment had gotten to. Apologies for the incorrect posting. Feel free to remove.
The word I get is that the local association is considering the disfellowshipping of this church. That’s the appropriate way for this to play out, and it is very encouraging to me. The reason why the national convention has had to become involved in disciplinary matters of late is because local associations have too often failed in their role.
If the local association should disfellowship the church, I would be very surprised if the state convention and national SBC were to fail to acknowledge that decision. At that point, not only will racial equality have been affirmed, but also a healthy Baptist polity will have been demonstrated.
I’ll predict that Jonathan Greer will, if he desires it, have a place to preach this very Sunday. If he should have any problems in finding a pulpit to occupy, I hereby offer him mine for Sunday morning.
Yes, the Association is the means for this church to be disciplined. From my personal experience I do not see ALSBOM getting involved. Since my first church had a history of routinely dismissing pastors I asked ALSBOM for external leadership. Their frequent response was that “We don’t interfere in local church autonomy.” While I think they take this principle a bit further than it was ever intended, the best course of action is the Association. In the Association the church can find the congruency of their autonomy, yet have the needed accountability I sought from ALSBOM. If indeed they are disciplined then I pray it’s a measure that resonates towards correction to better God’s Kingdom.
Actually, while I don’t know the players involved, do not discount the idea that the State Convention might get involved. They can’t get involved in the local church’s affairs – that would be out of bounds, but they can act to disfellowship.
I wouldn’t rule out such an action.
Dave, I’d be glad to be wrong on this one and hope they do. If they do I will be surprised though.
If the state convention will not go the full disfellowship route, I at least hope it would pass a motion/resolution that condemns churches that act in this way and to explain that a “good” church makes every effort to be resemble the community in which it serves.
I think that the way that the state and national conventions will be involved is in following the action of the local association, if that association should disfellowship the church. If the association fails to act, then it has happened before that state and national conventions get involved without the participation of the local association. But the ideal pattern is for the local association to address the issue and then for the state and national conventions to follow their lead.
I am a pastor and an associational leader in the county in question. I know Jonathan personally. I fear that many of you are, in fact, jumping to conclusions. I’m not sure yet what all is going on there. It may well be that the circumstances are just as despicable as has been suggested. However, I believe that there is some misinformation in this post and the comments that follow it. I ask that each of you pray and patiently wait for more information. If you would do that I’ll commit to use whatever influence I have to see that sinners are called to repentance. We are in a very racially divided County and the power of the Gospel is bringing unity. Misinformation will only cause harm. Thanks for considering my perspective.
I think Justin’s comment is worth considering. Just a little internet digging reveals that there is a Justin Olvey who pastors a SBC church in the same county as the church in question here. One of my initial thoughts was that if Jonathan’s story were false, the local association would be quick to condemn it or at least call on people to wait for more information. However, the AL state convention website shows that this association is currently without a DOM, and it apparently does not have a website. Given that a fellow pastor who ministers in that area and is involved in the association has asked us to reserve judgment, maybe we should listen to him.
Justin, can you identify which parts of the news story you believe are misinformed? There has been a suggested by a well-respected, regular contributor on SBCV that the association is considering discipline against the church. Can you confirm that the association is in fact investigating the matter, and can you share what your position is within the association?
Justin, Thank you for this post. All should be praying for Jonathan and the members of the church in question. Certainly God can use all these circumstances to bring glory to His name, and change the heart of men and women to love one another. Patience, and seeking love for one another should be the goal. It is pretty obvious that sin has reared its predictable head. Our body will be praying for this situation, your association, and for the believers involved on all sides.
@Justin I think such a charge as, “misinformation” should be readily backed up. I would think that brotherly love would call for that, don’t you? After all, you readily admit that it could in fact be true.
Tim, a “charge” of misinformation was not my intention. I really did not want to come across as argumentative. I have verified by a personal conversation with Jonathan that part of my concerns were in fact my own misinformation. Alan has addressed the other of my concerns in his updates.
I still believe that the Kingdom of God is best served with an attitude that desires and facilitates reconciliation and repentance.
I hope everyone has heard my updates as well. I’ve heard from at least 2 different and independent sources that the Choctaw association is a model association in terms of racial reconciliation and such. They are doing it right.
This church is the exception, not the rule.
Even if you take the deacon’s alternate explanation at face value, you’ll notice that they didn’t say they consulted Scripture or spent time in serious prayer before taking this action. They also gave no evidence of how this action would advance the Kingdom of God and I certainly heard of no moral disqualification, either. Yeah, I’m not buying their explanation.
Unfortunately, I fear that there are more churches like this out there than we think. Kicking this church out of fellowship at local, state, and national levels (in that order mind you), AND have each step plastered on every news service and blog that is SBC related, is very much needed to send a clear message to our entire fellowship of “like minded” churches.
I originally gave Jonathan the “protect the church” advice knowing he’d been fired and assuming it was some other kind of normal stupidity that just happens in churches. Generally, the best course of action is to walk away and trust God to defend you and to take the vengeance he sees fit.
When Alan told me the story (this is not really hearsay, folks. Extensive research has been done and both sides have been contacted. Those who have contacted both sides are convinced the truth lies on the side of Jonathan Greer and did not believe the deacon’s story.
I can’t go into more details than that.
But this is not just a rumor we heard and printed – as Tiffany would have you believe. The TV station and the author of this post did due diligence in research.
Johnathan did NOT want to make this public – someone else contacted the press. Our story did not post until after the secular news media had broken the story.
But light needs to be shined on this darkness. Wherever racism still hides in our church culture it needs to be exposed and repudiated.
There are plenty still left. Thankfully, they are dying slow deaths. No one is joining them and eventually they will disappear. Then maybe someone gets the building and can actually act like the church
When it comes time to start evaluating sermons in preparation for the ’17 Pastors’ Conference, I’d like to propose that Pastor Greer be under consideration.
Here Here!!!
I will guarentee you one thing if I ever have a church leader not want to reach a particular race, I will have their head on my office wall when I am done. Ridiculous!
” I will have their head on my office wall when I am done.”
Adam Hatfield,
I have a question regarding your comment: If you put your church leader’s head on the wall of your office, what do you plan to do with the rest of their body?
Do you know what a figure of speech is?
My church needs a senior pastor — send me his resume
So sad. Myvhusband pastored for about 30 years. We’ve experienced this. The churches that behave this way want less evangelism and more coffee drinking with the saints.
Lisa Bannister,
Please don’t blame this on the coffee. It’s not the coffee.
This is a wild story, Jonathan had posted about it in the reformed pub about a week ago asking for prayer- sad that this church actually went through with it, and congrats for this man’s bravery and faithfulness.
Case #1 – I pastored for 20 years in Columbia SC. In the later 90’s I drafted a letter calling for the churches of the Columbia Metro Assoc. to expose and denounce racism. The letter was irenic but pointed. It gave 6 months for churches to sign a statement that they genuinely welcomed and encourage people of all races to be a part of their assembly. If they did not, the Association would remove them from fellowship.
The DOM (now deceased) refused to even consider sending this letter to the 90+ churches in that Association. The reason? It would violate the ‘Autonomy of The Local Church. A church near the one I pastored went ‘calling’ on Monday evenings. If a black family expressed interest they told them to come to the church I pastored – they were not welcome in their church (not stated but clearly implied). The sad conclusion of this pathetic posture is that violating Autonomy is bad but open overt racism is OK!
Case #2 – FBC Center Pointe AL pastored by Bobby Earls. Fred Luter was invited months before the Annual Meeting in New Orleans to speak at Center Pointe. Fred was elected as President of the National Convention. The Convention ended on Wednesday. The local Association & the State Convention learned of this invitation to Fred. They allocated $5,000 for the purpose of busing all the black pastors in that area to attend the Sunday service. They planned a fellowship meal to follow the Sunday AM service.
When the ‘Personnel Committee’ learned of this they had a ‘Special Called Meeting’. They cancelled the invitation to the black pastors. They stated very clearly – – ‘We don’t mind Fred speaking here but we do not want all those black pastors “in our church!” That church belongs to Jesus Christ not that Personnel Committee!!!
To my knowledge FBC Center Pointe is still a member in good standing in the Birmingham Association. That is flat out pathetic. You may verify all of this if you so choose by contacting Pastor Earls. He is now in Florence SC.
Tom Fillinger
803 413 3509
Tom, if you have Bobby Earls’ permission to share his personal cell # and email, you can put them back in. I’d err on the side of caution before I would post someone else’s personal contact info in a place where 10k+ will see it in a day or two. Thanks.
So, and pardon me for being slightly contrarian here, were either of you able to get in contact with anyone in the church? Was an attempt made? I understand that the reporter talked to one deacon.
I am a bit hesitant to go full bore at church shaming, and that is what this is and may be what is needed, without giving the church a chance at a response. At least one person representing himself as a leader in (what is presumably the church’s) local Baptist association offers caution.
That said, I know Alan to be very thorough.
William, since there had already been a public vote and the decision was final for the pastor to be removed and a news story had been released with an interview with the pastor and Deacon and I talked to the reporter and queried him, I had confidence in the parts of the story that I shared. There were more details about what happened that were left out of the story. I became aware of this situation before the news story and after the story ran added the link for verification. We talk about a lot of things here and once a story is public knowledge, the standard is not that we have to have personal conversations with all involved before we comment. But, I did not contact the deacons of the church to personally hear their side. I went off of the news report. If I am in error, I will make corrections.
My purpose here was not church shaming, but rather to highlight a pastor who did the right thing. Many do not. I also do not believe that what happens here represents the vast majority of churches.
Thanks Alan. I understood that. You didn’t name the church but the links do and I saw the story before I saw it here. There is at least a dual thrust here: support the pastor and shame the church. You may not intend the latter but from the comments that is the result. Does the church deserve it? Perhaps. I am mildly uncomfortable, partly because you say there is more and there is surely more from the church’s side.
With views well into five figure here alone, the matter is out there. I hope you guys were thorough and got it right.
Some churches need public shaming.
Putting a young man out of work for not visiting enough is one of them. That is something that can be rectified.
Putting a young man out of work for not working with deacons who are racist is another. If a pastor was preaching on racism to his church, he had a reason.
Those reasons alone are enough for public shaming. Sometimes Christians do bad things, and should be shamed for it.
Paul certainly wasn’t against public shaming…so…I don’t know what the problem is here.
If they fired the pastor because he didn’t visit enough, then they deserve shaming for that as well. In fact, more of that sort of rebuke needs to happen. Too many churches do that sort of nonsense.
Anyone who has been around churches long enough knows that the “he doesn’t visit enough” is a total garbage blanket accusation that pops up all the time when people (usually deacons) don’t have a real grievance, and the pastor hasn’t truly done something wrong. It honestly happens all the time, and it is disgusting.
I wish more churches would be held accountable, if only by being called out for this, for the way they destroy pastors over absurd issues.
As for ascertaining the truth of this situation…the fact that it happens the same day as a sermon on racism, and after a special-called business meeting makes it a little obvious what the problem actually is. You don’t call a special-called meeting for lack of visits. You call it if something came up that enraged you enough to want to get rid of the pastor. The deacon’s excuse doesn’t make any sense. Even without personally interviewing people, anyone who knows anything about church life could be able to look at this situation and see that things only fit together when read a certain way.
I got in big trouble at my first church for bringing a black student to church. It happens way to much. I was told not to sacrifice my ministry to 30 white students for 1 black student.
A history lesson. I’ve pastored 3 churches full time and 2 part time. All but my current church was “Deacon run.” Of those “Deacon run” churches, only one was remotely healthy. The rest will die in the next decade or so.
While I understand Tiffany’s concern to “not rush to judgment,” the vote numbers are clear in this situation. 31-0 to dismiss is slightly more shocking than a 100% calling of a Pastor.
Racism is sin, plain and simple. When a church abides in sin, justifies sin, and/or fights on the side of sin, they are no longer a church of Christ. They’ve become a social club that seeks members based on qualities other than salvation and conversion.
In Thom Rainer’s book, “Autopsy of a Deceased Church,” Rainer estimates roughly 10% of American churches are dying. It sounds to me like we’ve found one.
If you’d like, send Pastor Greer’s name to the West Virginia Convention of Southern Baptists or the Blue Ridge Baptist Association of the Maryland/Deleware Baptist Convention. I’d love the opportunity to work with him!
Pastor Greer might be out of a job right now, but he has a long ministry ahead of him.
Unfortunately I’ve had too many conversations, even in NY, with people who essentially say “I’m not racist but look at how bad the blacks are….”.
Racism is on the wane, hopefully, but it’s far from dead. It isn’t even on life support.
It’s frustrating that every time blatant racism is brought up, there are some Christians out there who either deny that racism still exists or just accuse those of us who bring it up as being liberals. I just don’t understand it.
I can relate deeply to Pastor Greer’s struggle. I lived with my family in a Muslim nation for 14 years where we shared the love and truth of Christ with our neighbors. We knew Christians who were severely persecuted. But in terms of my being hurt myself, we were actually hurt far worse during my first two years as a pastor back in the US by “Christian” church members than I was directly hurt by our Muslim neighbors during our years overseas. I very briefly shared about this in a blog post several months ago. The relevant part of the blog post is in the middle of the post under the heading “I’ve Been a Victim of Slander”. You may read it here: http://parresiazomai.blogspot.com/2016/04/allegations-of-sexual-sin-against-ted.html
This story broke my heart and frustrated me. Then, I hope there was more to the story. I hope there was more, not because I don’t think racism still exists, but because I don’t want racism exist, especially, in the church. And if the rest of the story is merely what the deacon stated about Greer not visiting enough – pitiful excuse!
I do understand the need to be cautious as more information potentially comes out. However, I trust Alan’s (and Dave’s) investigation and discernment. I do not believe they would post this horrid story carelessly.
Not only would it be nice to hear of the state association disfellowship this church but to refund any money they’ve given this year.
Sad. Like some here I have had my own story with this sort of thing. I did not get fired. Maybe the church thought about it. I will never know.
What startles me here are those who immediately assume there is more to the story. On the one hand I suspect it is the overall demise of trust in clergy. High profile failures run downhill in their effect on how people view us. “There must be something the pastor did. It could not be just . . ..”
On the other hand, it simply buries the issue beneath the empty core of pointing to texts like Matthew 18. It is as if the Bible will save us from embarrassment. The problem? It is the Bible that uncovers our embarrassment.
Thank you Alan for posting and for Dave in defending and supporting the post.
If the story here is correct, the church is certainly wrong.
I would not, however, want to be on trial at SBC Voices. There are at least two sides to this story, and basically only one has been heard. The church has not been contacted. Seems there is a lot of jumping to conclusions here.
Tiffany and a couple other commenters here need to be thoughtfully, respectfully, heard. The same goes for the church.
The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him. -Proverbs 18:17
David R. Brumbelow
David, there is a time to take an unequivocal stand against racism. This is the time.
What part are you bothered with David B, Tiffany et all? What side David, Tiffany et al?
Say for the sake of argument that the minister was not fired due to racism(which I am not buying. Not visiting 31 parishioners? Really?), racism was committed by the church by not allowing black children to be invited to the Bible School and the sermon that had to be preached against racism.
I don’t understand why you would think that is not something to stand against. Again, in God’s way I believe that is why the resolutions were passed at the meeting in June and with such high votes. I am so thankful for the stands being taken, both by this young minister who did not seek publicity, but to do the right thing and others who have spoken in this post.
In my restless 20’s. I resigned two churches when they forbid me to have black students in my youth ministry. I was fired by one pastor who was a closet racist. I would do it all again right now, and I’m retired after nearly 40yrs in student ministry. It’s a medal of Honor to get fired/resigned by some people.
Michael Holt: Wow. Good comment.
This is sad on so many levels. The best a prospective pastor can do is 1) ask questions and find out about the history, and try to gauge the climate and 2) try to find a former staff member or someone familiar with the church to gain insight. Unfortunately, if you ask if they are for outreach their answer won’t necessarily jive with what is actually practiced. Praying for this young pastor. There are plenty of churches that really want to grow but need leadership such as this.
I had the exact experience in a church not far from Butler, AL. I, too, was terminated over a desire to reach all people in our area, and the same reasons were given by the deacons for the terminations. It’s curious that the deacon did not want to be on camera. Churches like Mt Sterling should be booted out of the SBC if they are unrepentant.
Butler, AL, is the county seat of Choctaw County. It is one of the Alabama counties referred to as the Black Belt. That name originally referred to the rich black soil, but it later came to also mean an area with a large black population who worked the cotton fields. Choctaw County’s population of about 13,000 is 56 percent white, 44 percent black, different from the town of Butler. As someone who has lived in Alabama for 41 years, I suspect Butler is like other places where historically, blacks more likely had to live outside of a town’s incorporated borders. That means that the number of blacks in Butler’s “metro” area would be significantly larger than the 26.7 percent suggests.
Choctaw County has a school system with four schools–two of them in Butler. Choctaw County Elementary School is 78 percent black, 21 percent white. Choctaw County High School is 81 percent black, 17 percent white. Notice that the district itself is 67 percent black, 32 percent white. The percentage of students receiving free lunch is about 80 percent at those two schools.
So why are the public schools’ demographics different than the town’s? Most likely, a preponderance of white families who can afford it send their kids to the private school in town. This is very common in small-town Alabama. These schools popped up like weeds during the civil-rights period and were called “segregation academies.”
It is not a far reach to imagine that there may be white people in Butler who do not want their children associating with black children at VBS if they don’t want them associating with black children at school.
May God help us see others through His eyes and may our churches represent the diversity we will experience in heaven as we worship with people from every nation, tribe, and tongue.
I was trying to post the previous comment in reply to Tiffany’s earlier comment in the thread about the town’s demographics. Somehow, it ended up many comments down. Hope this doesn’t create confusion.
The same thing happened to me in 1988, only it was in West Texas and I tried to help Hispanics. We were required to vacate the parsonage by December the 23rd. My sons, who were 4 and 6 at thetime, cried when I had to pack up our Christmas tree and gifts.
Yep, my husband was voted out the Sunday after our daughter was born. Two sweet old ladies were visiting me and the baby in the parsonage next door to the church while the church was voting us out. Or other three kids suffered through this as well.
Wondering, kelly and angie, what ages your children are now and how they view church affiliation. My father befriended a black restaurant manager, helped him do his taxes, grew to love him and his white fiance and they accepted Christ and began to attend our church, while “living in sin”. This was in the 70s. People said they had issue with lack of marital status. My dad explained they were new christians and pointed out the hypocrisy of another couple who had attended for years, unmarried, but were white and related to a deacon..I watched my father love and minister passionately and compassionately as we were booted from one church to another. My brothers rebelled and have struggled with belief. I believe but gave up attending social organizations. As a young mother, I watched a young pastor family kicked out, 3 young children, a church family member called and had water turned off on them to hasten their move. I claim PK PTSD. No longer choose to be part of any organization that clings so proudly to their own selfish laws and use them to hurt those who minister to them. Never understood why my dad, brokenhearted so often by those who wooed him and loved him in beginning, never gave up. He loved people and preaching til the day he died.
Sometimes we should lead and teach our Church to believe the truth and go in God’s direction. People must be discipled and taught and led. There are many, many things that people, and even a group of people, believe and do that need changing. Changing takes time.
But, there’s also a time to stand. There’s a time to die on a hill.
Wisdom shows us when and what. Discernment helps us see what and when.
If that Church really did fire this young man, because they didn’t want Black people to come to their Church, then that’s just wrong. Wrong with a capital “W.” They should be disciplined.
I’m glad that this past Sunday, in my Church, when it came time for the young children to be dismissed to Children’s Church….we let them leave after the singing to see a Bible video for their sermon….we had two, little girls holding hands and skipping to the door to catch up with the rest of the children…..one of the little girls was White with blond hair, and the other was a Black girl. They went hand in hand, with no racial tensions, whatsoever. They went hand in hand, happy to go together to worship the Lord. And, the congregation was smiling and chuckling at them skipping together, very fast. Praise God!
David
I think its long past time to make racism a hill to die on – 100%, no dithering, no justifying, no defending.
Some of you southern pastors seem to feel the need to state that your church isn’t racist. I guess I understand that – and I’m glad of it!
Jonathan, in a conversation with me a few minutes ago, made it clear that in his association, Mt. Sterling is the exception. His association makes racial reconciliation a priority. I just put that in a small post above.
But when this thing rears it ugly head, we need to act. We need to unite in condemning it.
Frankly, I think some folks are afraid to condemn (not saying you did this, David, just using your comment as the springboard) racism because if they admit it exists in Mt Sterling, they are afraid they will have to join Black Lives Matters or something.
But Mt. Sterling BC is racist. They did an evil thing. They are not the only racist SBC church in the south. Whenever an SBC does a racist thing, we need to shine the light, expose the darkness, and call for repentance. “The enemy deserves no mercy.” (Racism being the enemy.)
But let’s agree to this. The fact that racist churches exist does not mean all SBC churches are racist. Does racism exist at all our churches? Probably. In someone’s heart. But institutional racism is not dominant at all or even a majority of SBC churches today.
But don’t let the fear of being branded racist stop you from calling out and condemning racism when it appears.
Color of the heart is at the root of this problem.
In my mind this certainly sounds like a situation where they fired him due to his desire to invite blacks to church.
It is curious how the church is so coy, however. The deacon says that they are not firing the pastor because of his outreach to blacks. If I understand it correctly, the entire church, all 31 people voted to fire him. But the pastor says that some in the church do not agree with the position that blacks should not be invited to church. If that is the case, why are there no votes not to fire the pastor? Is it because some people wanted him fired for one reason, and some people voted to fire him for another reason?
Again, I suspect this pastor is right, and I believe his story, and that’s all this post is about.
But there seems to be some additional dysfunction here that I can’t get my head around.
Also, the church being so coy is going to backfire.
If the church is unwilling to admit why it fired the pastor, they are going to end up being more integrated than they imagined. Because now reporters, associational leaders, state leaders and others are going to be contacting the church. Local black churches may contact the church. The church is going to be forced to show that the firing was not about racial issues, and to prove it, the church will have to do things to promote racial harmony.
I think that leaders in the SBC and in the State Convention should offer to come to the church next week and hold a service with people of all races in the community. If the church is willing to prove its non-racist bona fides, how could it refuse such an offer?
This church is getting ready to be one of the most integrated churches in Alabama! And they don’t even know it yet.
Maybe some voted as they did and have not spoken up over peer pressure? Such a small congregation is probably very close knit and possibly has several related individuals.
This church is evidently fairly united in their racism.
Jesus-Christ is God made flesh (Jn.1/14). Then, mankind is dignify in his divine Person. That’s the reason why all races are invited to salvation, because his humanity is oversized by his enhypostasia in the eternal Person of the Son of God. This reality explains: Col.3/11 or Gal.3/28. So, racism is a denying of Incarnation, as saint John said in his epistles (I Jn.2/22-23, 4/1-4, II Jn.7/11). Then, you cannot be a Christian if you are racist!
I’m going to quarrel with you.
“You cannot be a Christian” – that is a judgment of a person’s salvation that puts you a very shaky foundation.
Say, “you hold an anti-Christian position.”
“You are not integrating your professed faith with your life.”
“You give evidence that your faith might not be genuine.”
Fine.
But Christians are not sinless. There can be genuinely saved people who commit just about every sin in the book.
I get the point of your comment and agree with it in the theoretical point – racism is unChristian. But the way you state it is putting yourself in a position of making judgments you are not authorized to make.
I don’t make a judgment about a concrete guy, or person, but about a theoretical point. I cannot understand how a church isn’t able to understand this essential point of theology: that’s all.
While the judgment of my two colleagues Dave and Alan, is sober, usually sound, and reliable, I continue to be mildly troubled about calling out and shaming this church, now by name rather than anonymously. I think it improper to conclude that this church is united in racism, nor that it is a loathesome outlier in the association, particularly without a conversation with a single soul in that church.
If this is as it has been portrayed then conversations relying on anonymous insiders with knowledge about the situation should be bolstered by names and relationships. Thus far, only the principal individual, the one with the most at stake, has spoken freely. One other named individual, an associational leader has offered a word of caution.
Is there a better way to handle such things? Should the local association and/or state convention have been given space and time to deal with the matter? Would that have signaled some weakness on the issue, or, would such have proven more profitable? Perhaps we will know in time. I am reminded of the scripture that counsels a spirit of gentleness to be used in restoring individuals who have been caught in sin. Does that provide a better protocol for like matters concerning congregations?
William, I have had other conversations today with people there involved with the situation personally. I have been told that my post was accurate. I am not sharing their names because I told them I wouldn’t, not because they asked me to. If you doubt me, I understand. I am confident that the story I was told is correct. Now, will other issues be put forward that are pointed to? Perhaps. Likely. But, I am confident that the underlying issue was race.
Are any of these people personally involved in the situation members of the church? If not, then something is missing in this.
Mr Thornton,
Correct me if I am wrong, but I suspect that if this was a case where a church fired a pastor, because the pastor wanted to report (or did report) a member for sexual abuse of a child, and the church wanted just to sweep it under the rug; you would be willing, able, and active in making sure that church was named in every possible medium so people knew they protected a child molester. Even if the church “claimed” that they fired the pastor for other reasons, you would still name them openly would you not?
Now, while the earthly effects of child abuse and racism are much different in their scope and impact, they are none-the-less equal in terms of both are sin. If one church’s sin is proper to openly confront, even with out “both sides”, then why not the case of another church’s sin?
Now if I am wrong in that you would wait to name a church that protected a child molester until “all sides were consulted” then I am sorry for making that assumption. However, I believe that while we are an convention of autonomous likeminded churches, we must be clear in refusing fellowship to churches that are in such gross sin. In far to many cases, be it racism, sexual immorality issues, or anything else, we are too easy to overlook these issues under the guise of “well we don’t know all the facts”. Sometimes to stand for truth means going out on a limb.
SV, where you are wrong is in telling me what I would be doing. You don’t know my state of mind sufficiently to predict my future.
This is a church. Before we shame it, demonize it, at least let them have a say. I am uncomfortable wth this for reasons I’ve stated several times.
Hello all, my name is Eddie Pullen JR and I work for NAMB of the SBC. When I was in seminary at NOBTS, I actually interviewed with this exact church to be their pastor. My wife and I declined their call to us because they specifically stated that we would not be able to reach out to the local African American community. We were flabbergasted and sought clarity to which they unmistakably told us that they were not desirous to reach out to African Americans. One woman from the committee wept as she stated that we wouldn’t be able to reach out past the caucasian community. This meeting (and their call to me) was almost 24 years ago and yet the racism still exists in this church. I, for one, am glad that the story came to light. Maybe the leaders will repent and God can ultimately be glorified in this community.
And again Mr Thornton, I ask, would you have an issue if people with knowledge of a situation, “outed” a church that fired its pastor, because he wanted to bring a child molester to justice? If that church “claimed” they fired him because of “not visiting Church members”, and were completely silent about protecting a child molester, would you give that church the benefit of the doubt, and wait until they “had a say”? How much damage has been done in that area of “church automony”? When people don’t want to name churches that have protected child molesters? Would you argue that racist churches are any different, or any less damaging to the Church catholic (little “c”)?
Mr. William Thornton,
You said, “I think it improper to conclude that this church is united in racism…”
The vote was 31-0. Racism was the issue. That is pretty unified. However, I do know there are a few that did not agree with the racism, but they were outnumbered and apparently did not vote.
We must condemn an heresy. So, racism is an heresy, a Christological one. Then, when a church persevere in this way, we must excommunicate it, after advertisements. The rest is God’s business…
I found this article to be extremely revealing. Just this morning I shared with my wife, in prayer, how I felt the Lord calling me to become a part of the SBC and submit myself to working, leading, teaching, pastoring a White church. I realize this is insanely dangerous on so many levels. I first spoke with a Black pastor who quickly refuted my suggestion. He loves me.
My point is that only a few hours later I read about this young man’s courageous stand against systemic and embedded evil. I truly pray the Lord was simply testing my heart. And yet I know for certain that until such events actually occur, nothing will change, and people will continue to walk out their perverseness before God with a complete resignation that He will provide grace for them. And guess what…#thereisgrace4them2.
I attended a church almost completely white and pastored by Dr. Baucham. No one there cared anything about his skin color, but we loved his powerful messages and call to obey the scriptures.
I don’t think you will have a problem finding such a congregation to love and appreciate you, at least in Texas.
Thank you, I was wondering.
Here’s a good read – https://9marks.org/article/biblical-qualifications-and-responsibilities-deacons/
Indeed it is.
Ok. Since so many are certain about the facts as presented – Someone get the ball in motion, to culminate in Phoenix, and remove this church from the convention.
Let’s not just talk about it, do it. That’s something we can do as a convention.
Maybe some SBCer could have a conversation with the church folks before such things?
Here’s a story that influences my reluctance to bring the power of social media to bear on this church:
A local pastor was in conflict with our associational missionary. The AM wanted the associational executive committee to meet, pass a resolution of support for him, the same resolution naming and condemning the pastor (who was a bit of a nutcase). We met. The pastor to be condemned wasn’t present and wasn’t invited to the meeting. He wasn’t presented with the proposed resolution. He wasn’t asked for a response at all. I objected to the protocol and was quickly bulldozed by the torch-carrying mob of distinguished XComm members from all the churches. The brother was duly denounced, the AM affirmed, and all save one went home feeling smug and happy about doing it.
That was wrong. I don’t much see Jesus in that. What it was was an exercise in power directed at someone who was weak, already despised, and who had few allies.
I haven’t disputed any of the few basic facts available on this case. Dave and Alan happen to be two people with whom I have had personal interaction and productive conversations and for whom I have respect and confidence. I have expressed discomfort and reservations about leveling the considerable power of social media at this church with no one here having contacted or even attempted to contact anyone in the church. One side has spoken early and often. The other side? We have a single secondhand, secular report.
Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted.
This church may be filled to the rafters with loathsome, racist miscreants, but I doubt it. In our zeal for attacking racism, are we at a place where we think it is a good idea to go down this road this way?
Forgive the length of this comment but most of us who have pastored in the South, particularly earlier than the present, have our stories about church folks similar to this one. Most of us were settled in doing the right thing but didn’t end up forcing a vote and getting summarily terminated. Nor did we take steps to put the church in the Klieg lights where thousands of strangers felt compelled to get involved from their laptops, phones, and armchairs.
This discussion has moved from helping the pastor to labeling all the folks in the church as racists, to calls for expulsion. I say, send the brother some support but stand down for now on the vicious condemnation of the church. It doesn’t cost much nor take much effort to offer outrage and condemnation and indignant calls for repentance. It is a more arduous task to work with the goal of restoration and correction, if needed. Those who are local and know the situation, either put your name to your opinions and facts or keep quiet. So far, the one local guy who has commented by name advised caution in this. Another guy, by name, offered his experiences of a generation ago at the church. If this church deserves to be shamed, condemned, and expelled, let those who drive by it, who know the members, who have prayed with church leadership, and who think the church’s attitude harms their ministry take the lead in that.
William,
Good points. I strongly agree.
David R. Brumbelow
I agree with your post and sentiments, William.
Others, Is it not possible that many in the church agreed with the pastors sentiments but not the way he handled it? Is it possible that while racism among some may have been an impetus that there may be other issues at play with others? Perhaps various factions making up the 31 who voted him out were united in desire (firing the pastor) but not in reasoning?
As pastors we all have a tendency and a natural desire to take the pastors side anytime there is a conflict within the church and certainly if that conflict results and termination of the pastor – sometimes the pastor is on the side of the angels – and sometimes not – sometimes he is partially on the side of the angels but goes about it in the wrong way – or countless other scenarios that could be ther case – there’s lots of nuance in these issues.
I’ve learned in life, and I’m reminded almost every day; that it matters of conflict there is typically three sides; this side, that side, and the truth.
Granddaddy often reminded me – “it’s a mighty thin board son, that only has one side. ”
Grandpa was smart.
Now to say what should not have to be sent – but always seems to have to be said and discussions like this – please no one say that I am dismissing racism – I hate racism – and as I’ve said many times – the whole idea of skin color discrimination and the dividing up human beings by such is ridiculous and Sinful and denying of Scripture.
Others, Is it not possible that many in the church agreed with the pastors sentiments but not the way he handled it?
Tarheel: Be careful with this argument. It’s been used before in an attempt to shield a wrongdoer from scrutiny. I agree with the need to tread softly, but this particular argument just set off all the warning alarms in my brain.
If that’s the standard, William, then all they have to do is do what this church is doing – refusing to talk. Then the story can’t be published.
Can’t do a story on sex abuse because the accused refuses to give his side.
Can’t do a story on **** because both sides won’t tell their side.
This is NOT in doubt. Alan did better journalism here than major news organizations usually do. The story is not a question mark. The deacon talked to the press – he was surly, but he gave his story.
But the truth cannot be held hostage until Mt. Sterling decides to talk. They have closed ranks and clammed up. But enough independent and reliable sources have verified this, William.
Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.
And William, if this was a story of sexual predation, you’d be on the other side. Not sure why you are taking this tack on a racism story.
It’s time we STOPPED defending and providing cover for racist churches. People, this has to stop. We cannot play this game anymore.
How many church members were the Deacons visiting and ministering to? That’s their purpose in the church.
William, David Brumbelow, Dave Cline, and others playing defense lawyer,
I don’t get it. What will it take for us to get incensed about racism?
The facts in this case are not in dispute. Alan has done an excellent job of research and has compelling evidence. Granted, he can’t source some of it because they spoke on condition of anonymity, but the facts have been established beyond any disputation.
Jonathan Greer was fired because of racism, by a 31-0 vote of Mt. Sterling Baptist church.
Here is my biggest frustration. Every time we write about racism here, we get the same response. “I’m not a racist, but…”
“I’m not a racist, but the Confederate flag is a good thing and we should fly it proudly.”
“I’m not a racist, but let’s keep all “‘those people’ out of ‘our’ country.”
“I’m not a racist, but when an innocent black man gets shot, its always his fault.”
Why are there some who ALWAYS stand against every effort toward racial reconciliation, yet feel they can still say, “I’m not a racist?”
And here, why do people stand so loyally behind a church that deserves NO loyalty? This church behaved badly. They fired their pastor for handing out VBS flyers to black children (and for calling them to repent for their racism).
Why do some SBCers ALWAY stand on the wrong side of these issues?
If we dither on this, will we ever get serious about racism in the SBC?
C’mon guys (and gals).
By the way, I realize not all of you made all of those arguments (though I think at least one of you has).
But I’m at the breaking point with some who seem to always want to defend the WRONG side on issues of racism and still maintain, “I’m not a racist.”
I don’t know what racism is or who is a racist.
But I know this – if you read a story like this and your response is, “Are we being fair to the church?” – well, I have to wonder a little bit about your perspective.
Don’t forget that racism is wrong, not because liberalism’s arguments, but because it is an heresy, a Christological heresy!
Dave Miller,
Although I know it unwise to exchange in disagreement with the one who has the delete button and the shut down option – I have to respond here.
““I’m not a racist, but the Confederate flag is a good thing and we should fly it proudly.”
“I’m not a racist, but let’s keep all “‘those people’ out of ‘our’ country.”
“I’m not a racist, but when an innocent black man gets shot, its always his fault.” ”
I guess if I had said any of those things, ever, in my life (except the I am not a racist component) – then you might have a point….but…..there;s the little fact that I have not.
“But I’m at the breaking point with some who seem to always want to defend the WRONG side on issues of racism and still maintain, “I’m not a racist.” ”
I guess you could make that point if you are willing to make it on the other side….when people on this forum (including you) whose narratives have been on the wrong side of numerous scenarios once the actual evidence fully came out and that with no apology, correction or retractions – then it should be understood when others resist immediately adopting an articulated narrative without consideration.
I will let the other accusations you threw at me alone. People who know me, I mean really know me, know better than to believe that stupid drivel.
Perhaps you might whether your intentionally castigating and twisting words, and then using that to assert racism toward your brothers in Christ is the most productive behavior for a blog editor…especially one who prides himself on “not being like the other blogs”.
I don’t much care for the problem solving approach that involves taking one of only two sides and then going at it. I am uncomfortable with this for reasons stated. Even if stipulating all that might be in dispute, I’m unsettled about it. It’s too neat and clean. I don’t like the idea of throwing out your pastor onto the curb. Neither do I like the idea of subjecting your former church to ridicule and contempt.
I don’t set standards for this. You guys did what you thought right and proper. Fine. My peanut gallery objections won’t matter. If journalistic standards are invoked then failing to contact the church, using multiple anonymous sources all weaken the thing.
My expressed reservations are not a defense of racism, nor do they provide cover for it.
The church WAS contacted. The deacon lied. After that, they clammed up.
What more do you want?
“My expressed reservations are not a defense of racism, nor do they provide cover for it.”
Exactly. No one on this blog has defended racism. No one.
I wish our editor would get off his high horse and be willing even attempt to see that.
Here’s where I come down.
We need to fight racism and take an unequivocal, strong, bold stance against it. When we play petty games like this, we look like we are defending the racists – that’s what Southern Baptists have done for years. We’ve played defense lawyer for the indefensible.
We need to stop. I’m not advocating lynch mobs. I’m saying when the evidence is clear, don’t play defense lawyer for the church.
No one has defended the church. I have questioned what I see as unprofitable shaming of the church and have objected to this level of vitriol without even an attempt to contact church folks.
William, I challenge the notion that “shaming” is necessarily a bad thing.
It is a practice you encourage in the sexual predation arena. I think it’s necessary here. What you call shaming I call “shining a light” and I think you vastly overstate the level of shaming that has gone on.
We’ve called sin sin – a godly thing. We’ve called on the appropriate SBC entities to act.
But when racism happens as egregiously as it happened here, and we don’t call it out, we are tacitly giving our approval.
And to say that we cannot speak until a church that refuses to speak has spoken, well, that is effectively silencing the truth.
And again, the church WAS approached and DID speak. The deacon was their “spokesman.”
Rule #1 in church crisis management – appoint a spokesman and let him speak.That’s what all the books tell us. That’s what this church did. The deacon spoke and he was not credible.
Are you saying that we should not speak until we give someone a plane ticket to Butler to interview the members?
Do you hold SNAP to the same standard?
Do not speak until the members of the accused church have spoken?
NO! You cannot make that situation public because the accused has not issued a statement!
It’s an inconsistent position.
Right again, William.
If the association or state convention, who actually know the situation and the people involved, act based on gathered evidence and investigation – not assumptions and one sidedness – then we can all speak with clarity and definiteness to the specifics realting to this church – but until then – we only have a media report (where two diametrically opposed sides of the story are offered) and the word of Dave Miller and Alan Cross who believe they have reliable sources. Of course the church deacon who responded to the news is telling a different story…that could mean several things – among the possible meanings is that he is lying to cover up obvious sin.
I will say that based on a more thorough reading of Alan’s work this sure seems as though it might be a racist situation and would be in need of remedy by the association, state convention and the SBC – all of whom I hope, upon investigating the allegations, will, after giving ample opportunity for repentance on the part of the membership, remove the church from any and all affiliation with the Southern Baptist Convention absent their repentance.
Racism, discrimination, and preference based on skin color should have absolutely no place in the SBC….as such is antithetical to the gospel, the scriptures and our confessional statement.
William: I must say your reaction does surprise me given what I would say is appropriate response to sexual predators in the church. I, like Dave, did not see your inquisition to a church who was silent in those cases.
I do trust Alan and Dave when they say it has been checked and rechecked as well as those who know the church which has been spoken of. If the deacons are smart they may not speak, as adding lie to lie is fruitless at this point. I don’t see where a rush in judgment has been made. The facts appear to have been carefully sifted through.
I know Alan has not printed anything without taking the time to check the story out, I have no reason to think the same care was taken in this story.
My hat is off to him. I understand completely where is is co I got from. I was recently let go by a church who is struggling to keep the doors open from poor financial decisions over the years. I understand the struggle to show backbone and do the Biblical thing instead of just saving your job. I commend him on that. He was charged with leading and that comes at a cost sometimes. The deacons do not have the responsibility to God that a Pastor does, so the pastor did the right thing. It’s 2016 and racism is still alive and well in a place that it should long be outdated and done away with. Also a 31-0 vote is also telling. Not one deacon supported him? Strange.
Chad, in some of those small towns the people feel tremendous peer pressure to stick together and to support the group against “outsiders.”
It is possible that some of the folks actually agreed with Jonathan, but when push came to shove they voted with the group out of fear or loyalty. I don’t know.
Yes,…that is typical, and is probably the case here. It is tough to get an ultimatum from influential deacons / families in a small congregation. I feel for young men that get into these snake pits. There are typically some real Christians that make up the church at Mt. Sterling, but they will need to find a way to establish leadership that can help them get beyond prejudice when posed with the Word of God. Generally these tight nit families (ignorant of the Word) rule the church in opposition to Godly men. God has a way of dealing with these folks, sooner or later.
Dave, I think that’s a valid point. Given the small size of the church, I figure some non-racists have probably left over the years, given that there are other churches nearby in the association that don’t have a strong racist proclivity. However, if there are long-time members who have family members sleeping the back yard (they do have a fair-sized collection of rocks back there) and are willing to tolerate the racism in the church in order to keep the family plot together, then the last thing they would want to do is raise the hackles on the deacons who would give them a problem over it by voting against them.
What I find completely amazing in this conversation is the group of people wanting to give the church the “benefit of the doubt” which means you are indirectly calling the former pastor a liar.
Who has been forthcoming and made themselves available to all who wanted to talk to him? The pastor
Who has dodged and refused to answer questions about the issue? The church
If you have nothing to hide, then why not be more forthcoming.
What’s even more frustrating to me is the insinuation that all people in the church may not be “racist” so we don’t want to paint the church with a broad brush or defame them. Here’s the deal. Anyone who voted to remove that pastor is a racist. Period. Anyone who wasn’t there for the vote but shows up this Sunday after all this has come out. Also a racist. Why? They didn’t stick up for the man who called the church to repentance. They preferred their own comfort to the Gospel.
Let’s quit parsing words here and speculating about the “goodness” of this church. Multiple people who have proved to be trustworthy in the past have vetted this story. It’s true whether the church ever admits it or not.
The fact that some are debating the veracity of this story at this point is bordering on foolishness.
The whole story will come out in due time. If I had to “vote” right now I would probably trust Alan’s work (because he good at this stuff and I find him to be really honest) and vote for removal of this church – but you know what – not only do I not have to vote right now – its OK to choose to wait for more of the story to be revealed before speaking definitively – even (might I say especially these days) on issues connected to race. Remember this whole thing only happened less than 72 hours ago.
The association is reported to not be in the “racist” camp, so to speak, and has been posted somewhere in these comments that the association is investigating. They will, I’m sure, make a decision regarding the future partnership between that church and the association based on that evidence. I applaud that. Decisions and, yes, our comments on them should be made once the facts and both sides are well understood and presented. This is true in dealing with other issues and should be true when dealing with this issue as well.
If the church is found to have acted in the manner accused then I would hope the local association would grant them the left boot of dis-fellowship….and the state convention and the SBC in Phoenix. If evidence is presented at the convention that they fired the pastor for preaching a call to repentance and passing out fliers to people in the community whose skin was darker than the current membership – and they refuse to repent for it – then I will be certain to hold up my ballot (or fill one out, or whatever happens) for their removal. That has no place and should receive no sanction in the SBC.
I will also say that if this went down just like the pastor tells us it did – I respect and applaud his courage, conviction and backbone to stand against the majority, defy the peer pressure and stand strong for what is right, no matter the consequences.
Dave Miller,
Will you be willing to publicly apologize if the facts of this case come out differently than you now say?
Not just delete comments and posts, but publicly apologize?
Notice that I have not condemned the pastor or the church.
I have said there are at least two sides to every story, and you have basically presented only one side.
I can see how the pastor could be completely accurate, partly right, or very wrong. Same about the church, who hasn’t really been heard from.
A church fires its pastor on Sunday, and before Wednesday you declare from on high the pastor is pure, the church is racist, and the deacon lied.
I pray you never sit on the jury if I am on trial.
There is not just one way to look at racism.
I weary of articles here that basically say,
“You either agree with our view of racial issues, or you are a racist, or at least a suspect.”
David R. Brumbelow
Yes, David. The facts have been established pretty conclusively here. If the facts roll differently, I’ll apologize publicly.
Why are you so reluctant to accept the facts?
David R. Brumbelow,
I love you, brother, but sometimes there is only one side to a story.
However, let me quickly state that I do not think you a racist because you question this story. My point is simply one thing. There are not always “two” sides to a story. That’s just a fact.
“I can see how the pastor could be completely accurate, partly right, or very wrong. Same about the church, who hasn’t really been heard from.”
I don’t understand your reluctance to accept a simple, verified story. The church HAS been heard from. The deacon spoke. And others who know that church well have verified the story.
“A church fires its pastor on Sunday, and before Wednesday you declare from on high the pastor is pure, the church is racist, and the deacon lied.”
Yes, because that is where the facts lead. We actually knew that by Monday night. Sometimes, David, right and wrong are clear and we don’t need to dither. Racism is wrong, David. Refusing to allow your pastor to invite black kids to VBS is wrong, David. Cancelling VBS because he invited black kids is wrong. Firing the pastor because he called the church to repent of racism is wrong, David. You don’t need to dither on that. Just call it wrong and say, “repent.”
“I pray you never sit on the jury if I am on trial.”
Actually, I’d do what I did here. Listen to the facts and make a decision. But I would not put my fingers in my ears and refuse to listen.
“There is not just one way to look at racism.”
Yes, there IS just one way to look at it. It wrong. It is despicable. It is from the pit of hell. And we need to stop justifying it, defending it, hiding it. We need to admit it, shine the light on it, and repent of it where it exists. We need to love one another and call the SBC to “make disciples of all nations” – all ethnos.
There’s only ONE way to look at that, David. It’s 2016, not 1966.
“I weary of articles here that basically say,
‘You either agree with our view of racial issues, or you are a racist, or at least a suspect.’”
And I am weary of having to argue with those who defend the indefensible.
The facts about this incident begin to come out:
http://www.bpnews.net/47325/racism-alleged-as-part-of-pastors-termination
David R. Brumbelow
Pretty much confirms what we’ve been saying all along.
Of course, I’m sure the deniers will find something in there to buttress their denials.
But 1. Racism was the issue
2. the deacon made up the visitation thing
I’m not sure it’s good news, but evidently we aren’t the only denomination plagued with racism and racists. A man named Stuart DiNenno has left a couple of comments here. He’s PCA and left a couple of blatantly racist and shameful comments. I emailed him and sent me his diatribe – a biblical defense of segregation.
He accuses the PCA of liberalism because they aren’t supporting segregation anymore.
He’s evidently a fairly successful Atlanta businessman.
This problem is REAL folks.
The other side of this story:
“Our church is not racist,” Wimberley said. “We invite anyone that comes into our door to join us at any time. We welcome them. We ask them to be members.”
Greer “misunderstood what the deacons said or just didn’t listen,” Wimberley said. She was not present for his sermon on racism because of a memorial event for her late husband but later listened to a recording of it and cited the sermon when asked the reason for Greer’s termination.
“If you heard Jonathan’s sermon the Sunday before his dismissal,” Wimberley said, “it was not a sermon of love. It was a sermon of anger and hate.”
In terminating Greer, the church “made a bad decision, in my opinion,” Long said. “Nothing that the pastor did was worthy of dismissal. He’s a young pastor in his first church. As with all of us, mistakes [were] made — when you’re young especially.”
At the same time, Mt. Sterling should not be disfellowshiped from the association, Long said.
“Mt. Sterling Baptist Church, like every church, has people that are committed to Jesus Christ and the Gospel at different levels,” Long said. “It is a mistake to believe that every member of this church is racist. It is a mistake to believe that this church has any kind of printed or stated policy that excludes anyone … They have a documented history of having fellowship with other races.”
http://www.bpnews.net/47325/racism-alleged-as-part-of-pastors-termination
David R. Brumbelow
David B, thank you for sharing the BP story. I am persuaded the DOM knows more about this situation than those of us who couldn’t find Butler, AL with a GPS.
Dean,
Thanks. A lot.
The first one to plead his cause seems right, until his neighbor comes and examines him. -Proverbs 18:17
David R. Brumbelow
Dean Stewart,
I can find Butler without even a road map. Been there many times.
David R. Brumbelow, You have correctly quoted the Proverb. Yet, there are still stories that have only one side. And again, I am not arguing about this story. I am saying that the adage, “There’s always two sides to the story” is not always correct and it’s not.
“Let me share a story here if I may, Dave Miller?”
“Sure, cb. Anytime, Ole Buddy, Ole Pal and Exalted BAMA Fan, living in the land of the Great SEC.”
“Thanks, Dave. BTW I met your associate this past Monday evening. He is a nice guy.”
Here’s the story.
Several years ago, in an Alabama Baptist church while serving as pastor, I had a strong youth outreach. Several young guys were involved: some Black, some White, Some Mexican. As time went on two of the young Black guys made strong professions of faith. They wanted to be baptized. I told them I would baptize them, and intended to do so.
I shared this in a deacons’ meeting. There was no opposition, not any. This would be the first Black people to ever be baptized in that steel mill town church. However, one of the deacons told me that I might run into resistance from their mothers.
I went to visit both mothers. There was not a father in either home. The ladies were middle class folks, both with college degrees. One was a RN, the other was an accountant, I think. When I told the ladies (in separate visits) what I wanted to do and their sons confirmed the desire, both gave me similar answers.
Here is the answer from the RN, yet as stated, the other response was very similar.
“You will not baptize my boy and if my boy is ever baptized it will not be in a White church, by a White man. it will be be by a Black pastor, in a Black church.”
A couple of years later I did baptize both those young men (after their 18th birthdays) Both of them did well, they went on to college, got degree, and the last I heard, both were in business there in Birmingham.
Now, everything I just stated is true. Folks, racism is not always White. It can definitely be Black and I have, on more than one occasion, experienced it. I have integrated three churches and fought racism in a Baptist college. I know racism can appear in any ethnic group. That’s racism. The daddy of racism is Satan. He is an equal opportunity player in the racist game.
Now bigotry, that is a “horse of another color.” The true color of bigotry is $GREEN.00, and you can take that to the bank.
CB, you are 100% on the money. There’s more wrong with the issue of racism in the US than white people thinking and acting unkindly toward black people. Saying that often earns the people who say it all kinds of vile from others who think that racism only goes in one direction.
There’s only one problem with what you said, though. It isn’t particularly relevant here. Racism from some of the white members of this church is still just as wrong.
I have to end on a positive note, though, and I don’t recall if I’ve ever shared this anywhere here on SBCV or not, so forgive me if I repeat it. I never met a black person until we moved South in my 5th grade year, so I didn’t know what to expect. My experience up to that point was Fat Albert and Good Times. However, the move was fraught with financial woes for various reasons and we were living in old clothes. I went to school with holes in the patches of my high-waters. There were white folks that were nice to me, but plenty of white kids who looked down on me. The folks that accepted me most were the black folks: my teachers, my principal who called me personally to welcome me to the school and could call me by name in the hallway with a positive thing to say, the older folks who sat on the porch and watched me walk to school through their neighborhood, and my fellow students. I heard racist jokes from white students and heard older white folks talk unkindly about the black folks. But from what I saw here at the time, the black folks were largely more honorable. (This is why the degradation since that time of the black communities in my area with crime and broken families seriously grieves me.)
I have to say that I’m sure I don’t know all the facts in the case of this church. From the evidence I’ve seen in these comments and elsewhere, there probably was some racism as well as some immaturity, and that not as much from the pastor as from the church. But I also know that people are redeemable on account of a great Redeemer. I pray for a better end to this affair.
Jim Pemberton,
What happened to you was not racism. It was bigotry, pure $GREEN.00 bigotry.
Remember when articles were posted on other blogs attacking David Platt based on one sides “anonymous sources close to the issue”. The editor of this blog along with others on here, me included, hollered from the tops of the internets that we need to wait until the facts were out and the “other side” (David Platt) was allowed to respond.
That aside.
If the church were to release a statement (for example) outlining numerous offenses of the pastor that did not include racist stuff, as their reasoning for the no confidence vote (which by the way would be HIGHLY improper)….would it be run on this forum? Would be given fair treatment and reading and consideration?
It is clear that the die has been cast, and no matter what the church says it will be suspect and dismissed.
I am only asking for basic fairness to the membership of the church. We have only heard one side of the story. Let the association investigate and then we can all comment. We will all likely be in agreement at that point.
What we have here is not “a group defending racism” and a “group standing against racism” – we ALL agree that racism is wrong and sinful and anti scripture – there is no disagreement there.
Instead what we have a that is “pronouncing guilt” based on limited evidence, and a group saying “This sure smells fishy – but lets wait it out and make sure we got it all right.”
Perhaps Alan and Dave Miller know more about the details than we do – but that’s just it – we do not know, yet.
“Folks, racism is not always White. It can definitely be Black and I have, on more than one occasion, experienced it.” -C. B. Scott
C. B., I agree, and also have personal knowledge along those lines.
David R. Brumbelow
Until you have been treated as this church treated inviting the black community to VBS, then cancelled it, until you have been denied being served at a eating establishment because of the color of your skin, or denied a job because of the color of your skin and I can go on and on this garbage about “Racism is not always white” means nothing. You have no idea what true racism is, so get over yourself. White privilege has always been and it seems always will be. So to say this is simply ridiculous.
And David B: They have one black member who lives out of town? The member that is speaking out was out of town during the racist sermon so she did not hear it? That doesn’t sound questionable to you or William, William who is pretty smart when it comes to sniffing out questionable material? Come on.
I’m sure you guys who have doubted Jonathan’s every word will jump on that lady’s word as the gospel truth.
I’m disgusted and I’m walking away. It’s a sad day.
“I’m sure you guys who have doubted Jonathan’s every word will jump on that lady’s word as the gospel truth.”
So she is a liar (1)? The DOM (2) lied about there being “other issues involved as well”, the deacon(3) lied about his “lack of visitation”?
To correct the record: That is actually three people that you are publicly calling liars – and none of us on the forum that I have seen called the pastor a liar.
I agree with what Dean has said…..lets leave it in the Associations hands. (I have no clue where Butler, Alabama is)
Another statement from the other side of this story:
Wimberley, who has been a Mt. Sterling member 20 years, said the church has received expressions of “hate” since Sunday and that the termination was not about racism. The congregation long has had a black member, she said, though that member currently lives out of town and was not present for the vote.
http://www.bpnews.net/47325/racism-alleged-as-part-of-pastors-termination
David R. Brumbelow
David, you did nothing but question, deny, and doubt Jonathan’s story.
Now that someone speaks up denying the racism aspect, you log on trumpeting it.
That seems odd.
Baptist press did a good job with conversations from the DOM and church member.
Alan said he wanted to help the terminated pastor, not condemn the church. Commendable.
Dave called this for what it was, racism in the church, and condemned it. It just wasn’t without other serious issues nor as clean a case of such as it looked.
I was uncomfortable with going down this road this way without more conversations with the church. I don’t question the use of SBCV to point out injustice. To terminate the pastor with no severance is not the right course either.
I invoke Galatians as the outline for a better course of action. Sometimes social media takes us where a “spirit of gentleness” is absent. Allowances should be made for churches that fall short of the glory of God and pastors who can let zeal displace love.
It seems to me that there’s a lot more interest for some in DENYING what this is than in DEALING with the problem.
Well tell us – what are your suggestions for dealing with the church – the director of missions Who ackknowledges racism issues in the church (but states there were other reasons at play as well) – said in the baptist press article that he did not think that the church should be disfellowshipped – what do you suggest??
Not sure why anyone should “deal” with the church. They made their decision. It was public. A pastor was fired without severance. They made their choice. After the fact, they say it had nothing to do with race. Others say differently. People will believe what they want to.
This pastor had courage and should be supported. Too many just go along to get along. That is the point of this post. If there had not been a news article that I referred to and got information from, there would have been no mention of the church at all. They are not the main players here. The pastor and his family are.
I accidentally placed this in the wrong thread. Apologies.
I tend to agree with Robert Hughes when he says, “In stress, angry people who don’t have enough language (or whose language is merely the servant of an agenda) reach for the most emotive word they can find: ‘racist’ being today’s quintessential example, a word which, like ‘fascist’, raises so many levels of indistinct denunciation that it has lost whatever stable meaning it once had.”
So I have sympathy with those who say not everything that is called racism is outright racism. Having said that I see some tremendous problems even in this BP response.
1. The antidote to racism is not merely “we’ll accept anyone who comes through our doors”. The antidote to racism is to actively engage communities that are not necessarily like your own. Now, I won’t say that such a thing is necessarily racist, but it isn’t New Testament. It’s akin to taking off the old clothes but not putting on the new. The thief not only doesn’t steal anymore he now works hard for the sake of love. Likewise a culture which was once plagued by racism cannot stop at “we’ll open our doors up to blacks now” but must actively engage the cultures they once sinned against.
2. It sounds as if they are acknowledging that race was a problem within their church but not with everyone. It appears the pastor pulled a Jonathan Edwards and called out everybody when he should have been a bit more sensitive with the broad brush he was painting with. Very well. But, isn’t it a bit backwards to go after the guy who calls out actual racism because he didn’t quite communicate it the best? Shouldn’t the church be considering disciplining those members who actually were discouraging the inviting of kids of a different ethnicity to their VBS? I mean if this church REALLY isn’t racist wouldn’t they be joining with the pastor in helping him communicate a bit better and working to oust any racism within their body? You see, this wreaks to me of a church trying to spin and pretend like there are other issues. Not visiting members is a scapegoat and any pastor who has been in the midst of a difficult church situation knows how these things spiral.
3. Read what the DM said, “he stood valiantly for the truth. He would not compromise and deserves our admiration and encouragement and praise for that.” What truth is THAT? Sure this 26 year old pastor might not have navigated this situation the best. And I’m sure this brother was quite lonely within his local church. But the DM in this quote is confirming that there was truth to stand upon and this young man did that even if a bit awkwardly.
I’m not buying it. And I’m saddened that this is now being spun in such a way that this is the fault of an immature pastor and not a congregation which wrongly threw a man and his family out on their rear because he awkwardly confronted the sin of racism.
What Mike said.
I’ve largely stayed out of this thread because I didn’t really have time to put my thoughts together, but Mike L, you said it well. 🙂
(my middle name begins with L, so can I just go by Mike L and claim your post?)
Mike, on #1 if they fail to reach-out to all races equally is it still racism?
That’s a question with way too many unknowns to answer.
I’ve just got to walk away from this for a while. I’m so angry right now I can’t see straight – and that is kind of unusual for me.
For 2 days I heard this constant refrain doubting Jonathan – though all the facts back his story.
As soon as one lady in the church gives a slightly different story, you guys jump on that and act like he’s been disproven and the allegations of racism are negated.
I am angrier right now than I’ve been in a long time.
Someone has to explain why you are so quick to believe the church member when you wouldn’t believe Jonathan. But it doesn’t matter. I’m shutting off Voices for my own Spiritual health and sanity for a couple of days. I cannot handle this.
I apologize for my anger. Usually I’m better at controlling it, but this got under my skin.
Brother, perhaps I may be viewed as inciting discord, but truly I am not intending my comments to have such an effect. Then again, I recall Paul’s words to the Corinthian church concerning how his letters were bringing about bouts of consternation – “8 I am not sorry that I sent that severe letter to you, though I was sorry at first, for I know it was painful to you for a little while. 9 Now I am glad I sent it, not because it hurt you, but because the pain caused you to repent and change your ways. It was the kind of sorrow God wants his people to have, so you were not harmed by us in any way. 10 For the kind of sorrow God wants us to experience leads us away from sin and results in salvation. There’s no regret for that kind of sorrow. But worldly sorrow, which lacks repentance, results in spiritual death.” 2 Cor. 7:8-10. NLT
Having said that, my heart too is overwhelmed with hope in the courage of men and women such as yourself. Just as I was when my PCA brothers and sisters denounced the vile ancillary fringe group of their body that seeks to promote racism and bigotry and attempt to color it as racial dignity. Sad.
I have been praying about how to cross boundaries into the culture we serve as missional church planters here in Orangeburg, SC. I have been welcomed by a couple of White SBC pastor’s who sincerely love me and my family. But for the most part the deeply ingrained racial discontinuity which exists within the the hearts of most Whites I have met is so entrenched they have no idea it’s actually evil in nature. But then there is the other group. Those who actually know. And yet, consciously choose to continue in their depraved sinfulness for, as another person put it, “their own comfort, rather than the gospel.”
I’ve attached a link to a video I shared after a meditation one morning shortly following a conversation with just the sort of person I’m referring to. Just know this sir, your anger is justified. And must remain so; albeit without sinning; because Jesus is just as hurt and angry as you are. No – scratch that – MORE!
For those who want to negotiate the heart of this church’s congregants, I would merely ask them, “Which one of the seven churches of Revelations 1 would Jesus equate them to?” And why?
Oh and lest I forget…#thereisgrace4them2
Link to blog: https://elimorangeburg.org/2016/06/18/contemplating-racial-dissonance/
Gods peace and Journey well!
This is the 2nd time the PCA has been mentioned. This guy, Stuart DiNenno, may or may not be associated with
https://www.facebook.com/ConcernedPresbyterians/
This “Concerned Presbyterians are part of the Kinist movement. A FB group I am in, PCA Teaching and Ruling elders, had a post on them back in July. I read the comments and learned that basically these people in some cases claim to be PCA but use fake names on FB and so are virtually impossible to identify. Most of us doubt they are actually PCA members or pastors, but if so and can be identified would be brought up on charges of heresy. Here is another link written by a PCA pastor in 2015 where this Stuart guys comments. Interesting reading. The SBC resolution is talked about as well.
https://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/what-is-racism/
Yes. Stuart DiNenno – the racist from Atlanta – is involved with Concerned Presbyterians. He sent me their disgusting manifesto. It makes you feel dirty just reading it.
Dave Miller,
You said, “David, you did nothing but question, deny, and doubt Jonathan’s story.”
No, I did not. I simply wanted, and eventually presented, the other side of the story; the side you and Alan did not present.
Read my comments again.
Read your comments again.
Read the Baptist Press story again.
Then calm down and do some reflection.
If you are true to your word, and take off your blinders, you have some public apologizing to do.
David R. Brumbelow
David, the BP story buttressed everything I’ve been saying.
I’ve already apologized for becoming angry. But other than that, factually, our story was correct.
New statement at SBC Voices:
“Church now says they did not fire the pastor because of racism.”
Did the church say earlier that they did fire their pastor because of racism, and have now changed their story?
If so, I don’t recall. Yet, that is what the statement implies.
How about being fair to both sides?
http://www.bpnews.net/47325/racism-alleged-as-part-of-pastors-termination
David R. Brumbelow
Oh. My. Goodness.
There’s no point in discussing anything related to racism with you, David.
David, the original news article from the local TV station has a deacon of the church saying the pastor was fired for not visiting members. Now the church is saying it is because of a sermon that was filled with “anger and hate”. So what is it? The only one whose story is remained constant is Pastor Greer’s, the churches story has changed. Again, I wonder if the church will ever make available this sermon that was now the “main reason” for the pastor’s termination. Again, I doubt they will as it likely would blow a hole in their argument. Again, sinners normally find sermons that target their sin to be filled with “anger and hate”. Whether it is on racism, sexual sin, tithing, ect, people do not like being called out on their sin. This seems to be exactly what has happened here.
And don’t forget the DoM saying that racism probably played the most significant factor in the termination.
That and the consistency of the sides do paint a clear picture that racism still played it’s role in all of this, though other factors might have been present.
David B.,
What did I miss in the BP article? Clearly the church fired him as a result of a strong biblical message that he preached on race. They scheduled the vote after his message. He preached the message in response to whatever the deacons said to him regarding race as it relates to community VBS invitations. The roots of this firing can be traced to the deacons statements to Pastor Greer regarding race. Again, what am I missing? How can u deny that race & racism are at the bottom & top of this Pastor being fired, based on the BP article? The whole issue is related to race.
You are denying that grass is green; water is wet; ice is cold; eggs are poultry; and George Wallace was never a racist. WHAT AM I MISSING?
I don’t think you missed anything, but there are other perspectives that almost certainly do not have racism as the motivation.
The story could be just as it has been presented. Those presenting it obviously think they know the facts but are possibly blind to legitimate issues with how it has been presented.
From just the last few posts, it seems that problems on this site include jumping to conclusions that cannot be known from what has been presented as well as strong attempts to silence anyone who does not toe-the-line on the surety of knowing the hearts of all involved.
SVM is making much of “the church” changing it’s story, when what we have are different “church members” telling their own story. He juxtaposes this against the pastor being consistent, but it seems a comparison that is not so conclusive.
Dave does not acknowledge that saying “Church now says they did not fire the pastor because of racism.” is unclear as to what has “now” happened compared to the past. It is odd to make much out of the first denial of a charge being “now” rather than “then”.
Mike points out the validity of an outside opinion, but we really can’t make too much of the DOMs “probably”. He does not know but is making an educated guess,and none of us know what has educated that guess. It seems he doesn’t know for sure so at best we must then trust the process of a man we do not know. Perhaps he knows and likes the young pastor and is trusting his statements. BTW, I do not doubt that the young pastor is telling the story as truthfully as he can but those of us with higher mileage have seen situations where a crowd of people have different recollections of a stressful event, and none of them are actual liars.
It is also telling that the pastor wrongly accused the entire church of racism. I can see that make a tense situation worse. If we cloud the message we have done the truth a great dis-service. That applies to this blog also.
“Greer later apologized publicly and privately for broadly classifying the congregation as racist in his sermon.
“I didn’t realize that there were more people in the church … that were okay with people [of all races] coming,” Greer said. “And in my sermon, I didn’t account for that. I kind of lumped everyone together.””
“You are denying that grass is green; water is wet; ice is cold; eggs are poultry; and George Wallace was never a racist. WHAT AM I MISSING?”
Off subject, but perhaps of some interest since you brought up Gov Wallace, is that he was a repentant racist and won the black vote for his last term of office (1983-1987). He was forgiven by many blacks contemporary to him, but has been vilified anew by those with no first hand knowledge. I met Gov Wallace, after his repentance, and liked him a lot.
Well said, Dwight. Unfortunately, there are some who can see the splinter in a neighbor’s eye, but not the whole tree in their own.
John
Dwight,
You asked, “What am I missing?”
Quite a lot.
One thing you are missing is, that I am interested in the truth about this situation, not just one biased side of the story; like you just presented. I think the BP article did a pretty good job of being fair to both sides.
Dwight, are you interested in the truth about this and other situations? Or just feelings?
For example, are you interested in the truth about Ferguson, MO?
I’m a lot more interested in the truth rather than feelings.
I think our righteous God is as well.
I was always taught the correct order of importance should be:
Fact, Faith, Feeling.
Donald Holmes has made some valid points here as well.
Consider them.
David R. Brumbelow
That’s an incredibly arrogant and self-serving statement, David – as if only you are interested in truth.
What has frustrated me here is your unwillingness to accept the clear and plain truth. You pretty much engaged in name-calling and derogation toward us for reporting the truth.
I would trust the DOM. He says racism probably played a major role, and that they made a horrible decision. Regardless, they are ruined. Ichabod!
Adam, why would you trust the DOM? I’m not saying he isn’t trustworthy, but if you don’t know him personally how can you make that statement? And, if he isn’t familiar with both the church members and the pastor he is only making an educated guess at best.
The DOM of my association has never been to my church and would not be able to make any statements regarding it other than what others would have told him.
The reality is we have the Pastor’s statement and other statements that are cobbled together. I think the church overreacted and fired a young pastor for being passionate against racism. Unless there is a history of occurrences that this young pastor did for his entire tenure, firing him is a very harsh punishment, and no severance shows a lack of any Christian compassion. These items alone tend to back the pastor’s story.
Let’s wait and see if fuller facts become available. I doubt they will.
Agreed, Nate. All good points. I’ll highlight two:
“Unless there is a history of occurrences that this young pastor did for his entire tenure…”
“Let’s wait and see if fuller facts become available. I doubt they will.”
These have been the crux my points all along. We just don’t know – we don’t have the whole story.
Nate,
1. The SBC has a system of dealing with these things despite NAMB’s overreach.
2. If a man can’t be trusted he should not be put in a position. Trust leadership until given a reason not to do so.
3. The DOM has said racism probably played a major factor, knowing the history of the church.
Its late at this point, but it would have been wonderful to get the DOM or some other Pastors in the area to come around Jonathan and help him through this situation, it could have salvaged his relationship with the body and allowed him to continue to preach the Word. Those in Corinth had similar struggles, and as Paul was absent, it probably took a good 8-12 months just to get one of the major sins addressed as was depicted in his second letter to the group.
Young Pastors need to be surrounded by some seasoned men whether at that church or surrounding local bodies. That would greatly help both the young Pastor and the parts of the body that have not recognized the nastiness that sin demonstrates …eventually involving the entire congregation.
Whomever comes next to Mt. Sterling will no doubt need the assistance.
Amen and Yes.
“Young Pastors need to be surrounded by some seasoned men whether at that church or surrounding local bodies. That would greatly help both the young Pastor and the parts of the body that have not recognized the nastiness that sin demonstrates …eventually involving the entire congregation.”
OK, Ladies and Gentlemen,
No matter what is true or not true of this particular post, and I have no real or valid reason to doubt it, what Chris Johnson has stated here is an absolute truth and of founded well on the New Testament.
Young guys needs help to develop as pastors and preachers. I thank God that some old guys were willing to help me along the way. I am sure they shook their heads often, but they helped me anyway. They did not give up, nor did they throw me overboard.
Thanks once again, Chris Johnson for being a level-headed guy.
Yes, cb… I am grateful for those men that were patient with me as well, and helped me to be patient with others, while at the same time confronting sin and preaching the Word of God. Preaching and teaching is difficult work, and wise counsel is always a welcomed sight as the storm clouds are brewing within the body.
The only assistancw Mt. Sterling needs is in closing their doors. Unless one or two of those who continue to disbelieve the facts presented in this case want to go there and pastor.
The lamp stand has been removed. All that remains is a building and a sign to indicate a church once met there.
No room for repentence?
You reference their lampstand – assuming you’re referring to the first couple of chapters in Revelation – I don’t have my Bible in front of me but I’m pretty sure that even Jesus use the phrase when speaking to churches “unless you repent” – I think we’ve got to be really careful pronouncing judgment without leaving room for repentance.
There is One who can remove a lampstand and one who pronounces Ichabod and He doesn’t contribute to blogs.
I’m not removing anything Dean. I’m commenting on what has already happened and is obvious to anyone who is paying attention.
Heel, sure repentance can happen. You moving there to pastor that “church?” Fellas, 31 people voted to fire a pastor for calling them to repentance. The reason has gone from “not visiting enough” to an “angry and hateful sermon.” To whatever else is now being used as an excuse. Here’s what we know. A pastor reacted rightly to grevious sin. He performed his prophetic duty. They booted him.
Jesus instructions to his disciples when they were not received was to shake the dust off and move on. Some of you want to wallow in the mud and make excuses. Enjoy it.
I’m not interested. If the church were to come clean and make an actual attempt at repentance then we can discuss whether or not they still have a future as representatives of Jesus and His Kingdom. Until then, they have revealed themselves as playing for a completely different team. How that’s not obvious to some I will never know.
Chris, exactly right!
You sure is smart! 😉
Chris, they did come around the pastor. They worked with him throughout this process for two weeks.
Alan,….That seems like a very short period of time to work through this type of issue. He didn’t have a lot of time at the church as well, only into his second year. I’m sure there is a lot to unpack there….that I’m not at all aware of. Its good also if these other Pastors were able to meet with the Pastor and these deacons in question with the Mt. Sterling church as well for that much needed support over time. It is good for other churches to see other Godly men in agreement.
Sounds like it is way past that point though… and ended in a crescendo.
Chris, they had been in fellowship for some time prior. I was speaking to the actual crisis. This association was trying to do good things. I never said otherwise.
It’s so refreshing and hopeful to know that the Spirit of Truth has not abandoned those who remain a part – although a remnant – of this organization. It’s so often the fact that the most racist people I know are actually members of SBC Churches. I live in S.C. and have been experiencing it with such stalwart rigidity I’m actually afraid for their eternal damnation to be more of a resignation to it than a sin of willful omission.
Thank you sir.
If the church didn’t fire the pastor because of racism then invite a black pastor to preach next Sunday and help them work through this situation in a redemptive way. (smile)
Holding my breath in Sioux City.
Steve,
Have you asked a Black pastor to preach in the church of which you serve?
Actually, we have several times. But good point. My snarky comment was intended to suggest that the church in this controversy certainly could take clear steps to show that racism wasn’t the issue if it wasn’t (but the facts do seem to point to racism as the real reason for this pastor’s firing.)
Well said, Steve. I had a cousin (now deceased) who was DOM in Bessemer, John L. Smith. He was invited to a prominent pulpit in Birmingham (in the late ’70s or early ’80s) when they were without a pastor, and after his sermon, several members of their pulpit committee came and asked him to submit his resume. His response, according to him and I believe it, was that they did not want him as pastor. They asked why, and he said if he was their pastor, he would insist that they minister and reach out to the people all around the church–drug dealers, prostitutes, African Americans, drunks, and the homeless. I don’t know if he ever submitted his resume or not, but I was told that shortly after a new pastor came, the church announced it was selling their property downtown and moving to an affluent (and mostly white) suburb. Of course, several on this board will tell me that it had nothing to do with racism because we only have one side of the story. . . .
John Fariss,
I am pretty sure I know that church and you are right. . . .and there is no other side of that story.
I expect you do, C.B. Per their website, they may have made some strides since then. Still, due to prejudice, they passed up an opportunity to be salt and light to a community that desperately needed salt and light, and no amount of reconciliation in their now “safe” location can change that. I am not kicking them for either the decisions of a generation ago or criticizing them for their more recent efforts, but rather crying for what could have been and was not. Two things: one, if a large church like that with (what I presume is) an large influx of people had that mentality a generation ago, I am sure (I know, really) that there are many small, stagnant churches in the South still with the same mentality; and two, if such as church as this can change, there is at least hope for future generations.
John
Well, there it is. . . . John Fariss has spoken to that of which some would rather be a “trade secret” as to the reason that many churches whose financial resources would allow them to “relocate to better serve the Lord.”
My friends, “White Flight” has been the “church growth plan” for a multitude of Southern Baptist churches (and a few state convention buildings), not only in the Southland, but in many other regions of this country.
Herein I agree with John Fariss in his stating: ” I am not kicking them for either the decisions of a generation ago or criticizing them for their more recent efforts, but rather crying for what could have been and was not.”
There is work to be done. Yeah, I reckon.
I doubt they will be sending messengers to Phoenix, but I think there would be a motion not to seat them if they do.
It’s a good thing I didn’t see this comment earlier, John, because I’d have said something snarky that would have gotten me in much trouble.
But you are right. That is a racist decision that the church would have presented in “Great Commission” terms. We can always present our terrible ideas in the best light.
I said it. The association is going to ride the fence on this one. The church will not be disfellowshiped, the pastor goes on vacation with his family, and in the end who really gets hurt? Oh wait the universal church ends up looking pretty bad in a small town in AL and a young pastor is now out of a job and marked as a “young” pastor who in a round about way was said to have made a “mistake”. Yup. Sounds about right.
Jason,
It does appear that mistakes were made on both sides. Sin does not seem to have to take sides. It does appear from the reports so far….that both have admitted to making mistakes, but many are now ready for the sentencing phase.
How about reconciliation? Is God still big enough to overcome sin in the life of a Christian body? Can prejudice, fornication, or a whole host of sin fracture the body of Christ, and the Cross of Christ not be effective? Christians should not let politics get in the way of forgiveness or reconciliation. This is not the first time that prejudice will be inside the church walls, or a “young” pastor coming out “swinging” for the fences.
If we are called to love our enemies….surely God can work in this situation.
I am not sure where the disfellowship talk started. That was not in view in my original post. My desire was not to condemn the church but to lift up a young pastor who stood for truth, even when it cost him his job. We need to tell that story more. I stated what was reported. If disfellowship did happen, it would be enacted after a year or more of investigation and persistence in racist attitudes and actions. My hope is that it would not get to that point. A church can do something racist and then repent and admit that that was not the right attitude and then make an effort to change. That can happen at any time. The only way that a church would be disfellowshipped The goal is always to be reconciliation to God and to one another through Christ.
Anyone hoping for disfellowshipping this church has their heart in the wrong place, I think. The prayer should be for repentance and reconciliation. Repentance is not a bad word. It is a word of grace and mercy and is only possible through Christ.
Chris and Alan…good and reasoned words gentlemen.
Are Church congregations not liable for those leaders that they elect or place in office. I am not saying that there should not be repentance and forgiveness here. However, I am a bit concerned that we see such things as this playing out as they do. I am not contending that all the members of the church are racist. I am saying however, that the members of a congregational church are liable for the actions of its leaders. Should we presume that these people, in a church of 31 people, didn’t know that there were deacons who did not like the “demographic” that was being invited to their VBS? Honestly, do we just put our heads in the sand?
I just posted on my blog more of my own story related to being opposed by a church when I wanted to reach out more to blacks in our community. I also shared some thoughts about this based on the Bible. You can read it here: http://parresiazomai.blogspot.com/2016/08/a-church-fires-pastor-who-invited-black.html
I’m curious and would like to hear the sermon. Seems at least one member listened to a recording of it. Is the sermon available for the public?
Yes…^^^^^^
I’m going back into hiding, but the disinformation on this topic is both disheartening and overwhelming.
1. Does everyone realize that what Baptist Press is? They are good people, and professional, but their job is not to dig to the heart of a matter. They are a public relations arm of the SBC. They are not doing investigative journalism but trying to put lipstick on this pig.
2. I also realize that what is frustrating me is based on information we may be privy to that many of you are not – because we have chosen not to make every conversation public. We’ve presented our findings – which have been consistent and true since the beginning. Alan’s research is pristine and his statements are unchallenged. Despite insults from David Brumbelow, Alan’s research on this goes beyond what “professional journalists” often do. He has been conscientious beyond what bloggers usually are. So, David can take shots, but Alan has taken the high road and others should follow his example. If you read my summary from my update on Tuesday, the facts of that are also pretty much unchallenged. We have chosen to report the information from conversations without saying, “This person said,” or “That person said,” – and because of that some of you have armed yourself with disbelief.
But the facts of this story are unchallenged.
*Racism was at the heart of the firing of Jonathan Greer.
*The deacon’s story of Monday – that the firing was about visitation – was NOT true.
*The church voted 31-0 to fire Greer – and the main issue at stake was RACISM.
I’ve had SO MANY people who know the area and know the people tell me – It’s about racism. But some of you simply will not believe Jonathan.
3. The reactions of the church are NORMAL in a situation like. Have any of you EVER been in situations like this? What happens? Those who are upset never say, “this is what I am upset about.”
A man left our church recently. If you asked him why he left the church, he would say he was upset with me about X. X was a completely fictional reason. I know why he was upset but we couldn’t get him to deal with that. He was mad, so he created X and made that an issue – something everyone realized was not a real issue.
The church did not want to deal with its racism, so it immediately played the “blame the pastor” game.
Remember Ahab? He saw Elijah and called him, “the Troubler of Israel.” He refused to deal with his sin so he saw Elijah as the one causing the trouble. That’s what happened at this church. Refusing to deal with their sin, they blamed Jonathan – he was “unloving.”
And of course, you who want to deny that racism existed here jumped on the lone church member’s rationalization. You believed her even though Jonathan’s word was never good enough for you. Even though EVERYONE who spoke to it said, “Yes, racism was at the heart of this.” Even after the deacon had been demonstrated to have been untruthful.
But when one member said, “The problem was the pastor was unloving” – you jumped on that as if it was gospel truth.
4. Do you think the Pharisees thought Jesus’ words were “loving” in Matthew 23? How about Stephen’s sermon in Acts 6 and 7? They killed him for what he said. I can see a few of you saying, “Well, Stephen was also at fault. Luke needs to get the Pharisees’ side of that before he calls them sinners.”
Everyone who confronts sin is going to be unpopular.
Deniers – what do you think the church was going to say?
5. Its’ becoming more and more popular here to play “bash Jonathan.” He’s a young pastor who blew this situation. Did he? He saw a sin and he confronted it. What should he have done differently? The only basis of this is the woman’s words that he was unloving. Her word, of course, is gospel truth. But have you ever known someone to ADMIT to racism? If Jonathan stood in the pulpit and confronted racism (or any sin) isn’t the NORMAL response to say, “that’s not loving?”
I know that Jonathan sought and received wise counsel and that he proceeded out of conviction that this was indeed a “hill to die on” – a gospel essential worth risking his job over.
It’s easy to sit here on our seats of judgment and say, “Well he could have handled that better.” He probably could have. But I think he handled it pretty well. Better than I did when I had a similar situation. He died on a hill that was worth dying on – a gospel hill.
6. Racism is alive and well in the SBC.
I realize that I’m not going to win an argument here. Those who refuse to believe Jonathan’s story and jump to believe the racism deniers will not be persuaded by another statement from me.
That is why, barring something unusual, this is absolutely my last word on this post.
I’m not arguing anymore with those who simply, in my mind, are determined NOT to see the simple reality of this sad situation.
I know that I am not the only one to whom you refer – and I am not on the “good boy list” but….
I hope that you might one day see, after you calm down, that no everyone who does not see things related to racial issues exactly as you do, is racist or part of the problem.
No one has bashed the fired Pastor – a few people have asserted that information was missing and desired to proceed with caution before pronouncing Ichabod and damnation upon a local church that almost no one who reads or posts on this forum have ever visited or even drove through,
If the situation is as you and Alan have told it (based on what you have been told) then the pastor did the right thing. I likely would have done something similar. Mega Kudos to him. I have stated numerous times that if after investigation by proper and appropriate persons (like the association) that a finding of guilt (acting so sinfully) without repentance should result in complete top to bottom disassociation with the church and the SBC. I will, if presented with evidence and refusal to repent, vote for such a measure.
Incessantly condemning racism is good and necessary – but, please know that you are preaching it to the choir – as we ALL (note ALL) agree that it is deadly wrong and sinful and we ALL condemn it.
Perhaps another thread might be advice from someone who has dealt head on successfully with this – maybe a discussion on how other pastors might also stand up to overt (or subtle) racism in their churches. Certainly, this (with differing specifics) is a problem in north, south, east and west of our denomination? Perhaps a solution centered post might be in order.
If the church was reluctant to bring black kids into VBS and the pastor was fired because he confronted that, then this church must be called to repent by the association and removed from membership as soon as possible. Both sides should have a fair hearing from the association, but just because there are “two sides” doesn’t mean that the truth is equally on both sides. How the association handles this will show whether this is a sad exception or a tragic symptom of the attitude in that association about racism.
Steve,
Did we serve in the same association for a few years?
Yes, when you were in Birmingham area.
And C. B., I have appreciated and respected you then and since then. Where are you now?
Steve,
I thought that was you. I left B’ham and went to Georgia, serving at Brewton-Parker College, got into a little dust-up there with some folks and now I am in Kentucky serving as a local church pastor.
I assume you are still doing well and I am glad to hear it. You were doing some good work there when I left.
Steve, I completely agree.
I’m surprised BP touched this but it was racing around the convention on social media so they felt compelled. I don’t fault their effort. They talked to people who were named from the church and to the Associational Missionary. It’s not their job to argue with the respondents. Maybe they should have gotten additional comment from the pastor.
I expressed some reservations here. We had a church where people were clamoring for expulsion on the basis of the secular news story and a number of anonymous sources mentioned here. When the AM was asked he did not agree that the church should be expelled.
Someone smarter than I might think through the idea of what constitutions an excommunicable incidence of racism in an SBC church. Everyone here who has pastored in the south has a story.
I’m sorry if this is repetitive; I didn’t read all the comments. What disturbed me most was that the associational DOM acknowledged that racism “probably” played “the most significant role” in Greer’s termination yet maintains that the church should not be disfellowship from the association. How long are we going to tolerate racism in the SBC? Until God’s writes Ichabod on our house?
johnwallace482,
I guess fools do rush in where angels fear to tread, but here goes anyway, fool I am.
Here is a question for you. How many churches will you be willing to “disfellowship” from the SBC to weed out racism?
By what standard will you determine the disfellowshipping of churches?
One possibility is that if a church refuses black kids in VBS and then fires the pastor because he confronts them on it, then probably that would be a good starting point to consider separating from that church. A lot depends on how a church responds to such a situation. If they regret how they handled things and try to correct the situation then certainly I wouldn’t recommend separation. The association should offer to help. But if they refuse to acknowledge the problem and aren’t willing to make changes, then disfellowshipping seems to be the only responsible thing an association could do.
Talking to a friend online, and he brought something up. I want to make one more comment, then I really am (I promise with no fingers crossed) walking away.
Read these comments. Look how many people say, “I had a similar experience.” It is time we stopped ignoring this or trying to blame the man who stood in the pulpit and called racism and anti-gospel sin.
Read the sad stories – there are probably 10 or 15, maybe more – of people who have seen this kind of thing.
NO, not all SBC churches, members or pastors are active racists. But denying that racism was the issue, blaming the pastor for his firing, siding with the church that fired him – all of these things have just got to stop.
Dave,
Racism is not just in local churches. It is in state convention offices also. It is in local association structures, and it is in SBC entities. It is in all of those, because it rests first and foremost in the hearts of men.
Okay – my REALLY, REALLY, REALLY last comment.
“…foremost in the hearts of men.”
BOOM! That’s the problem. The flesh is strong within us. We like what we like and we like those like us. We want to keep to our own kind. It takes intentional repentance, intentional renewal, intentional application of gospel truth to change our hearts and our behavior.
You are not as dumb as David Worley says you are.
Les Prouty,
“Miracles appear
In the strangest of places
Fancy meeting you here
The last time I saw you
Was just out of Houston
Sit down, but I can’t buy you a beer 😉
Your presence is welcome
With me and my friend here
This is a hangout of mine”
And let’s talk about this post of Ole Alan’s here.
Les Prouty,
Where did you go?
I’m here, sort of in and out. Have a couple of 6 year old grandsons at the pool this afternoon.
Les,
I had responded to a comment you made, but I don’t see it now.
CB now these last couple comments make more sense. I didn’t see your other comments.
Now I’m. It seeing my earlier comments I made about what Dave said at 3:04pm.
“NOT seeing my earlier comments”
That’s the comment to which I responded. I seems to be gone.
Well let’s see if I can do it again. Dave wrote,
“racists. But denying the existence of racism, blaming the pastor for his firing, siding with the church that fired him – all of these things…”
To which I replied:
Hmmmm. I done think I’ve seen even one person do any of those three things on this post. And, I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone do number 1, deny the existence of racism, on this site, ever. I may be wrong, but I don’t think so.
Something like that CB.
Yep. That was it.
Food for thought….
It is true that many of us pastors have experienced racism and had to deal with it within our churches. It is with that reality in mind that I post this thought again….it is reasonable.
“Incessantly condemning racism is good and necessary – but, please know that you are preaching it to the choir – as we ALL (note ALL) agree that it is deadly wrong and sinful and we ALL condemn it.
Perhaps in another thread might we might see wise counsel and advice from someone who has successfully dealt head on with racism within their church – maybe a discussion on how other pastors might also stand up lovingly, effectively and appropriately to overt (or subtle) racism in their churches. Certainly, skin color discrimination/preference (with differing specifics) is a problem in north, south, east and west of our denomination?
Perhaps a solution centered post might be in order.”
Les Prouty and Tarheel,
I tend to agree with your comments in that I don’t think most of the guys who comment here are racists. I certainly don’t think David R. Brumbelow is. I know Vol is not, nor do I think you guys are.
Now, as for Alan’s post here, I have no doubt that the young pastor got railroaded. However, I don’t think that those who had questions about the church and pastor are racists.
Racism in the US does exist. Racism in the SBC definitely exists. Yet, not every person who challenges an accusation of racism is a racist, but they are often accused of it and that is what makes a blog “dialogue” about racism a hard cat to clean after.
There is also the issue of Black hatred against White people that has to be addressed in any of these dialogues. I commented about that issue above in this comment thread. There are also some who comment here who deny that Black hatred against Whites (All Whites, maybe) is a reality and that complicates the issue also.
Racism is not dead in the SBC, not by a long shot. It is a definitely a subject that needs to be addressed. However, there are addition issues related to racism that must be addressed also, such as Black hatred against Whites. That is a real issue also.
So maybe if everyone could lay down their swords and shields and just address the issue without the baggage of political correctness and without the problem being blamed on Calvinists or Non-Calvinists, maybe we could do some good about a hard subject.
That is sound advice, CB. Thank you. I know I have, in frustration and exasperation, lashed out more than once in this discussion – specifically at Dave Miller. I apologize for that. No matter what justification I might convince myself I have – lashing out at a brother in Christ is inappropriate and wrong.
I find that Dave and I are in agreement about the fundamental issues relating to this topic:
– Overt and subtle Discrimination and Preference based on skin color is alive and well (sadly) and must, like other sins, be confronted.
– It is sinful and should be condemned.
– It should never be justified.
– We as pastors must lovingly, appropriately, and with the right balance of compassion and firmness address these issues within our churches.
– Christ is glorified when the gospel is preached and taken to all people no matter skin color, geography or nationality.
(I am sure I could go on with agreements that we have – but it is always our differences that get us all engaged in sword and shield fights – and that too is dishonoring to God and truthfully to the reflection of the gospel to the world. My part in dishonoring Christ with such behavior was public – as is my apology.
Good words, Tarheel.
Dave Miller takes a lot of heat privately about this blog. He gets called everything from a liberal to a Yankee fan. Oh yeah, he is a Yankee fan, so I guess he deserves some of it.
Seriously, Dave takes some hits that he does not deserve. I remember one guy stating Dave was the “most liberal Baptist” he knew. Dave is no liberal. His theology is solid. . . . . . He just don’t know much about FOOTBALL or baseball.
The liberal comment is out of line!
(the other stuff you mentioned is all true though so he *deserves* that heat.)
CB those are some wise words right there. I do not think there are any racists commenting on this blog. Again, I may be wrong, but I haven’t seen any.
Seems like this subject always brings about way too much heat in our conversations, just as politics does. Well and of course so does Calvinism.
and alcohol
and IMB
and NAMB
and state conventions
and…….
Thanks, Les.
You are right as the rain. This subject draws down the lightning, as does politics, and soteriology.
Sometime I wish things were simply in Baptist Blogging like in the good old days when we just fought about Baptist Identity and the IMB. 😉
I really think it would be beneficial for us to define racism. For some, I think it means hating black people. For others it means believing that your race is superior (even by a little bit). Those two are actually quite different and I think might be part of the problem in these discussions.
Ex: Person with definition 1 has done a tremendous job of no longer disallowing African-Americans to eat at his restaurant, but he still tells off-color jokes about black people or he keeps up with stereotypes. Person with definition 2 sees this and says that he is being racist. Person 1 will argue to the death that he isn’t racist (and in his mind he isn’t) b/c he doesn’t wear a white hood or burn crosses in the yard. But person 2 will continue to argue b/c he is using another definition of what it means to be struggle with the sin of racism.
Mike it is not just one of those two options. You have people who would say they don’t hate black people (they have mysterious friends who are black); they believe black people should be treated equally; but believe in a “separation” of the races. No intermarriage, full segregation of schools and churches, ect. These people are every bit as much racists as the “I hate !” The issue is not what is racism, but rather recognizing that racism takes multiple forms. A church whose members say “We don’t hate black people, but we just think they would be ‘more comfortable’ at the black church down the street” is a racist church with racist members. And for the record, if there was a black majority church that did not allow white members, pressured new white attenders to go to a “white” church down the street, and who would fire the pastor because he invited poor white kids to VBS, they would be racists too. Ironically, racism knows no color boundaries.
Mike,
I think #1 is part of it, but not all of it. Its like the bare minimum but not the whole thing.
If #2 is the definition (which I think it is) then wouldn’t the idea of preference (affirmative discrimination) defy that?
What I mean is – if one feels that a feeling of superiority is racist – then shouldn’t they also oppose the idea of giving someone something or affirming them because of their skin color? (doesn’t affirmative actions carry with them the notion that “we must give it you because you need our help”?)
There are lots of complexities and nuances that make discussion on this topic very difficult. Almost everyone is working off a different set of definitions and each facet of the discussion carries with it the need for more definitions.
Mike, et al.
Why not start with a standard definition.
“the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.”
Now, where does the person telling off color jokes fit in? And what if said joke teller actually is white and has black family members he loves? This gets to be a sticky wicket pretty quickly.
The definition is pretty elusive. I think most people have a sense of racism that is subjectively anecdotal. That is, people have in mind some account that happened to them or a loved one, or that they heard about or saw in a movie or on TV. We lack a definitional standard that agrees with everyone’s experience.
If a person thinks less of another in any way due to the color of their skin, they have racist thinking.
Usually that leads to racist acts or speech, but not always.
If instead, when they have racist thought, they repent of it, and condemn it, then they will not sin racially.
Racism: when a person thinks less of another because of their skin color.
I wish it was shocking that some posters in here are denying the obvious and somehow claiming the church’s actions are somehow vindicated. But it is not. We have seen those same people defend blatant error and sin in various leaders for years, in the face of mountains of evidence…and we see how that one turned out. There were even claims of vindication there as well. Some people refuse to accept truth if it goes against their accepted views or positions. Some people let their presuppositions determine how they read facts…often at the expense of the facts.
The BP story did not vindicate the church. Read the story again. The issue is, and always was, racism. The church knows it and any attempt to turn it to something else, either (a) not visiting enough, or (b) preaching too “angry” a sermon are poor excuses to fire a pastor, and a really weak smokescreen. The fact that a deacon in the original interview said it was about visiting, with no mention of the sermon, shows they were mad at their sin being exposed and were ready to get rid of the guy. Even if he did preach angry, is there no place for that anymore? It seems to me if a church will fire a pastor for a sermon that they are the kind of people that need hard preaching. It is a safer bet that he exposed their sin and they hated it…like most unrepentant sinners do.
(Can we also say that even if this was about not visiting or preaching angry one time, that the proper response is not firing a pastor…it is helping him improve. Were there steps to help him? Did they seek mediation? Did they try and find a mentor? We all know the answer. So even if those were legitimate complaints, they didn’t handle it correctly. Firing him without doing those things is sinful, it is not loving him well or seeking his wellbeing. But, again, those were not the issues…they very rarely are, and everyone who has been in ministry more than a month knows it.)
Look, the church is grasping at straws, and it is pretty obvious in their response…to anyone willing to look at the situation fairly. The DOM, very diplomatically I might add, told the truth that this was about racism, even while trying to soften the reality. The fact that some here refuse to see it is disappointing.
I am not sure anyone argued that the church is vindicated – some of us were arguing earlier on that we should wait for more information – never was it our (at least my) intent to absolve sinful actions by the church. Then all Hades broke loose….
Yes, some were saying that there is likely more to the story – but that was never intended to minimize any proven racist activity.
As often happens on blogs, I think its fair to say that several of us, went immediately to corners and then in our fleshly desire for personal vindication latched onto anything that even seemed to “prove us right” (“see so and so is not telling the whole story”, or see, I told you so…etc.)
Pride is an ugly monster. It effects and infects us all, ESPECIALLY on blogs, I think.
While none of us want to excuse sin – we ignore the fact that pride and self righteousness is a sin too. We also from time to time get keyboard courage – and post comments toward brothers in Christ and we likely would not say in person in a real conversation.
OK…enough confession…LOL. You guys are not my priest and I am not a Roman Catholic.
Jason, that was a brilliant comment – I’ve been ignoring this comment stream, so I didn’t see it. But you are spot on.
Another article on this story:
https://baptistnews.com/article/former-pastor-says-racism-a-factor-in-his-dismissal/
David R. Brumbelow
The Miller Theory of blog commenting is that very little of any value happens in comments (at all) – but nothing after 48 hours and/or 100 comments.
Time to shut it down.
I think it is likely that, though it appears that the association is not going to take action here, and I have no idea what the Alabama convention will do, if Mt. Sterling sends messengers to the SBC Annual Meeting, I hope we will refuse to seat them and I think a message to that effect will be offered.
I’ll close this out by saying thank you to Alan.
There have been some disrespectful comments on here about this post – as if it is some kind of hatchet job. The opposite is the case. Alan did some excellent and careful research, even after he wrote the post.
Contrary to what some have said, this article was carefully researched and showed the highest level of integrity.
Alan is to be commended for the work he did here.
I understand that since Alan chose not to “show his work” on the blog, and kept some conversations private, the natural tendency of some is to doubt, especially those who do not want to believe such a story to be true. But nothing Alan published has been proven wrong. To the contrary – every word has been verified fully.
Well done, Alan.