I’m writing this the day after the ERLC Study Task Force released its unanimous report of its work and findings. The Task Force was charged with reviewing the “past and present activities of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission” to determine whether its actions are proving to be detrimental to Cooperative Program giving. Their conclusion is that the ERLC and its president Russell Moore have indeed negatively affected the Cooperative Program bottom line.
Giving
First, the report goes to great lengths to prove that the actions of Moore and the ERLC have caused some to stop giving to the Cooperative Program or in some other way to defer their giving. Stone assures us that the report “is not based on anecdotes or third-hand reports. It is based, almost exclusively, on documented facts.” However, these documented facts are based solely on anonymous comments from some state executive directors and reported third-hand through the Task Force. We are also told that only 15 of the 41 state conventions responded to the questions, and not all of those 15 provided negative assessments. This seems to be a case of selectively choosing which data to put forth.
Moreover, we are given numerous anecdotes about churches removing funds over concerns about a supposed “leftward or liberal drift” in our convention. Unfortunately, this is not clarified or substantiated. Is the Task Force suggesting that Dr. Moore or the ERLC (or the SBC) is becoming theologically liberal? If so, where is the evidence? It seems to me that any pastor who expresses such concern with his state executive could easily be assured by that executive that nothing could be farther from the truth. All the executive would need to do is avail himself of the readily available materials and provide any relevant information to the concerned parties. This would not be hard. It would be unifying leadership. To suggest even a hint of theological liberalism in the ERLC is easily demonstrably false.
On the other hand, one is led to believe that many are not so much concerned with theological fidelity at all. Rather, funds are being threatened because Dr. Moore did not toe the preferred political line of the concerned parties. The report mentions opposition to a presidential candidate (we can wonder if such concerns were voiced over Dr. Land’s opposition to Bill Clinton) and the appearance of a former ERLC staffer at a Joe Biden event. I have two questions about this.
First, is the Task Force suggesting that the mission of the ERLC is to support the Republican Party? If so, then what would this mean to all the African-American, Latino, and other minority pastors and congregations who vote overwhelmingly Democratic? What about all the younger adults who lean left politically but are theologically conservative? Are we really prepared to alienate them by aligning with only one party? Is the concern only with the loss of Republican money?
Second, do we want to muzzle our ethical and public policy entity unless the target of criticism is the Democratic Party? Dr. Moore demonstrated consistency in speaking about the moral failings of Donald Trump. On June 1, 1998, Southern Baptists passed a “Resolution on Moral Character of Public Officials,” encouraging all Americans “to embrace and act on the conviction that character does count in public office, and to elect those officials and candidates who, although imperfect, demonstrate consistent honesty, moral purity and the highest character.” Those are words to live by. They were then. They are now. One of the recommendations of the Task Force is that the ERLC speak “where the Southern Baptist Convention has already spoken through resolutions.” Nevertheless, we are told that people are pulling funds because Moore has done exactly that. And all of this comes within a week of a member of the Executive Committee calling the Vice President of the United States “Jezebel.” The inconsistency is staggering. The concern of politics over theology is even more so.
To summarize, the Task Force finds that Cooperative Program giving is suffering at least in part due to an easily disproved misperception that the ERLC is drifting politically leftward. This seems to be because Dr. Moore has spoken consistently with the expressed convictions of Southern Baptists. However, because of national political loyalties, some churches are withholding or threatening to withhold funds. I pray that we are not prepared to align ourselves so closely with any candidate or party that our very own Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission is only allowed to speak truth to power when that power is in the unfavored party. I also pray that we will not have the very vocal conscience of our convention of churches—our ethical voice—constrained by people writing checks.
Friends of the Court
The second major issue addressed in the Task Force report has to do with an amicus brief submitted by ERLC that contains admittedly troubling language. And lest anyone think I’m watering it down, the language is poorly worded and seriously problematic. This is a legitimate concern. The ERLC has acknowledged the error, publicly. They have issued an apology, publicly. They have rectified the problem, publicly. I understand that the ERLC did not respond as quickly as the Task Force would have liked, but as far as I am concerned, this one can be put to bed. It is over. Even convention lawyers seem to be happy with the end result. Let’s move on.
Various Concerns
In addition to what seem to be biggest concerns—liberal drift leading to decreased giving and the amicus brief in question—several other concerns were listed. Since little detail is given, I’ll not spend a lot of time on them:
- Some kind of ties to George Soros. I’m sorry, but I’m embarrassed that this was even included in the list. I suppose what is most embarrassing is that these kinds of accusations are apparently coming from pastors.
- That the ERLC is not available or responsive. I can’t speak to this because I’ve never experience it or heard it.
- ERLC stance on immigration. I admit that I have not read everything the ERLC has published on immigration, but I have read a lot. Literally everything I’ve seen is in full agreement with the 2011 SBC resolution “On Immigration and the Gospel” and the 2018 SBC resolution “On Immigration.” Rather than a blanket “ERLC stance on immigration,” someone could provide some evidence of inconsistency.
- Silence on religious issues for California churches during the pandemic. ERLC was not silent. However, it would seem that their consistent position was simply not favorable to some. In July 2020, an ERLC Explainer was published after California Governor Newsom imposed new restrictions on churches. The article is a cogent explanation as to why this executive order was not a violation of the constitution because it did not unfairly target religious groups. On the other hand, the ERLC did file an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in November because the state of New York singled out religious groups, thus imposing “a substantial and disparate burden” on religious liberty. Yet again, we see the ERLC being entirely consistent and fulfilling their mandate.
- The amicus brief the ERLC filed in support of a New Jersey mosque as well Dr. Moore’s response to a messenger who questioned him about this at the 2016 meeting. To begin with, in this court filing, the ERLC demonstrated consistency with Baptist history and the Baptist Faith and Message. Baptists are borne out of religious persecution and have been stalwart defenders of religious liberty for everyone. Frankly, this is not even a gray area for us. If the government can prohibit Muslims from building a mosque in New Jersey, then other governments can prohibit the building of Baptist churches in their communities. And as for Moore’s “disrespectful and condescending” response to the messenger who asked the question, the reader will have to decide for himself. I was there that day. The questioner was rude and condescending to Moore, and I saw Moore show great restraint in answering the question honestly and decisively. I was part of the rousing ovation that followed his answer. This is one reason I love being a Baptist.
- Moore’s support for attending homosexual wedding showers and receptions. I’ve personally heard Moore speak to this issue. Without question, it’s a hard one. He stated that he could not attend the actual wedding ceremony, but that he might attend a shower or reception. He also stated that this was his approach and that everyone would have to decide for themselves. You can read his comments here. Maybe you disagree with his approach. Is this a reason to fire the man or defund the organization? To be clear, Moore has been clear on his opposition to gay marriage. He also fully affirms the position of the Baptist Faith and Message when it comes to marriage, gender, and sexuality.
Conclusion
I see more problems with the report of the Task Force. However, I hope I’ve given you enough to see the primary issues. I believe it to be unfair, inconsistent, and needlessly divisive. My opinion is that Russell Moore has led the ERLC well and has represented Southern Baptists on Capitol Hill and in the media with clarity and grace. You might disagree. That’s ok. We’re Baptists. But this report has not solved any problems. It has only revealed an unfortunate drift in our ranks. It isn’t a drift leftward (or rightward, for that matter). It is a drift of political allegiance over theological agreement. This make me sad. My prayer is that this summer we will rally behind Russell Moore and the ERLC, affirming the outstanding work they do. And in doing so, I pray that we send a message loud and clear that we will not be governed by worldly politics.
Mike Miller is the Pastor of Central Baptist Church in Jacksonville, TX and a former professor of preaching at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. He and Terri have 3 grown kids and 4 grandkids. He enjoys teaching, preaching, flying airplanes, and hanging out with family.
I agree that too many of our pastors and convention leaders equate being Republican with being Christian or being godly. No political party should have our allegiance because we “cannot serve two masters.” We cannot be salt and light if our messages about morality, ethics, and sin shift to fill our pockets or get political clout.
Thanks for this explanation. I’ve been very disappointed with this move by the EC. I’m proud of Dr. Moore and the ERLC, and am grateful for their role in SBC life. I will proudly stand with them this summer.
I’m glad someone posted this. We can dance around with other picky details about the ERLC and mistakes they might have made, but this is first and foremost about Trump. Moore will never be forgiven, ever, for failing to support Trump. Al Mohler has tried to escape the same trap. We’ll see if he was successful.
So excited Moore did NOT support Trump. I voted for Trump but he crossed lines and someone needed to say. THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. !
Here’s what this entire debacle and abject failure of leadership from Mike Stone and the Executive Committee confirmed once again- that for far too many in the SBC, the only orthodoxy that actually matters is Republican politics – and recently that has meant Trump. The ONLY orthodoxy that matters is political and our idolatry is out in the open now.
Under absolutely no rubric would Russell Moore be a liberal – it’s so absurd. He’s the only guy who has been willing to be honest and tell the truth about evangelical capitulation to Trumpism.
Yes to all this!
Let’s not forget, we saw in stark and deadly detail just weeks ago, that Moore was right about Trump. As if we didn’t see it every day for the last 4 years.
So by the comments and how quickly they became political one thing is clear. The problem for the SBC leadership is that about 80 percent of SBC voted for President Trump and his agenda. The SBC hat was thrown into the political ring by Dr. Moore who decided to get involved early on in the 2016 election. This is an overlap in many ways between the “progressive” wing and the “traditional” wing of SBC membership. So President Biden in a nice, Presidential , non threatening manner has rejoined the Mexico City Agreement, taxpayer money for international abortions, signed transgendered related E.O. that will filter down to church levels, Gay Flags flying at U.S . Embassies worldwide, plans to codify Roe vs. Wade into the federal law and taken many positions certainly not friendly or supported by people of faith. However he has stayed private and not revealed his true agenda. You can do your own research on Biden agenda so far and this is just the beginning. The EC report and the comments below are just signs that there is a conservative vs. progressive/liberal division that will have to be addressed or the split that has happened in about every main stream denomination is brewing. I believe that the majority (conservatives) will either leave as individuals or as a group but they will leave eventually. I heard the other day the Republican establishment leadership really does not like its base voters (Trump supporters) but have to put up with them as they pay the bills and they need them. Seems this is where the SBC is headed. President Trump banned Critical Race Theory being forced taught to federal employees, President Biden immediately reinstated the mandatory training. SBC has let CRT work its tentacles in the SBC fabric. There is a storm brewing ahead and it may be unavoidable. So far the average SBC remains loyal to their local church and their historical upbringing but that will fray soon.
You are spot on sir.
Steve, you make a nonsense, laundry list comment but one that correctly identifies the underlying issue as political. If trump is so important to some SBCers that they feel more do for around prosperity gospel heretics and full moon theocrats, then we’re better off with that crowd gone. I suspect that the financial hit would be far less than the numbers touted.
William,
I absolutely second Steve’s assessment. Before you generously offer me a tinfoil hat, please consider the following:
Moore’s efforts to encourage voters to seek the moral ‘high ground’ within the Democratic platform …has contributed to a ‘first in political history’, the high-visibility appointment of a tormented soul suffering from gender dysphoria.
Perhaps the ERLC-REVOICE conferences appropriately harmonize with this development.
Doubtlessly, some within the SBC will applaud such examples of ‘progress’. J.D.’s sermons this year, soft-peddling the matter of homosexuality, now seems fortuitous.
Beth has been featured in so many headlines of late, one would be willfully blind to disregard that there may be a strategic purpose behind the scenes.
Decades ago, I heard the humorous SBC put-down; ‘Southern Bad-taste’ …as an amusing example of inter-denominational rivalry. Funny how history unfolds.
’Liberal drift?’ Nawww, nothing to see here folks …move along.
This Dave ain’t me!
If this were not about politics you would hear an outcry about Biden/Harris actions. Missing ……at ERLC level and from its supporters.
You should read more. ERLC has addressed several Biden admin actions. Get facts or go away.
Articles are overwhelmingly one sided…..those are the facts and truth…Can you reference one dedicated article you have written criticizing Biden/Harris?
No one here is paid by the SBC and no one cares if you dislike the POV of the opinions expressed on voices. Your earlier comment was on ERLC and Biden. You can do your own research.
Dear Mike Miller. Not your fault but my dear family friend, Mike Miller , died this week. Shocking to see same name. Excellent report.
I did a little research and within a few mins you can find many statements from SBC churches and SBC pastors that are firsthand accounts of them leavening the SBC for numerous reasons. Some of those reasons: liberal drift, the ERLC, race,
If I can find this in a very short time I certain a task force would get greater insight than myself.
Mr. Miller you should do some research and look into yourself
I I have been pastoring since 2006, first church during my time in Bible college was unsupportive with money to the SBC
I graduated and we moved to South Ga and I took my first full time church, church was in a mess financially I was young it was short lived pastorate. They had pulled all there money and was giving it to the GBC children’s home I did not change that. We moved to middle GA and stayed for 10 years good folks great church they were very concerned with the liberal drift and mismanagement of all things SBC and gave the minimum out of habit. I saw no reason to change this. I am currently 1 year into my current full time post, I love where we are hope I get to stay forever! We currently give everything to the GBC children’s home due to perceived mismanagement of the SBC and Perceived liberal drift. We support missionaries directly. We have also discontinued our business with life way as well for same reasons. I know I am just one voice but represent the people I serve as there Shepherd and I am confident I represent them well.
Perhaps voices should reach out on there own and see what pastor say of average size churches in the SBC and just ask two simple questions
Do you see a liberal drift in the SBC?
Do you think the ERLC is necessary?
If you don’t trust the Task force do your own study outside of your sphere of influence you might just discover a very Split SBC on these issues.
I don’t have time to undertake a research project right now, but I would love to see your research. Is it published somewhere? Peer reviewed? I’m especially interested in your methodology, survey of other relevant research, and the interpretive grid you used after gathering all the data. Of course, I want to see the compiled data. I would also be interested in your research question and working hypothesis. I’m really glad you have undertaken this research, because the Task Force did not do any competent research. Their data set was far too small to arrive at any trustworthy conclusions, so I’m glad you have a full body of data for us—even if it proves I’m wrong. One thing I will say, however, is that any pastor who sees a liberal drift in the SBC is ignorant of the facts. I challenge anyone to put forth real evidence of such a drift. I’ve talked to many pastors concerned about this liberal drift, and literally every single time I’ve asked for evidence, they have come up empty. Every. Single. Time. Why? There isn’t any. Of course, if you’re calling a Google search “research,” well then we can find anything we want to find, can’t we? I can find people increasing their CP giving because of the ERLC and Russell Moore. I can also find people leaving because of the political alignment of many in the SBC. In fact, I’ve had those conversations as well. So hopefully you’re not just talking more anecdotes, but you can proffer real research and data. If not, then you have done nothing more than this abject failure of a Task Force has done, which is logically fallacious, inherently incoherent, and intellectually lazy. I truly wonder how anyone can read this report and say anything positive about it at all. If it were an assignment by a first year seminary student, I would require the student to start from scratch or scrap the project altogether.
Mike, I might be able to help with this idea of “liberal drift.” I’m afraid they are talking about churches like mine. We have been in a steady drift into liberalism for some time now. We believe the Sermon on the mount and take Jesus at His word when He said to ‘turn the other cheek.’ This stands in contrast to the politics of power that many on the right and left seem to take. We believe that racism is both individual and systemic. We believe that pro-life starts at conception and goes until death. We believe that the Kingdom is about welcoming and loving the ‘stranger.’ We believe that Scripture is fully sufficient but also that CRT isn’t the greatest threat to the church in America. We believe that Christ crucified, buried, and raised is our greatest message and is the Hope for all of creation.So sadly, we may be all the research that is needed on this one. It is true…..we have drifted and lost our way:/. We also have personally thanked Russell Moore for his courageous stances and his willingness to speak truth, even when it hasn’t been popular.
Your research can start with how I feel, ultimately believing that it’s liberal to give funds to unnecessary things.
There is life way stuff that I find fault with, that’s a liberal drift to say the least.
Social justice is a liberal drift
We have seen in many the liberal drift as it relates to women pastors
I know that people have huge divided and how to view Scripture as it relates to these things some people take. Liberal approach to the scriptures while others take a more fundamental approach to the scriptures. We all know this is true. I would consider many comments on this forum and post on the voices site. I see some post and some comments that are conservative while other times I see some post and comments as liberal the trouble with liberals is they call there views and practices conservative often and sometimes that is flipped.
I have seen people post hear that claim to be conservative as it relates to theology but (progressive/liberal) socially to me the two are completely incompatible and I call that liberal drift
Mike I know you don’t like this but your response was that of an unloveable guy
I meant to say unlikeable not unloveable
I agree with the “unlikeable” term and I might use the term “smart alec.” When I was a lost man there is another term I would use for this, but I will refrain.
Bryan,
The trouble is, I think you and others are equating “not supporting Trump” with “liberal drift”. Not the same thing at all.
I actually don’t think the ERLC is necessary. Wasn’t under Land, isn’t under Moore. But opposing it because Moore didn’t toe the Trump line is silly. It’s even sillier since Trump’s presidency imploded at the very end.
In my comments I did not mention trump are mr Moore
The idea that this is all about Trump isn’t so. Russel Moore’s troubles started long before Trump.
You can trace the escalation in rancor directly to the escrow over Moore’s comments on trump. It’s even in the TF report.
I do not know if the “report” is connected to the Trump issue, it may well be at least on one point. However I never voted for trump in fact I haven’t voted for a Rep or Dem presidential candidate since GW, I have been an independent for years. I initially was a supporter of R. Moore and quickly fell off that wagon for reasons I have already addressed through the appropriate channels none of which is SBCVoices and led our church to line item out the ERLC a long time ago, before Trump. To say that all the hoopala over the ERLC and Moore is a Trump issue is not true at all. There are many pastors and churches in my Association that had issues with Moore and The ERLC well before Trump. If that is true of one Association it may be true of many.
Where in my article did I say that this is all about Trump? I think I only mentioned Trump once. I don’t think it’s all about Trump. I think Trump is a factor, and I think it’s more political than theological, but I never even came close to saying it was “all about Trump.”
Thank you Mike. Excellent response.
It appears that we won the Battle for the Bible a generation ago, and now are turning the guns on ourselves. Sad.
Thanks, C.J. I saw someone say recently that some folks have never seen a hill on which they aren’t willing to kill. Sad indeed.
I’ve been checking in the last few days looking forward to someone writing on the EC Task Force report on the ERLC. Very well done. Thank you!
Another major issue with the report is that it was based solely on information from a handful of state directors. When this task force was first formed, I reached out directly to every representative from my state on the Executive Committee. I informed them of my displeasure with this task force, and my support of the work of the ERLC. I also clearly stated that action taken against the ERLC or Dr. Moore would seriously impact my church’s CP giving. I went directly to the group the task force represented, and yet, none of that was considered. I obviously, should have run and complained to my state director. Beyond that, in 2018, the messengers to the annual meeting affirmed overwhelmingly the ministry of Dr. Moore and the ERLC. That was also completely ignored in this report. This was a premeditated hit job on Dr. Moore and the Executive Committee needs to be very cautious in how they move forward with this report.
If those state directors would work to discredit the lies about the ERLC rather than being party to them, that would go a long way toward solving this issue.
Can you please give examples of the state directors who are party to the lies, that is a pretty serious charge.
Is anyone associated with the BGCO [Oklahoma State Convention] involved in propagating lies regarding the ERLC?
Serving as an anonymous source when you are the state director is not a great sign. I sure hope my state director was not one of the ones quoted but as Rick Patrick says above he might well have been one. The percentage of money retained by my state convention is a far greater impediment to CP giving than whether Russell Moore supports my politics.