Merriam-Webster defines nepotism as; “favoritism (as in appointment to a job) based on kinship.” Some expand that definition to include close friends. Thus nepotism, for those defining it to include friendship, would certainly be correct and something, if taken to an extreme, that could be harmful to the SBC. However, for this post I will remain strictly focused on the kinship definition as defined by Merriam-Webster. One may ask the reason I do not use the “friendship” part of the definition? That is a fair question. I do not use that because of the nature of appointments and convention positions within the SBC. Many appointments and recommendations are made based on relationships made within the process of meeting one another through the educational institutions of the SBC. Thus recommendations to various pulpits and other convention positions are based on friendship. I merely would like to point to some positions that seem to be given solely on the fact that someone was kin to someone else.
Lifeway
Dr. Tom Rainer has done a tremendous job at Lifeway. I do not know of anyone that is disappointed with the progress of that company. There are some serious concerns with Lifeway’s direction of headlining authors that have questionable theological views at best, but if the bottom line is financial stability and viability, no one can complain about his tenure. Having said that, there remains some concerns with the nepotism that seems to have embedded itself in that organization.
As I said at the outset of this Op, I do not deny that friends are recommended to places of employment throughout the SBC. For example in Dr. Rainer’s Executive Leadership Team (ELT) we see that four of the nine ELT members worked closely together at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. As I said, that should not raise a concern as it is in settings like seminary that friendships are forged for a lifetime. Thus, when Dr. Rainer moved to head of Lifeway he certainly was going to tap people he was comfortable with and could trust to place in key positions. However, the nepotism, while not seen in the hiring process at Lifeway is certainly seen in the process of publishing books. For example we see that Dr. Rainer has a son, Sam, who is Pastor of 1stBaptist Murray, Kentucky. Sam also serves as President of Rainer Research, Inc. in his time off from being pastor. But in Sam’s busy schedule he is also an accomplished author. Would one care to venture a guess as to the publisher of his book? You got it; our own Lifeway’s B&H Publishing was the publisher for his first book, Essential Church, a joint venture that he and Dr. Rainer co-authored together. The question is not whether Sam Rainer is a prolific author or not; the question has to do with the publisher. Would Sam Rainer received a published title had he presented this concept to another publisher?
Enter Dr. Rainer’s second son Art. Art, according to the Lifeway bio, serves on staff at First Baptist Church, West Palm Beach Florida as the Business Administrator. I am not certain as to the length of time that Art has been in that position, but it is presumed that his Dad’s good friend, Dr. Jimmy Scroggins, brought Art to that position when he became pastor. What is interesting is that First Church West Palm Beach no longer completes the entire Annual Church Profile. Thus, there is no way for the average person to investigate their percentages. Well, Art seems to have also been featured in a Co-author position with his dad, Dr. Tom Rainer. After Dr. Rainer partnered with Eric Geiger to put together the #1 Ministry book, Simple Church, Dr. Rainer partnered with his son Art to ride that wave to launch Simple Life. Thus, another author for one of the largest Christian Publishers was discovered simply because he was the son of the president. Allow me to say one more time. The question is not to the ability of Art Rainer to be an author. I am certain he has writing skills that far exceed those of mine. The question is centered around the fact of Art Rainer’s ability to be a published author at any other publisher.
You may say that I am pulling at straws. Not really. Enter the youngest of the Rainer brothers, Jess. It seems that Jess is not only a banker but he has now graduated with his M-Div from SEBTS. As a result of that educational opportunity he is now on the church planting team of Grace Community Church in Hendersonville, Tn. According to the website, Jess is serving as the Administrative Pastor of this new church plant. However, as one looks at the church planting team one will find that Dr. Ed Stetzer will serve as Lead Pastor. The same Ed Stetzer that is VP of Lifeway and answers to Dr. Tom Rainer, Jess’ father. Should that concern anyone in the SBC? Not really. Jess has served as an associate pastor in NC while attending seminary; therefore, he has pastoral experience serving on a local church staff. What should concern SBC people in the pew is whether church planting funds are funding various church plants at different levels due to the staff relations with SBC leaders. However, there are two mega churches that are helping in the funding of this church plant. But Jess is also an accomplished author of the new book, The Millennials, which he co-authors with his father Dr. Tom Rainer and published by B&H. Once again, the question is not about the qualifications of Jess as much as it is of the inside track he would not otherwise have.
Therefore, the question bears asking: does the fact that all three of Thom Rainer’s sons are published authors at the publishing company where Dr. Rainer is president qualify as nepotism? I can hardly see how it does not given the working definition we mentioned earlier. If I am correct, the nepotism of using one’s position of authority to influence family members for positions should concern the SBC.
Please, before you break your computer screens, allow me to sum up this portion with saying that I can find nothing flawed in the abilities of these authors. I am certain the three Rainer progeny are completely competent in what they are called to do. One is a pastor, and the other two are serving in administrative pastoral staff positions. The issue for me has nothing to do with their abilities; it has to do with the fact that they were made authors in a major Christian publisher for the sole reason their father was the President. Would the editors at Broadman and Holman have taken on these projects if presented this prospectus by someone of another familial identity? Let’s give the benefit of the doubt and follow the understanding of riding the wave. For example, perhaps Art Rainer would have been strongly considered because of the popularity of Simple Church. But, if Simple Church was eliminated from the picture, would there have been a deal? Doubtful, unless, of course, your dad is the president..
Executive Committee
Under Dr. Morris Chapman’s tenure a position of Director of Information Services was filled by his son, Chris. While Chris, I am certain, had the qualifications needed for that position, it still reeks of nepotism. To Dr. Chapman’s credit, he was not Chris’ direct supervisor; but he was the direct supervisor to Chris’ direct supervisor, Augie Boto. Is it reasonable to assume Boto’s freedom to supervise Chapman would have been hindered had a disagreement arose between himself and his direct supervisor’s son?
Allow me to approach this from another direction. Let us suppose that Dr. Chapman founded the Executive Committee and solicited funds from churches in order to run this organization. Would it have been appropriate for him to place his son on his staff, even in a direct subordinate role? Certainly it would have because Dr. Chapman was the one with the vision and the risk. Thus, no one should question his desire to leave his family with a firm grasp on the future and direction of the organization. However, when influence is used in order to grant a position to a family member it calls into question the conflict of interest that may result in the work environment. Now I want to say it again lest I be misunderstood: those mentioned are more than likely qualified to fill the positions they fill. What I am not grasping is the complete disregard to the business principle that the secular world practices in order to keep from destroying a company.
My wife started back in the public work force in June 2010 after being out for thirteen years. Before she became a stay-at-home mom she was a Manager in the Purchasing Department at Duke University. While they were able to recommend members of their families to other departments, it was frowned upon. For example, her Director’s wife worked for the Athletic Director which was under a division completely separate from Purchasing. Thus, there was no conflict of interest if one was not performing their duties. The company she began with in June, 2010 has a policy that no one can have a relative working with the company. They do this for one reason only, and that is to avoid a conflict of interest if someone does not perform their duties properly.
Some may point to the various churches where the Senior Pastor’s son is on staff. But that does not concern me in this post. Why? Churches are autonomous, and if the congregation decides that is what they allow, then as a non-member of that church my opinion does not matter. My opinion does matter when it comes to SBC entities for the very reason as a pastor of a local SBC church those are my entities.
The few examples I raised above are just that–examples. Do I feel those mentioned are not qualified? No. Do I believe they would have those positions had it not been for their family connections? My point exactly! I am saying that nepotism in the SBC has got to stop, or we will see only those with family connections getting the choice positions and funding when it comes to convention offices and church planting funding. Why? Read The Millennials and you will find out that family relationships is the number one priority for those born between 1980-2000. Thus, in order to maintain those family relationships those following us will be tempted even more to place family members in choice positions.
These are fair, honest quesitons. You should have titled the piece, “Thom Ranier and nepostism at LIfeWay”
Having put all this together, why stop before emailing Ranier and asking for a response?
Dear Outsider,
I may do that, but really don’t see the need for me to ask for a response from Dr. Rainer. The reason? We entrust the oversight of the leadership to the trustees. I am asking honest questions that should be answered by Dr. Rainer to the trustees not me.
Blessings,
Tim
Outsider,
One other item. Thanks for the suggestion for the title change. However, I believe you will note that I addressed more than just Lifeway. I also addressed the issue of Dr. Chapman at the EC. Thus, my title of the SBC and Nepotism.
Tim
Tim,
Extremely interesting and should be noted by all concerned Southern Baptists. Not to toot a personal horn but by experience I know the difficulties authors face “being published.” It is one turn down after another, and many times a deafening silence (that is, some publishers won’t even contact you back to inform you ‘what’s up’ with the manuscript). With that in mind, to have an entire family (minus mom unless she publishes under an a.k.a.) as established authors is simply unheard of. Unless, of course, a private, family-owned company is involved. Even then, however, one would be hard-pressed to find a parallel in the publishing world.
I was told by someone not long ago that Dr. Rainer’s sons are also on an editorial committee for LifeWay. Do you have any info on that?
And, I’m with you: this is definitively *not* a case of offering benefits to unqualified people. Like you made abundantly clear, the Rainers are an incredibly gifted family. Nonetheless, if I can say it like this, no family is *that* gifted that a single publisher would offer all of them book deals. Simply incredible.
With that, I am…
Peter
P.S. I may link this post if you don’t mind, Tim…
Brother Peter,
As to the link you go right ahead. The editorial board is something I caught wind of, but because there is no way for me to verify that information I cannot confirm it. There seems to be nothing on any of the Lifeway or B&H websites that speak of any such board. If someone knows of such it was add an interesting twist to this entire situation.
Blessings,
Tim
How about David Allen going from the trustee chairman at swbts to dean of school of theology after bringing on Dr Patterson
Nepotism has been a big player in the post CR SBC, it has just taken some longer than others to be concerned. Of course it is easily justified by the ” it is someone they are comfortable” argument.
Jim,
Hope you are well. Comparing Allen/Patterson to Lifeway issuing all three sons of its president book deals is like comparing the mudhole in my back yard to the Mississippi. Please. As Tim made clear, this is a family gig. Something is twisted in this scenario.
In addition, you indicate nepotism is “a big player in the post CR SBC.” Not the family gig as Tim made plain, and certainly not to this extreme.
With that, I am…
Peter
Brother Jim,
I ask you go back and re-read my first paragraph. It deals specifically with the definition I am using. Please name me another entity that has a person on payroll simply because that person is biologically related to the president.
Blessings,
Tim
Not only is this piece troubling because of its conjecture and painting a picture that may or may not be factual, but it is a needless attack on a family that from every account I have ever read or heard are following Christ well.
First, have you read the books they wrote? You say they are “more than likely” qualified to write these books. If they are qualified, and the books are helpful to the church at large and Lifeway generated income from these books, why shouldn’t they be published by Lifeway? Do you want Southern Baptist authors to go someplace else to get published
Second, in each instance, they coauthored a book with their father, the president of Lifeway. CO Authored!!!
There is no doubt that the force of these books comes from the fact that Thom Rainer is the primary author. It seems that Thom is training his children well. They no doubt contributed greatly to the research and assembling of the information. Why shouldn’t sons follow in their father’s footsteps?
Would I have that opportunity? Well No, of course not. But why should I be offended, concerned, if a father is training and leading his sons to be servants of the church?
muckrake:to search for and expose real or ALLEGED corruption, scandal, or the like
“Conjecture”…may or may not be factual”
Don A, this is entirely absurd. Please be precise and inform readers where Tim has “conjectured” or “painted a picture” which “may or not be so.” Look for yourself.
Nor can any reasonable stretch make this piece into a “needless attack of a family.” Tim did no such thing and, in my view at least, even became overly redundant in making sure he clearly communicated this had nothing to do with questioning the Rainers’ value, talent or integrity.
On the other hand, if you have no reservations with blatant nepotism, be my guest.. But don’t expect sympathy from either the church Church at large. The truth is, one would be hard-pressed to cite private secular corporations practicing the kind of situation presented here. Yet apparently you want to cite Lifeway’s practice as exemplar for Kingdom ministries while proudly accusing those who have reservations concerning nepotistic practice of lobbing “needless attacks” on families.
Marathana
Come Lord.
With that, I am…
Peter
Is what has happened at Lifeway any of the following things?
Sinful/Immoral? If so, the Scripture violated would be appreciated.
Illegal/Unethical? Is there a law that has been violated? Has someone been harmed or discriminated against? You have said they are “more than likely” capable writers/researchers. All of Rainer’s books are research driven. If his sons assisted him in the research, is there any reason they should not have been included as contributing authors.
conjecture may have been too strong a word. And in the strictest sense, Tim was factual.
But, it is clear that he intends for people to believe that what took place at Lifeway is misguided/dangerous at the least, nefarious at the worst.
I submit, this OP was written to feel a certain way and believe certain things.
That what happened at Life way was wrong and should be prevented in the future.
That the trustees are either not doing their job, or are complicit in the alleged violations.
It seems more likely that Thom Rainer received the book contracts and because of the assistance and contributions of his sons, he included them as authors as well. If you think that is wrong or dangerous, well then, feel free. But don’t expect every “concerned” Southern Baptist to follow you on the way to the windmills.
Brother Don,
When a father is elected President of an entity that is over 100 years old he is the President. Just as George W followed George H.W. it was the vote of the people, not the decision of the father. Tom Rainer has his own publishing company through Rainer Research, which by the way, has Sam Rainer as the President. If he wanted to mentor and train his sons to be authors why not allow Rainer Research to publish the books? Then he could have had B&H and all of the resources at Lifeway to promote the books because He is President of Lifeway. That way no nepotism could be charged. However, when he used his influence to sign a book deal with the publishing company he is president over and allows his sons to be listed as co-author that is nepotism plain and simple. A practice the entire secular world frowns upon for the simple fact that nepotism will destroy a business quicker than you can say bye.
Lifeway is not a church it is an entity and sole member of the Southern Baptist Convention. That means I have a stake in this company and as a pastor I have a controlling interest. Tom Rainer is not the founder of this company he is a servant of the company. He doesn’t get to use my dime to train his boys by making them authors simply because he wants to see their names on a cover jacket.
If Thom Rainer did the work and received a contract then gave his sons their own authorship for his work then we have a far more serious problem than him taking their talents and authorizing their receiving remuneration for their work. Do you realize that your statement means that you advocate paying people for not doing anything?
Blessings,
Tim
Brother Don,
Allow me to respond to your assessment of the “feeling” of the OP. When the first co-authored book with his son came out, I responded in my mind with, “ugh, that looks like a conflict of interest.” When the second co-authored book was released, I responded in my mind with, “wow, this is a conflict of interest, I certainly pray our Trustees are going to say something to Dr. Rainer about this.” When the latest came out, I responded in my mind with, “this is not right because it is not Dr. Rainer’s company for him to be making his sons authors on the dimes of Southern Baptist.”
Let me say this so you will understand better my intent on this Op. Had Dr. Rainer co-authored these books with his sons with another publisher and Lifeway would have promoted them, then nothing would appear to be in conflict. Why? Lifeway is promoting their president’s book. But, with Dr. Rainer co-authoring these books with B&H he hired the president of B&H and he made his son a author at B&H. While I do not conceive of any underhanded practices on either B&H or the Rainer’s, it still does not do away with the appearance. The appearance is that Dr. Rainer has propelled his sons to authors in the largest Christian Publisher in the world, not based on their expertise, writing skills, or research, but based solely on their last name.
As for a Scripture violation. 1 Thessalonians 5:22.
Blessings,
Tim
“If Thom Rainer did the work and received a contract then gave his sons their own authorship for his work then we have a far more serious problem than him taking their talents and authorizing their receiving remuneration for their work. Do you realize that your statement means that you advocate paying people for not doing anything?”
My statement means no such thing. I never said they did no work. TR was the primary author. It seems clear they did contribute.
“Authors Thom S. Rainer and Art Rainer interviewed a cross-section of 1,077 individuals to confirm that most people feel their lives are overly stressful and misguided, not allowing enough time for what really counts.” B&H website
Now it is clear that with his responsibilities, Thom Rainer could not interview hundreds of people, so he worked with his son to conduct the interviews. His son contributed to the project in no doubt many ways. I would find it incredible if a research assistant was not credited in some way.
“Now, as its members begin to reach adulthood, where the traits of a generation really take shape, best-selling research author Thom Rainer (Simple Church) and his son Jess (a Millennial born in 1985) present the first major investigative work on Millennials from a Christian worldview perspective. ”
Here it seems that he consulted with the person he new the best that falls into the group the book was about. Again, why wouldn’t he consult a person in his own family about a subject his son would have insight into?
“This important question is examined and duly answered in Essential Church?, a follow-up to Thom S. Rainer’s best-selling Simple Church cowritten this time with his son, research expert Sam Rainer.”
I have no reason to believe that Sam Rainer is less than an expert in research. As you have said, you do not either.
1 Thessalonians 5:22 Abstain from every form of evil. NKJV KJV has every “appearance of evil.”
Let me make sure by asking a couple of questions.
Are you accusing Dr. Rainer of evil deeds?
Are you accusing his actions to “appear” evil?
The first book was released in 2008, the second in 2009, the third this month.
Are you saying that the trustees, who I am sure have much more insight into the situation than you or I do, have dropped the ball? Are they complicit in the alleged, ongoing malfeisance? After all, this is now the third time this has occurred.
I see no evil doings here. I don’t even see any appearance of evil.
Why do you?
Brother Don,
You are making my case for me. First, there is a basic understanding that Lifeway is not Dr. Rainer’s personal business that he built from the ground up. Second, he did build Rainer Research from the ground up. He certainly could have published any book he wanted to publish through Rainer Research, thus allowing his sons the opportunity to get their author credentials through Rainer Research.
Now, allow me to interact with your response.
That is my point. B&H is not Dr. Rainer’s personal publishing company. Rainer Research is.
Many of the presidents of the entities have research assistants. I do not know of any that were given con-authorship in a book deal for being the research assistant.
You just pointed out an area that would certainly call into question the research being skewed. Why? If that is the case and the rationality, there is a predetermined end the statistician enters the research looking. Thus, the data is being viewed with a pre-determined end in mind.
As you have pointed out I have not called into question any of the Rainer’s abilities. There is nothing anywhere in my article that questions their abilities or their character.
No, I am not accusing Dr. Rainer of any evil deed. Yes, I am saying that these actions appear evil as they certainly are not practiced in any secular organization whose president was not the founder.
I do not believe I have said anything that the trustees have “dropped the ball.” Neither have I suggested there is an “ongoing malfelsance.” Those are your words that you are trying to push me on as you evidently do not agree with the facts I have placed out here. Now, if you would like to deal with the facts I will accept your disagreement. However, if the trustees have approved this and they see nothing wrong with this, then it is something they need to revisit.
Now, please tell me what other company that you know of, secular or Christian, whose President has catapulted their offspring, not one but all, to a position of leadership based on nothing but their last name?
Blessings,
Tim
“Now, please tell me what other company that you know of, secular or Christian, whose President has catapulted their offspring, not one but all, to a position of leadership based on nothing but their last name?”
Catapulted? Leadership? you are overstating this quite a bit.
They were co-authors on three books, where their father is the primary author.
They, as far as we know at this point, are in no positions of leadership at lifeway. They were co-authors. There are hundreds of authors at lifeway.
If you are an author, that makes you a leader?????
They don’t have positions at lifeway.
What benefit have they received?
Did lifeway not make money on the sales of this book?
Who has been discriminated against?
“However, if the trustees have approved this and they see nothing wrong with this, then it is something they need to revisit.” How do you know they have not?
Well, Certainly If YOU think so!!!!
Tim,
I don’t discount your right or perogative to have your own viewpiont on Lifeway.
But, maybe this quote form the original OP gets to what caused me to respond.
“My opinion does matter when it comes to SBC entities for the very reason as a pastor of a local SBC church those are my entities.”
With all due respect, the entities are not YOURS. You contribute voluntarily to SBC entities.
That contribution allows you a vote at the Convention. It allows you to make any motion you deem to be relevant. But, in no way could it be said that you have ownership of any entity of the SBC. Sure, you have a voice, but certainly it is that one voice, one vote.
Certainly, you would agree on the basic point that The SBC and all that it entails could hopefully be said to fall under the ownership of the Lord Jesus Christ
Why not just trust the trustees and Thom Rainer until you have evidence to the contrary?
If it comes to light that there is more here than what you have pointed out here, than I may join you in your consternation. But, pretty thin so far.
Brother Don,
I may be totally wrong on this thing and if that is the way the SBC has now gone then it speaks volumes as to where we have come. For you to make the statement that the entities are not mine that my contribution only allows me a vote, then we have moved a long way away from the CR. In the CR it was understood that we had control over the entities. When Dr. Jack Graham was leading us to change the name of the convention there was one little lady that stepped to the microphone and asked a question that derailed the entire thing. The reason she asked the question was because she saw the SBC as hers and she did not want to see the name changed. Also, we were told going into the GCR that the “local church was king.” Now you tell me that we are not the owners of the entities. Also, every entity is the “sole member” of the SBC. Thus, they are mine. Just like they are yours.
I trust your evening well and sorry that you do not agree with me.
Blessings,
Tim
Don,
“Is what has happened at Lifeway any of the following things?” Sinful/Immoral? If so, the Scripture violated would be appreciated.” If you are looking for a “thou shalt not commit nepotism,” no. There is no Scripture like that about which I am aware. But I know of no Scripture which explicitly says “thou shalt not torture babies when they cry” either. There are many good reasons why we may reasonably deduce moral principles from other texts to confidently affirm it is morally wrong to torture crying babies, however. Similarly, there are moral principles which may also be deduced from biblical passages concerning justice, honesty in executing bestowed power, not exploiting one’s power for selfish gain, loving one’s neighbor as ones self, un-favoritism, unselfishness, and the like which are applicable to nepotism, not to mention Tim’s concern about avoiding the appearance of wrongdoing in others’ eyes, including those outside the church.
Even so, there are a few passages which some scholars (not all) believe blatantly address nepotism. One such passage is Isaiah 22 where the Prophet condemns Eliakim who apparently practiced nepotism. Keil & Deilitzch write:
“Illegal/Unethical? Is there a law that has been violated? Has someone been harmed or discriminated against?” As for the illegality of it, it depends on Tennessee laws. Some states have laws against nepotism. Even if Tennessee does, however, the law might not affect non-profit companies like LifeWay (the state of Nebraska amended its constitution with laws against nepotism). In addition, for all I know there are already policies in place in Lifeway’s manual which speak about nepotism—especially under the conflict of interests section. Hence, as for the legality, all one can say is perhaps, perhaps not.
You also query whether “someone has been harmed or discriminated against.” Of course others were discriminated against! B&H must surely receive 10-15 times more manuscripts than they actually publish (and that’s conservative). The only way they could judge which books Lifeway would offer contracts and spend thousands of dollars to produce would involve discrimination. But the issue raised *is not* discrimination per se. Rather it is the criteria used to discriminate. And, one would be hard-pressed to argue anything other than prejudicial selection based on paternal instincts when almost an entire family has book deals—dad and three sons—from the firm where dad is the ultimate say-so pertaining to who and who not is going to get published. If I am correct, then yes, others have been harmed and unduly discriminated against because paternal instincts pushed presidential sons ahead of someone else.
“You have said they are “more than likely” capable writers/researchers. All of Rainer’s books are research driven. If his sons assisted him in the research, is there any reason they should not have been included as contributing authors.” There is. Read the above.
“conjecture may have been too strong a word. And in the strictest sense, Tim was factual.” I’m glad you see your error.
“But, it is clear that he intends for people to believe that what took place at Lifeway is misguided/dangerous at the least, nefarious at the worst” I’m not sure how you come to the distinctions you’re making (for your terms have fairly synonymous connotations). Anyways, precisely. Nepotism is misguided and hence inevitably leads to dangerous precedents which, going on long enough can destroy an entity.
Interestingly, the Medieval Church was decimated by papal abuse indicative of factors—including sale of indulgences and unchecked nepotism—which ultimately led to the Protestant Reformation. Phillip Schaff writes:
And, in spite of their disqualifications whether spiritual or moral, Schaff lists a catalog of family members made cardinals, some as young as 18, 17, 14, and even seven years of age!
Even more, one of the core values in Islamic culture in contrast to Western culture is teased out in what we call nepotism. Former missionary in Iran and Egypt, Patrick Cate explains:
And, you apparently think, Don, “No problem. No one is getting hurt. It’s O.K. No big deal.” For some reason I think those who hold such a bold laissez faire approach would think entirely different were their own children ignored while the boss’s children excelled around them to the top of the food chain. Supposing you had a daughter who worked very hard in a particular place, qualified in every way, much experience and talent when the job of her dreams opened up. But wait! Not just one job but three! Lo and behold, the president’s daughter got the first assignment. “No sweat,” she says to herself. “Surely, she’ll get the next.” Nope, the president’s middle daughter got the second position. “I know I’ll get the third,” she assured herself. “The president’s youngest daughter has no experience whatsoever. She’s just now graduating.” The day came for the announcement. Did she get the job of her dreams? Sorry. The president;s youngest daughter got it as well.
Yeah, right. You would have no problem? Spare me, Don.
“I submit, this OP was written to feel a certain way and believe certain things.” So what? All pieces are written “to feel a certain way and believe certain things.”
“That what happened at Life way was wrong and should be prevented in the future.” Precisely—at least so far as I am concerned. If Thom Rainer owned LifeWay, he’d have my utmost support. But he doesn’t; Southern Baptists do. And, so far as I am concerned, exploiting one’s position—a position bestowed by Southern Baptists, a contract of trust that an executive will keep all Southern Baptists in mind as he executes his office, not his next of kin—is a practice which has no place in God’s Kingdom.
“That the trustees are either not doing their job, or are complicit in the alleged violations.” Perhaps. But not necessarily out of insincerity. It could very well be out of ignorance.
“It seems more likely that Thom Rainer received the book contracts and because of the assistance and contributions of his sons, he included them as authors as well.” You obviously do not know how contracts work. Lifeway had to include contracts to the sons as co-authors. Nor is it about promoting one’s sons. I promote my children every chance I get. If I can use connections, I use them. You’re entirely missing the point, Don. It’s not that Rainer or anyone else should not pursue and fulfill paternal instincts concerning their own flesh and blood. Good grief. No one is suggesting fatherhood should be cold and mechanic. Hence, the issue is not the promotion of his sons as authors. The issue is nepotism—granting favors they undoubtedly could not get were he not the president of the publishing company. Here’s an idea: why not use one’s connection and relationships with fat cats of other publishing companies? Had the president said to Baker’s president, “Let’s do lunch” and ask him, “Listen my boy is a great researcher and writer. Do you think you could give him a shot at a book?” We would *not* be having this conversation had something like that happened. Instead, all three of the president’s children get book deals where he’s the boss. Sorry, Don. To ignore such blatant and extreme—*all* his boys! Not one; All!—fundamentally absurd.
“If you think that is wrong or dangerous, well then, feel free. But don’t expect every “concerned” Southern Baptist to follow you on the way to the windmills.” Laying aside what in Sam Hill you meant by the latter phrase, it’s not only me, my friend. Like I said above, if you’re daughter was on the receiving end of nepotism’s darker side, we’d see what you really believed about it. Even so, not only has the church condemned nepotism historically, but even secular culture thinks it’s totally unacceptable. But you keep right on believing as you wish.
Finally, no better advice can be found than Charles Haddon Spurgeon. In 1878, Spurgeon wrote to his son an encouraging note exhorting him in the work of the Lord. He counseled his son to “not engage yourself far ahead” because it “would be a great pity to lose it for the sake of some travelling engagements.” Rather, Spurgeon said: “Work hard now at theology, and never leave off doing so…Get nearer and nearer to the Lord in prayer.” Spurgeon was convinced his offspring would eventually “maintain a good congregation, and by God’s blessing will be useful.”
Most interesting of all, Spurgeon wrote:
With that, I am…
Peter
Brothers.
There is no job/position here. They were authors. You may say that is a distinction without a difference, we may just disagree.
Maybe you know better than I, but are the contracts for these books separated by individual. Would there have to be a separate contract for ach of the Rainers on one particular book? I seems unlikely. I am relatively sure the renumeration involved was tied to sales of the book.
Do you have proof that anyone was denied a publishing contract because the Rainer boys were given one? It seems
It appears that you and Tim may not entirely agree about family members on staff at a local church, from your Spurgeon example.
You say it appears evil/duplicitous/shady/(insert word of your choice), I do not.
It appears we will just have to disagree.
Tim,
What is your end game here? What do you want to see happen? Have you contacted the Lifeway trustee board to voice your concern?
Peter,
Actually, I wouldn’t have a problem with the situation you posited. I would encourage my daughter to find employment elsewhere.
I firmly believe that hard work and talent will win out in the end.
I suppose my position is absurd to you. So be it. It seems that we will find out eventually the position of the rank and file SB, if they even have one. Maybe everyone you know would say this is a problem, but I know few who would think this is a big deal at all.
‘Laying aside what in Sam Hill you meant by the latter phrase, it’s not only me, my friend.”
Well, the phrase was an oblique reference to Don Quixote. I am sure you are inquisitive enough to figure out how I was using the phrase.
As to whether or not you are the only one, I suppose you know.
But, if there is a large outcry over this situation, I will be surprised.
Don,
“There is no job/position here. They were authors. You may say that is a distinction without a difference, we may just disagree.” Please, Don. There most certainly IS a position—a published author with perhaps the largest evangelical publishing company in the world, and hence hardly a small feat. Do you know how excruciatingly difficult it is for young authors to be offered contracts? Thus, it’s not about disagreeing over a distinction; instead it’s about not actually dealing with the facts as they are, Don. You’re attempting to say, “no big deal” when it most certainly *IS* a big deal based on what we know about publishing
“Maybe you know better than I, but are the contracts for these books separated by individual. Would there have to be a separate contract for ach of the Rainers on one particular book? I seems unlikely. I am relatively sure the renumeration [sic] involved was tied to sales of the book” Don, you obviously know little, if any, about the publishing process. Hence, not only is your reasoning skewed because of it, you end up making it worse for the Rainers by arguing points from blind ignorance—“I am relatively sure…” “Relatively sure? Based on what? Contract offers are extremely personal. Please refrain from asserting what you have no way of knowing unless the Rainers have somewhere said. Do you have info about this? Is it published somewhere? If not, drop such silly notions. Even so, supposing not a single penny in royalties were a part of the book deal. Are you aware how many thousands of dollars were spent to publish & promote the book? There is no such thing as a book deal where no money is involved. Hence, money was spent on the Rainer’s behalf whether or not they directly received a dime. In addition, one cannot leave out the influence an author receives when a major publishing house publishes his or her book. Hence, in way you want to slice the pie, Rainer’s sons gained in a major way when their dad published their book at a company over which he serves as president and the ultimate say-so on matters like these.
“Do you have proof that anyone was denied a publishing contract because the Rainer boys were given one? Again, Don, you’re simply not thinking. Of course, others were denied a contract. It’s about picking & choosing. Even if no others matters were involved, budgetary matters dictate a publishing house cannot publish every manuscript. It just so happens they had the budget to publish the president’s three sons’ books, and by doing so, three other book did not get published.
“It appears that you and Tim may not entirely agree about family members on staff at a local church, from your Spurgeon example” This has absolutely nothing to do with my views concerning local church decisions to allow kin to serve together. Local churches are autonomous entities and if nepotism floats their boat, as despicable as I might find it when unchecked, in the end, I have no real spoon in that soup (unless it’s my home church). LifeWay *IS NOT* an autonomous entity but belongs to the Southern Baptist Convention.
“You say it appears evil/duplicitous/shady/(insert word of your choice), I do not. It appears we will just have to disagree” Yes, I can see you disagree. The problem is, you have no reasonable basis for your disagreement. I’m quite sure Rome would have loved guys with your views in the Medieval church, arguing nepotism is an acceptable practice. Of course, the Reformers would have booed you off the stage.
“Peter, Actually, I wouldn’t have a problem with the situation you posited. I would encourage my daughter to find employment elsewhere” For some reason I just don’t buy that, Don. No dad could watch his daughter be unduly discriminated against based on parental ties in a company not his own. I think you’re sandbagging it. But if you say so, O.K., since you’d have “no problem,” why would you encourage your daughter to find employment elsewhere? What’s the reason for looking for employment elsewhere if no injustice was done to your daughter? Seems to me, given your position on nepotism, you say something like,
“I suppose my position is absurd to you. So be it. It seems that we will find out eventually the position of the rank and file SB, if they even have one. Maybe everyone you know would say this is a problem, but I know few who would think this is a big deal at all…As to whether or not you are the only one, I suppose you know” Don, have you read a single thing I’ve written or are you really not getting it? This is *NOT* about personal feelings, controversial opinion, vague ethical concepts, or lack of biblical truth. Rather it is about social justice in community with one another. The church has historically condemned nepotism; secular society has and continues to condemn nepotism; nepotism is a crime punishable by law in many case…nevertheless, you confidently assert it not a problem.
What a double West Georgia hoot…:^)
With that, I am…
Peter
Tim,
I can’t help but get the impression from your piece and the interaction in your comments that you included the brief example of Dr. Chapman to avoid being charged with authoring a “hit piece” on Dr. Rainer. In spite of the “appearance” of evil in your intentions, I would like to ask you a couple of questions for the sake of clarity.
Questions:
1) Have you questioned the trustees on this matter prior to painting a very negative picture of a brother in Christ without having all of the details? Christian decorum would seem to demand that you at least send your article to them before raising very negative questions about their leadership at Lifeway. For the record, you did question their leadership in the comments.
2) Are you aware that Rainer Research is NOT a publishing company? You assert that it is on a number of occasions, but your assertions are a contradiction of Rainer Research’s stated services: Custom Research, Comprehensive Consultations, Complete Survey Work, Expert Testimony, Leadership Development, Strategy Implementation, Video Conference. To assert that Rainer Research could have published the stated books implies that you wrote this piece without doing your homework. It is a shame to make accusations of impropriety without having all of the facts.
3) Are you aware that Dr. Rainer agreed to publish exlusively with LifeWay when he was hired as President? He was under contract with Zondervan when he was hired, but had to back away from them as a publisher when he went to Nashville (Incidentally, he went with Zondervan only when Lifeway declined to publish one of his previous works). It would look bad for Rainer to partner with his sons to publish a book with one of Lifeway’s chief competitors would it not? (Would you then author opinion pieces about his lack of loyalty to the SBC or LifeWay?)
4) Have you called Dr. Rainer to ask about any of these questions? I have known Dr. Rainer personally for 11 years. Not once in that time have I seen him engage in ministry or business in an unethical (or apparently unethical) manner. Furthermore, I have never known him to refuse an opportunity to discuss ministry questions with brothers and sisters in Christ. Perhaps you should call LifeWay to discuss this issue with him. I know you said that you did not feel obliged to discuss this issue with him because it was a matter for the trustees. Given the fact that you do not have all of the information you need on this issue, I suggest it is not an issue for the trustees. Dr. Rainer is just opertaing within the agreed upon parameters of his employment with LifeWay. Perhaps you should call him to clarify this fact prior to writing pieces that paint him in such a negative light.
I hope that as you pursue all of the facts that you should have had prior to raising such questions, that you will either remove or correct this piece. For the record, there is a big difference between co-authoring a book with someone (which Rainer was doing long before Simple Church – see Chuck Lawless, Eric Geiger – it is almost a form of mentoring for him) and offering them a paid staff position at an agency. Perhaps you should write an article about agency heads that actually hire family members – and there are glaring examples out there.
Chris
Brother Chris,
Allow me to begin this response with a full effort of not being on the defensive because of this statement. First, the only “appearance of evil” I have charged Dr. Rainer with is in the area of nepotism. I have not questioned his intentions. Not one place in this article can you quote any statement where I am questioning anyone’s intentions. I merely placed an article out there that states we have nepotism and I have given examples. Please, help me understand what my “intentions” of evil are here?
No, I have not questioned the trustees. I learned when Lifeway promoted The Shack that questioning the trustees on something that had already been put in place was not going to get anywhere. Also, from your statement you seem to agree that nepotism is wrong for this piece to be a “negative picture” of a brother in Christ. As to the details. Please tell me what details I have left out. The piece is on nepotism and either it is nepotism for the head of a publishing company to co-author a book with a son that has no track record of being an author or it is not.
Let me make sure that I have this right. Rainer Research specializes in; Custom Research, Comprehensive Consultations, Complete Survey Work, Expert Testimony, Leadership Development, Strategy Implementation, Video Conference but they do not publish anything? Now, they may not be a “publisher” in the sense that Zondervan is a publisher, but certainly he had the resources and tools to “publish” the books of his sons.
Don’t look now Chris, but you have made my point stronger. This is fine because he should have an exclusive publishing contract with Lifeway. However, his sons do not and since he had a contract with Zondervan there would have been no complaint from anyone in the SBC if any one of his sons would have been under contract with Zondervan. However, Chris that is the point of my Op. Dr. Rainer knows how hard it is to get published with Lifeway seeing he was turned down before going to Zondervan. Thus, placing his sons as authors on B&H is the entire issue I am speaking about. They received their publishing contract simply because Dr. Rainer is the President. Chris, that is nepotism.
Ok, Chris, what is the information that I have missed? Did the sons of Dr. Rainer co-author books with their dad and as such received author status with the worlds largest Christian publisher or not, simply because their dad was President of Lifeway?
Chris, the only logical understanding I can see with this is that Dr. Rainer was able to place the clause in his contract with Lifeway that he wold be co-authoring books with his sons. That would be logical. However, given his sons were still in High School and college when he took over the position at Lifeway I suspect that was not the case. But, I could be wrong and given the protection against nepotism within the secular work force I honestly do not understand a search committee allowing for such a clause. If that is the case then we do have a serious situation within the system that needs rectifying. As, you have stated, you know him personally and you are asking me to clarify that point. So, it appears with your personal knowledge you do not know the ins and outs of his contract.
First, the only facts that I have produced are the only facts needed for the Op–Dr. Rainer has produced three books with his three sons. Those three books were published with B&H, the publishing company that is under the President of Lifeway, who is Dr. Rainer. Neither of the three sons had any publishing experience prior to the publishing of these three books. Thus, as a result of these book contracts (we are not saying that any of these contracts include any compensation as the Rainer sons could have foregone any royalties) these three sons are now listed as published authors with the largest Christian Publisher in the world. Are there any facts that I missed?
Second, Chris, I have not in any way questioned the abilities of the three Rainer sons. I have made it crystal clear they have impeccable abilities and educational experiences. This has nothing to do with their qualifications to get published. It all has to do with the fact that their dad is the President of Lifeway and is over B&H who published three unpublished authors based solely on their father’s position.
Now allow me to interact with a couple other points you make.
First, Dr. Chapman hiring his son. I pointed that out in the Op and in the comment thread all of the comments were focused on Dr. Rainer and his sons. I have not elaborated on Dr. Chapman, not because I placed him there to keep from appearing I was doing a drive-by on Dr. Rainer, but because it has not come up. What about Dr. Chapman having a position at the EC for his son would you like to discuss?
Second, concerns the last sentence of your statement.
Please Chris, help me understand who/whom you may be referencing? Can you point to specific examples? I have looked at all of the entities. Does Richard Land have any of his family on the payroll? What about Jerry Rankin? Could it be that Dr. Chuck Kelly has his wife teaching a course? (You will want to be careful with this one as she was employed at the seminary before he became president) What about Dr. Paige Patterson, is Amour listed on payroll as teaching a wilderness course out in Arizona? What about Dr. Frank Page, did he bring some of his daughters with him to the EC? Could it be that Dr. Phil Roberts has someone from his family on payroll? What about Dr. Iorg, does he have his family members on payroll? Maybe Dr. Al Mohler, and Dr. Danny Akin have their children on payroll? Could it be that Dr. Ezell made his son supervisor over children playground outreach? Who else could you mean with your statement?
I promise you, if you point to someone else that has their family member on payroll simply because they are their family members I will write the article. Nepotism, as strictly defined in the definition in this Op, has no place in the SBC and it should be rooted out.
Blessings,
Tim
Tim,
You are correct to query Chris to cite precisely the facts you “overlooked” which allegedly would overturn this single fact–the president’s three sons have prestigious book contracts for the publishing company over which he has virtually the final say in who gets published and who does not. Even more troubling, since all three sons have contracts, is there any reason to believe that, if the president had a fourth son (daughter) or more, he (she) would also have a book contract as well? Any way one slices the nepotism pie, it all tastes the same.
As for the “why not ask the trustees?” issue, you rightly point out this is an ‘after the fact’ situation. Ask about what? The decision has already been made. There is no “O.K. We’ll stop publishing their books.”
Finally, as for the predictable coloration Chris brushed on this piece, implicating it a ‘hit piece’ take for what it is–cheap rhetoric from long-time friends. One shouldn’t blame them too much. We all are apt to take up our friends’ side when unpleasant facts bobble to the top.
With that, I am…
Peter
Tim,
I will not be drug into a fruitless, never ending debate on your website. You continue to state inaccuracies that would be corrected simply by calling Dr. Rainer to ger answers to your questions, yet you refuse. For example – that his sons were in high school when he was called to Lifeway.
I look forward to your article on Southwestern Seminary and the employment of the president’s wife. I do not have a problem with her teaching at Southwestern (or the undergraduate college). I do find it interesting that you neglected to even mention their situation at all in your article. You cited the definition that nepotism was ““favoritism (as in appointment to a job) based on kinship.” You never even discussed a situation with which I am sure you are very aware – perhaps more so than LifeWay. Are we really to believe that the hiring of the president’s wife had NOTHING to do with the hiring of the Paige Patterson? This is why I made the tongue in cheek comment about the “appearance of evil” that your commentors had raised prior to my statements. The glaring ommission of discussion of SWBTS called into question your motives behind writing.
Again, I don’t see anything wrong with Dr D. Patterson’s employment at SWBTS. Neither do I find anything wrong with Dr. Rainer co-authoring books with his sons – especially given the circumstances under which that was done – but I will let you call him and report back on the details since this is your blog.
Blessings,
Chris
Perhaps in your next article you will 1) discuss SWBTS and 2) give us details from your conversation with Dr. Rainer. I still find it hard to believe that you are so concerned about this issue that you feel the need to write about it, yet won’t pick up the phone to get all of the facts before you write.
I will not comment again, but will read your response and next article when they are posted.
“I will not be drug [sic] into a fruitless, never ending debate on your website. You continue to state inaccuracies…”
Chris, please. You continue to squat down on this site hurling rocks for “inaccuracies” but contend you will not fall for a “fruitless, never ending debate.” Then stop your petty whining.
The fact is, Tim has not posted ‘inaccuracies’–certainly not ‘inaccuracies’ which would overturn his central concern–nepotism’s presence in the SBC. Whatever age Rainer’s sons were when he became president of LifeWay lends exactly zero against Tim’s concern.
As for your mentioning the Pattersons, I think that’s a very good question and look forward to Tim’s response. However, I’d not pass the campaign bucket just yet, Chris. It may just be you’re not as informed as you so confidently imagine.
With that, I am…
Peter
Brother Chris,
I am not trying to drag you into a fruitless conversation. I am merely pointing out your statements that you are accusing me of not have all the facts. Whether Dr. Rainer’s children were in the home when he came to Lifeway is really not a nonfactual argument concerning my Op. I merely mentioned that if there were some type of language like that in his contract someone should have informed the SBC of this when he was hired.
As to Southwestern. You say that my omission “called into question” my motives. However, you fail to understand facts that you accuse me of not gathering. First, if Dr. D. Patterson were on payroll at SWBTS I would have certainly called that nepotism. However,facts are that Dr. D. Patterson is not on the payroll at SWBTS, neither has she been on the payroll at at SEBTS. Dr. P. Patterson had Dr. D. Patterson set up the program at SEBTS and SWBTS just as a pastor would have his wife set up a ladies ministry at a local church. My wife works closely with our ladies here but she does not lead it. However, had there not been a ladies ministry at this church I would have asked her to lead in setting it up and would not have had her come on board in any way financially other than setting budgetary funds for her to led the ministry. Thus, as you wrongly point to SWBTS, because you do not have your facts straight, your point is not a valid one.
Now, once again, what facts have I missed concerning Dr. Rainer’s sons now being listed as authors of the largest Christian Publishing company in the world simply because their dad is the president? According to the definition of Nepotism that is exactly what this is. Now, Chris, the only way you have of getting around this issue is to say that nepotism is not an issue we need to concern our self with in the SBC. If that is your position, then please openly state it and stop trying to hide behind nuanced arguments that try to divert the issue. Chris, I have openly stated this is nothing personal against the Rainer family. I am certain they are a fine group and love our Lord. I am saying this is not the way that SBC should operate because nepotism opens the door for many things to ruin our testimony as a convention.
Thus, would I be correct to state your position would be nepotism is something that the SBC should condone and we just need to drop the issue?
Blessings,
Tim
Tim,
I submit your definition is too rigid. Here is another definition
Nepotism: Favoritism granted to relatives or close friends, without regard to their merit.
I think the key phrase here is “without regard to their merit.”
Now, you have exhaustively tried to point out that the Rainer boys are extremely able and qualified.
“I am certain the three Rainer progeny are completely competent in what they are called to do. One is a pastor, and the other two are serving in administrative pastoral staff positions. The issue for me has nothing to do with their abilities; it has to do with the fact that they were made authors in a major Christian publisher for the sole reason their father was the President. ”
“Second, Chris, I have not in any way questioned the abilities of the three Rainer sons. I have made it crystal clear they have impeccable abilities and educational experiences.”
It is clear you think the Rainer boys are extremely qualified, I am sure, in no small part to the guidance from their father. It is cliche, but apples usually do not fall far from the tree.
“They received their publishing contract simply because Dr. Rainer is the President. ”
I am no tracking here. you have said several times they are extremely qualified, able researchers etc. Is it possible that they do merit these contracts? You seem to indicate that they are able.
“Thus, as a result of these book contracts (we are not saying that any of these contracts include any compensation as the Rainer sons could have foregone any royalties) these three sons are now listed as published authors with the largest Christian Publisher in the world.”
I think it would be more accurate to say they co-authored books with their father. I think this distinction is key. Neither you or I know the details of the formation of these books. If the Rainers were indeed coauthors with their father, why in the world would they not be listed as coauthors? Should they have written the books on their own? Should they have not looked to their father, already an accomplished author to work with, an author who has a history of coauthoring books? If they wrote the books together, then they should be listed as coauthors.
Now, the minute Dr. Rainer and his sons worked together on a book, in fact, Lifeway is the only publishing outlet that could print the book. As has been stated, Dr. Rainer had an exclusive contract, therefore the books would have to be published with Lifeway or they could not have been published at all.
“Nepotism, as strictly defined in the definition in this Op, has no place in the SBC and it should be rooted out.”
Well, again your definition, IMHO, is lacking. The very fact that the Rainer boys, as you have stated, are impeccably qualified. Then, there is no nepotism. They have merit.
I do not understand your decision to not go directly to the Trustees at Lifeway or Dr. Rainer personally. It seems this would be your only recourse, if you really want this to change. In my opinion, which I hope is biblically informed, they deserve at least a phone call, a chance to explain themselves, to give you more facts, etc.
If you were a reporter for a secular reporter/journalist, a contact with the person you are reporting on would most certainly have been attempted. I have seen few reports about a person and alleged wrongdoing, where the person was not given the chance to speak the the article and commensurate charges. If they do not wish to comply, the reporter invariably says “we attempted to talk to so-and-so and they declined our request for an interview.” Certainly in the spirit of Matthew 18, you should communicate with Dr. Rainer and the trustees at Lifeway to hear their side and give you facts that you may not have.
I once heard a definition of gossip that went like this.
“Spreading information to people who can do nothing about the situation”
I think it may fit here. Go talk to the people who can do something about this and if you get no satisfaction, then by all means publish to your hearts content.
Tim,
What a Georgia hoot! Chris brings up what he thinks is your loose dirt–”Are we really to believe that the hiring of the president’s wife had NOTHING to do with the hiring of the Paige Patterson?”–only to have it blow back in his eyes…
Then, after a series of unsubstantiated complaints followed by sabbatical silence, good old Don comes back on with a “you’re wrong” because I have a nuance of the word “nepotism” which does not square with your thoughts.
Oh my. Peachy. Just peachy.
Ya got to love it…
With that, I am…
Peter
Brother Don,
I am sorry but you do not get to choose the definition for two reasons. First, it is my article and I plainly expressed the definition in the opening paragraph. Second, it is the standard definition chosen in any article you want to look at concerning nepotism. Why? The word itself is taken from the French word for nephew. Now, if you can find for me a meaning of nephew that relates to friendship, then I may be open to hearing your argument, but until then we will stick with this definition.
While I agree with you, your position is flawed by the B&H website. It is that website that I was able to ascertain their standing in the publishing world. They are all three listed as “authors”.
Now, Don, let’s look at “nepotism”. In all of the articles I looked at, before I placed this Op online, they all had nothing but negative comments concerning nepotism. In every case that I found the articles spoke of it being wrong and even found some that informed a person on what procedures to take in order to report nepotism. Many problems in trying to bring it to light but one thing was abundantly clear. It is wrong to promote someone based solely on family standing.
To be fair there is one well known business that practices nepotism that had a good review. Here we find a critique of nepotism and they list Thomas Publishing as a company that is favorable in their use of nepotism.
Have to go and pick up my daughter will respond further later.
Blessings,
Tim
Tim,
While Peter is free to mock and condescend, If the authors in question do in fact have merit and academic standing, then it should paint a different picture. Even given your definition, If they in fact merit the “position” of author, then it is not nepotism. Again, you have went out of your way to describe the Rainers as an extraordinary family.
If they in fact do merit being a coauthor, then where is the nepotism.
Such a narrow definition as you have used, I think, limits the rights of the Rainers as citizens and Christians.
Do the Rainers have a right to publish books together? Yes.
Is it a sin for them to publish books together? No.
If Thom Rainer has a clause in his contract that says he will publish exclusively with B&H,
then he must live up to that. If the boys in fact, coauthored the books with him, they should be listed as coauthors.
You have set up a scenario where you have limited the rights of the Rainers.
Following your thinking, they must publish a book independently with a separate publishing house, before they could co-write a book with their father. If they want to write a book together, there is no reason, biblical, moral, or legal to limit their freedoms.
“While I agree with you, your position is flawed by the B&H website. It is that website that I was able to ascertain their standing in the publishing world. They are all three listed as “authors”.”
Not sure I get what you are saying here. Should they have a section that classifies people as coauthors?
Again, what is your end game here? What is the outcome you are looking for?
According to your strict definition, no relatives of employees at Lifeway should be allowed to publish a book there.
One other thing I was considering, Henry Blackaby an established author and one time employee of the Executive committee, authored several books with his sons, and as far as I can see, when his sons published their first book, they coauthored with their father. I was unable to find the timing of Blackaby’s employment with the Convention.
I seem to remember it to be the early to mid 90′s. I am not trying to chase a rabbit, here, or drag another name out of thin air, but it seems to me their are similarities.
Would you include this restriction you want to see implemented to include employees of other entities? For example, Dr. Akin and one of his sons was to coauthor a book together, should they avoid B&H, or would that fly with you because Dr. Akin is not employed by Lifeway.
Everyone discussed here is in someway employed by the SBC, or as you say it, by me and you.
I should probably go back on my sabbatical silence as Grand Poobah Peter has said.
I appreciate conversing with you you Tim. I cannot say that same for Bro. Lumpkins.
Brother Don,
Let me just say that I am not the one who uses the “narrow definition”. Here you will find that the law uses this definition. So, I am not the one making up definitions as I go along.
Yea, that would have been better, but you still miss the point. These sons, while qualified per say in they have a BS degree and they certainly have been taught well on how to write and express their thoughts, they are unpublished authors. As was stated earlier in this comment thread, Thom Rainer, while prolific and very much able to research and write about a subject was turned down by Lifeway. He was an author for Zondervan when he came to Lifeway. That is the difficulty of getting a book deal. But, three unpublished men enter the arena and are published because their dad is president. That, Don, is nepotism.
Don, you seem to be grasping for the extreme in order to pooh–pooh my point. Neither Dr. Akin nor Dr. Blackaby are the presidents of the publishing company. They both serve autonomous entities. Dr. Rainer is the president of Lifeway and as such could nix, or promote any author he desires. Just one word from him and someone has a contract, or does not have a contract. For example, don’t start looking for a book that I author coming out of B&H Publishing, as for that matter with the reach of B&H probably not from any publishing company.
Don, you get it. Look, it isn’t about their abilities. Even if they are a published author at another publishing company, with their father as the President of Lifeway they certainly should be limited in their ability to receive a publishing contract. That is the way it is in any secular organization you can find. Even in the publishing company I spoke of in an earlier comment there is problems. You remember the Thomas Publishers that I directed you to earlier? Here you can see that it does not work because the morale among the employees drops immensely.
Don, once again. Is it ok with you that President’s of entities in the SBC place their family members in positions of leadership in those various entities?
Blessings,
Tim
Dear Don,
It saddens me you do not appreciate our exchange. Even so, I do not think I’ll lose any sleep tonite.
Fare ye well.
With that, I am…
Peter
Tim,
You’ve got more patience than I, please know. With garbled points like employing a standard definition of nepotism “limits the rights of the Rainers” or a Henry Blackaby and/or a Danny Akin (given their circumstances) “should…avoid B&H,…” or the Rainer boys “must publish a book independently with a separate publishing house”, before they could co-write a book with their father you’re pretty dog-gone patient, brother.
with that, I am
Peter
You ask fair questions regarding the issue, Tim. I think it would also be fair to examine some of the nepotism in place due to Paige Patterson’s influence in the SBC.
Dr. Galyon,
If you could express specific examples I would love to deal with them. However, Dr. Patterson has one boy and one girl. His son is in Arizona serving in a small church there with no affiliation to the SBC, or leadership in the SBC, that I am aware. His daughter is a pastor’s wife serving in Texas and she, other than being a Pastor’s wife in an SBC church, is not affiliated with the SBC leadership. As to Dr. Patterson’s wife, I believe I have well expressed my position on that one above. Unless you can show me where she has been placed on payroll at either SWBTS or SEBTS because Dr. P was President then there really is no nepotism in place. Thus, I do not understand your position on Dr. Patterson and his influence on nepotism. Certainly, Dr. Rainer did not have a pattern in Dr. Patterson to make his sons authors in the worlds largest Christian Publisher simply because their dad is the president.
Blessings,
Tim
Tim, what of Russ Kaemmerling and Chuck Kelley?
Dr. Galyon,
First, I do not know of a paid position that Russ Kaemmerling held within the SBC. And I certainly have never known that Dr. Patterson has ever placed Russ Kaemmerling in any paid position of any entity that Dr. Patterson was a President.
Second, Dr. Kelley is President of NOBTS. He was Prof. of Evangelism at NOBTS when before he held that position. At no Time have I ever known Dr. Patterson to be in a position to offer Dr. Kelley a job.
Therefore, you need to try again. Nepotism is not an issue with Dr. Patterson.
Blessings,
Tim
I see your point of view but I do not agree. Too many people in the ministry have left their kids behind so that they can “do ministry.” In this case Dr. Rainer has chosen to take his kids with him in the ministry. I agree that they would not be able to be published otherwise, at least not at this level. Getting published is very difficult. However if you have the ability to help your children, why deny them the blessing?
Brother David,
What a refreshing, honest answer. You say;
According to your further answer, because you see my point, which is that we are dealing with nepotism and I am sounding the warning, you disagree that there is a problem with Dr. Rainer doing this for his sons in the entity he is the president. Ok, that is fair. Your point, I assume, is that he is bringing them along in the ministry a lot like he did Eric Gieger and others he has co-authored books. My point is not that Dr. Rainer shouldn’t do this but that he has the means and resources to do it without placing in jeopardy the reputation of the largest Christian publishing company in the world. By bringing your sons on board as co-authors they are now listed as authors for Lifeway and as such, have credentials to be published at any publishing reputable company. Their credentials would be based, not on the fact that their first book was published based only because their dad was the president, but they re published authors at the largest Christian publisher in the world. Also, because people get publishing deals simply because their parent is the president, then we call into question the veracity and integrity of the publishing process. Then it calls into question the credibility of those who are listed as authors.
Now, while Dr. Rainer has every right in the world to work with his sons and help them in the ministry his rights to bring his sons along in the ministry end at the door steps of Lifeway. This is not denying “them the blessing” of his expertise, as the president of Lifeway he has every right to use his influence with other publishing companies to get his sons get “the blessing.”
Blessings,
Tim