I wasn’t raised Southern Baptist, but I became one when I was seventeen years old. I pastored my first Southern Baptist Church when I was twenty, and have since had the privilege of pastoring in the denomination for thirteen years. I also have the honor of serving on both the Southern Baptists of Texas Executive Board (SBTC), as well as the Southern Baptists Executive Committee. I am a deeply invested Southern Baptist, and deliberately so. I relate to the man in the Parable of the Hidden Treasure, and feel the Cooperative Program is like a treasure buried in a field we call the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). I joyfully sold the traditions of my denominational upbringing to buy the field so I could own the treasure. It’s a brilliant treasure that has been used to see countless people come to know Christ.
It is for this reason I entreat those who are considering altering their CP giving over their ERLC concerns. It is my conviction that such a move would not merely devalue the treasure, but destroy the field.
A diagnosis is first in order. Many of the articles I’ve read on the subject acknowledge the symptoms of the division, but few consider the malady, which is a philosophical difference of opinion over the purpose of the ERLC. That is, whether the ERLC echoes the SBC’s ethics, or helps the SBC fashion its ethics.
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), for example, emphasizes several SBC individual’s concerns over Moore’s representation of them. William F. Harrell’s comment is perhaps the clearest on how several understand the ERLC’s purpose, in which he says, “the ERLC should continue under Mr. Moore’s leadership only if ‘he will start doing what the ERLC was meant to do, and that’s simply represent the Southern Baptist people in Washington.’” In an NPR article Harrell is quoted saying, “Since Dr. Moore has taken over, there are a lot of things that are being said on various issues that the Southern Baptist people at large don’t agree with.”
This summarizes how several understand the ERLC’s purpose. It isn’t to set the ethical tone for the SBC, so much as it is to parrot what the SBC by and large asserts, in this case the support of Donald J. Trump. This is an important distinction, because it demarcates how the entire ERLC operates.
Insofar as his commentary shows, Moore would agree that his job is to represent the SBC, but he also believes it is to help the SBC think ethically through complex issues, in this case a Southern Baptist’s support for Trump. Moore has clarified his intention was not to disrespect anyone who voted for Trump, but to exposit the ethics of the dilemma many faced. “There’s a massive difference between someone who enthusiastically excused immorality and someone who felt conflicted, weighed the options based on biblical convictions, and voted their conscience … If [criticism of anyone who voted for Trump is] what you heard me say,” Moore says, “that was not at all my intention, and I apologize.”
Nonetheless, Moore has incensed several SBC members, who are now threatening to withhold or designate their CP funding unless something changes. This, however, would be a nuclear option to the SBC, and this brings up the impetus for this particular article: Withholding or designating CP funds away from the ERLC volcanically undermines the spirit and functionality of the Convention.
It reburies the treasure, and lights a match to the field.
For one, this would be a catastrophic hit to some state conventions, like the one in Texas on which I serve as an executive board member. Under our governing documents, any designated gift to the CP goes into a reserve fund, which cannot be used for operations. Joe Davis, the SBTC’s CFO, outlines the logistics in saying, “when funds intended to be CP are designated, they are no longer CP funds, and can therefore no longer fund the budget of operations. Cooperative Program funds are necessarily undesignated. So, under strict terminology there is no such thing as ‘designated’ CP funds”. Thus, the SBTC’s budget of operations would plummet, and I imagine the same might be true for other state conventions.
State Conventions play a key role in our national Convention, and designating CP funding would be like breaking our Convention’s kneecaps.
Cutting CP funding also sets a dangerous precedent for churches who might want to “designate” their gifts away from other SBC agencies, like the IMB or NAMB. This is worse than breaking our own kneecaps; we’d be cutting off our own legs.
Rather than withholding or designating CP funding, Southern Baptists should contact the trustees and boards of the respective entity to express concerns and enact changes. Moreover, Southern Baptists who are opposed to the ERLC because of Russell Moore should consider employing the same cooperative spirit they espoused for the election of Trump. The nature of Moore’s latest articles and tweets shows his desire to work alongside the SBC, and it would behoove us to take advantage of that.
The field is too good, and the treasure too precious to cast before the swine of division.
Cited:
http://www.npr.org/2016/12/20/506248119/anti-trump-evangelical-faces-backlash
Jared — Thank you. This is a thoughtful reflection on the ERLC issue. What you said kindly I will say a bit more blunt — it seems that Dr. Moore is expected to be a puppet leader rather than one who leads by biblical conviction when gauging the issues and culture at hand. I’m speculating that over 95% of the opposition to Dr. Moore is coming from churches led by white pastors over 60 years old. While I am not disregarding their biblical convictions, it does bring to mind yesteryear Christianity that was wrapped in the American flag with an… Read more »
Question: Is there are particular charter for what the ERLC is suppose to be doing? If so, I would like to read it. This is all I can find on the website. “Through its Washington D.C. office, the ERLC secures a Southern Baptist presence on Capitol Hill and represents the views and concerns of the over 16 million members of the Southern Baptist Convention.” To that extent Dr. Moore did not represent the views and concerns of all Southern Baptists during the election, he only represented some. I think it is unfair to say disagreement and/or restructuring would have Moore… Read more »
I’m sure there is a document that outlines the ERLC’s purpose. I would contact the ERLC or the SBC office to attain it. Also, I would argue that your interpretation of his apology is misguided. It’s true Moore’s commentary can bite, but he has been clear on what he meant concerning criticism over voting for Trump. I quoted one of the statements in the blog, and I don’t think it was political. The ERLC President is called to be prophetic, and anyone in that position would have had a hard time navigating his way through what was the 2016 Presidential… Read more »
“I don’t think it’s fair that one side can go this public while others should remain silent.” One side has been public for the last year plus. That would be Moore’s biting articles against those that supported Trump. Why has it taken his election for this so-called apology to come forth? I seriously doubt had Trump not been elected as President that Moore would have apologized for his remarks. If you want to encourage cooperation, you might want to be a little more reflective of what Moore actually said over the last year about Trump supporters and what he supposedly… Read more »
Nate, I think both “sides” have been public throughout the entire course of the election, and to deny this would be to ignore your own advice of being “reflective.” I could cite several comments from pastors like Robert Jeffress, for example, who said that anyone who didn’t vote for Trump was guilty of the sin of pride.
I was merely responding to your comment which suggested that articles like this aren’t helpful. I think they can be. The goal isn’t to ignore one side over the other, but to remind everyone we are on the same side.
Moore apologized when he did because people were expressing that they were offended, not because Trump won the election.
Prior to the election, Moore explicitly stated that his critiques were not directed at Christians who were choosing Trump as the lesser of two evils. “I understand why some, including some devout religious conservatives, argue that they recognize the moral and temperamental unfitness of a man such as Trump for the nation’s highest office, but feel they must cast their ballots for him in an effort to forestall the very real perils of a Supreme Court increasingly hostile to the most basic of religious freedoms and constitutional restraints. While I disagree with my religious conservative friends who think this way,… Read more »
Steven, here is a direct quote from Have Evangelicals Who Support Trump lost their Values. Quote: “To back Mr. Trump, these voters must repudiate everything they believe.”
In what world does his apology of I didn’t mean anyone specifically work?
This is a screen shot of the ERLC Ministry Statement in the 1995 SBC Annual.
https://twitter.com/PastorAdamGBC/status/811242472408043520
I think the biblical metaphors here as applied to the cooperative program are ill used, the tone is far too shrill, and I’m a bit puzzled by the statement that the current business would set a precedent. There are abundant precedents for designating or lowering CP giving in response to objections to spending. Check the CR to find them. And I don’t know how often SBCT receives CP money with a note not to spend on X, or Y, or Z. Churches are fairly sophisticated and can merely lower their CP by the amount that ERLC would receive. That said,… Read more »
William, Reducing CP giving by the amt the ERLC would receive accomplishes nothing, except punish the State convention and every other entity receiving CP funds…and the ERLC would still get something. The only was a church can eliminate fin support for the ERLC is to quit giving through the CP altogether and instead give DIRECTLY to the State Convention and SBC entities they wish to support.
An excellent article, Jared. I would only add this: The Southern Baptist Convention is not a hodgepodge of millions of people polled by Rasmussen; it is a convention of churches who gather annually at a meeting. Entity heads “represent” the Southern Baptist Convention by acting in accordance with the official actions of the convention. Has Russell Moore acted within the BF&M adopted by the Convention? Yes. Has Russell Moore acted within the mission assigned to the ERLC by the SBC’s Ministry Assignment? Yes. Has Russell Moore acted in fulfillment of past resolutions adopted by the Convention? Yes. Has Russell Moore… Read more »
Exactly, Bart!
Yes; NO; Maybe, but they were not directly aimed at the ERLC; Not sure. All Moore did was vent. He did/said nothing helpful to pastors or churches. He did/’said nothing to help deal with the issue in the present or the future. These things do not mean he should be fired. They may mean he needs to reconsider his approach. BUT it definitely demonstrates the irrelevance of the ERLC.
Thanks Bart. Appreciate you rightly dividing the nuances of the definition of “Southern Baptist Convention.” Incredibly helpful.
this
I also question the wisdom of these pastors speaking to the press about these internal matters. Why air our dirty laundry to a watching world? It seems to violate the spirit of 1 Corinthians 6.
But Moore had no problem airing his rants against Trump supporters in the press at the NY Times and the Washington Post among other places. Did he violate the spirit of 1 Corinthians 6?
Russell Moore didn’t air internal squabble by announcing to the world that he’s planning to extort the CP unto
his own end….these pastors did.
Disagree with him as one might (and I do from time to time) but to go as far as going to secular media to call for his firing and to Make announcements regarding their plan to extort the Southern Baptist convention over secondary and tertiary disagreements (like his opposing Trump) is a bridge too far… In my opinion.
Fair enough Tarheel. That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. From my standpoint Moore thinks he can say whatever he wants about other Southern Baptists and it won’t come back to haunt him. We shall see. His predecessor had a similar mindset and he was shown the door.
Sadly, Nate, he is right. Moore is very insulated. Trustees only do what they are asked to do….they provide no accountability. Doesn’t the ERLC pay for the Trustees to meet? Do you think they would pay for a Trustee meeting to reprimand Moore? I doubt it. Unless Moore has a moral failure the trustees would NEVER vote to remove or reprimand him.
Nate: I agree with David C(Tarheel). Russell Moore did what he is paid to do and that is speak Biblical truth. His convictions. I am so glad that he did. And once again his critics now helped to pass this resolution in 1998 when Bill Clinton was having his own set of problems in the morality department. Look at the high profile leaders who are not speaking against Moore, in fact he has gotten lots of support. There are more not speaking or standing by him than those who are speaking against him. Count them. Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That… Read more »
If I may say these pastors sound like some church members I have had in the past. I I don’t get my way I am going to quit giving and the church will vote you out. These pastors are being very immature.
Playing ‘The Immature Card’ is kind of like playing “The Race Card.”….a smoke screen, irrelevant to the topic of discussion designed to shut down dissent and shut critics up.
Honest question for the Moore critics. If Moore had been extremely critical of Clinton, and not Trump, throughout the campaign, would you still be critical of Moore’s imbalanced criticism and do you think people would be threatening to withhold funding?
Bill, the real issue was, and is, that Moore was critical of Southern Baptists who were supporting Trump. Now, while it is true that Moore didn’t write too many hit pieces on Clinton, I don’t think that is the real issue. If he had been balanced on speaking to the flaws of all the candidates (including his favorites) without denigrating Southern Baptists, there wouldn’t be an issue at the moment.
I would not have liked him opposing Hillary personally. But I would have appreciated him critiquing the platform of the Democrats and the moral demise of the last eight years. The ERLC has no business supporting or opposing specific candidates.
Another honest question. In the eyes of the unbelieving country, do you think the ministry of Southern Baptists in sharing the Gospel is more harmed by tension between the Trump administration and the ERLC or by the full throated Trump support by prominent Southern Baptists. For example by Falwell’s assertion that it didn’t even matter if Trump was guilty of sexual assault, that wouldn’t sway his vote.
To those of us who supported Trump, we believe the country will get to continue to have 1st Amendment freedoms (and 2nd) because of who we supported. We also believe the gospel would have been more harmed had Clinton been elected and, perhaps, the CP damaged had she become President through potential taxing of churches, etc.
So perhaps a question to you (and others). What would an unbelieving country think if Southern Baptists had stayed away in droves and allowed Clinton to be elected? Would unbelievers see that as “good news”?
Nate: I agree that SBCers had a far greater dilemma once Trump was the nominee. I think we could collectively have done the most good in preventing Trump from being nominated. Let’s face it, nothing we learned about Trump’s moral character after the nomination was a surprise, only our continued support in the face of the revelations.
I don’t like Clinton one little bit, but I think the things she was proactively accused of supporting, like eliminating the first and second amendments, where simply republican bogeymen.
What about churches withholding their Cooperative Program money because they are upset with Russell Moore? Actually, the Ethics Commission gets a small part of the Cooperative Program budget. The International Mission Boards gets 51%; the North American Mission Board gets 23%, and the seminaries get 21%. So, you can see that our mission boards and seminaries get 95% of CP money. If you are dissatisfied with Russell Moore’s performance, don’t call the Wall Street Journal, contact one or more trustees of the Ethics Commission. They supervise Dr. Moore. That is the way our SBC system works. Our institutions are governed… Read more »
“If you are dissatisfied with Russell Moore’s performance, don’t call the Wall Street Journal, contact one or more trustees of the Ethics Commission. They supervise Dr. Moore. That is the way our SBC system works. Our institutions are governed by trustees elected by the SBC in its annual meeting.”
Bingo.
They DO NOT respond!
The fact that they do not respond in the way that you want them to does not mean that you have not been heard. You are but one voice. Cooperation means we don’t kick and scream every time we don’t get our way.
The REASON CP reductions have been adopted by some churches are now being considered by more is NOT because of MOORE’S MORONIC BASHING of those who either reluctantly or enthusiastically voted for Trump. This is just the tip of the iceberg OR perhaps the TIPPING POINT for more SBC Pastors and lay people in the know. THE SBC is ignoring its churches. It is doing its own thing. Today’s SBC leaders are intentionally seeking to Calvinize the convention even though a small fraction of our churches and pastors are Calvinists. SBC leaders are doing everything they can to urbanize our… Read more »
OK. Name some churches that have reduced their CP as a result of what’s happening at the ERLC. Harrell and Graham have threatened.
Your comment is a collection of vitriolic nonsense.
Wait and see…
You said they “have been adopted by some churches”. I’m just asking to see if you know what you’re talking about.
If you’re just venting, fine. Have a merry Christmas and try to hold all the ‘bah humbug’ stuff until next week.
Merry Christmas to you too. I wished Dr. Moore a Merry Christmas too on his Fb page.
Wow….Breathe, Allen – breathe.
Mark Terry and I are old enough to remember when Jimmy Draper and other SBC pastors threatened to with hold Cooperative Program funds not just from one agency but from the entire SBC if their candidate was not elected president of the SBC. This is an old custom for many in our denomination. I agree with Mark that a pastor should not use his pulpit to endorse political candidates but Russell Moore was acting not as pastor but as leader of our denominational entity tasked with speaking out on ethical and moral issues. Of course by speaking out on issues,… Read more »
Although I read SBC Voices quite often, I rarely comment because I have come to see that in most cases comments usually end up in arguments instead of illumination (or in discussions of football). I am going to make an exception now because I would like to give a view from the pews, so to speak. I am not pastorally ordained (I teach Sunday School, am an inactive deacon since I was divorced by my wife, minister to our seniors, and for 30 years worked with RAs before the convention abandoned the program) and have been a Southern Baptist for… Read more »
Jim, you should comment more often. That was excellent. Thank you.
+1
Thanks for your words. They are needed. I pray they are heeded.
Wow. Thanks for that “commentary from the pews”.
Such a powerful comment Jim Lockhart, that I kept shaking my head yes, yes as I read each word.
As on 69 year old to another, well said.
Ron West will always be older than me (by two years). Yes, I can remember that during the Conservative Resurgence some withheld CP funds, or threatened to. I thought it was wrong then, and I still do.
There were four areas where I think Russell Moore erred in his efforts to convince Evangelicals, and specifically Southern Baptists, to not vote for Donald Trump in this past election: 1. He confused personal conviction with universal Biblical truths/principals which actually are the prevue of what the ERLC is chartered to address. 2. He made many disparaging comments about fellow believers who disagreed with him. 3. He stated that the younger generation of Evangelicals has a “stronger theology” than the older “Religious Right” of the Jerry Falwell/Charles Stanley generation. 4. He focused so much on Donald Trump’s personal foibles that… Read more »
Well said!
In a way Moore is under the same pressure that our civil representatives are under. We are a deeply divided nation and it’s impossible to represent everyone’s interests. The SBC is pretty diverse as well. In this case that diversity plays out in the way we approach the civil arena. There’s obviously a lot of disagreement in the SBC over it. There’s no way Moore is going to do anything that’s not going to make one faction or another angry. Additionally, he is constrained to orthodox theology. He just can’t make up his own rules in an attempt to appease… Read more »
As someone who has been active in SBC churches since the 70’s (and a loyal supporter of the CR, FWIW), my first question is “When did championing clean CP giving become a thing for conservative pastors in the SBC?” I could name names here but we all know prominent SBC churches that have never valued direct CP giving, preferring to designate funds to preferred agencies and not to others. This was sorta the point of the GCR, right? To allow for a cooperative giving measurement that was not strictly CP? The overall trend line for CP giving is down, as… Read more »