…just get out of pastoral ministry if you’ve messed up your life and aren’t above reproach. I’m about 48% in favor of having a guild for Southern Baptist clergy that has the authority to deny credentials to rascals, scoundrels, Elmer Gantry types, and criminals; to incompetent hucksters, church-wreckers, and money-grubbers; and to just plain ecclesiastical imbeciles who have absolutely no business inflicting their so-called ministry on a Southern Baptist or any other congregation of the followers of Jesus Christ.
The devil is in the details, though. The chances of any SBC board, group, or individual putting an official stamp of approval or disapproval on individual SBC clergy is somewhere between zero and none. And, yeah, I know that there is no such thing as an “SBC minister” anyway. When I think of some of the DOMs/AMs/AMSs, some of the state convention church relations people, some of the oligarchs who like to give thumbs up or down on individual clergy, I’d almost rather fall into the devil’s hands instead.
Ordination is the most meaningless of things in SBC life. It’s an unbridled scandal and no one can do a doggone thing about it. Some churches would ordain a ham sandwich. Ordination revocations are as scarce as tithers.
Clergy who abuse children should be in jail and if jail is not an option, certainly out of the ministry, permanently. But, who will inform the ignorant or idiotic church that calls a child abuser? No one has to in SBC life. If there is a way that our “system,” and we don’t have a system so much as historic polity that isn’t going to change, is broken it is where miscreants can move to another church or state.
Clergy who are abusers of women should be out of the ministry, probably permanently. Spiritual abuse is a slippery concept and sometimes defies any concrete definition but I know it when I see it.
So, who should attempt to inform a local church that their minister or prospective minister has disqualified themselves for the Christian ministry? Whomever has the facts and feels compelled to act, I suppose. In many cases, I’d love to ruin the man’s ministry. Easy to do some chest-thumping here but thank God for any who value the fellowship of clergy enough to act to force some back to selling shoes or cars.
Stray questions along these lines:
- Should ordinating churches be contacted when someone they have ordained, set apart, has failed?
- Should seminaries award degrees conditionally, that is, subject to revocation in some cases?
- Should DOM/AM/AMSs be more aggressive in this regard?
- Should the SBC Executive Committee have an independent review board who receives reports and assesses these things?
- Should the three levels of SBC life be more aggressive in excluding churches?
- Is there a basis for any level of SBC life to formally disassociate themselves from any individual clergy, for cause?
If I could put a gif here, you’d get Shia LaBeouf clapping. As to your questions…
1. Yes
2. Absolutely
3. If they’re going after the right guys, yes
4. Without question
5. 100%
6. No doubt
There is some talk right now to consider criterion which could cause churches to be deemed “not in cooperation” with the SBC if they have a bad track record relative to sexual abuse.
However, it would probably make more sense for the “black list” to include individual people –not churches.
If I attend Podunk Baptist church and some member of the staff is an abuser then I think that target of the investigation should be the culprit and anyone who knew about the abuse and did nothing. Why kick out the whole church from the SBC for the isolated acts of one or two members?
Yes on all 6.
I agree with 1-5. I’m not clear on what you meant by #6. I urge churches or individuals to contact the ordaining church about an abuser or immoral pastor. If the abuse or immorality occurred in another state, the church probably would be unaware of the illegal and/or immoral behavior. For sure, our churches should revoke ordinations, and that action should be publicized in the associational newsletter and the state Baptist paper. I’m not sure whether seminaries could revoke degrees because of abuse or immorality. Perhaps an attorney could comment on this. I remember that New Orleans Baptist Seminary refused to grant a degree to a student several years ago. Just before graduation, the seminary discovered that the student had committed adultery and barred him from graduating. NOBTS tried to withhold his diploma, but he sued and won the case. As I recall, the dismissed student prevailed in court because the seminary’s catalog and student handbook did not specify that the seminary could withhold a diploma in cases of immorality. In recent months we’ve focused on sexual abusers, and rightly so, but I recall a prominent pastor who committed adultery in three churches in succession. Perhaps associations and state conventions could set up advisory committees to advise churches about how to deal with abusive pastors.
I don’t know of a good process to create a ‘blacklist’ of unapproved clergy. Criminal records would be public, of course, but beyond that I’m not persuaded of a fair process. Clergy are informally blacklisted all the time. On the seminaries, I would think that a private religious institution could create and practice their own rules, though not ex post facto. More to come on this, I expect.
2. I’m sorry, but you cannot revoke a degree because a person committed a crime. Period. That is absurd. Lawsuit waiting to happen, and the person should win.
you gonna be in Athens Saturday ?
Nope. Family reunion in the mtns. I’d probably be there otherwise. Still would love to connect…
Should ordinating churches be contacted when someone they have ordained, set apart, has failed?
They could be but it likely would have no practical effect.
Should seminaries award degrees conditionally, that is, subject to revocation in some cases?
No. While I believe we need to drastically adjust how we respond to abusers in church leadership and share that information FAR more than we do now, a degree should be about the work and requirements completed by the student and not conditional on future conduct. I could see this standard misapplied both ways. I lead a non-profit ministry that has a clear stance and requirement around the Biblical definition of marriage for our staff. I don’t want UGA (Go Dawgs!) to decide that my degree needs to be revoked for me not being “socially conscious” or representing my alma mater well.
Should DOM/AM/AMSs be more aggressive in this regard?
YES YES YES YES
Should the SBC Executive Committee have an independent review board who receives reports and assesses these things?
ABSOLUTELY.
Should the three levels of SBC life be more aggressive in excluding churches?
Absolutely! Membership in anything has little meaning if there are not requirements and enforcement of those requirements.
Is there a basis for any level of SBC life to formally disassociate themselves from any individual clergy, for cause?
This is a trickier one and I do not know how that basis would be established or enforced.
1. Perhaps out of prayer concern, but what does it effectively do? They ordaining church holds no authority.
2. No – a degree is a degree. If they earned it, they earned it. There are hundreds of seminary degrees out there held by guys and gals who are not even pretending to be in ministry.
3. No – what does DOM/AM/AMSs have to do with ordination? That’s a local church function. Be aware? Certainly, but not “be more aggressive”
4. What would they do with the findings? I’m not saying no, I’m asking a legit question.
5. Perhaps
6. Yes, if there is a path to redemption. Disassociate, to me, implies permanence.
1. Yes, by principle they should be. However, privacy laws related to employment should be considered
2. No, a degree is earned. A church endorses a student into a seminary and provides additional endorsement by ordination. A seminary is an educational institution.
3. I’d like to say yes, but the SBC is full of DOM’s and other bureaucrats who are full of themselves and their ability to wield power. Do you really want to put that kind of power in their hands, knowing that so many of them are working to feather their own nests?
4. Yes, if it is truly independent and not made up of best buds and brothers-in-law.
5. A comment from the ERLC Conference, How easy and fast would disfellowshipping a church be if they called a woman or lesbian or gay pastor? Shouldn’t this issue make that process happen just as fast?
6. Absolutely there is. There are Baptist groups with clergy recognition that don’t violate local church autonomy and which don’t behave like good ole boy denominational bureaucrats.
1. Absolutely. In fact, I believe that churches should have the right to revoke ordination, but only of those that they actually ordained.
2. Only if such degrees are honorary. I have two, nearly three degrees. All were paid for. All are still being paid on. I have earned them through hard work and determination. While I agree that predators should be barred from ministry, revoking a degree is just wrong.
3. Absolutely. In fact, I think it smart for DOM’s or their counterparts contact all churches searching for a Pastor and offer their advice and assistance.
4. Yes. As we are so committed to autonomy of the local church, it would be nice to have a report board.
5. Yes. We make such a big deal about Cooperative Program contributions and ordaining gay people, is not sexual predation just as serious as homosexual ordination?
5. Is there a basis for any level of SBC life to formally disassociate themselves from any individual clergy, for cause? I don’t think there is a basis, but that doesn’t mean one cannot be established. I think this is the time to do so, a blackball list of clergy. Any church hiring one of these would be referred to the committee from question 5.