The ultraviolet image of the southern polar region of Saturn with its aurora was taken on January 28, 2004 by the Hubble Space Telescope’s Imaging Spectrograph.
Emily Hamilton commenting on the latest ERLC fundraising misstep
{I have redone this post which went done due to a massive glitch which caused me to have to go back to some text and recreate it. I am posting this now so we can get back on course. I have to go and pick up y daughter from the airport and review when I return.}
I have part if the ERLC email and am posting it this AM 12//21/19
A statement before I begin the post:
I believe Susan Codone’s testimony regarding her abuse 30 years ago in an SBC church. She is quite articulate and presents her story well. Her experience 30 years ago was horrific. I’ve written to Susan Codone, expressing my advocacy for all victims of abuse and explaining my chosen terminology of designated survivors. Susan disagrees with me and I respect that.
Sadly, although Susan has been treated amazingly well by the Caring Well/ERLC, her experience has not been the experience of the large numbers of those who have reported their abuse to SBC churches and even SBC leadership. That is the motivation for this post.
Winsome survivors
Now a clever person on Twitter suggested I rename the survivors who are ERLC approved, *winsome* survivors. I till believe that the ERLC/SBC leadership picked only the individuals they could trust to serve as winsome spokespersons of the SBC.
I believe that some extremely important people have been left out of the discussion.I contend that several of these men and women, who are well known nationally, have been deliberately overlooked because they are not winsome enough. They have named their abusers and have demanded that the SBC assist them in bringing their abusers or those who have covered up the abuse to justice. I don’t think this is what the ERLC intended. Winsome survivors do not ask the leaders to actually *do something * regarding their abuse.
The ERLC *ask* while using Susan Codone to bring the money in.
I’m a little late to this game. I’ve been swamped with calls from survivors and helping others to get their story out there, along with dealing with some illnesses in my family. One day, I will report on a rather amazing responses as my adult children have sought advice.
I was reeling from the Credentials Committee which is set up to function in complete secrecy. Survivors will not know if their report about churches will be investigated. They will only know it if there is a public announcement by the committee regrading disfellowshipping of a church. My prediction: there will be little, if any, churches which will be disfellowship. The committee will also deal with issues of racism, homosexuality and other matter (read women in the pulpit ) I wrote about this. Sure sounds like a near impossible job for 9 people.
In that post I expressed concern that the Credentials Committee will not do anything to help the victims. In fact, I believe that there is nowhere for victims to turn to report their abuse. The only abuse that’ s been accepted is by those who appeared at the Caring Well conference. I’m delighted for them but I am quite angry at the SBC and I’m not inclined to be patient.
Yes, the adopted the Caring Well curriculum is to be sent to all churches. But even that has some drawbacks as the authors saw fit to establish a soft protocol for allowing a Registered Sex Offender to attend church.
So, when I saw the following video that accompanies the ERLC fundraiser vemail, I was taken aback. In this video, Codone appears to make a claim that the ERLC is ready and waiting to help anyone who tells their story. But is that true?
Susan Codone’s Story from ERLC on Vimeo.
SNAP and Christa Brown express serious concern over the ERLC’s
After I viewed the video, I was frustrated and a bit angry. So, I called Christa Brown and discussed why I was upset. She reassured me that I was correct in expressing concern that the ERLC was asking for money for an undefined *thingy* to help victims make their voices heard! No program is outlined. No explanation was forthcoming. I do exactly that on a daily basis and I don’t ask for a dime. Maybe they need another leader who will be paid $500,000 to help victims’ voices be heard?
I have been unable to get a copy of the email that was sent out by the ERLC but you can read about it in the SNAP Press Release which is included below. If you get a copy, please forward it to me and I will include that in the post.
Here is part of the email from ERLC with identifiers removed.12/21/19
Since this a press release from SNAP, I will include the statement in its entirety. It is important to understand what Christa is saying.
In a new fund-raising email, the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission suggests that it “stands with” clergy abuse victims, a claim that is misleading and insensitive.
Specifically, the email states that “through your support…we are able to stand with people like Susan and equip them to make their voices heard,” and it attaches video of #SBCtoo survivor Susan Codone, who praises the ERLC for the support it has given her. https://vimeo.com/379402328
In response, SNAP points out a disappointing disparity. While the ERLC has indeed stood with & used its financial resources to make Susan’s voice heard (and to serve its own public relations purposes), it has simultaneously ignored and suppressed the voices of many hundreds more #SBCtoo survivors who have received zero support from the SBC.
As David Clohessy, SNAP’s St. Louis leader states, “It’s cruel and Orwellian for any Southern Baptist official to fundraise with the claim that he’s ‘equipping’ clergy abuse victims to speak up when nearly all church officials continue to subtly silence them.”
SNAP board member and #SBCtoo survivor Christa Brown responds: “I wish that every clergy abuse survivor could receive the sort of support Susan has received, but that’s just not reality when the vast majority of #SBCtoo survivors receive no support at all.”
It is also important to note that the SBC has never named Susan’s clergy perpetrators. This is something that most clergy abuse survivors feel is critical – i.e., to have their clergy perpetrators publicly named by the faith group so as to protect others from the harm they suffered and so as to reach out to any other possible victims. Even retired and deceased perpetrators should be named. Retired clergy may still have access to children in other contexts, and deceased clergy should still be named for the sake of institutional transparency and outreach to others who may believe they are all alone in what was done to them.
For the majority of #SBCtoo survivors who seek something more than words and prayers – i.e., who seek from SBC officials some measure of accountability for clergy sex abusers and enablers – the SBC as yet provides no safe place for even making a report. Nor does it have any established transparent process for institutionally doing anything at all about clergy who have been credibly-accused.It should not be forgotten that, just 2 years ago, the ERLC responded via email to a person seeking to report a clergy “pedophile” by stating that “engaging in this matter is not in the scope of our role, authority or ability.” https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/fort-worth/article214373769.html
Christa Brown states: “Until the ERLC will publicly disclaim that statement and explain exactly how it would respond differently today, and until it can demonstrate a transparent process for actually doing something about reported clergy predators, #SBCtoo survivors who share their stories with the ERLC are likely to feel betrayed all over again.”
CONTACT: Zach Hiner, Executive Director (zhiner@snapnetwork.org, 517-974-9009); David Clohessy, St. Louis SNAP leader (davidgclohessy@gmail.com); Christa Brown, SNAP board member (christa.brown@prodigy.net)
Here are some takeaway points
- Only a few people have received the level of support that Susan (and others on the Caring Well conference) received.
- The ERLC does not need money to stand with victims.
- is the ERLC using Susan Codone’s statement to fund their entity?
- SBC churches continue to silence or refuse to help victims.
- SNAP/Christa Brown believes that all perpetrators should be named. Until that happens, these abusers can be involved in molesting others.i have wondered why the SBC chose individual who have been silent about their abuser when there are many like Tiffany Thigpen and Jules Woodson who were frozen out of the Caring Well conference. Could it be that the ERLC prefers victims who don’t point fingers at their perps which would mean they would need to act on the issue?
- 2 years ago, the ERLC, who was headed by Russell Moore, responded to a victim by responding to a request to help with an abuse situation. They said it was not their role and not within their scope of authority, ability.! Why haven’t they renounced this response. This is the entity that now wants $$$$ to fund an ill definer program. to give victims *a voice.*
- It’s really easy to give victims a voice without asking for money. That’s what I, along with others, do every day and we don’t make a dime doing it.We do it because it is the right thing to do.
- Why would people give money to a project that has not defined what they want to do beyond giving victims a voice and standing with victims?
- SNAP proves, once again, why outside eyes are so important in this matter.
Baptist News Global adds insight
Baptist News Global’s Bob Allen adds some good material in Abuse survivors cry foul over ERLC’s end-of-year fund-raising appeal.
Here are some highlights/
- Daniel Darling, vice president for communications at the SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, sent out an e-mail Dec. 16 soliciting tax-deductible donations of $50, $100 or $500 to help the agency “stand with” survivors of sexual abuse and “equip them to make their voices heard.”
- Christa Brown, a SNAP board member and abuse survivor who writes occasionally for Baptist News Global, said she wishes every clergy abuse survivor could receive the kind of support described in the ERLC video, “but that’s just not the reality when the vast majority of SBC survivors receive so support at all.”
- The SBC recently introduced a process for filing paperwork to report churches accused of falling short of the denomination’s standards regarding abuse prevention, but critics say it repeats mistakes of the past such as offering no protections for victims and relying on non-experts to evaluate whether abuse allegations are credible.“The SBC as yet provides no safe place for even making a report,” Brown said in the SNAP press release. “Nor does it have any established transparent process
In the end it boils down to these issues.
- A very few survivors got all sorts of attention from the SBC leadership which was wonderful for those few survivors.
- The ERLC overlooked survivors who have been speaking out for years. These survivors have named their abuser or the church which failed in reporting abuse or in supporting the victims. Some of us believe that this knowledge causes the leadership some heartburn particularly if the church named are really cool SBC churches with lots of $$$.
- The ERLC needs to involve Christa Brown, Tiffany Thigpen, Jules Woodson, Dee Miller, Anne Marie Miller, Kenny Stubblefield and Brooks Hansen. What is it with the leadership that makes them exclude men? To riff Rachel Denhollander’s book”How much Is a boy worth?” All of them were abused in the SBC, all have reported their abuser, all were shunned by their SBC churches and pastors, all have called for SBC accountability and all are compelling survivors.
Until the ERLC and SBC show as much attention to folks like I’ve named, their entire process should be called into question. I wouldn’t give them a dime unless they can say EXACTLY how the money will be used. And it better not be used to fund another high paying, secretive job.
Rachel Denhollander speaks out
I am thankful for Rachel Denhollander who has spoken out on this issue while the others have remained very, very silent.
And her most important tweet of all:
Emily’s tweet
This tweet says it all. Emily, I want you to know that there are many of us who stand with you. Please feel free to tell your story here. Unlike the ERLC, I am ready to tell your story immediately and I won’t have to raise a dime since I don’t charge for giving survivors a place to have a voice.
onest?
I don’t know whether the comments will be combined, but will comment here…
Creating classes of survivors makes me extremely uncomfortable. All the more when some are included in fund raising that lacks specifics.
If I were giving to a shelter for people escaping abuse, I would understand know that my money goes to pay rent, staff, food, etc.
If I were giving to an advocacy organization for abuse survivors, I would want to know what the group is doing. Do they have an executive director, counselors, website, toll-free hot line, online chat? Do they travel to conferences, lobby elected officials? Yes, there is a curriculum, but it’s not clear that these new donations are needed to distribute it.
I’m just going to repeat what I said before. These people are weasels. Whether they are simply advised to urge “winsome-ness” from some legal source or if it’s an actual desire on their own part, it doesn’t matter. Anyone who expects victims to necessarily give you some non-challenging stance and grin while recalling painful experiences doesn’t actually care about anyone. The world is a big place – and there are better routes to help people.
omg, not only is the whole thing a disingenuous public relations stunt, it turns out it is just a fund raising campaign.
How can you not become a complete cynic watching these things unfold?
I think winsome is the exact right word and concept. You need winsome victims to pull in the cash.
I can at least give them credit that it’s more innovative than the same gig that televangelists have been doing for 30-40 years. The swindlers are evolving.
Winsome third?
All it takes is time. [eyeroll then sigh]
ERLC and the SBC need to also deal with the people who have left the churches behind because of the abuse they experienced. Just My Personal Opinion.
SBC & ERLC would not be addressing this issue at all if it hadn’t been for the series of articles in the Houston Chronicle, Denhollander and the watchblog community. Why wouldn’t we think that they are now using folks for PR and fundraising? And their all-of-a-sudden female-friendly stance doesn’t have informed observers fooled either.
As we’re dealing with institutional christianity here, it was only a matter of time before they found a way to productise a convenient response to sexual abuse, and peddle it for money.
What is even more blatant is that they have bundled this part-product up with their push to brand their efforts to “stand with those who are making a difference to life and religious liberty”. Religious liberty to do what? To sin, in order to milk yet more cheap grace? And who are “those”? If anyone wants to support “those”, then they should give money to “them”, not to parachurch middlemen in the SBC or anywhere else.
The New Calvinists, as a group, have abused Christian liberties in the name of “grace” … IMHO. The whole movement is drifting toward antinomianism; some of its members are already there (Driscoll, Tullian, MacDonald).
“Daniel Darling, vice president for communications at the SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, sent out an e-mail Dec. 16 soliciting tax-deductible donations of $50, $100 or $500 to help the agency “stand with” survivors of sexual abuse and “equip them to make their voices heard.”
+++++++++++++++++++
i feel sick.
co-opting the rape and molestation of children and adults to make money. “We can exploit them. What a great idea!”
Russell Moore, Phillip Bethancourt, Daniel Darling, Jed Coppenger (and whoever else was at the ERLC christmas party i saw pictures of on Twitter), all ERLC staff and those who derive income from the ERLC:
how does it feel knowing that your income and your christmas parties are funded on the backs of rape and molestation victims?
aside from having an awareness handicap, these christian leaders, support staff (and their spouses) appear to me to have some screws loose in their criticial thinking mechanism. having bought into this money/power paradigm.
.
.
i’m not sure exactly when the pursuit of power and money became the new normal for representing Jesus Christ, but that is the default mission of the ERLC, the SBC, ministry ‘franchises’, ministry ‘brands’, and evangelicalism as a whole.
and once you have money and power, the end game is protecting them. in the final analysis, all else will be sacrificed.
“In this video, Codone appears to make a claim that the ERLC is ready and waiting to help anyone who tells their story. But is that true?”
… anyone who tells their story to ‘them’, that is … not the media or watchblog community … they want first shot at survivor stories to filter the information. If SBC/ERLC leaders were all of a sudden deluged by the great multitude of abuse reports that are out there, they would most likely get back to something more important to them, like Calvinizing the denomination. I’m very skeptical of the “Caring Well” hype. Ask Southern Baptists who were abused by the New Calvinist takeover of their churches if they felt like the new reformers cared well for them.
Using the fact that your stinking damned by God institution is doing such a bad job handling abuse inside of it to leverage a fundraising scam for a totally undefined “program to help survivors” is sinking to a new low! This is disgusting and demonic and anti-Christ as they get. We stink in dealing with this so give us a bunch of Mammon in order to fix it. Are donors really that stupid? This is truly worthy of outrage. What calls itself a church is too often nothing but a septic tank being white-washed for money’s sake…
That’s pretty much been the norm since Constantine, probably before….
It wasn’t Constantine himself’s doing, but there were certainly courtiers and hangers-on in the Roman government who joined the church simply because it was the “in” thing to do. That left a bad taste in some people’s mouths immediately. Protestants who don’t understand and mock monasticism don’t realize that this was why it originated. St. Anthony was famously the first who looked at the new landscape of the church and ran into the desert. He felt guilty for having to mingle with the very same people who persecuted his Church just years before. Or were too cowardly to protect the previous generation of martyrs. Eventually others followed Anthony. And further, these “Desert Fathers and Mothers” started inspiring people in the cities to take their beliefs seriously. Clerics like Athanasius and Chrysostom, while serving the cities, greatly admired them. And for a time, people like created a counterbalance to the heathen and power structures in the Church.
My point is, that this has be renewed time and time again. But Constantine himself? He wasn’t perfect, but he was just a military general who sympathized with Christian’s being murdered. You could FAR worse than this guy. It’s silly to create conspiracies around one lone individual. There are far bigger groups at play.
^Wow, sorry for the typos there. I hope it was still clear. I need to take my time when I write.
GuyBehindtheCurtain,
Actually I’ll kill the old post later tonight or tomorrow. If you want your comments from it to survive you’ll need to put them here. Copy/Paste is your friend.
It’s a very old problem. The Didache devotes quite a lot of words for how to identify and deal with fraudsters. See
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/didache.html
Whatever the motivation, faith or agenda, probably both as they inseparable in the past. Power, money and faith have always been intertwined.
The Anglican Church still has Queen Elizabeth at its head.
Evangelical Christians have tried with the moral majority and the Christian coalition.
Different characters, same agenda.
Elizabeth II is virtually powerless. The Parliament and as far church goes, the Anglican bishops make all of the decisions. Only at times is she asked to give her “approval” on their choices (like meeting a new Prime Minister and such). She doesn’t seem to shake anything up, which is a fault, but it wouldn’t matter if she tried anyhow.
Moral Majority types had good intentions once – to stop abortion and tangentially, prevent their kids from being indoctrinated in modernist public schools. I don’t think they were driven by power so much as just simple disgust. The problem is that they aren’t very bright and got taken over by neocons, who don’t care about Christ, but will say anything to secure votes.
The other child abuse survivors that submitted a claim, had they already gone to the police sometime in the past?
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
I thought that was already part of the program?
Saraph,
My understanding is he named himself Pontificus Maximus, head of the church. This was the same title the Caesars used when they were previously named head of the pagan religions. Constantine never truly came to Christ until later in his life.
He never did. That’s a title the bishop of Rome started taking. And you’re right, he only got baptized later in life. He believed Christians enough to side with them and end their persecutions, but when he found himself running his newfound office of Emperor and wanted to know more about the Church, he was actually let down by the current infighting amongst themselves due to the recent Arian heresy. The biggest flex of power he did here was simply call a council of all of the leaders of the Church to resolve this embarassing mess. He didn’t want to save Christians, only to find them suddenly destroying themselves. Thus was the Council of Nicaea convened, with Constantine merely opening and closing the council, mostly taking a hands off approach and hoping the bishops would resolve it. They did. They gave Arius the boot and the timeless Nicene creed that everyone right minded Christian recites to this day, except the buffoons who read Jack Chick cartoons.
Also, just to mention, some emperors did in fact abuse their power and tried making sham councils to push Nestorian heresies or outlawing otherwise good Christians, but Constantine was more hands off. None called themselves Pontiff though. Only the bishop of Rome slowly re-adopted the title.. and he was given the boot himself (by the Orthodox). They considered him a “first among equals”, as an honor to Peter, but never a Pontiff. And that’s the reason why they’re split to this day.
Saraph,
63 BC, Julius Caesar was elected by the Assembly of Rome to the lifetime post of Pontifex Maximus or Chief Priest, the highest religious office in the Roman state. “Caesar Against the Celts” by Ramon L. Jimenez, page 15. My spelling was off a bit.
Yes, sorry for not mentioning that. It definitely got subsumed into the office of Emperor. I just mean that wasn’t Constantine’s doing or even his behavior at the Council of Nicaea. He didn’t act the part of Pope. His actions were almost childlike. He was a newcomer and wanted to know why Christians were fighting. He also wanted them to organize their scriptures for wider user. Thus we got the Bible in the form we have now. And one of his successors/grandsons (or step grandson) ended up throwing out the title completely. Later on, the bishop of Rome got a big head and started sneaking it in for himself.
Actually, a telling example of how little power he flexed is the Council, as we know, declared the Trinity and gave Arius the boot, as I mentioned. But Constantine himself liked Arius personally, and befriended the historian Eusebius (who also had Arian leanings). And since this is Christmas, you all might be amused to find that the famous St. Nicolas, Bishop of Myra, got so angry at the blasphemy during one of the council debates that he got up and punched Arius!!! Constantine declared him a nuisance and out of order and temporarily jailed Santa Claus for the duration of the Council.
Constantine continued until his death as a friend of Arians. Eusebius was his apparent confidant in the Church. But he never overstepped his bounds and ruled the Council of Nicaea invalid… despite having Arian sympathies.
That flies in the face of all of the supposed Jack Chick tier conspiracies. As well as the Bart Ehrman ones from the Left.
I agree that the only SBC churches who will be kicked out are those that don’t give a whole lot to the SBC and rarely support it in other forms (and at least six of those have already chosen to leave this year). No church that is a prominent giver will be removed.
Mark R,
I thought the six leaving were because they thought things theologically were trending towards liberalism?
GuyBehindtheCurtain,
Thank you for every minute of your time and every atom of your skill.
Friend,
Amen and amen!
LOL!
There’s still a lot of them out there…
“Jack Chick’s body lies a moldrin’ in the grave,
But his Tracts keep marching on…”
They did, most if not all of them were hardline Reformed. But they had long cut their SBC giving to only the minimum needed to seat messengers at meetings. I can see someone in the SBC “reporting” similar congregations — those who only give the minimum and don’t do a lot in terms of other support, or who make a lot of noise against SBC leadership — just to rid themselves of “problem” congregations.
Perhaps, like his more famous Wartburg namesake, he was mildly autistic!
Mark R,
So your saying the ERLC will disassociate churches based on the amount of grumbling in relation to how much they give? And, not on pulling away from church fundamentals as the SBC defines them?
I would think that the churches that stick to the fundamentals or even bleed over into legalism are the ones they will want to keep.
Nick Bulbeck,
The original Santa Claus fits perfectly on this blog, his paying the three women’s dowery so they wouldn’t have to turn to prostitution.
Was this before or after he (Constantine) had his wife Fausta boiled alive?
Before. Constantine got increasingly worse.. then seemed to repent in old age. But he did a good thing by ending persecution in the beginning of his reign.
Locking Santa Claus though? I’ll let y’all be the judge if that was good or not 😀 Personally, I admire this about St. Nick. St. Peter was a bit hotheaded himself.
He was also famous for advocating against executions, and became a patron saint for prisoners.
So he was hotheaded, but in a good sort of way. Never extreme.
He and his ministry here at TWW are much appreciated.
Absolutely, yes.
It’s good to be reminded that it isn’t just heinous acts of abuse that are perpetrated in secret. Many patient and kind acts of help and service are also done where nobody can see them. We have it on good authority that God both sees, and knows the difference!
So, yes: thanks, GBTC.
AWWBA, the name “Nicholas” comes from two Greek words: nike, meaning victory (in fact Nike was the Greek goddess of victory) and laos meaning people. This has been variously translated as “the people’s victory” and even as “victory over the people” when applied to the Nicolaitans, whose practice the risen Jesus hates. Though “laos” seems to be in the nominative case, on the face of it.
But I prefer to translate it as “a victorious people”. The victory here is not over “a defeated people” (I’ll need to look up the Greek for that!) but over injustice, division, hatred, tribalism, malice and greed – in fact over all the things Jesus went to war against.
Nice namesake you have there. I learn something new everyday 🙂
I don’t believe Jesus was born on Dec 25 (compelling evidence.. to me anyways.. points to something like early Fall), but I still wouldn’t mind celebrating some form of this upcoming holiday in honor of Nicolas. His feast day is Dec 6. Close enough!
Not quite that powerless but the history lesson still highlights the link between faith & power.
Abuse is nothing new in any religion.
While it happens in the secular world, God is a real force multiplier.
How many years and lawsuits and the RC Church still covers it up.
The Baptists are having their own reckoning, I suppose.
It will be up to the Christians of the Baptist variety to stop it.
But I’m not holding my breath.
The main conspiracy, is one of silence within these closed communities.
Caring Well is an initiative of the SBC President (Greear). As such, it is not part of the regular Cooperative Program budget, it got funds only AFTER all the SBC entities got all their CP $$$. IOW, only if and when SBC total CP giving surpassed the year’s goal, did the CW Initiative get any CP $$$, from the excess receipts (and limited to $250K)
Explained here:
http://bpnews.net/51616/blog-sbc-executive-committee-meeting
“the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention, on behalf of the Convention ad interim, approve setting aside the first $250,000 of Cooperative Program Allocation Budget receipts in excess of the 2017-18 Cooperative Program Allocation Budget goal to provide two years of funding for the SBC president’s initiative to study ways to address sexual abuse and related issues in a church or ministry context; and That the expenditures related to this initiative be administered by the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission”
“at the conclusion of work undertaken in the initiative, any unused portion of the funds allocated for that effort be distributed to the SBC entities in accordance with the 2017-18 Cooperative Program Allocation Budget overage percentages from which the funds were drawn.”
It was late 2018 before Caring Well finally got some funding:
http://bpnews.net/51647/greears-sexual-abuse-advisory-study-underway
“Southern Baptist Convention President J.D. Greear’s Sexual Abuse Advisory Study is now ‘actively involved’ in phase one of its two-year process, the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission announced Sept. 19 following appropriation of $250,000 for the study by the SBC Executive Committee.”
“The study will receive the first $250,000 of overage for the 2017-2018 Cooperative Program Allocation Budget…Expenditures for the study will be administered by the ERLC, a partner with Greear in the initiative”
“The budgeted goal of $192 million for the SBC portion of the CP allocation budget was surpassed today…[and] overage will be available for distribution beginning next week”
[that $250K was for the duration the two year initiative = $125k per year]
https://caringwell.com/faqs/
“Who is funding the work on sexual abuse?…The Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention has approved up to $250,000 in Cooperative Program gifts to fund the work…In addition…several entities including the ERLC, LifeWay, and others, have contributed their resources or services pro-bono”
It does not sound like the fund raising is even earmarked for the sexual abuse initiative.
Perhaps ERLC is trying to recoup their ‘pro bono’ contributions to the initiative?
There are many regular, permanent ‘ministries’ they do, besides this one that was foisted upon them for two years.
“The ERLC does not need money to stand with victims.” (Dee)
Exactly. The SBC has plenty of money. It is legendary for getting in the pockets of its members for national “programs.”
The most recent revenue numbers indicate that regular church giving across SBC-affiliated churches are nearly $10 billion annually (billion with a “b”). Contributions to the Cooperative Program, which supports SBC entities like ERLC, are around $500 million. Add to that another $250 million to support home and foreign mission programs. Heck, $60 million of that is directed annually to plant reformed theology (under the guise of church planting) across the SBC kingdom … surely some of those funds could be redirected to something more important like “caring well” for abuse victims without another end-of-the-year tear-jerker plea for money.
http://www.sbc.net/BecomingSouthernBaptist/FastFacts.asp
Seems the only time women are put front and center with SBC is for the extra offerings:
The Lottie Moon Christmas offering (all $$$ directly to International Mission Board)
and North American Mission Board gets the Easter crowd (Annie Armstrong offering)
and now this by ERLC
Great point! Two of the best preachers that SBC ever had were Lottie Moon and Annie Armstrong (but don’t tell SBC’s ruling party that!).