Our ESA/Webb Picture of the Month centers on a giant molecular cloud complex of the nebula N79. @europeanspaceagency / @esawebb , @nasa , @canadianspaceagency , O. Nayak, M. Meixner
Bureaucracy gives birth to itself and then expects maternity benefits. Dale Dauten
The SBC throws out (aka “not in friendly cooperation”) four churches: 2 due to abuse, 1 for a woman senior pastor, and 1 for not giving.
Religion News posted Southern Baptist leaders expel two churches for allegedly mismanaging abuse.
- Grove Road Baptist Church in Greenville, South Carolina, “for a lack of intent to cooperate in resolving a concern regarding the pastor’s mishandling of an allegation of sexual abuse.”
- West Hendersonville Baptist Church, in Hendersonville, North Carolina for “breaking denominational rules on dealing with abuse by retaining a pastor who was “biblically disqualified.”
- Immanuel Baptist Church In Paducah, Kentucky, was “deemed “not in friendly cooperation” for having a woman who serves as senior minister.”
- New Hope Baptist Church of Gastonia, North Carolina, had been “discontinued because it had not given to SBC causes for five years. A question about the faith and practice of New Hope had also been raised, and the church had a “lack of intent to cooperate” in resolving that question.
West Hendersonville Baptist Church in Hendersonville, North Carolina, according to the Tennessean:
employed a pastor who is “biblically disqualified” according to SBC standards on abuse response.
That pastor, Jerry Mullinax, faced discipline in 2003 when he taught at a middle school and reportedly sent “improper emails” to a female student, according to news reports. The North Carolina Board of Education revoked Mullinax’s teaching license in 2004.
New Hope Baptist Church, of Gastonia, North Carolina, according to the Tennessean, was expelled:
Update thanks to Michael Barley and others: “We are unique in our support of the ordination of women and men as deacons and pastors.“
That would seem to be the reason they were expelled.
“due to lack of reported financial participation for at least the last five years.” But the church has previously come under scrutiny for a past deacon who was sentenced to prison in 2008 for charges including statutory rape, according to information contained in a list maintained by Southern Baptist leaders of churches with a history of clergy abuse. It’s unclear if that history at New Hope Baptist factored into someone initially reporting the church to the credentials committee.
Grove Road Baptist Church in Greenville, South Carolina, according to US News, was booted for:
allegedly showing a “lack of intent to cooperate in resolving a concern regarding the pastor’s mishandling of an allegation of sexual abuse.”
I could find little information on Grove Road. Apparently, the church has an active group that, according to Google Reviews, uses ladders to peer over a fence to an abortion clinic. Here is one Google Review. I do not know if this is the reason it got booted out. I tend to think not, but who knows? If anyone knows what happened, please let me know. I can’t find it in any major news report.
Immanuel Baptist Church in Paducah, Kentucky, was expelled for having a senior pastor who is a woman. According to US News:
On Tuesday, the committee ousted Immanuel Baptist Church of Paducah, Kentucky, whose senior minister is a woman. The SBC’s official statement of faith says the office of pastor is open only to men.
Immanuel said in a Facebook statement that it affirmed its “decision to to call Rev. Katie McKown to serve with and among us.” It cited Baptist tenets emphasizing the autonomy of congregations and individuals, and it offered prayers that the SBC “be blessed with wisdom and discernment as it moves forward.”
Each Southern Baptist church is independent, so the denomination can’t tell churches what to do. But it can decide whether churches can be members or be ousted.
Some thoughts about the above.
- Why do I feel they covered for booting a church with a woman pastor by finding two churches that are relatively unknown with sex abuse issues, one of which isn’t even clear? What about those ten churches mentioned by the Houston Chronicle in the Abuse of Faith? Maybe I forgot? Did the SBC exonerate those churches? Were some “too big” and “too important” to be booted?
- I’m sure Baptist leaders are glad that CJ Mahaney’s SGC Louisville is safely part of the SBC firmament.
- Why is it so challenging to discover what happened at Grove Road Baptist Church? Indeed, the EC could have spelled it out.
- Why do they mention throwing out female pastors and sex abusers in the same breath?
Sex Abuse Implementation Task Force appears in over their heads.
According to Baptist News Global’s Mark Wingfield in SBC wants to create independent commission to address and prevent sexual abuse, but funding uncertain:
The Southern Baptist Convention will create a new, independent nonprofit to address allegations and investigations of sexual abuse in SBC churches, according to the second task force assigned to figure out solutions.
Josh Wester, chairman of the SBC’s Abuse Reform Implementation Task Force, reported this news to members of the SBC Executive Committee meeting in Nashville Feb. 19. Although Wester did not give the cost of creating such a commission, BNG has learned the estimated startup could cost as much as $5 million.
Take a look at their faces in the lead picture. They look rather down.
Where’s the money? Umm, nowhere to be found, it seems. The SBC is getting sued in more than a dozen states!!!!
The Executive Committee currently is defending itself against more than a dozen lawsuits related to sexual abuse claims and has spent more than half its net assets on legal fees and investigations. An outsider audit called the Executive Committee’s financial status “unsustainable.”
…The task force reportedly is seeking funding from existing SBC entities, especially the two mission boards that receive the largest share of Cooperative Program funding from churches. Messengers to this summer’s SBC annual meeting could, in theory, adopt a budget that would carve out funds for the new commission as well.
SBC President Bart Barber also joked about giving Monopoly money to Wester to help fund the new “entity.” The joke was not well received.
Then as Wester left and the banter continued, Barber made a comment about giving Wester “Monopoly money” to fund the new entity. Later that night, Barber posted on X an apology for that comment, calling it “really bad judgment on my part.”
Some thoughts on the above:
- Christa Brown was right. The SAITF was ineffective. It took all this time, promising that a database was coming, and voilà, nothing…
- How much money was spent for the SAITF to learn that they wanted to turn this into a brand new entity for which there is no designated money?
- I have no problem with a nonprofit group running the show, but why did it take this long to get there? All of the updates are for naught. The changing makeup of the group was useless. All of the money…
- There are still no stats on how many calls have been received by the hotline and what is being done with those reports. Are callers being led to believe that help will be given? If so, who is providing the help? Or are the records of those calls sent to the circular file, doomed to circle until a real solution is found? This is terribly concerning.
Money is getting tighter in the SBC.
Mark Wingfield made some excellent observations in SBC’s budget takes a hit after more than a decade of inflation losses; Executive Committee expels four churches.
SBC money is declining.
…by another measure, considering the inflation rate over 10 years, giving to SBC causes has declined up to 30%. That $190.5 million given in 2015 would be valued today at between $235 million and $247 million
…The proposed new budget of $190,250,000 is exactly $5 million less than the current year’s budget of $195,250,000. That’s a 2.5% decrease in dollars but a larger decrease in spending power
Guidepost costs continue.
Based on comments made in open session, it appears the Executive Committee has incurred at least another $780,000 in expenses related to the work of Guidepost Solutions addressing sexual abuse issues.
Legal costs are significant.
The previous year’s audit showed legal expenses of $6 million in an array of legal matters related to sexual abuse, including Guidepost.
Decreased giving, rising legal costs, and raises for the EC staff.
Faced with these mounting legal expenses and decreased giving to the Cooperative Program, the Executive Committee last year laid off staff and cut expenditures. For the new budget year, remaining Executive Committee staff will be given 3.4% salary increases
Budgets in the SBC’s NAMB are secret, and efforts will be made at the Convention to make them public.
(The boys will fight this one.)
In recent years, some Southern Baptist pastors and lay leaders have made efforts to get all SBC entities to make public more of their financial information. This has been driven in part by suspicions and allegations against the SBC North American Mission Board.
The concern about budgets will affect the funding of new entities.
The concern about budgets may make funding the new not-for-profit entity, as suggested by the SAITF, more complex. Yet, if something isn’t done to deal with sex abuse, legal fees will increase.
Wingfield made the most compelling summation of the expulsions:
Female pastors and sexual abusers are treated the same way by the SBC now.
Agreed. It’s a terrible look, isn’t it?
Midwestern. Embraces and promotes 9 Marks while being a SBC entity. CP declines in part because of things like this.
And… about that “seeking funding from the two mission boards” part… The IMB and NAMB have already said Nope. https://religionnews.com/2024/02/21/heads-of-sbc-mission-boards-and-send-relief-say-they-will-not-fund-a-new-abuse-reform-nonprofit/
You might’ve thought they would’ve gotten their funding in order before they hyped it, eh?
The Wingfield/Mwaura arcticle in BNG says:
And New Hope Baptist Church in Gastonia, N.C., was expelled because it has posted an “egalitarian view of women in ministry” on its website.
From https://religionnews.com/2024/02/20/southern-baptist-leaders-expel-four-churches-including-two-for-alleged-abuse/
” Trustees also decided that the SBC’s relationship with New Hope Baptist Church, of Gastonia, North Carolina, had been “discontinued” because the church, according to the Executive Committee, had not given to SBC causes for five years. A question about the faith and practice of New Hope had also been raised and the church had a “lack of intent to cooperate” in resolving that question.”
I suspect the last sentence in that quote is referring to the church’s “egalitarian view”.
Giving to SBC ‘causes’ is CP donations – an option, not a requirement for membership in the SBC. The only catch: a church that does not send CP money cannot send messengers to the convention.
So, if people would just keep their dogs…. errr, women muzzled and leashed, and cough up more money, all would be heavenly in God’s little SBC fiefdom?
Is the New Hope info about abuse the reason they were expelled? That’s back in 2008.
But it says on their website:
“We are unique in our support of the ordination of women and men as deacons and pastors.“
That would seem to be the reason they were expelled.
The Gastonia church is certainly openly in favor of women ministers and deacons. It also claims to be open on its budget and says explicitly “Becoming a member at New Hope means you have an equal voice as a participant in the body of Christ. Ministers do not control the church or make final decisions for the church.”
Church leadership:
1 Pt 5:1-4
Beloved:
I exhort the presbyters among you,
as a fellow presbyter and witness to the sufferings of Christ
and one who has a share in the glory to be revealed.
Tend the flock of God in your midst,
overseeing not by constraint but willingly,
as God would have it, not for shameful profit but eagerly.
Do not lord it over those assigned to you,
but be examples to the flock.
And when the chief Shepherd is revealed,
you will receive the unfading crown of glory.
Without commenting on the validity of the lawsuits. I am not a lawyer. It seems that the good ole boys running the SBC have seen the “hand writing on the wall”. The woke stuff seemed like a good idea to some of their leadership. But now that the money is running short they seem to be running as fast as they can back to the more conservative side. The fact is that if the more conservative side goes out, they have a hard way to hold getting money to fund the SBC and paying for the lawsuits. Rightly or wrongly that is just a fact.
“Immanuel Baptist Church In Paducah, Kentucky, was “deemed “not in friendly cooperation” for having a woman who serves as senior minister.”
To which Jesus would shout “Whoever is not against us is for us … leave them alone” (Mark 9:38-41)
“SBC President Bart Barber also joked about giving Monopoly money to Wester to help fund the new “entity.” The joke was not well received.”
So, go ask Kevin Ezell over at the North American Mission Board for some of his big bucks … he’s never missed a beat through all this, spending $60 million per year from SBC coffers to plant 1,000 new churches annually, staffed with primarily New Calvinist pastors fresh out of seminary. What are SBC priorities? Spreading reformed theology or heeding the cries of abuse victims?
Indeed … regardless of race, class or gender (Galatians 3:28).
Ava Aaronson,
Apparently, there are many SBC church leaders who flip quickly by this passage.
Which “woke” stuff?
If they/you deem common decency in dealing with abuse victims “woke” (and therefore bad) in SBC terms, what does that tell us about the SBC/you?
If they/you deem common decency in treating women “woke” (and therefore bad) in SBC terms, what does that tell us about the SBC/you?
The whole thing about the SBC becoming “liberal”, “woke”, “left” is completely ridiculous for anybody “left of Ghengis Khan”.
“Decreased giving, rising legal costs, and raises for the EC staff.
Faced with these mounting legal expenses and decreased giving to the Cooperative Program, the Executive Committee last year laid off staff and cut expenditures. For the new budget year, remaining Executive Committee staff will be given 3.4% salary increases”
And, once again, I am not surprised. Funded by congregants that have no idea where their donations are going, probably because it is not explained to them by their deacon and/or elder board. Just give and quit asking questions. Do you not have faith?
Gus,
I have been around TWW for many years. I came because of the integrity of Dee and Deb calling out the abusers in all denominations. I have not always agreed with Dee, however when she is calling out real abuse she is a champion that was very needed. When the issue (not Dee) crossed the line was when people were accused of being a racist because they were white. Sorry they lost a lot of people at that point.
The SBC (with its current ideology) will not survive much longer than another decade.
As a former Southern Baptist, I’d say that would be about right. They were already on a downhill slide when the New Calvinists moved in … the new reformers will no doubt finish it off with 9Marks nonsense. What they don’t discipline to death, they will subordinate and abuse until millions of SBCers leave to join the Done ranks … done with SBC, but not done with Jesus.
From the OP:
Could it be that the new, independent nonprofit is being created so they will (potentially) be the ones that get sued, rather than the SBC? Will the SBC do the whole “autonomy” thing with the new, independent nonprofit?
In the OP, Dee wrote:
Or is the information in the calls being weaponized against the victim(s)?
Or is the information in the calls being weaponized against the victim(s)?
researcher,
That would not surprise me.
Tattle-tale, tattle-tale. Hang your britches on a nail.
When I first saw the article about Grove Road Baptist, I was surprised, but I had not heard about the church. The only article I found out about the church before this was an article on how the church had a lot of mold, mildew, and water damage due to water flowing into the building, requiring help from a local Baptist group trained in disaster response. The pastor at the time described the church as small with a lot of older members.
https://baptistcourier.com/2015/08/workofgrace/
A more recent article told how the church had 20 members, and 12 attending most Sundays.
https://baptistcourier.com/2024/02/executive-committee-deems-four-churches-not-in-friendly-cooperation/
Now, it’s worth noting that a CREC congregation meets there.
https://www.christkingchurch.com/visit-us
Ken A,
“When the issue (not Dee) crossed the line was when people were accused of being a racist because they were white.”
++++++++++++++++++++
i don’t recall this happening.
although i have observed people equating a reference to an unconscious bias,
and lack of awareness of the impact of one’s words and actions (or lack thereof) on others (or even the possibility of such)
as an accusation of being racist.
.
.
not saying that’s the necessarily the case here.
just seems to me that understanding what it means to be ‘racist’ and what it means to self-assess as ‘I am not racist’ requires people taking the time to hear from each other for a very extended transparent conversation.
having put on a humble objectivity hat.
those in pain from direct experience and legacy of racism and racist cruelty have long been presenting many sincere and thoughtful discussions on what it does to individuals and groups.
i think they’ve been ignored by many.
After reading all the comments on Dee’s post, I thought the following post I recently picked off her Twitter (I still don’t call it X. 🙂 ) seemed appropriate to add….
Hope roots in truth-telling and grows with action, by Christa Brown, Baptist News Global, February 22, 2024.
https://baptistnews.com/article/hope-roots-in-truth-telling-and-grows-with-action/
Ken,
I have been reading here since 2012, and while I have not read all posts and definitely not all comments, I do not recall anybody calling all white people racists qua their whiteness.
What has been mentioned is that we who are part of the majority group in our countries (in mine as well as in the US) often tend to take our own ideas and predilections as “normal”, as the default, that every reasonable person would agree with. And often we don’t realize that this excludes people who do not see things the way that we do.
We often do not see the subtle (or sometimes not so subtle) racism in our institutional life that we are not subject to. Many benefits in the GI bills in your country (help with housing, free college education) were explicitly restricted to white people who later said, “well, blacks don’t seem to build for the future”.
This also goes for age groups: Many millennials are looked down upon by aging boomers for not building careers and families that these boomers had done don’t see that they had relatively inexpensive health care, housing was a fraction of what it is now, same for college. And jobs for life were still a thing then, if you wanted that.
It also works across religious groups: when I was a kid, catholics were more than three quarters of the population in my country. At the beginning of the new school year in many of the villages, important information about the new school year was not sent to parents by mail but announced at the end of the catholic mass in the village church, on the assumption that “everybody will be there”. I don’t even think that this was willful discrimination against lutheran kids like myself or any atheists, it was just unthinking decision-making. (Sure felt like discrimination for me at the time.)
It
A mainline church in town; 30 years ago a local mainline church had a senior pastor who stayed 30 plus years and was quiet theologically conservative though the denomination itself had begun to turn liberal. The church had an average attendance of 400. This pastor retired and the church hired a man trained in the theological liberalism of the 80’s. He stayed for about 20 years and then retired leaving the church with an average attendance of 200. 7 years ago the church hired an attractive young lady who had a master’s in social work and one year of seminary.
Within, 2 years, the increasingly small staff was all female and on their web pages they announce their pronouns. She has recently resigned to take a staff position in another state. The church now averages about 50 a Sunday. The denomination itself has become increasingly small and has a hard time paying its bills.
I think, given the choice most men would prefer that their senior/teaching pastor be a man; I’m not sure if that’s true of women or not.
I think any denomination has the right to declare expectation of their churches the parameters of what their church shall believe and what their polity will be. I’m not sure why some many people are upset with Southern Baptist churches for continuing to insist that senior or teaching pastors be male. There’s theological case for that and the SBC has always held to that policy with the occasional rare exception.
In general, it doesn’t appear that mainline churches have thrived with liberalized theological and women in the pulpit.
Accusations of ‘racism’ are the new witchcraft trials, and the new Orwellian meme.
You (generic you) can get denounced by a former confidant and hauled before a tribunal (so to speak).
Christa Brown,
No way. The hype IS the thing.
The people who warned them were the lawyers they fired. Also, the people with business experience on the Executive Committee who were forced to resign by the secular companies for whom they work because the Directors and Officers insurance was jeopardized when the Executive Committee decided to waive attorney client privilege- they warned them, too.
But the PR from the hype was so intoxicating at the time.
Dee:
Serious question.
Given the fact that the SBC has no way to control churches that contribute, that is, the SBC has no hold over the churches’ real estate, bank accounts, staffing decisions etc., isn’t the only thing the SBC can do is exclude offending churches from being in the SBC?
That being the case, how can the SBC treat offending churches differently based on the seriousness of the behavior.
A church that excuses a rapist for a pastor, a church that is openly racist, or a church that violates a strictly doctrinal standard, whether a larger or smaller matter, end up receiving the same treatment because there is no other punishment available.
Is there a solution to this situation?
Gus,
Well, the SBC went on record in one of these “woke moments that seemed like a good idea at the time” of approving of Critical Race Theory.
You couldn’t have gotten a conservative Christian denomination of churches to approve of Critical Race Theory in a million years even if you gave every church $1M.
But they did that in a moment of virtue signaling wokeness. So the phenomenon is real.
On the sex abuse stuff, that doesn’t seem woke to me at all. Just common sense decency that is fully in line with the SBC’s stated ethical beliefs.
On that front the SBC just wasn’t wise. Overpromised and under delivered.
Ken A,
Bingo.
“I don’t pay a lawyer to tell me what I want to do is illegal.
I PAY A LAWYER TO TELL ME HOW TO GET AWAY WITH WHAT I WANT TO DO!”
— attr to J.P.Morgan, J.D.Rockefeller – one of those 19th Century Captains of Industry