Last week Baptist Press reported that “Amid continuing discussion of churches’ escrowing or withholding Cooperative Program funds, the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee launched two efforts to study the issue at its Feb. 20-21 meeting in Nashville.”
Prestonwood Baptist Church in Plano, TX recently announced that they would be escrowing $1 million dollars while they evaluate future support of Southern Baptist Convention causes. The announced concerns were related to “various significant positions taken by the leadership of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.” We’ve discussed this quite a bit here at SBC Voices over the last couple weeks. You can find some of these articles here, here, here, and here.
Certainly the situation at Prestonwood is by far the most significant known occurrence of a church escrowing Cooperative Program funds. But apparently there are other churches who have contacted the Executive Committee to let them know that they have done or are considering doing something similar. So the Executive Committee is responding by launching a couple study committees.
I judge this to be an appropriate response. I agree with Executive Committee chairman Stephen Rummage who said, “The issues behind [churches’] escrowing funds have risen to a level of prominence that justifies us taking a special look.” Sticking our head in the sand and ignoring the problem won’t solve anything.
One of the charges often lobbed against our entities is that they do no listen to the churches. Well, the Executive Committee is listening. They want to understand why churches have made the decisions that they have made, and they want to see if there is a way that reconciliation can occur.
I’ve talked about the Executive Committee’s actions some with a friend since the news broke. He argues that the Executive Committee is rewarding bad behavior. He feels that Jack Graham and Prestonwood are making a power play with their money and that the Executive Committee is falling in line by launching this study committee.
I understand his concern. We do not want to send a message that the way to get your way in the Southern Baptist Convention is to withhold funds. Using your money to get what you want should never be the way God’s people do business.
But what happens if the Executive Committee ignores Prestonwood and the other churches that are planning to do the same thing? They will feel like they have not been heard. They will feel like no one cares about their churches and their contributions. There will be no reconciliation, and these churches will take their missions dollars elsewhere.
That’s the conundrum. The Southern Baptist Convention is a cooperative effort. It requires cooperation. And when there are issues, cooperation means that we are willing to listen. That doesn’t mean that we have to agree with all of the concerns that others may raise. It doesn’t even mean that we submit to whatever it is that they want. But it does mean that we are at least willing to listen with the hope that there can be reconciliation.
So I for one am glad that the Executive Committee will be looking into this. I hope they can develop an understanding of what is going on and come up with a way forward that is satisfactory to all involved. So let’s applaud their efforts, and pray they are successful.
In case you feel we haven’t covered this controversy enough, here’s another article about it.
If the Executive Committee members speak to one another in a ‘study group’ about this issue they are not going to come up with any truly helpful answers (ref: Great Commission name change fiasco). Maybe Frank Page should pick up the phone and call Prestonwood’s pastor. That might actually begin a helpful dialogue. This is not a hard problem to solve.
Allen, why would you assume that this study committee wouldn’t involve talking to Jack Graham. I’m sure that will be near the top of the to-do list.
Also, your comment here shows the absurdity of the “elites” accusation you keep throwing around. If there are any elites, Jack Graham is one of them. Yet he’s not included in your pejorative use of the term because he agrees with you.
I am glad you are covering this. The blog is called “SBC Voices.” This is happening in the SBC and it’s news. So you are doing the right thing to report on it. In SBC life, the EC has 2 choices when it comes to the behavior – try to do something to respond to it, or ignore it. There is not a third option, such as punish the church or run it down. I believe that Frank Page is an excellent, fair, and proactive leader. He chose to address it. I believe that is the right course. The genesis… Read more »
“Most in the SBC are very comfortable with our good brothers like Fred Luter and Dwight McKissack, but they are not comfortable with groups like Black Lives Matter. I believe the ERLC is more comfortable with affiliating with some groups that the SBC base.” I’m glad that “most” Southern Baptists are comfortable with Luter and McKissic. Good grief, the fact that you typed that and didn’t realize how it read is a shame. When has the ERLC come into line or supported BLM? And, on Immigration, how is the ERLC at a different place than the majority of Southern Baptists?… Read more »
Alan: First, If you are able, I would appreciate your refraining from trying to put me down morally. You may be illustrating the observation made recently by one pundit regarding “racism.” That is, that “racism” charges and discussions about racism are generally discussions among white people in which one white person tries to “one up” another white person by calling or implying that a person is “racist”. If we could avoid that kind of game, I believe we can dialogue. Now, to the substance of what you have said. It’s just my perception on the race question, but I have… Read more »
Louis, I can play nice. I’m responding to your words. I didn’t put your down morally. I responded to your statement that most Southern Baptists are fine with Luter and McKissic. Really? Most? Because they are black? What other reason are you giving? And, most, not all? However you meant it, that sounded terrible. Me saying that is not putting you down morally. It is addressing the way you phrased your thoughts on the matter. I have no idea of the thoughts of your heart or your morality. I can only respond to your words. As for Resolutions not being… Read more »
We are about to learn a lot about the future of the SBC. If the EC study group decides to appease the fit throwing of Prestonwood and these other churches that are using money to try to influence the convention then the SBC is on its way to an end. Despite all the volume from Dr. Moore’s detractors, the future of the SBC is very much represented by men like him and David Platt. People who are more concerned with Kingdom than political power. If the EC decides to reward the fit throwing, it will prove to many young and… Read more »
Yep. If they “appease the fit throwing of Prestonwood” more churches will do so whenever they disagree with someone.
That’s why this will be done quietly, along the lines of what I have suggested above.
Yes, I agree. It seems that theology and great commission tasks may not be enough to unite.
I wish that Dr. Graham and others would just come out and say what they are concerned about… The smoke and mirrors about the ERLC, IMB, Trump, and soteriology is unnecessary.
I will continue to say this is about power and control until proven otherwise. There is a certain group that believes they were the heirs to the CR and something went wrong on the way to their coronation. These pesky guys and gals showed up who were not willing to “wait their turn” or cede to the good old boy network. Now in order to reclaim what they think is rightfully theirs, this group has no choice but to demonize and seek to discredit the leadership that is in place. And to do it by any means necessary. I have… Read more »
Alan: Thanks. If that sentence is your only concern, I said “most” because I am uncomfortable saying “all” because I don’t know all. They beat that out of you in law school – “all” “every” “always” because all it takes is 1 exception, and then you are wrong. I did not mean 50% plus 1. I trust that helps. Thanks for acknowledging the issue about resolutions. You clearly get my point. Amending resolutions is hard because of time. Just ask those who wanted to amend the flag resolution when debate was cut off last year. I was glad debate was… Read more »
I don’t quite share Adam’s optimism and enthusiasm on this. I read that the EC’s meetings are open but people cant be quoted. It would be nice to have reported what other complaints were discussed at the meeting other than the ERLC. If the process and results of this are public, that is, people speak on the record, deliberations are public and reported, and data gathered is made public then perhaps this will be beneficial. If we have secret meetings, minutes locked up for decades, and are presented with fait accomplis then probably not beneficial. I agree with Louis on… Read more »
Optimism? Okay.
But enthusiasm? Nah.
I prefer benefit of the doubt.
Abson: You could be correct. On the part of some, this may be a method of getting the ERLC post. I have watched battles such as this for over 30 years in Baptist life. The Trustee system works slowly, and agency heads are in a strong position, unless the problem is money or women. The way to be back a challenge that has improper motives at its base, is to respond to legitimate concerns. I believe if the ERLC responds to the criticisms that have been lodged publicly and in a gracious manner (which o have no doubt Dr. Moore… Read more »
If it’s just ERLC I share your optimism. Moore has already responded reasonably and graciously. Seems the EC has a broader agenda, unstated other than as “anything” that negatively impacts CP giving. We will see (I hope).
William,
”
If the process and results of this are public, that is, people speak on the record, deliberations are public and reported, and data gathered is made public then perhaps this will be beneficial. If we have secret meetings, minutes locked up for decades, and are presented with fait accomplis then probably not beneficial.
I agree with Louis on Frank Page. He has my confidence.”
I agree with you 100%!
I believe the study committee that the exec committee is establishing is a proper response to the problem. Of course setting up a study group does not preclude interested parties on both sides of the “escrowing funds issue” from having one-on-one discussions to try to flatten things out. I believe that any study committee that the EC sets up would be even more useful if it took a look at the need for the continued existence of the ERLC. I just don’t see a way forward for the ERLC right now given the hornets nest that they stirred up. They… Read more »
I would be interested in knowing the level of CP giving of the Young Reformed Pastors’ churches. It seems to me Dr. Platt’s church gave nothing to CP. I may be wrong; I just have an inquiring mind. Thanks for any information you can share.
Jesse, throwing out a ridiculous and untrue charge is not justified by following it with “I may be wrong; I just have an inquiring mind.”
My brother, cool your jets… I wasn’t making any charge. My main question was about the level of CP giving by the Young Reformed Pastors’ churches. Can you handle that question?
“My main question was about the level of CP giving by the Young Reformed Pastors’ churches. Can you handle that question?”
What does this question have to do with the blog post at hand?
Jesse: I don’t know if they break down CP giving in this way. I don’t think there is any question but that the younger more Reformed churches have a wider pattern of giving, other things in addition to the CP. They are clearly ERLC supporters. But it is interesting to note the silence of younger agency heads in all of this. We have heard about the influence of Dr. Mohler and the placement of his friends and supporters at many agencies, these agency heads, and Dr. Mohler, are silent. I am not finding fault there. I believe it is indicative… Read more »
The blogpost talks some about “giving and escrowing of CP gifts.” I just have an honest question about the level of giving by the Young Reformed Pastors’ churches. Brother, I am not looking for an argument, nor am I looking to attack anyone. I am just wondering if anyone knows. That is all…
I think the biggest issue is that it’s impossible to answer your question. The ACP doesn’t ask about soteriology. I can only speak for myself. My soteriology is Reformed. Both churches I have pastored gave/give 10% to the CP.
Adam,
Thank you for your response.
I think we can divide the stuff that is potentially contentious with the ERLC into three main buckets. The awareness level of each of these tiers is one or two orders of magnitude greater than the next lower level. LEVEL ONE — Biggest issue — Trump vs Hilary — If you are still breathing and have a pulse you know about this issue LEVEL TWO — Secondary issue — Situation with immigration, DACA, the wall etc. Many people in the SBC are weighing in on this. Also, some think the SBC should speak up and/or do more on this. LEVEL… Read more »
Roger:
That’s not a bad rough division, though I think that Alan would disagree that there is any disagreement about immigration. From what I can tell, he thinks Southern Baptists are altogether on this issue.
I do not agree, and agree with you. But to work on a problem, it usually has to be defined first.
“…the ERLC is going to have to reemphasize the agenda that the vast majority of SBC churches agree with.”
Perhaps SBC churches would be better served if the ERLC were simply allowed to reemphasized the agenda of the Book.
I wonder if Jack Graham asked his church if they wanted one million dollars of their offerings escrowed. Is that the way it works in mega churches where elite pastors handle the offerings as if they have total control of how they are spent? I don’t believe my pastor could make that decision unilaterally and I don’t think the church would go along if he requested it.
That’s a really good question. I suspect the cherished baptist tradition of congregational polity is more of a theory than a reality is most mega-churches. Our church would never allow our leadership to make that decision without a congregational vote.