I believe there are several important issues that we will face next month at the Annual Meeting.
What do you consider to be the biggest?
About Dave Miller
Dave Miller serves as senior pastor of Southern Hills Baptist Church in Sioux City, Iowa, and editor of SBC Voices. He served as President of the 2017 SBC Pastors’ Conference. He is a graduate of Palm Beach Atlantic College (now University) and SWBTS. He served churches in Florida and Virginia before returning to Iowa, where he grew up, in 1991, and has served two churches there. Twitter
The continued insistence that SBC direction be set only by those wealthy enough to attend annual meetings even though modern technology would allow greater participation by a wider selection of SBC members at a lower cost.
Because the long-run on that is an increasing separation between “what the SBC does” and “what most SBC churches” do, because the policy and structure is set by the majority of a minor slice, not by a majority of the people that actually are the SBC the other 363 days of the year.
Unless, of course, the solution is for us to redirect missions money into convention-attendance expenses, but that doesn’t sound very good.
Doug, it’s not like having a central site is anything new. This generation actually has a better chance of being on-site than those before us.
I love technology, but think the personal interaction is a valuable part of the convention.
Plus, I’ve seen the failures of technology.
How in the world do we have a better chance of attending? The cost of airfare and gas are at the highest levels ever. Further, I fellowship plenty with guys in my area. I would not come to the convention to make new friends. I would come to be heard. Putting the meetings online with remote registration and voting privileges would go a long way toward leveling the playing field and lowering the average age of participation. There is only one reason not to do it and that reason will probably be inscribed on the SBC’s tombstone. “We’ve never done it that way before.”
Ryan, the convention has been around even longer than airplanes and automobiles.
Yes, airfare and gas are at highest levels ever, but most things are…including wages. We live in a world that travels more than ever before.
It is not true that there is only one reason not to do it. Technology is not a guarantee. I remember watching the SBC a couple of years ago online when the feed went dead at a critical point. I’ve been in multi-site video feed church that lost the feed to the other sites. Then what?
It is also not an age thing. Have you seen the attendees at T4G, Desiring God, Resolved, etc.? These conferences are booming.
I have not seen the attendees at any of the mega-conferences.
Again, those are for the privileged few, not the ordinary. The gas alone to get me to New Orleans would require a month of my family’s grocery budget. Louisville is farther. Orlando is farther, Phoenix, Baltimore–then there’s the expense of living at least two days in a convention city.
It may not be possible to do the SBC meeting any differently, but the reality that the wealthy few control the votes will continue to be the problem, whatever gets voted on–either because people will not know what happened or because there will always be a sense of “that’s their opinion, but I don’t see it.”
That is, at least, what I keep hearing from rural pastors around me. The ones who lead churches that are moving CP % numbers down from 10-20-30 to lower numbers because of a distrust of the whole process.
Eventually, only those who go will be the funding structure. Where will the SBC be then?
I’ve seen failures of technology as well–but I don’t see a better chance of being on-site than those before. It’s about the same, as far as I can see: pastors of big enough churches get to go, pastors of small churches cannot participate.
Yet these are the churches that contribute lots of pennies to make up the funding dollars of the SBC.
Doug, that’s not a fair characterization of those who attend the conferences or conventions. “Privileged few”? In my early days of ministry, I managed to make it to the convention while pastoring a very small church without many resources.
Some people pair up, triple up or whatever to lower costs on gas and hotels.
I’m not saying that your situation would allow you to go, but countless small resource people have made the trip in the past.
If you make it a technology thing, then those without technology resources could make the same claim.
I wouldn’t mind you making a case for technology, but why does your case have to take shots at others?
I understand the concern, but in what meaningful sense would technology increase participation other than in the casting of votes? I can’t imagine any way that internet participants would be able to cast floor resolutions, motions, speak to issues, etc. The technology just isn’t there yet. Twitter and such already offers ways for viewers to interact, but the only way I could see technology increasing participation is by providing the possibility of voting via the internet, and the potential issues with internet voting have been substantial enough to keep any organization of any size from jumping in. Technology has come a long way, but we still have work to do before things like the annual meeting become truly open to internet participation.
Yes, I love technology
But not as much as the SBC, you see
But I still love technology
Always and forever
Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
That poem is dynamite!
Whether or not Dave Miller wears on a lime green suit
Not sure where the word “on” came from. Silly autocorrect
For some reason I think Acts 29 and the Calvinism debate is going to rear it’s ugly head. Some people will not let it rest.
On another note.
I would like to see a survey done of how many people that attend the convention are paid denominational employees and their spouses. I wonder what attendance would look like if those people were not there.
I wish folks would stop conflating Acts 29 with Calvinism. There are plenty of SBC Calvinists that have nothing to do with Acts 29 and whom Acts 29 most certainly does not represent.
Indeed! I am one of those of whom you speak.
I think the biggest issue will be that of tone. Will this be a convention known for ugly debates over name and Calvinism? Will the convention be able to speak to hot social issues with clarity and grace? Will we be able to portray Baptists as a people determined to glorify our Lord in what we do? Especially in going to the nations?
I think anyone who is accustomed to going to the annual meeting would certainly miss the interaction and fellowship of such a trip. But it ought to be clear that if we really wanted decisions made by more than just a tiny fraction of Southern Baptists, we would utilize information technologies to give more people a voice.
Biggest issue in NOLA will be finding some fresh beignets and strong brewed coffee.
I agree. There needs to be a rotating schedule for Cafe Du Monde. I propose that last names A-E go before 11am, F-J between 11a-2p, H-L between 3-5p, M-Q between 6-8p, and S-Z after 8 pm.
Or we could do this by age
55+ – go before 11am
45-55 – between 11a – 3p
35-45 – between 4-8p
25-35 – between 8-10p
under 25 – after 10p
Either would work for me. Maybe someone could add it to the official app.
I think the biggest issue will be the response to a black president being elected. Overreaction will be a concern for me. When I played baseball I seldom was able to make the kind of plays the other guys made easily. When I made a good play or hit the ball well I could tell they overreacted with excessive praise of me. When I did something good I just wanted to be treated the same as the guys that could play well. I think the new president would sense that even though he would never say anything.
Whether or not there will be any gutless cowards who oppose the election of Luter, by using a “place holder” reason to oppose when their real opposition is to the color of his skin. I hope that if there is opposition, it is because of real, honest issues with Luter’s character/leadership, and not using excuses to oppose him because he is black. Or if people are opposed to him because he is “black” they will at least admit so openly. Will we be able to tell the liars from the genuine non-racist opposition? I dont know. But I hope we can.
I have not heard significant opposition to the election of our first African American President. I think that will sail.
However, we are scheduled to debate and vote on another first–the first convention approved replacement name in our 167 year history, transforming us from a “single named” denomination into a “double named” denomination. I’m not sure this is the most important issue, but I think this issue will generate the most debate.
The Calvinism resolutions, though well intentioned, would open up the microphones for a discussion that, while moderated, would nonetheless allow for a more spirited and possibly embarrassing exchange on the issue than what we’ve already seen in blogs. I believe they will be DECLINED.
It may well be that the #1 issue has not yet been brought up, but will rather be a by-product of other issues brought up at the Convention.
I think we might see that in the 2006 Convention, where Frank Page won the presidency on the 1st ballot, to everyone’s amazement, establishing the power of the communication capabilities of the internet as a tool that can affect the Convention’s direction. Perhaps something will arise which will parallel that.
And no, I don’t have anything in mind.
The scaffolding is in place with the NAMB changes to accomplish the re-focusing on direct, church start-centered, “Great Commission” disciple-making, baptism, and teaching. The distractions are minimized from a national convention level. The economy is picking up from a funding perspective. The only things that could severely hamper a major result are the problems we put in our own way. I think the key issue is focusing on keeping the distractions to a dull roar.
From that perspective, the Luter presidency must be allowed to draw minorities into leadership to complete the symbolism. The name change whether it occurs or not needs to have minimal crowing over the outcome. Calvinists, semi-Calvinists, and principled anti-Calvinists need to work on unfraying the torn cloth that is our conservative coalition.
Now, honestly, I don’t care if any of this happens because I believe the local church uses CP giving to excuse lack of action. We need to work on a vision for the local church that truly is challenging to every believer to put discipleship into action in every way. I personally believe the prayers to the Lord of the Harvest for harvesters may be the single most effective way to accomplish this. The Father has expressed his clear desire for us to invite those that will accept the invitation that was rejected and fill the banquet hall. Surely he is able to accomplish his desire in us! If we merely pray and seek his face!
Most Important Issue for SBC 2012 = Fred Luter’s candidacy for SBC President and our ongoing need for gospel repentance
Regarding the term “gospel” repentance, may I ask if this is just another way of saying “biblical” repentance or “Christian” repentance? In other words, is it what I would just call plain, old fashioned repentance?
Or is there some other specific type of repentance you have in mind by using the term, such as repenting for not keeping the gospel primary, or for not sharing our faith the way we should?
What is gospel repentance?
Good question, Rick Patrick.
I am interested in the answer to that one myself.
CB: Send me a note. Do you have my email address. I thought I had yours. Jim W
James,
I do not have your email address. We exchanged phone numbers.
Hello Scott. I’m on here some. God bless your ministry in snow country!
Les
There are two pretty big items: Luter nomination and the name change deal.
The first seems to be a pretty done deal. He is worthy of the office, gives generously to the CP, and is a great guy. I don’t see a problem there.
The non-name change will surely generate some discussion then be passed handily…and be forgotten about.
Wish I could be there…not looking like I will.
One thing for sure in New Orleans, displaying the grace of Christ in all we do is truly the #1 underlying issue.
Romans 5:20b ” But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more,”
I wonder if the decreasing funds for the IMB will be an issue at all?
In what way? From what sources? Please explain.
I’m unsure what Ken is referring to unless he means a decrease in CP, direct funding, and LMCO giving to the IMB. However it is interesting to note that the 2012 IMB budget was increased from 2011 making it the largest budget in IMB’s history.
The biggest issue is whether the SBC can meet, remain calm and cordial and professional in deciding its business.
Getting in late again, sorry. My concern is what we discuss and debate at the convention will be reported in the national media. I wish we could debate our issues without media maiming the message.
The election of Fred Luter will be a great thing.
The allowance of an alternate name is not that big a deal. I don’t care for the alternate name, so I will vote against it, even though I would be for the adoption of an assumed name.
I believe that what “plagues” the SBC is not that we are not “Gospel” enough or have not “repented” enough.
I believe that what “plagues” us is the constant worry about what our problems are. Organizations that are on the move are not excessively self-critical.
I am for getting better. We should always evaluate what we are doing and whether it is effective.
But there is a difference between that, and constantly beating ourselves up.
The religious world, even the conservative, protestant religious world today is much different than it was in 1950. The culture of many SBC churches is much different than the larger culture around them, which may not have been the case so much in 1950. Also, the SBC is still very rural. People continue to move to the cities.
I say all of that to say that there are a lot of things that we can’t change. We should concentrate on being good stewards and modeling Christ in the way that we handle our denominational and other business.
If we do that, we can leave the rest up to the Lord.
I got another one…Will SBC messengers/ministers continue with their ungodly treatment of waitstaff at NO area restaurants? SBC folk during conventions have a history and reputation of giving lousy tips, replaced by a “bible tract”. To the point where many veteran waitstaff loath working during SBC days, and come out with a low outlook on “Christians” who do not practice what they preach.
Good point. The restaurant establishment knows who is in town and alerts their waitstaff. Just above average is acceptable in tips. Then, a gospel tract would be appropriate. Of course, alligator wrestling with a “What Would Jesus Do” T-shirt would be better.
I agree that SBC Messenger ought to tip well. However, Smuschany’s comment talks about “continued” poor tipping and treatment. I wonder if there is any evidence to back up the assertion that there is a large contingent of bad tippers.
That’s a charge I’ve over and over again not just about the SBC but all Christians. I personally have never seen evidence of that and as a matter of fact my experience has been that Christians tend to be very generous.
I meant a charge I’ve “heard” over and over again.
I agree with John. It is because we are Christians that it is worse than non-Christians. I have seen more non-Christians tip less than Christians. We happen to be in town and it is exposed more because we are Christians that we get the bad exposure. My dad is old school and tips only a $1 because he does not get out very much. He thinks that is allot of money. Most of the time it is because of ignorance.
As someone who has worked in many pizza places i have seen time and time again Christians be horrible tippers. Wait staff moan and groan when they see a church group come in. Our drivers did not want to deliver to the seminary because the students there were such bad tippers.
I don’t know if there are any stats, but there is plenty of anecdotal evidence to back it up. Our family minister began working at a downtown hotel in Louisville just after the SBC there in 2009 and the staff was up in arms about their lack of tips. They said it was the worst weekend they’d had all year. Three years prior to that, Scott Lamb and Don Hinkle, at a blog they collaborated on called Thoughts and Adventures, wrote of an experience they had at the 2006 convention meeting in Greensboro, NC, where they encountered a waitress at the end of her rope after having served convention attendees all day. That story served as an opening illustration for a post I wrote on Christians and tipping. After that I wrote two more articles on the subject. With each article, I saw more and more folks agree that they’d seen the same thing. My latest article (written over 4 year ago) was mentioned by a writer at Yahoo! just this past year and again the response by those posting comments was almost unanimous (got some 3,500 site visits in one day and over 300 comments at the Yahoo! page).
So again, I think that despite a lack of statistics, such broad-sweeping anecdotal evidence seems to paint a picture that this is indeed a problem we need to address. I do hope that Dave Miller will consider publishing something about this prior to the convention and maybe some other big sites like SBC Today would be willing to do the same. I actually thought about at one time getting a hold of the Annual Meeting planning committee and seeing if they would consider printing up a brochure or a flyer encouraging attendees to tip, which would be included in their welcome packets/bags or setting up a booth just into the exhibits to highlight this issue.
Prayerlessness.
We need more agonizing and less organizing at NOLA. We need to engage the “Then Will I” of God on several SBC fronts, but need to first genuinely humble ourselves, pray, turn from our wicked ways and seek God’s face. “IF my people … THEN will I”.
I think you are absolutely correct. Sadly, it will be mentioned, but not engaged. We will schoomze with each other; back-slap and grin; and perhaps pander to “big shots” but we will not cry out to God for mercy & grace upon our land and her churches.
Then we will wonder why we have no power.
Much prayer, much power … little prayer, little power … no prayer, no power.
These are desperate times, Heath. One doesn’t have to look very far on the American landscape to observe the prayerless, unrepentant condition of the saints. Consequences of our unfaithfulness are evident in every fabric of our society. The church of the living God is the only institution on the planet that can curb the moral chaos we are in. Yet, heavenly resources to change our wicked course are not apportioned to us because we won’t humble ourselves, seek His face, and pray as we ought. Our altars are empty and dry while precious eternal promises go uncollected.
Hell has launched a tremendous assault on our land. The hedge is down. Schmooze, back-slaps, grins, and pandering big shots in NOLA won’t repair the breach.
The repudiation by the gathered messengers of the racial/racist remarks made by our chief ethicist. Dr. Land rightly apologized for his words. But, as a Convention what we will do to continue to resist the subterranean elements that keep this sentiment alive should receive an actionable resolution or motion coming from Dr. Land’s peers. To make Dr. Land a scapegoat for what most/many of us know as repugnant racial/racist sentiment among us is unconscionable and we owe it to Dr. Land to follow suit.
And, that we expect the Trustees of the ERLC to report on actions taken to correct the plagiarism practiced by our chief ethicist. Dave Miller got skewered, he tells me, for mentioning the need to do away with the ERLC. I will and have joined that chorus. Outsourcing our ethical positions to a funded PAC does nothing to force us to talk about virtue and ethics among/in our local churches where it should begin.
If we are going to applaud what Greg Harvey writes,
The scaffolding is in place with the NAMB changes to accomplish the re-focusing on direct, church start-centered, “Great Commission” disciple-making, baptism, and teaching.
then, we should view this as an end to outsourcing the work of the local church to cumbersome entities. That we would do the same with the ERLC only makes sense.
My .02.
Rev Kev,
You said – “My concern is what we discuss and debate at the convention will be reported in the national media. I wish we could debate our issues without media maiming the message.”
It is terrible that the media treats the SBC the way it is. I agree.
But since the media is going to do this, shouldn’t we be smart enough to realize that and conduct our business as much as we can with the understanding that we will be watched, and what we say is going to be twisted?
We often seem to have the idea that if we are sincere that we can say and do anything we want, but then we lament the fact that the media uses our own actions and words to paint us to be someone whom we are not.
Why can’t we learn to be more media savvy? Is there some sin in that?
Tim Tebow is a great example on a personal level. He has been goaded, asked questions and things have been said about him that are untrue. But he always responds wisely. There are some who still say bad things about him, but Tebow does not give them ammo.
Our convention needs to learn that lesson, and our business at the convention needs to be structured to help.
Just because a lot of true things can be said, doesn’t mean they should be said.
Todd:
I would hope that the way this would go down would be that Dwight McKissack and others who have accepted Dr. Land’s apology would step to the mic and present a resolution thanking Dr. Land for his apology and asking that we all work together to help ERLC be all that it can be in its field of ministry. That would accomplish the point and would not be controversial.
Also, we really need to understand what ERLC is, what it does and how the SBC and Christians benefit from it.
It is not a PAC, as you have stated.
In fact, there is a court case right on point. The District of Columbia tried to remove the tax exempt status of ERLC and said that it was a political organization and tried to remove the tax exempt status of the ERLC property in DC.
The courts in DC heard the case, and confirmed that ERLC is not a PAC or impermissibly engaging in politics but is a ministry and is entitled to have its property classified as tax exempt.
I am not sure if you knew about this, but thought you might find it interesting and helpful.
ERLC engages in many good ministries and helps people and churches in the SBC. To take one example, it would not take many years of a complete lack of discipleship in many areas for the SBC’s churches to return to a position of believing that the pro-life position was the “Catholic Position” rather than the biblical position. Or for the SBC’s churches to have a warped understanding of the relationship between church and state, or religious freedom, other areas in which the ERLC works.
ERLC does not receive a large amount of money from the Convention, but does some important work. What it does is very helpful to the other ministries in which the SBC engages.
The SBC could abandon this work, but we would probably be the only major denomination in the U.S. without a similar ministry or agency.
Some might say that would be good because we would be spending all of our money on missions.
Others would see it as evangelicals retreating from the public square. A retreat, and that the SBC likes playing inside baseball but doesn’t excel at an exchange of ideas or playing on the ethical field where all of the teams play.
Those are my thoughts, for whatever they are worth.
‘pro-life’ as a ‘Catholic position’ does vary from the Southern Baptist position on ‘pro-life’ in some critical ways
Christiane:
That’s not what I said.
You may not know this, but a previous director of the SBC ethics agency used to say that the opposition to taking the life of the unborn via abortion was the “Catholic” position. He was in favor of abortion rights and was a co-founder of the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights.
The work of ERLC in the last 20 or so years under Dr. Land has helped educate Southern Baptists regarding this issue.
I am sure there are lots of differences between Catholics and Baptists on lots of issues. My comment was not to address that.
It was only to point out that the ERLC has done a good job of helping Southern Baptists understand the abortion issue much better. I believe that the protection of the unborn is not simply a Catholic position, but is the Christian and biblical position.
We needn’t turn this post into the many differences between Catholics and Baptists on many issues. I was hoping to stick to the topic at hand – the ERLC.
Thanks for your keen eye, as always.
Louis,
I agree. The ERLC has a vital, valuable ministry to our nation and to the Southern Baptist Convention. I pray they continue their work, and I think they will.
David R. Brumbelow
Louis,
What will controversial is in the wake of this event that we settle for a merely symbolic move of electing an African-American/Black Baptist Pastor as President of the SBC and not as a Convention agree with Dr. Land’s apology in an actionable way whether by resolution or motion. The issue is larger than letting Dr. Land get back to leading the ERLC. There is still the matter of an egregious habit of plagiarism that still begs the ethical question. A pro-active move that suggests in some form we will not tolerate nor give the perception that any segment of the SBC will stand for such racial/racist remarks is not to pour salt on Dr. Land’s wound but to help bind up the wounds still present from our past AND present in racial/racist matters. Read up on the fact we still have SBC churches who will not baptize people of color. I believe it was in an FB thread by an SBTS prof.
If we want to consider the ERLC to be our voice then it must act with virtue due the ethic of Jesus. That we would expect such should be a given. But, it is not.
On the matter of the ERLC being or not being a PAC. What the courts have ruled follow a particular, maybe even narrow, vision. If you would prefer to term what they do a ministry then we should hold them accountable to an ethic we may be proud of, 2011 alone is not one of those sorts of years and the year is not over.
Your paragraph that begins, “ERLC engages in . . .,” makes my point – I think. If we need the ERCL to save us in the event of poor discipleship then we have much deeper problems. That such a move could even be an illustration is problematic.
And, I do think your thoughts are worth something. I suspect we simply see this matter from different places.
I disagree that we should call any more attention to the matter. It will not only pour salt in Dr. Land’s wound, but it will split open our own wounds as we argue about whether or not to dwell on this or just move on already.
I know the trustees will report on the plagiarism issue. He may even resign or retire. Dr. Land has stood with Southern Baptists for years. I think we need to stand with him now and err on the side of support and graciously receive the apology he has already given with no further attention drawn to the matter.
Every now and then in church life we have a little controversy. One of our wise deacons eventually says, “Let it die.” I think we should.
The biggest issue for SBCers this year is obviously the election of Rev. Luter.
But to what extent is this debacle going to rain on what should have been a historic moment? WORLD magazine asks that question here:
http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/19521
This episode has dragged on much longer than I think anyone expected. Now, the chairman of the ERLC exec committee heading up the investigation has resigned (see Baptist Press and The Tennessean). And then Dwight McKissic replies “I cannot address that” when asked if Land by himself wrote the 5-part apology (see EthicsDaily)
If Land had not issues the second apology, this issue could be a big black eye to this year’s SBC. But if we are people of grace, we must accept that apology which (at least in my somewhat skeptical view) came across as genuine and move on from that issue. The pastors in attendance all agreed that the apology was enough.
But the plagiarism issue is a major one. It is an issue for the trustees, but it must not be swept under the rug.
I’m not sure that all agreed the apology was enough.
Rev. James Dixon who is executive of the National African American Fellowship of the SBC announced immediately after the meeting that he would not comment until the conclusion of the investigation.
McKissic was very public about accepting the apology. Dixon would not comment though.
What more could he do, except to resign?
I think the plagiarism issue (some yahoo down in Texas stirred things up on that one – can’t remember his name) is the one that could end his term at the ERLC.
Even when he was upset at Land’s comments, Dwight said he had had dealings with Land and was convinced he was not racist.
The fact that Dixon didn’t comment – preferring to wait until the investigation was complete – signaled something. What did it signal? I don’t know. I can only speculate that perhaps Dixon believes that a person who apologizes must be willing to accept the consequences of his/her actions for that apology to be truly legitimate. Of course, consequences does not have to mean firing. Lots of ways to hand down consequences.
Again, I don’t know.
As to the plagiarism, it’s a problem. But I don’t think the plagiarism alone (if limited to the the two instances I reported) gets him severe consequences. The race comments are a very significant factor driving this.
I’m sure this will not be one of the major topics, but I do think it is of consequence that the SBC funding for the office of the National Strategist for Gender Issues, Bob Stith, is set to end. With the national push for same-sex marriage getting a hefty boost from President Obama and VP Biden and with several other denominations becoming gay-affirming, I think this is the wrong time for our denomination to pull back on the effort to teach our members the truth about sexual brokenness, as well as how to reach out to those who struggle.
I’ll be at the convention again, working in the Dare To Care booth in the trade show. I hope any of you attending will drop by. The SBC is one of the few denominations that has shown some clarity on this issue. I know a lot of pastors would just rather not address it, but more and more are rising to the occasion and confronting the cultural push. I hope that continues, even if the office is defunded.
Is this defunding a done-deal?
The last e-mail I had from Bob Stith, a couple of days ago, indicated that no one has been able to find further budgeting. I think part of the problem is that it is hard to figure out exactly where this type of ministry falls within the convention. Ironically, it grew from a motion made at the 2001 New Orleans Convention and was originally funded with a Lifeway grant in 2005. The grant was for three years, but Bob has been able to stretch it by four years.
I think it’s time for another motion. I can’t imagine abandoning it at such a crucial time.
Write the motion. I’ll make it.
Thom:
Thanks for your good work.
If our culture goes the way of adopting so-called Gay Marriage, it will not be because we did not try to warn.
And if it does, the duty to teach and encourage about what Jesus taught about marriage and the natural order (e.g. “For this cause shall man leave his mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh”) will be even more important.
Louis,
You’re so right. It think sometimes we shy away from what seems like a divisive issue in our culture without realizing that the real divisiveness taking place is within the family.