“How Could it Be?” Part I

The title of this post were the words of the sister of the late Laura Van Ryn who was one of five Taylor University students tragically killed in an accident back in March, 2006. The Van Ryn, and Cerak families told their stories on NBC Dateline and also have book about this case–Mistaken Identity. What a wonderful story of God’s people setting straight a terrible mistake and the pain that one goes through trying to sort the circumstances in order to arrive at the truth.

It seems this mistake occured on the side of the road after the accident and was further exacerbated by the trustworthiness of both families. This speaks more of the families faith than it does to their naivety. These families trusted the people that told them of these tragedies. In listening to the stories one can grasp how these various situations kept building until it was discovered by one that questioned enough to cause doubt. While the Van Ryn family is to be commended because they looked after and treated as one of their own someone they had never met before. They also should be commended for their compassion and their exuberance to do, as Lisa Van Ryn said, “the right thing”.

For the purpose of this post I want to focus on these two families, and in Part II I will make an application using this example. I want to call attention to a couple of Christian families that faithfully and fervently serve our Lord. These two families were united by something that was beyond anyone’s comprehension. They also handled the entire situation with Grace and compassion. Lisa Van Ryn asked the lady she thought to be her sister Laura, to say her name. This young lady said “Whitney”. She then asked her to say her parent’s names. Whitney responded “Newell and Colleen”, which there was no way that Laura would know that. However, Lisa responded by encouraging her and telling her she was doing well. She did not make an issue out of it with Whitney because she did not want Whitney to be upset any further. Notice the exchange during the Dateline story;

Matt Lauer: When I read that, Lisa, it knocked the wind out of me. But you know what else I thought? What a fabulous response you had. What a moment of generosity that was to Whitney. You didn’t get up and run screaming down the hall and create more trauma for her.

Lisa Van Ryn: Well, I loved her. We loved her.

Lisa Van Ryn: We—

Don Van Ryn: And still do.

Lisa Van Ryn: Yeah. I mean why would I do that to her? She had become a dear friend and basically a sister.

Susie Van Ryn: She was a sister.

Lisa Van Ryn: Yeah.

Notice Susie Van Ryn’s statement. “She was a sister.” She is speaking of the relationship that born again believers enjoy in Christ. A sister, that is what she was to them. That was not some foreign person that we could abandon in a time of need. She was a sister. What an act of grace and humility.

The story then moves to the hurt and pain that it took to right the wrong. What a heart wrenching job it must have been to actually dig up a daughter someone else buried. While the Cerak family moved from horror to hope to hallelujah to hope, the Van Ryn family moved from hope to hallelujah to horror to hope. These families have lived an unimaginable tragedy and I pray for God’s grace in their lives as they move forward. I believe the book will be a great closure for both families as they move forward with their lives. But, oh, what a powerful testimony of faithfulness to God and His sovereignty.

As Gail and I watched this story I had a thought of the similarity for another situation. That thought will be shared later. Right now, I just ask that we all take time with our Lord and lift up these two families.

Oh, I am also going to purchase the book.

Dr. Frank Cox has my Vote

On June 10, 2008 during that morning session, probably, we will have a time that the convention will elect her next President.  When that time comes, I will punch my ballot for Dr. Frank Cox.  Oh, my wife and my daughter, if she is elected a messenger from our church, will also punch their ballots for Dr. Cox.

I am voting for Dr. Cox for three reasons.  First, I have prayed about this decision and I believe that God is leading me to vote for Dr. Cox,  I believe Dr. Cox has presented himself as a man of God that desires to do what is right for the Southern Baptist Convention.  Dr. Cox has served our convention well on the Executive Committee.  He also has never been afraid to take a stand on something that he believes in.  Dr. Cox, as I remember, stood and spoke at a convention when he was serving on the resolutions committee.  He spoke against a Christian Education resolution and he did it with integrity.  His point was that he served on his school board and was able to make changes and be light in the public school system.  This was not a popular stand for him but he stood without flinching.

Why the Complaining?

It seems that there is a saying I grew up hearing and it applies to what we are now seeing in the blog world. The saying; “Stop spitting in my face and telling me it is raining“. This saying was used when someone was trying to change something that was fact and using words to change public perception in order to change facts. Judge McBryde’s summary judgment is now in, but some seem to be spitting in our faces and telling us it is raining.

With the case of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and her President Dr. Paige Patterson coming to a summary judgment, it seems that it is not good enough for some. In the weeks leading up to the judge’s decision one person said; “Once the jury (or judge) decides a proper verdict, whatever they decide, nobody should complain.” This comment was said on this blog. In the same comment stream this same commenter said; “I trust that we as Southern Baptists can rest in the belief that a sovereign God will ensure a righteous decision, and judgment, shall be forthcoming – however it turns out.” It seems that now this commentor seems to question the ‘outcome of this situation’. Later in the comment stream this same commentor said; “Thanks Bart, for the healthy discussion. I think it is evident that nobody knows the truth – YET. But a court will soon decide.“

Well another blog in another comment stream was rife with comments about how many would see the truth and we should follow the judges decisions. It seems that some wanted to make those of us who were calling for an accurate reading of the case feel like we had no business reading, much less commenting on this case. Here one commenter said; “Listening to you parse case law is like watching a ground hog in the clutches of an eagle assuming that he can fly.” But, here you can see that the author of the article referencing to the loyalty of Dr. Blaising and insinuating he is merely trying to cover his proverbial backside.

Today, Craig Blaising is doing his best to cover Defendant Patterson’s hind quarters. In fact, no greater loyalist at SWBTS can be found among Patterson’s two-legged colleagues. His affidavit reveals the nature of his involvement in negotiating Klouda’s contract with the seminary, in revising the conditions of her faculty responsibility to satisfy hesitant trustees, and in doing the dirty work of giving her the boot when Patterson determined that his “sincere religious belief” warranted a unilateral vacation of the trustee majority opinion regarding the suitability of a woman to teach Semitic languages in the School of Theology.

With all of these pre-judgment statements, these same bloggers are now asserting a mistake by the judge. The same judge, whose decision that one said, ‘we all should submit’. Well, now I want you to notice the post-judgment posts. Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, and Here.

As has previously been noted; Once the jury (or judge) decides a proper verdict, whatever they decide, nobody should complain. Why all of the complaints if we trust that we as Southern Baptists can rest in the belief that a sovereign God will ensure a righteous decision, and judgment?

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!

Here in Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood it seems that many have taken me to task on how I interpret the law. It appears that before long there is a Judge in Texas that will issue a decision in the Klouda vs. Southwestern case. I am not sure of the outcome, but if the judge is true to the law, I believe Southwestern and Dr. Patterson will receive a Summary Judgment.  Why?  It seems this case was all about the President of a seminary allowing the Bible to drive his beliefs. I mean, we still live in America where we do have a freedom of religion held constitutionally as a basic right of each individual.  This case had nothing to do with contract law, but all to do with the theological convictions and the freedom to follow those convictions.

A couple of questions and then I will leave you until the summary is made public. Where are the papers, copied and place in .pdf format for all to see, of this decision? It seems that information in the past has been given before anyone else had it and made available on the internet. Why are those that made this available in the past not so quick to point out that this decision is coming.   After all, one editor contributor at another collaborative blog has made it known that he has visited Judge McBryde’s office and even got to know some of his staff.

But, we will wait to see what the verdict is in this summary.

Welcome to Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood!

It seems that there are some that desire to pull quotes out of context in order to paint something with a broad brush. By doing so they make simple statements become complex and try to make things into something they are not.  A prime example of this is the recent post here. It seems that the author has, not only violated his own announced rules of blogging, but he also has taken a little truth and then wrapped untruth innuendo around that truth to lead his readers astray. First, is his innuendo concerning “Mr. Rogers Neighborhood”. Let me tell you that I am one of the founders of the collaborative blog SBC Today. However, that is not my neighborhood. My neighborhood is here. You can be my friend too. :>) Second, I have never stated that we are to never use the court system. As a matter of fact the Bible clearly states that is the reason government was established. I cannot make you love me, but I can establish laws and live in a society where it is wrong for you to kill me. If you decide, because of your hatred of me to come after me, there are consequences you must suffer and the government is responsible for making you suffer those consequences. The author of the above linked post does something as old as the Garden of Eden. He pulls a statement out and then questions the intentionality of the statement without contacting the person making the statement. That is what Satan did to Eve. I want you to see the statement and then I will show you the full statement.

No Christian should be involved in taking another Christian to court.

That statement is used to say that I am trying to encourage never using the court systems if someone ever said they were Christians. However, notice the context of the statement. The following is the statement in full which is found on SBC Today.

No Christian should be involved in taking another Christian to court. We in NC have every right to take the Schools, Baptist Retirement Homes and WMU to court and fight it out suing them for everything we can get our hands on. If that were to happen and we win multi-million $ settlements I would vote to give every cent back to the entities. However, that is not the case. We have agreed to let God be the final judge.

If you will follow the comment stream of over 140 comments, you will notice that my argument has been consistent. I believe you will find the Bible teaches that Christians should not take other Christians to court in order to settle civil matters. If it is matters concerning criminal activity, then Christians should involve themselves and make themselves available in order to bring about justice. Civil matters are different issues. I did not arrive at this conclusion in a vacuum as you will note from the following true events in my life.

I have an older biological brother that was murdered back in 1983. His probation officer called our home one day asking if we had seen him. He lived in Bull Head City, Arizona and we did not know what happened. A Detective with the Police Department told us they suspected he was dead and they had someone they believed was responsible. However, there was not enough evidence to convict and the case became a cold case. In 1989, a Obstetrician was rummaging around some desert washes searching for various treasures. He stumbled across a bone and recognized it as a human pelvic bone. Police were notified and the rest of his remains were found along with his skull. There was a bullet hole in his skull along with bullet holes in his ribs. The dental records proved to be my older brother. We were able to bury his remains, but we have never been able to see his killer come to justice.

Why do I tell you that story? This is a criminal case. I am 100% in agreement that his killer should get justice. If his killer is located, I will push for this killer to be convicted. If it turns out that his killer is a Christian then I will not file a civil suit. If his killer is not a Christian then the civil suit is available for me to file if I deem it necessary to do so.

Back in 1997 my wife was employed at a major private religious university. She was in management and expecting our child. During this time there was a ‘right-sizing’ taking place. She applied for a position that would increase her responsibilities along with her salary. She was brought into a room and told that because she was pregnant they did not believe she could do the job and as such she would withdraw her application. If she withdrew her application, she would be rewarded with the same job making the same pay and benefits. However, if she did not do so, there was no guarantee that she would end up with either job. We went to the EEOC.

Why do I tell this story? The EEOC told us we had a case and it was bordering on criminal. However, if she was not planning to work after the baby they could not prosecute. They told us that if we went to a lawyer he/she would file a civil suit against this university. We sought the Face of God and was driven on our knees to His Word. In 1 Corinthians 6 we found Paul’s admonition for Christians not to take other Christians to court. We sought to work through the system within the religious university, but it was to no avail. We decided it was better to be wronged than to bring something like this into the public arena to be resolved and debated by unbelievers.

What is the difference in these two situations? The first is a criminal situation and the second is a civil. The above linked post seems to present a blanket statement for anyone anywhere to go to court. That post is completely against Scripture. For a Christian to take another Christian to court over a civil matter reveals one’s belief in the sufficiency of Scripture. The post linked in this article reveals something about one’s belief of Scripture. One may say they believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, but to counsel one Christian to take another Christian to court over civil matters, speaks loudly that the sufficiency of Scripture is something that can be thrown out.

Allow me one other statement concerning the post that has taken my statement out of comment and wrapped it in innuendo and false assumptions in order to further his cause. I will leave you to research the methods of the one trying to paint me as a person that is dogmatic and paints me with a broad brush. Here is just one issue where he uses the same tactics–mining quotes. He quotes Matthew Henry and links to this article. I do not know where he got his Matthew Henry quote, but in Matthew Henry’s unabridged commentary, it never says anything like he has quoted. The closest it comes to what he has quoted is the following:

Note, Christians should never engage in law-suits till all other remedies have been tried in vain. Prudent Christians should prevent, if possible, their disputes, and not courts of judicature decide them, especially in matters of no great importance.— Matthew Henry Unabridged

The above quote comes from Matthew Henry explaining his position on the 1 Corinthian 6 text. If you read the commentary you will note that Matthew Henry dogmatically states in the beginning of the section; “Here the apostle reproves them for going to law with one another before heathen judges for little matters; and therein blames all vexatious law-suits.“— Matthew Henry Unabridged (Emphasis mine)

This is just one misapplied quote from the other bloggers quote mining experience. But, if after all of this explanation you still desire to believe that I have said no one should ever involve themselves in the courts, then believe what you would like.

However, there is a danger that should be well noted with this litigious society spilling over into the church. What will happen if the pastor that advocates Christians taking other Christians to court ever believes you and your church has wronged him and his church? I wonder what kind of news storm will be created when two churches go to court after each other?

But, if something like that happens, You can still be my Friend.

Paul Chesser Says it Well!

The American Spectator carries an article that I believe speaks well about the seemingly inconsistency of some SB leaders. This is from an observer that doesn’t have a dog in the fight. I have high respect for many signers of the SBECI, but I just do not understand their reasoning. My biggest concern is that we now have a group of people who have advocated expository preaching declaring that preachers begin an ecological topical sermon series, but we do not have scientific evidence that we have Global Warming.

It appears that something is strangely amiss. The ERLC is the “official” arm of the SBC that addresses social and moral concerns and their implications on public policy issues. But they have not, and apparently cannot, sign off on this document.

Read Paul Chesser’s Article

I will be in Indian Trail, NC

I plan to make the Thursday event of the Real Evangelism Conference at First Baptist Indian Trail. I need my preaching pump primed and have experienced this conference in the past to do just that. There is something about this conference that I have always felt was a hinderance. They begin on Wednesday evening. Not only that but Dr. Bailey Smith usually speaks on Wednesday. This year he also has Dr. Ron Lynch scheduled to speak. Dr. Lynch spoke at the NC Pastors conference when he was a pastor here and the person preaching in front of him preached his sermon. Not only that it was the sermon Dr. Lynch had planned on preaching at the conference. Talk about recovery, Dr. Lynch, at the drop of a hat, put together an outline sitting there in the pew and preached it. Dr. Bailey Smith is only scheduled to preach on Wednesday evening. I love to hear that man preach. His message on the Wheat and Tares is one that God used in my wife’s life to get her to examine her heart. Gail, as a Pastor’s wife, realized her need for Jesus as her personal Lord and Savior after she an I watched the video. I will never forget how she had to purchase that video. She could not wait until the end of the conference when Dr. Smith puts everything on sale. She purchased it at the beginning and paid full price for the video. :>) But after we got home and viewed the video, God’s Spirit convicted her and she accepted the fact that just walking down an isle did not make her saved. You see, that is what she was depending on, her trip down the isle and her crying so hard she could not speak to the preacher. The preacher assumed she was there for salvation and presented her to the church. Dr. Bailey Smith, it could be said, is the greatest thing that happened in my marriage. :>)

I will be there on Thursday to hear my President, Dr. Danny Akin, who is President of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. Then I will hear the Dean of some rinky-dink seminary out in some cow town in Texas named Dr. David Allen. (I will probably have to repent at the judgment seat for that statement) Of course you can get a taste of his preaching skills here and here. Then that afternoon I am looking forward to hearing Dr. Jr. Hill and Dr. Bill Stafford. I am about to bust just thinking about that afternoon session. Dr. Hill will be his usual self proclaiming God’s word in humor, humility, and with tears as he tells us of times God has touched his life. Dr. Stafford will be his Wild Bill self. It has been some years since I have heard Dr. Stafford and the last time I heard him he was everywhere. I pray he just cleans himself off a spot and has a spell. That evening will end with one of Southern Baptist best testimonies for Sunday evening worship. Dr. Johnny Hunt will preach that evening and if you do not know this you need to. Dr. Hunt got saved on a snowy day at a Sunday evening worship service. Praise God for preachers that will not allow snow to keep them from having Sunday evening Worship.

I certainly want to get back for Friday but my schedule will not allow it at this time. I am trying to re-arrange some things to see if I can get back. Dr. Anthony George is preaching that morning and I want to hear him preach. Also Dr. Danny Forshee will preach after Dr. George and what a treat it is to once again hear him. That afternoon Dr. Bob Pitman will mount the pulpit and if you have never heard him preach, I would encourage you to make plans to hear him. Dr. Jaimey Ragel and Dr. Herb Reavis will close out that evening. You now see why I hate that Friday may not be in my schedule to be there.

I am working on getting everything that I can in place to be available to attend.

Revelation from the Dark Side

From over at SBC Outpost we have had some information released to the general public. This information is open to the public now because it is part of a law suit that Dr. Sherri Klouda has filed against Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminay and her President Dr. Paige Patterson.

This information has been released in an effort to place Dr. Patterson in a bad position. Now the latest information is released to try and paint Dr. Craig Blaising as some mindless lackey employed to carry out Dr. Patterson’s endless fundamentalist desires. However, it seems that this little venture of the bombastic one has now enlightened everyone to what people have been saying all along. Dr. Bart Barber has more clearly stated it than I can, but it seems that we are now finding out that SWBTS and Dr. Patterson have not kicked anyone in the street. If you do not believe me, read it for yourself.

patterson-affidavit.pdf

blaising-affidavit.pdf

A couple of items that will reveal some discrepancies in the facts as told by the Dark Side. These “facts” that some would have you to believe are clearly spelled out in these two different affidavits. Let me give you just two examples.

First, we were told from the beginning that all of a sudden in the spring of 2006 Dr. Klouda was relieved from her position with no place to go and a sick husband to look after. You can see the position stated in this post, but to whet your appetite, here is the money quote; Through a series of broken promises that eventually led to Patterson quietly not assigning her teaching responsibilities for the fall of 2006 because of her gender, and then seeking to terminate her contract and benefits in December by 2006 (the middle of an academic cycle, and the worst possible time for an academician to find a job), this popular Hebrew professor found herself being phased out. According to both, Dr. Patterson and Dr. Blaising, she was not forced out and was given a position with the same pay and the same benefits. Dr. Klouda willingly resigned in July, 2006 to take a position at Taylors University. Some have tried to point to a reduction in position as being equivelant to a Pastor being asked to stop preaching and keep employed at the church as the janitor. This is not even close to what is being presented in Dr. Blaisings affidavit. The pastor is called to the position he holds and he is called to influence people through the pulpit ministry. Dr. Klouda expressed her call was to influence people through teaching and writing. Would one not agree that the position of Associate Director of Writing would not be within the parameters of her calling?

Second, we have been told that Dr. Patterson promised Dr. Klouda in a private meeting that she would retain her position as she was on a tenured track. Also, according to this comment, there was a plan in place to bring legal action months before it was exposed to the public through the web blogs. Also, if you look at Dr. Patterson’s affidavit, you will see that he never promised Dr. Klouda her position was guaranteed. He says in paragraph #18, “I did not give her assurance of future employment.” How much clearer can one be?

It does appear that this case is going to come down to contract law. Did Dr. Patterson promise Dr. Klouda that her position was secured? He says no and he holds to scriptural authority for his guide. She says he did, but feels free to violate scripture in order to line her pockets along with her lawyers. I think I am going to believe the one that holds to Scripture in all he does.

What Does it Mean?

When I was younger in my BC days, I went to a beer joint/pool hall called the “Blues Bar” along with my cousin and his friends. When daddy found out that I have been to this place, he questioned me as to my intention of doing something like that, as the bar was known for being a place where shooting guns was as common as shooting pool. I tried to dodge daddy’s questions by referencing the friends I went with were more friends of my cousin than friends of mine. Daddy responded with words that ring in my ears to this day. He said; ‘You may not be able to pick your family, but you can certainly pick your acquaintances‘. Which brings me to the point of today’s post.

During my time of sitting up with my mother at the hospital recently, while she was asleep, I would peruse the Google search engine for various items. One such item of interest to me was the connection of North Carolina Baptist with the New Baptist Covenant Celebration recently held in Atlanta. What peaked my interest was the advertising of this event in the Biblical Recorder, the state paper for the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. I began this search out of curiosity and the more I searched the more I began to see connections that most NC Baptist may not be aware.

First allow me to lay some basic ground work. Before anyone tries to attack this post saying that I am presenting this from a biased perspective. I do admit my bias as to my suspicions that this celebration was not what it was billed to be. Let us look to an independent news agency for their explanation of the event. I, for one, have always stated this celebration was not about getting Baptist together for expanding the kingdom as much as it was for getting them together to expand the Democratic party base. As Naomi Schaefer Riley stated:

The New Baptist Covenant is officially apolitical. But with Mr. Gore and former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton on the roster of speakers at a meeting jammed last week between the Florida primary and Super Tuesday, one might be forgiven for doubting this claim.

It seems that an independent news agency such as The Wall Street Journal, would be one that is unbiased. However, it appears that Robert Parham, Editor at Ethics Daily, disagrees. He said her article had too many errors. In a response that is classic liberal smack down, he addresses her title at the Wall Street Journal in a degrading way. What Mr. Parham forgets is that an Editor for Friday’s Taste page, in the Wall Street Journal would have more readers than the Editor of Ethics Daily.

Therefore, from an independent news agency, this celebration was about politics, not Baptist politics mind you, but secular politics. Does that mean that those involved were there to promote the Democratic Party? No, that is not what I am saying. I do believe that many people involved in this event were there simply to do the various duties within their convention. This celebration was planned, with different motives other than uniting Baptist to move forward to overcome poverty, aids, global warming, promote civil rights for gays and other issues it seems that conservatives are accused of not caring for. Allow me to note two other items and then draw some connections of North Carolina Baptist that many may not be aware.

If this celebration was about bringing everyone together, where was everybody on Thursday and Friday? You see we heard about the expected 20,000 people and then the count of over 12,000 people that attended on Wednesday evening at the opening ceremony. But we have never been given any other numbers for the attendance when the other Baptist meetings closed out their conventions. It seems that most left and went back home. One example is the Al Gore luncheon. I am not going to try and argue the purposes of the the media not being allowed into his luncheon. I am not going to even try and argue how he presented our responsibility of God’s creation when he is an avowed evolutionist. But 2500 people attending a luncheon, at $35 a head mind you, does not make a grand statement to me as to the 12,000 Baptist reported at the Wednesday opening ceremony. Also, it seems that 2500 people paying $35 a head could have used that $87,000 to help feed these poor that this celebration was supposed to unite the Baptist that were present. It also seems that the food to feed 2500 people at $35 per plate was a bit extravagant. Certainly paying $35 for rubber chicken, uncooked green beans, hard dinner rolls, unsweetened tea, and carrot cake could have been better used feeding the homeless in Atlanta–where most were right outside the World Congress Center.

Also, with this celebration promoting unity among diversity, I have to ask a question. Where were the invitations for two groups? Everyone knows that the SBC was not invited. There never was an official invitation sent to the SBC. Therefore, there was no way for the SBC to decline to be involved. The SBC probably would not have accepted the invite, but the fact remains they were not invited. And you can now understand why, as you peruse the speakers manuscripts you find the the SBC was the favorite ‘whipping boy’ of many speakers. If President Carter believes this is an official representative of the SBC, then he has another thought coming.

The second group that was not invited were the Gays and Lesbians. According to this news article the diversity that the New Baptist Covenant calls for was not even allowed a voice in the arena. How pious and even hypocritical of Former President Carter in his opening talk to point to things that have divided Baptist as “He cited a laundry list of issues that have divided Baptists-the role of women in ministry and marriage, varying accounts of creation, legalized abortion, civil rights for gays, separation of church and state, and the death penalty.” This opening talk came a year after the Alliance of Baptist were not given invitations to be at the celebration. We certainly want to promote civil rights for gays but we will not allow them to be part of this celebration, because it is not politically expedient. Of course this did not seem to bother the Alliance churches because many of them already have a voice as they are connected to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. The Fellowship is strongly connected with the celebration and thus, the Gays and Lesbians are represented through this group.

Allow me to now make come connections that should cause NC Baptist to pay attention. As you look to the committees that were structured for the planning of this celebration you will notice some very well connected NC Baptist. First I want to point your attention to the Program Committee and you will not that Dr. Bill Leonard is a member of this committee. Dr. Leonard is the Dean of the Divinity School at Wake Forest University. You will remember that this is the divinity school that would not take a stand against receiving Gay and Lesbian Students to study for the ministry. It is not about the students themselves, but the fact that we have a Divinity School that does not support the scripture as speaking to the issue of homosexuality. Second, I want to point your attention to the Finance Committee. You will note that Dr. Mike Queen, Pastor of First Baptist Wilmington being involved in that committee. Dr. Queen, you will remember is a former President of the Executive Committee of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina. While this does not really concern me as Dr. Queen is a pastor of an autonomous church, it would concern me if he were serving in a leadership position within our state convention at present. Third, there are 2 other NC Baptist connections serving on the Communications Committee that does concern me. One is Mrs. Ruby Fulbright. Mrs. Fulbright, as you know, is the Executive Director of WMU-NC. The same WMU-NC that recently left moved out from under the umbrella of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina because they wanted to ‘do missions with other groups’. It seems that Mrs. Fulbright may have found another source of funding outside of NC Baptist by taking part in this celebration. Also, it concerns me to find Dr. Tony Cartledge listed as a member of this committee. It does not surprise me, but it does concern me that we have a professor teaching in a NC Baptist college/divinity school that will attend a celebration that puts down bible believing Baptist as being some fundamentalist idiots. Why does it concern me? Campbell University has a desire to still have access to the students in NC Baptist churches. These NC Baptist churches have repeatedly voted to align ourselves more fully with the Southern Baptist Convention, and we are sending our students to a school whose professors, at least one, openly plan a meeting to speak against the very rallying cry of the SBC.

I know that some may try to point out that Richard Brunson was a presenter in a break out session as reported by the Biblical Recorder. (The Recorder’s coverage of this event is another subject for another post. Suffice it to say when a state paper gives more coverage to an out of state meeting that the BSCNC was not participating, than to the Ex.Com. meeting going on the same week, it seems a little out of kilter.) As I understand it, the Baptist Men of North Carolina Director was invited to express to those that wanted to know, how we involve ourselves in Disaster Relief.

Which brings me back to my opening story. As NC Baptist we may not be able to choose those that God leads to become part of our fellowship. We certainly need to hold high the blood stained banner while lovingly and firmly communicating that we will not allow anything to compromise our doctrine in that banner. But we also need to remember we can choose those with whom we associate.