Dr. Susan Codone is an “SBC Voice” – an active and supportive Southern Baptist. Her approach to this issue has been direct but it has honored local church autonomy. The church in question is free to do as it chooses, but she is also free to dissent and to put public pressure on that church when it does something that violates her conscience. Susan is a professor at Mercer University, an abuse survivor, a powerful voice within the SBC on issues of sexual abuse, and has spoken at ERLC and other SBC events. Here is Susan’s story.
Timothy Pigg, pastor of Fellowship Church in Immokalee, Florida, is hosting Paige and Dorothy Patterson at Fellowship’s Great Commission Weekend February 7-9, 2020. Because I opposed the platforming of the Pattersons, Pastor Pigg reported me to Twitter today, resulting in the temporary suspension of my ability to tweet because I shared the publicly available church office phone number and his email address as listed on the Fellowship Church website, on their Facebook page, and in Google search.
Read this again: A Southern Baptist pastor reported a survivor of sexual abuse within the SBC to Twitter for posting publicly available information without ever engaging in communication with her.
I oppose the platforming of Paige and Dorothy on behalf of all sexual abuse survivors in the Southern Baptist Convention, of those who suffered sexual assaults at Southeastern and Southwestern Seminaries, and of those affected by the ministry of Daryl Gilyard. For many documented reasons, I am confident the Pattersons are not qualified to lead or speak in a Southern Baptist church.
Following the guidance given to many sexual abuse survivors, I first followed the “Matthew 18 rule” and reached out to Timothy privately by email to voice my opposition and ask him to find replacement speakers. He did not respond. I extended my correspondence to Tommy Green, Executive Director of the Florida Baptist Convention and Ronnie Floyd, President and CEO of the SBC Executive Committee. Both Tommy and Ronnie responded kindly and generously. I also reached out by email to numerous Florida pastors, including Erik Cummings, 2018-19 President of the Florida Baptist Convention. None of these Florida pastors responded to me. Given Timothy’s refusal to respond, I took to Twitter, publicly asking him to replace the Pattersons and asking others to call the church and write Timothy with the same request.
I will stake my Baptist heart on the autonomy of the local church as a foundational principle of Baptist life, but I will also die on the hill that cooperation is essential to autonomy. Autonomy demands both accountability and cooperation. Following this reasoning, the SBC appears to agree with me.
Under Frequently Asked Questions on SBC.net, in reply to “Why is the SBC so committed to the autonomy of the local church?” the Southern Baptist Convention says this:
“We recognize that in the New Testament there was no centralized ecclesiastical authority over the churches that forced the churches into any form of compliance. There was encouragement, exhortation, and admonition, but there was never enforcement. We strongly adhere to that principle. Jesus Christ is the head of the local church—we are not. Each church is responsible before God for the policies it sets and decisions it makes.” (http://www.sbc.net/faqs.asp)
Brothers, it is both biblical and within the range of SBC autonomy to exhort, encourage, and admonish Timothy Pigg for inviting the Pattersons to speak at a Southern Baptist church and for publicly silencing a fellow Southern Baptist, a woman, an SBC sexual abuse survivor, and someone who followed the biblical guidelines for approaching an offending party.
If Timothy had invited a woman to preach the outcry would have reached the heavens. Yet Timothy has invited the most polarizing, unrepentant man in the SBC, and only an awkward silence has resulted. This is unacceptable.
I call on all of my brothers to exhort, encourage, and admonish Timothy Pigg for this reproachful behavior and to ask him to replace the Pattersons for this event. Better, I ask you to recommend replacement speakers for him, as his loyalty to a man has apparently blinded his ability to treat women and believers biblically.
Contact Timothy at:
Timothy Pigg
tpigg@fellowshipchurch.co
Church office: 239-657-2694
We have come too far with the Sexual Abuse Initiative and Caring Well to allow the Pattersons to speak in an SBC church. Their presence pours salt into too many open wounds.
Even though one pastor has “suspended” me, I trust that the rest of you will act.
I have said all along that the solution to abuse MUST recognize the importance of autonomy. We cannot solve this by creating a centralized bureaucracy. It is a bad idea and it violates our governing documents. Dr. Codone is one of few abuse survivors who has spoken in support of our doctrine of autonomy.
But autonomy is NOT simple independence. It is a two-edged sword – something that many on the moderate side did not acknowledge during the CR. Autonomy does not ONLY mean that a church is free to govern itself, but it ALSO means that associations and conventions are free to set the parameters of their fellowship.
The ONLY power the SBC has over a church doing something wrong is to pressure it to comply or to exclude it from fellowship.
Dr. Codone putting pressure on a church publicly as she is doing (respectfully but directly) is, as I view it, an act completely in compliance and in support of autonomy.
**She recognizes the church’s right to make its decision.
**She exercises her right to speak in opposition to that decision.
When a church fired its pastor for inviting black children to VBS, we spoke out.
When a church refused to participate in a mixed-race wedding, we spoke out.
Autonomy respects the right of the local church but also honors dissent. Autonomy without dissent can become chaos.
The question, of course, is whether Dr. Patterson has committed an offense worthy of being excluded from pulpits and stages in the SBC. This is a point on which we disagree, of course.
There is no evidence that he abused anyone himself. But there is ample evidence that he a) actively and consistently protected abusers from accusations and b) was cruel, unkind, and oppressive to victims of abuse. We will always remember the words “break her down” and the way he treated victims essentially cost him his job.
Does that reach the threshold of exclusion? He has never been accused of sexual misconduct but he has supported and enabled Darrell Gilyard and others. He has not touched women physically by any accusation I’ve heard, but many women feel greatly damaged by his words and actions.
If a church invites him for their public worship service, that’s a more private choice and I would let autonomy govern there. When Paige is publicly advertised for a regional conference, when he is on the stage with a state convention executive – that becomes much more troublesome.
So, my decision is that his actions reach a threshold where until he fully and publicly repents of his harmful actions, he should not be invited to a church to speak.
I support Susan Codone.
I would also say that reporting Susan was unnecessary. There are other ways to deal with this. One of the most disheartening things about this was the fact that many of the principles she contacted simply refused to acknowledge her or speak to her.
We must do better.
Ultimately, the question of whether the Pattersons speak is not an “SBC” decision, it is a local church decision. That’s the fact. If a church makes that decision then others can oppose it.
In a comment below, someone said, “The Pattersons shouldn’t be speaking in an SBC church.” They won’t be invited to MY church but that’s the principle of autonomy.
Churches make decisions.
The Convention gives opinions and has the right to withhold fellowship.
I am sorry, but I grow suspicious here. Everyone says they oppose abuse but there is much more concern about Susan’s actions than about Paige’s decades of protecting abusers and seeking to silence victims.
Over and over people give lip service to opposition to abuse but are energized about the fact that Susan published a publicly available phone number.
If THAT is what has you angry, not the actions of a notorious unrepentant abuser protector and a church promoting him as a Great Commission hero, I have to wonder.
It’s why I don’t like to engage comments. People say, “I am against racism” but they oppose every action ever taken to promote racial reconciliation. People claim to oppose abuse but attack SUSAN instead of those who abuse and promote abusers.
I am getting angry so I am just going to check out of this discussion.
But if you are more upset about a published phone # than decades of abuse and coverup, you need to rethink.
Yeah, yeah. I know. You are all opposed to racism and abuse. I get it.
Miller out.
I’m thankful for your voice, Susan.
I absolutely agree, Susan’s voice is important.
The opening statement here: “The church in question is free to do as it chooses, but she is also free to dissent and to put public pressure on that church when it does something that violates her conscience.” I agree. It was a mistake for Susan Codone to be reported. Backfired big time.
I wouldn’t be interested in attending the conference but neither would I call for the Pattersons to be blacklisted in SBC life. If this is the level at which churches should be excluded, and this is the only formal action available to the Baptist association, state convention, and national SBC, then I would disagree with it.
You beat me to it, William. I agree 100% with everything you just posted.
Well said William
According to the definition of doxing if her intent was to harm others or undermine them by creating a social media avalanche response it doesn’t really matter whether the info was publically. I can pay a dollar online and get virtually any phone number, but if I post that publically available info on social media with the intent of having others use that info to harass another that be definition is doxing and is generally against the rules of any social media website.
Also, isn’t it time to leave the Patterson’s alone. This just looks like vengeance to me. They have paid a rather large price for their failures, leave them alone and let us move forward.
Webster’s Online defines doxxing as:
“to publicly identify or publish private information about (someone) especially as a form of punishment or revenge.”
1. This information is NOT private.
2. She has been clear that she is simply seeking to influence their decision. She has never been vengeful or nasty or insulting in the way she has stated anything.
Point is NOT well taken.
I am not familiar with all the Social Media jargon. It is my understanding in my state (Montana) this is grounds for a lawsuit. Don’t know about other states. Obviously a side issue, not speaking to what the author wrote
” I am not familiar with Social Media Jargon”, “I don’t know what happened but.” If you don’t know either educate yourself or don’t comment cause you are commenting out of ignorance and it shows.
This is yet another example of a dictionary definition succeeding at capturing the basic idea of a concept, but failing to capture the broader implication.
1. The use of the term private in the definition is misleading. I could post your name, address, phone number, .work status, marital status, property tax history, size, location, and value of your home, etc by accessing public records. Perhaps a better characterization would be personal information. that is information whether public or private that is personal and that you would not necessarily want shared on social media. For example, My children’s names are a matter of public record, but i generally choose not to share that personal information on social media. If you were to conduct research and find out this information and then post it online as a means of coersion that would qualify os doxing. ANother example happened during the Justice Kavanaugh confirmation when the home addresses and phone numbers of senators was shared uploaded to wikipedia and other sites. The police considered this doxing even though that information was publicly available.
2. The essence of doxing is not the privacy of the information, but rather how and why that information is used. All of the information published could be public and even widely available. It becomes doxing when it is posted online for the purpose of inciting others to join in the coercion of the subject. Using information in this manner is a form of cyber bullying and should not be endorsed. We should hold ourselves to a higher standard of behavior. We should not copy the tactics of cyber trolls in order to accomplish our goals no matter how worthy those goals may be. Seeking to “influence” or coerce others using this kind of information is the problem.
3. That being said this is a relatively mild form of doxing. I really wanted to point out that the tactic is questionable. It is considered more acceptable to have posted the general church information rather than that of an individual
4. I have had serious misgivings about Paige Patterson for years. Having grown up in the shadow of SEBTS I saw the damaging effect of his and others tactics in the conservative resurgence. If he had not moved on to SWBTS by the time I enrolled in Seminary I would have gone elsewhere. That being said I think it is time to move forward. How long shall we punish him, Is there no forgiveness? IS there no grace?
IMO, Susan should not have been reported or suspended but the “I used public information” is not a valid defense against the actions of either the pastor or Twitter.
Every commenter and Pastor here home snd church addresses are publicly availiable but my posting them in an effort (or even what’s perceived by FB or twitter or the SBCVoices editorial team – whether or not, as in this case with Susan, its an incorrect or over reactive) to harrass, intimidate or cause them problems will likely get me suspended /banned from FB and/or twitter….just like it might here on SBCVoices.
You want her just to sit quietly? Not to speak?
Seems to me she has handled this with grace. Lack of anger. She’s confronted a problem head-on.
Sit quietly? Don’t speak – I didn’t say that. In fact I said and think the opposite
I was just saying – the “public information defense” is not adequate.
I did not see the exchange on twitter and I will take your word about the tone of it. Have no reason to think otherwise.
Based on their behavior and that of their supporters, no it’s not time to leave the Patterson’s alone.
Ryan, at what point do we just move on and ignore them?
When he confesses what he has done and seeks forgiveness and to make amends.
That’s biblical repentance.
Thank you
Pastor Pigg posted it publicly himself on twitter by putting it in his profile link- his twitter link takes people directly to his bio including church email and phone number. You’re comment makes no sense unless your saying he also doxxed himself.
Great point. There is a history of doxxing when it comes to Dr. Patterson. Federally protected student records remain online from two different seminaries where Patterson was president.
Those documents “appeared online with the intent to harm others and undermine them by creating a social media avalanche response,” around the same time Dr. Patterson was terminated in 2018.
One of those students is a victim of rape at a previous seminary. It was determined the documents were taken without permission and have now been returned to that seminary. I’m sure that student would love to move forward.
This is a better example of doxxing, Jason.
It is possible to think Patterson and his supporters wrong and to think that the social media post of one his opponents was unwise and unkind. 2 wrongs dont make a right.
Agreed.
But it is strange to me that the passion seems to be directed at the phone # issue, not at the issues of what the Immokalee church has done. We ignore the one, and get passionately fired up about anyone and anything that challenges the status quo.
Thank you, Dave. I couldn’t agree more.
Dave, If you inferred my comments as a passionate or fired up I used my words poorly and conveyed a tone I did not intend. Rather, I simply desired to give invite as to why it can be her actions can be seen as problematic. I deplore the actions of Paige Patterson over the years. Also I have a question about when comments are deleted on the site. What are the policies? I posted a comment defending another commenter from a seemingly sarcastic attack that was frankly rude. The original attack is still on the site, but my reply is not. Can you explain?
John,
I was thinking the same thing. PP, DP and minions are the kings/queens of doxxing and actually, unlike Susan, set out to smear their “opponents”.
I don’t think Susan is guilty of doxxing or harassing – it appears though that Twitter assessed it as possibly being so – or at least close enough to warrant a temporary suspension. I disagree but, I don’t get to make or enforce their policies.
Based on what I know (the article and Dave’s statements of support) I also don’t think Rev. Pigg should have even reported Susan to Twitter – I think, if he felt the need/wanted to, simply blocking her from seeing and posting on his/the church twitter account might have been a better choice.
“They have paid a rather large price for their failures…”
So?
Whatever price they’ve paid, it means basically nothing unless it has changed them for the better.
“…leave them alone and let us move forward.”
I’m fine with that. Just as soon as they leave, and move out of ministry work of any kind. That might demonstrate real repentance on their part. Until then, Patterson’s misdeeds should be broadcast far and wide, so that he knows we haven’t forgotten.
wow. just wow.
Let’s say someone found Dr. Codone’s phone number and email address online and published them as a comment to her article, with the encouragement for people to ask her to remove or edit her post. I would fully expect SBCV admins to remove that comment and even suspend that person. Why? Because SBCV wants to protect the ability of its users to participate on the site without being harassed. They want to encourage folks like Dr. Codone to feel free to speak here. It’s the same way with Twitter, although it’s a much larger platform. Timothy Pigg is a private citizen, not an elected official who claims to represent the public. So this is different than say, publishing the official White House contact information.
I think if she provided his cell phone or private number, your point would stand. The email and phone are publicly listed.
Is it the listing of these that you oppose, or her act of putting pressure on a church to change a decision?
The former. I understand why he reported it to Twitter, and I understand why Twitter took the action it did. Even though the contact information is available on the church website, as a site administrator I would oppose the sharing of such information on my site without that user’s consent. While she’s free to ask the church to reconsider its decision, the church is under no obligation to respond or to acquiesce to a flood of calls.
Edit: Look at it this way: if users on this site posted the personal contact info of those with whom they disagreed, folks would quit participating here. Even if that information can be found elsewhere. It hurts the integrity of the site, and Twitter is going to protect its forum.
I get that. She made a choice and suffered the consequences.
She is doing what she thinks is right and I think she is operating within Baptist principles – and biblical ones.
Twitter restored her account. When Pigg posted a link to his phone number and email on his own twitter account publicly that is the same as giving user consent to share that information. Jeff if you want to go ahead and give everyone here a link to your phone number and email addy then you dont get to then be upset later if you get lots of emails and phone calls if you do something many people find offensive.
it’s professional contact info, put out by him for the express purpose so he can be reached.
If Dr Codone put the link to her phone number and email address in her twitter profile she could absolutely expect people to also post her info, she didnt though. Pastor Pigg DID post a link to his phone number and email address on his public twitter profile. Timothy Pigg cant claim ‘private citizen’ when its HE that posted it publicly. Trying to get famous by inviting guest speakers that are infamous isnt maybe a great idea and then falsely accusing an abuse victim of harassing him is an even worse idea.
It is also important to note that Twitter is on high alert and easily triggered toward suspension these days.
IMO, Pigg overreacted to valid criticism (or was it a staff member who maintains the twitter page?) and reported Susan – and Twitter over reacted by suspending her.
I strongly agree with Dr. Codone. The Pattersons should not be speaking anywhere. It is not a question of vengeance. It is the simple fact that every time they are allowed to speak, it wounds the many women who they silenced all over again. Most women whose careers the Pattersons destroyed do not have the luxury of retreating to a multi-million dollar house in Plano. How long will they be allowed to peddle their extremist views on women? Women are no longer silent; in fact, many more intelligent, articulate women are speaking up. Do you want an SBC devoid of women other than your own wives? Because if the Pattersons continue their huckstering, they will drive women out of the SBC in droves. Leave the Pattersons alone? How about they leave us alone? I already know my comments are inflammatory to those who think the Pattersons are infallible. So I am prepared for any vitriol that is coming my way. I am standing solidly with Megan Lively, Susan Codone and all the women of the SBC who tired of being silenced.
Bonnie I have NEVER been a PP fan. For me the face of the CR was guys like Adrian Rogers and Jerry Vines. IMO opinion he took my Alma Mater downhill. Just want to be clear on that point. However WHO is going to decide who speaks in what church. While I value your opinion and agree with most of it, I simple see no viable solution in your comment. We definitely need solution to this, and admit I do not have one. I do believe however that the solution is not at a “voice” level or at the SBC. The solution lies with state Convention and associations. We have the means to be in every association in the convention. We have been doing that for years. A strong education program for pastors is needed. If pastors will not buy into this the dialogue must change. I have had experience in this with a staff member years ago. It is not rocket science. I informed the police. Two days later actually drove him to the station where he was arrested. He did prison time. The church hired licensed therapist for the victims and provided other support that was needed. Bonnie I suspect i am actually not sure what the solution is,. While I applaud those who are greatly involved in this, I don’t feel we have an answer yet. Perhaps the actions of the SBC and others is a beginning point. I pray so. Thanks for listening…blessings
Darwin: Jerry Vines is guilty of the same things Paige Patterson is. He hid Darrell Gilyard and was a partner with Paige in treating victims of Gilyard cruelly. So Jerry Vines is not a good example either. I stand with Susan Codone on this and strongly second Bonnie’s post.
My point was in saying we have not yet to find and answer and if a church invites PP to speak that is their business, i have never heard him preach nor do I intend to. I simply wanted to make sure she understood I have never been fan Of PP or the Judge. If they were the face of the CR i would never have been active in it. I framed my statement that way because SB have IMO ceased to evaluate a person. Whatever Russel Moore does will be infallible to some and always wrong for others, same with PP et.al. Fyi I also stand with Dr. Codone, did not disagree with anything she said. As I have said many times I just don’t think this will be solved by a ‘Voice” or at the SBC level. Associations and state conventions must get more mobile if changes are to be made…MHO of course. Your point is well taken about Vines, he made a big mistake in this area but I for one will not write him off for that mistake. Blessings, I’m still depressed that OU lost, actually got clobbered
I agree and disagree Darwin. This is a church whose minister would like nothing more than to have Paige and Dorothy back to where they belong. These are also messengers to the Convention. I think it is our business when it hurts sexual abuse victims. Paige Patterson will never ever be qualified to be in a pulpit or anywhere else in the SBC. The same goes for Jerry Vines. Yeah, I’m depressed over OU too, but still confident in them.
I don’t have a problem with publicly calling out of church or pastor for something they do. I am very concerned about the tactic of broadly sharing the church’s and pastor’s contact information and calling on people to “exhort, encourage, and admonish Timothy Pigg for this reproachful behavior and to ask him to replace the Pattersons for this event.“
They could easily get hundreds or thousands of calls and emails over something like this, including death threats and bomb threats. At best, it amounts to harassment. The long term effects are unknowable and could be catastrophic.
It is a sad day when Twitter recognizes such behavior as irresponsible and dangerous, yet SBCVoices does not.
I am sorry you feel that way. I am satisfied with what we have done.
..
Timothy Pigg has made himself a public figure on purpose. He has said “Hey, look at me!” on purpose. He has said “Here’s how can contact me” on purpose.
So people are saying, “Ok, we’re looking and responding.” They’re not supposed to?? Only people who agree and applaud are allowed to respond?
Seems to me anyone who works to be in ministry (makes themself a public figure, on purpose) saying “Look at me! Listen to me! but only if you give me happy applause”, is pretty confused.
The whole issue of inviting Paige Patterson to speak and the number of people that are supportive of it makes me wonder if they would be equally supportive if a SBC church had a conference and the guest speaker was a Catholic Priest that was defrocked because of covering up for pedophile priests (and the SBC church that invited him said he was acclaimed and a great guy) Sometimes i think SBC churches and members get so into what they are doing they dont realize what it looks like to the rest of the world. I try to regularly think about what does Jesus think of what I am doing, then in terms of would i do the same for someone else that committed the same injustices if they weren’t in my church denomination or my friend, and also how would those outside church view my actions. The offense of the world to Christians is supposed to be the Cross but we seem to be so caught up in personal fame and recognition that we offend daily those that would come to Jesus except they dont want to be like the Christians making the most headlines.
For the record, I do not agree with the church inviting the Pattersons to speak. I certainly would not invite them, nor would I attend such an event.
With that said, the twitter campaign with his personal information, was over the line. And I might add Voices allowing and many approving it is as well.
I agree with her position, but not her actions.
Let’s say I chose to publish Susan Condone’s information because I disagree and do not approve of her actions. Or publishing her or Beth Moore’s info or a pastor’s who invited them to speak at a Sunday service, which I personally oppose.
It would not be appropriate on Twitter and probably not published here.
It is very dangerous to approve or not approve of actions based on whether we agree with the position of the individual.
The pastor made a judgment error in my opinion, and so did she by publishing his information.
I guess I do not understand the tendency of Southern Baptists to constantly condemn the abused no matter what they do.
Andrew. You. Others. Many seem more concerned with attacking Susan than with solving an issue.
Nothing we have EVER done in opposing racism or abuse has failed to come under condemnation. People say they oppose racism and abuse but they always attack every opposition to it.
At some point, you can’t say say you oppose these things if you continue to attack every action in opposition.
At some point, the SBC is going to have to make some kind of statement or take some kind of action regarding the Pattersons. In any other venue, including most other Christian denominations and associations including the reluctant but finally on board Catholic church, his actions regarding the handling of the sexual abuse issues, the ownership and subsequent hiding of the records involved, would lead to some kind of separation that relieves the church organization from having to “own” the actions because it still appears to be endorsing him which is tacit condoning of what he did. Southern Baptist churches are free to invite whomever they want to speak from their pulpit or in their congregation but the SBC has the right to let them know the circumstances from their perspective.
Has there been an investigation conducted into the severe financial crisis and enrollment decline that occurred at Southwestern Seminary under his leadership? Shouldn’t Southern Baptists know what happened with regard to a staggering loss of students, budget cuts that led to professors having their pensions suspended or the contributions reduced and everything that transpired there, including the issues surrounding failure to property report sexual abuse? Should being a “revered” figure related to the conservative resurgence excuse the lack of integrity in disclosing and reporting to the SBC what happened to what was once their largest and most influential Seminary? A church should be able to access all of that information before it issues an invitation to the Pattersons to speak.
Thank you for calling attention to the additional SWBTS problems that occurred during PP’s leadership.
This seems like it could lead to a blacklist of who can and cannot speak at a SBC church.
3 questions:
1. Who is going to compile and enforce the list?
2. Who is going to be on it? Paige Patterson? Beth Moore on a Sunday morning (another highly debated issue)?
3. Do I have a right to try to prevent such event from taking place, i.e. a twitter campaign? (FYI, I would not invite either of the two examples.)
Mighty slippery slope.
You are missing the point, whether willfully or not. Susan is not asking for denominational action but us taking a personal and principled stand.
Dave , you very well may be correct, but actions such as these will lead to others if condoned. She appears to be seeking denominational support because she contacted many of the top brass. She apparently did want the SBC or FL convention to intervene.
I agree with her and you and others in principle. I believe it was a very unwise move by that church.
I support her opposition to it. I just don’t think the Twitter thing was a good idea. It certainly won’t stop with this. And the next one someone goes after may be someone you or I strongly support. Could be us or our church.
I guess I just don’t see social media as the appropriate avenue for the church/convention to deal with it’s issues. That’s how Donald Trump functions, but the church should function better than that.
Interesting dialogue as always. And we’re on the same side, we just won’t always agree on the tactics.
Blessings for all for a glorious day of worship of our Lord and teaching of his precious Word tomorrow.
The way it works lis that if you violate the blacklist we will put a scarlet letter on your church with the goal of damaging the ministry of the pastor and staff and hopefully creating enough negative publicity that the church’s influence in it’s community. For what? To prove that we do not approve of Dr. Patterson…..who has exactly how much influence in the convention anymore? Sounds like a great win for the Kingdom of God.
No one is asking for a “blacklist.” The convention could put it in the form of a resolution (hopefully doing a better job of wording than on some resolutions and issues) and separate themselves from any endorsement of the Pattersons. Churches are still free to determine who speaks in their church. The SBC is merely providing information and would be saying that they no longer endorse or are connected to the speaker and explain why. He was an executive employee of an SBC-related institution funded by Cooperative Program dollars. They are certainly within their rights to tell Southern Baptists why they no longer endorse a former employee as a speaker. I see no slippery slope, there’s a legitimate reason to do so, it involves one person and one very specific issue.
In the end, Dr. Codone tried to do something about the culture of abuse in the SBC, and people are unhappy that she didn’t do it the way they would do it if they were trying to do something about abuse in the SBC, which they may not be.
Every time ANYONE has done ANYTHING about the culture of abuse, people have complained. Many who will not speak out about the culture of abuse will speak loudly against anyone who seeks to combat it.
That is not entirely true. Our church is meticulously revising our policies for the protection of children and women. Thousands of churches are doing the same. But I can’t be too overly concerned about what a church in FL is doing. That’s not really what God has called us to do. Let’s all focus on our own ministries and work to faithfully fulfill our calling.
I detest what happened to the church in Naples FL who didn’t call a certain pastor. It was a tragedy. But I can’t fix them. I can pray for them and I can try to make sure my church is faithful to God’s Word and the Gospel.
I call it bullying and harassment!
Pastor Pigg is called to shepherd his flock as God leads him – not as Dr. Codone leads him.
Stop the bullying and let this Pastor and his congregation share Christ and win people to Jesus. Do not be a stumbling block for those seeking to know Christ.
Bullying and harassment by this poor lady? Thats a bit much. I don’t care much for the decision to publish the pastors info either, but she is being very polite still. Ultimately, this pastor is a bit looney for inviting Patterson. He likely knew he would spark backlash when he made the invite, but was crazy enough to do it anyway. Oh well.
Lorine,
Touch not the Lord’s anointed? This is the attitude that kept Pattersons in power for so long.
Lorine Spratt is a “touch not the Lord’s anointed and especially Paige Patterson” kind of woman who used to be featured on the Trad blog as well as commenting frequently affirming them. I don’t take her seriously nor do I interact with her.
She is a voice and welcome to her opinion.
She is consistently a Voice in support of one side, regardless of how they act. I have never agreed with her perspectives, but she has the right to her voice.
There are two issues here: First, the right to protest a person speaking because of their past actions. I agree that Susan Dr. Codone has the right to do so. She has the right to explain why and include all of the past actions of Dr. Patterson. However, where I disagree with her is her attempt to use cancel culture to marginalize Timothy Pigg by publishing his contact information. If she makes her case against having Page Patterson speak in a forceful, informative and effective manner, there will be no need to publish the contact info for Timothy Pigg. Those who have a strong opinion in agreement with her will contact the Florida Baptist Convention.
The second issue is the consequences of “doxing”. Having been in a mega church where the pastor will not enter the church property on Sundays without security because of death threats he had received, I am aware of the fact that there are many mentally disturbed individuals who can be a threat to pastors. Calling public attention to a pastor by giving his contact info on Twitter is not a wise decision. There are far better ways to make your point than causing potential harassment (or far worse) of Timothy Pigg.
Finally, all of our “heroes” have some sins in their lives that can cause disdain when they become public. Whether it was the slaveholding founders of our country (e.g. George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson) or the founders of the SBC, should we eliminate every monument or stain glassed window in their honor? Page Patterson did some wrong actions at two seminaries – period. However, at the same time he was an architect of the CR. This is significant when we see where the Methodist and Presbyterian Church USA are now theologically. Whether or not he should speak at events should be determined by each organization, but it’s not the right of the SBC to universally silence him. It is not a good thing to try to use cancel culture to silence those we disagree with, either.
Several people have raised the specter of death threats. Is anyone phoning death threats in to Immokalee FBC?
I don’t buy the death threat accusations anymore. I don’t believe they are true and makes the one doing wrong look like the victim in an attempt to stop any dissension.
I’m not saying that this will or has happened in this case at all. My point is the bigger issue of giving our personal details about individuals. I know firsthand of a megachurch pastor who had received death threats – a police officer told me first hand that this had occurred and therefore the pastor had personal detail with him at all times.
Why can’t someone make their case on the facts -period. And leave out the contact information of the person with whom they disagree. Does Dr. Codone want her phone number and e-mail (And other personal details) all over social media? Think of all the crazies who could harass her? When you put out the contact info, it appears that you are trying to make it so painful for the other person that that they will be silenced and not even attempt to make their case.
SBC Voices,
Thank you for posting this. Good for Susan! And you are correct. She has stood firmly for autonomy.
Unfortunately this *report to Twitter* thing has been used to shut up abuse advocates for years. It happened to me years ago when a prominent TGC writer reported me when I called him out for making fun of a woman’s weight when she was singing the national Anthem during a game. I received a communication from Twitter that I would be shut down.I went to war, showing them the tweets by this person. Twitter backed off.
Sadly, this sort of stuff does not surprise me. It is usually used by those who cannot stand on their own two feet and go crying to Mommy to *make it stop.*
As for the death threats, I have never received any although I’ve received some pretty disgusting comments. If someone received them they should post the tweets publicly unless advised not to do so by law enforcement. Oh yeah, they should report it to law enforcement. I certainly would do so. If they don’t then I am suspicious that this is another ploy to shut people down.
My heroes are the every day women of the SBC who continue teaching God’s Word and serving Him in many different capacities in their local churches despite what Paige and Dorothy did to shut them up through the years. Paige and Dorothy Patterson are spiritual and emotional abusers. I have been at SWBTS since 2016. They have not repented for the lives they destroyed and the financial mismanagement of CP funds. They have not repented but remain defiant. They have tried to play the victim instead of taking responsibility. Why would anyone allow an unrepentant sinner to fill their pulpit? What could either one of them possibly have to say that would honor God?
Well said, Bonnie. Well said.
Dave
How can i email you…have a question
I have only posted like 10 times over the years, but I do read this blog a good bit. But it sure seems like his blog is just a waste of time. If someone disagrees with a few of the main folks on here, who always seem to agree on most things, that person is shammed and is castigated at racist, sexist, etc… Literally there is zero room for nuance in any conversation on this blog, its either agree with my non-nuanced opinion or your a awful person. I agree with much of what the main folks say but it makes it hard to agree with them because of their actions. Good conversation cannot take place because of all the ad hominem attacks straw men line of argumentation. I admit that I am not perfect in every disagreement I have with another person, but I hope I strive to be fair and recognize when I am not. Not much of that happening here.
Unfortunately the Piggs and the Colters are also good friends. If you remember it was Sharya Colter who leaked sensitive, private documents out of context online in an effort to come to the aid of Paige Patterson.
I do remember those disgusting actions by Mrs. Colter. Didn’t know that connection between Colters and Piggs. I’m not sure I have ever heard of Timothy Pigg before this post.
THAT was doxxing and clearly came at the behest (or at least knowledge) of PP .
The invitation to Patterson to headline this event makes sense now (still saddening though) – it seems changing his mind probably ain’t gonna happen.
Like I said, I do not think I know him – y’all seem to be saying he is a PP sycophant though – well, sycophants typically sycophant.
Probably not. Mrs. Colter also designed Jessica Pigg’s blog site. And your last line is correct. That is exactly what I am saying.
“the most polarizing, unrepentant man in the SBC”
Less than two years ago, he was president of SWBTS! Who says things aren’t getting better?
Interaction with others gives opportunity to promote one’s beliefs,
Churches have websites and signs on their lawns to ‘adverttise’ themselves so they can get their message out.
If pastor Pigg was okay with inviting Patterson [and I assume he is for he did invite him], then he can answer every phone call and email on the subject with an invitation to the caller to “Come and see.”
If one doesn’t want to be embroiled in controversy, don’t invite controversial speakers.
Even if Dr. Codone had not been abused, she could for conscious sake oppose Dr. Patterson speaking.
Others coud object to her methods, and such objections could have nothing to do with the fact she was abused.
Nothing wrong with having emotions, but don’y let them over rule logic and common sense.
They should be guides to point us in the right direction but not lead us there.
I do believe Dr. Codone acted in just that way, to her credit, and chose non-emotional ways to act.
Kudos to her.
I share concerns about having speaker whose conduct has proved detrimental to the Church, especially in the area of something so critically sensitive and important as abuse, yet i cannot escape feeling this set of tactics is much closer to current vogue cancel culture practices than it is to the biblical approach to addressing error within the body of Christ. Personally, I wouldn’t have done it and wouldn’t have published her post here. But that is just my take which I am confident is not shared by most.
Dr. Paige Patterson’s defense:
February 14, 2019
In the case of Darrell Gilyard, Dr. Keith Eitel (now a dean at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary) and Dr. Danny Akin (now president at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) worked directly with me to uncover and confirm Darrell’s unfaithfulness to Christ. Dr. Keith Eitel has film of the proceedings of Gilyard’s discipline at the Criswell College, and Gilyard was consequently expelled from school. Dr. Akin accompanied me to Gilyard’s church to be certain that he resigned. I called as many places as I knew where he was scheduled to preach and asked them to cancel his invitation. Most did cancel, and he no longer speaks in Southern Baptist churches.
Further, letters exist in my file from the young woman at Southeastern thanking me for the way in which her situation was handled. She now (more than a decade later) claims to have been raped. According to Dr. Akin as quoted in a Baptist Press article, the term “rape” was not found in the report in her official student file, and there are no details of information being given to me or of my involvement in the matter. Dr. Akin did confirm that my vice presidents had handled the matter properly as this was during the transition of my presidency to Southwestern.
Fort Worth Police records show that within seconds of receiving an allegation of rape at Southwestern by a female student with her mother present, I called the police. They arrived in less than twenty minutes. The young man – also a student – was immediately dismissed from the school. The young woman was asked by me to file charges against him, and she refused. The Southwestern trustees even confirmed in a public statement, “evidence exists that Dr. Patterson has complied with reporting laws regarding assault and abuse.”
https://www.paigepatterson.org/post/letter-to-the-editor
David R. Brumbelow
David, the term rape was not included in the Southeastern file because the female student was not allowed to call it rape. She was encouraged to understand that the assault was her fault and her abuser was then protected. These records were mishandled, which is a violation of federal FERPA rules. As an educator, I’m sure you understand FERPA, and I’m sure you understand that a victim, when faced with authoritative leadership who does not allow her to label her assault correctly, will say whatever is needed to get away from that unacceptable authority figure. Your defense is more a defense of your actions than Patterson. Federal Title IX regulations were mishandled. It is to your advantage to stop defending Patterson. The fact remains that two students were raped and both rapes, the victims, and the rapists were not handled correctly, and their abusers were not punished by law as they should have been, immediately. Any academic administrator knows how to handle this, and this was badly mismanaged at both SEBTS and SWBTS. There is simply no defense anyone can make. A letter to the editor by Patterson is simply his opinion.
Susan – can you expand on a couple of things from your post: 1) Are you saying when the student(s) met with seminary admin they used the term “rape” but the admin instructed her not to use the term? 2) For those of us unfamiliar, what are the specific FERPA rules violated?
Blessings sister.
This is a quote from the link that David B. provided:
“Anyone claiming to be a follower of Christ who acts in such a way or who protects one who preys upon another is both opprobrious and ignoble. Anyone claiming to be a minister of the Gospel who is thus involved is reprehensible and should not continue in the ministry.”
I agree with the statement but isn’t that just what Paige (and Jerry Vines) did in the Gilyard case? I’m under the impression (wrongly?) that multiple people informed them that this guy has issues and they turned a deaf ear so that he continued to prey upon women.
TBH, we drive-by SBC posters have a great respect and appreciation for what these men did in the SBC CR, but this stuff just leaves a bad taste in our mouths. A public statement of repentance would be a glorious day for us.