Strong Coffee

God Uses The Willing

2012-01-25T08:16:00.001-08:00

For ten years I have had the privilege of serving on the board of Christian Unity Ministries, a ministry begun by my lawyer son. God has given him a passion for the health of the church, not just Baptist churches, but all churches. To communicate that passion the Lord has him to write three wonderful books. The primary text of the ministry is the Word of God, and Blake Coffee has taken from God's Word what he sees as five principles that help the church function well in its relationships. Relating to other people is what church is all about. We recognize that one cannot be in harmony with God and out of harmony with others. The question is, "How do we maintain that harmony with other people so as to stay in harmony with the Lord God?"

Blake's book Five Principles Of Unity has outlined the way churches can maintain harmony, or unity, in her fellowship. Christian Unity Ministries has dedicated itself to teaching those principles wherever God leads. By His mighty power he has seen the book translated into Japanese, Spanish, Russian, and the language of the South Africans. God has used these principles in hundreds of churches across America and in other nations such as Ukraine, Romania, and South Africa, as well as with a Japanese speaking church in Los Angeles who translated the book and uses it profusely.

For these first ten years the ministry has done well and has brought alongside Blake a marvelous corps of volunteers who not only have seen these principles at work in their own churches, but now have committed themselves to teach them elsewhere. That eclectic group includes a college professor, a city attorney, an Associate District Judge, an architect, a retired district judge, and a fund raiser, as well as one retired denominational executive. This group makes up the Executive Board of Christian Unity Ministries. Two weeks ago this group met and decided it was time to take the ministry to a whole new level. Step number one is to enlarge the board and seek to be inclusive of all denominations of the Christian faith. Already the new chairman of the board is not a Baptist, for the first time. The challenge is to find people who want to sign on to help spread the word that God has an answer for all the churches who need to understand it is all about how we relate to one another.

Step number two was to bring on board another executive who will oversee the operation of the ministry. Blake Coffee will continue to serve as Executive Director for programming. However, the Lord has brought to us Tom Cuthbert, a man who has started and grown businesses, to serve as Executive Director of Operations. Tom has set himself apart as a business growth consultant. He was the founder/CEO of Click Forensics (now Adometry). Currently, he chairs a group of CEO’s in San Antonio for Vistage International, one of the world’s leading CEO organizations. He loves God’s Word and has been teaching it in the local church for many years. He also has been in church leadership positions in times of severe conflict and his heart breaks for the devastation it can cause among God’s people

The ministry has made use of all media in the free world (and we mean free). Christian Unity Ministries is on Facebook, Twitter, and in the blog world. The ministry's blog at http://fiveprinciples.net this week has started a new feature called Principley Speaking which will feature one of these extremely confident board members sharing how they teach these principles in the churches to which they go. This week Dr. Ann Farris, a professor at Tarleton State University introduces the 5 principles and illustrates how she teaches people so they will not forget.

It has been an extreme joy for me to be part of this ministry for the past ten years, and to walk alongside my son as he developed the ministry concept in the manner God led him. It has also been a joy to welcome aboard those called by God to become part of this work, with no pay, and with an extreme commitment to the Word of God as taught through this ministry. The quality of this group of people is hard to imagine. How God brought them all together is a mystery to me, except that each of them had a personal experience where these principles were used to help their churches or to help them personally. Two district judges, a city attorney, a profoundly successful architect from Phoenix, etc.—all coming together because they believe in what this ministry seeks to accomplish in the churches.

I don't know where this ministry is headed under the new leadership Team of Directors Blake Coffee and Tom Cuthbert and board Chairman Kelley Kimble, but I know it will be a great ride and I can hardly wait to see where it goes. Who knows, it might even be to your church.

Clear Choice In 2012

2012-01-22T12:24:00.001-08:00

Now that things have pretty well shaken out in the Republican race for who is going to run against the current president, one thing we know for sure. The candidate will be a conservative. There is one social conservative (Santorum), one classic conservative (Gingrich), and one moderate-conservative (Romney). Of course there is also a fourth man in the race, but he is really not a Republican and only uses the name of the party to get his Libertarian ideas out there. Ron Paul ran several times in Texas as a Libertarian Party candidate and could not get elected, so he became a Republican just to be able to get elected to something. I do not believe he can ever be a Republican nominee for president. However, with the amount of support he has garnered this time around, he might be tempted to run as a third party candidate, which will virtually assure President Obama's re-election.

In the three races so far Paul has come in second, third and fourth. Many of his libertarian ideas are registering with folks, but his foreign policy ideas are downright scary. In what promises to be a close race, Paul's running as a third party candidate with somewhere near 10% of the vote will be enough to elect Obama to a second term.

While it appears the Obama people think they are going to be running against Romney, already taking out ads against him, they may have counted their chickens a bit early. However, if Romney wins in Florida, that may just about sow it up for him. But Gingrich is surging right now and may pull off an upset in Florida. One wonders if there are really enough Gingrich-type conservatives in Florida to give him a victory such as the one he got in South Carolina. Newt has already confounded the pundits, most of whom have counted him dead in the water at least three times so far. In my view, Gingrich, with all his warts, may be the best one to debate Obama, but Romney probably has the best chance of winning the election.

One thing has been interesting. That group of religious conservatives, including the Southern Baptist spokesman Richard Land, that met in Houston the other day to try to derail Romney failed. This was a clear loss for this group of social conservatives. One wonders how much influence they will have going forward.

Personally, I do not believe we will know who the nominee is until Super Tuesday in March. That is the time when the importance of winning delegates will crop up. Until now it has just been preliminary activity. After Florida things will start to straighten out. The bottom line is that whoever of this group gets the nomination, he will be a better candidate than John McCain was—and more conservative. This will give us a clear choiuce between a Chicago liberal and a conservati8ve. One thinks government is the answer to everything. The other thinks that which governs least governs best.

69 TO 1

2012-01-17T21:34:00.001-08:00

The Executive Board voted 69-1 to elect David Hardage as Executive Director of the Baptist General Convention of Texas. There are several ways to look at that vote. One way is to think that if I were the one that voted against Hardage, I would resign from the board because I am obviously out of step with the mainstream thinking of other board members. Another way is to look at this fellow as a brave soul who was not afraid to voice the convictions of his heart. Still another way to look at it is that the 69 who voted "yes" must have been wrong if there was not a unanimous vote. That, of course, is absurd.

Some will praise the one who voted "no" as a man of courage and conviction. Some of us will just believe that this guy might not have prayed about his vote enough to discern God's will, as expressed by an overwhelming majority. I personally do not think it is necessarily courageous to be the only one to vote "no". If 69 people voted "yes" because they believed it to be God's will, then the one "no" vote was obviously someone not in the will of God. Instead of saying, "God bless him", we should be looking for a way to encourage the guy to resign from the board. He is obviously not thinking like his brothers and sisters on the executive board.

Does this mean that I do not appreciate the democratic process? Absolutely not. It does mean that I am a fierce proponent of praying to seek God's will to find consensus in all matters and if 69 people all heard God say, vote "Yes", then obviously the one who voted "No" did not hear God. Of course, it is always possible that the one who voted "No" was the only one who heard God's voice and the others just went along to get along. I guess you readers will have to decide that for yourself. It is also possible that God led this fellow to vote "No" just so no one would get the impression that things are all going to be going smoothly. It is also possible that this person had a personal vendetta against Hardage, stemming from some long ago encounter with him. We don't know the real reasons for anyone's vote, but we just know it is what it is.

In any event, starting February 1, David Hardage will sit in the Executive Director's chair. I for one am very happy about that. According to Marv Knox's Baptist Standard article, his interview with David got a lot of "I don't know" responses from the new E.D. In other words, it appears he is not coming into the job with a preconceived vision and an agenda. That is a good thing, in my opinion. Formulating a vision will require some time, a lot of prayer, and a lot of discussions with staff and committee leadership. Hardage should not be expected to have a complete vision for where he wants to see the convention go in the years ahead. Of course, he could always contact some bloggers who seem to think they know what is best for the convention, me included. My belief is that David is a man of God who is led by the Holy Spirit and will form whatever vision for the BGCT that God leads him to formulate. That's what godly men do.

In spite of the fact there are some who think the BGCT is on its last legs, there are a lot of us who do not feel that way. Those who cannot see anything good in this old convention are nowhere near being in the majority and will have little to do with the future of it. Naysayers have always existed in the Christian religion and Baptists have always had more than their share. 69-1 seems to indicate that there are not many, at least, on the Executive Board. The board members positively affirmed the hard work of the Search Committee with their overwhelming vote. We should not focus on the 1, but on the 69.

Be On Mission Is More Than Just A Slogan

2012-01-15T06:08:00.001-08:00

For most Texas Baptists, the phrase "Be on mission" has a real meaning. For literally thousands it has meant actually going to a mission field, either internationally or home missions, or even across the city in their own location. For the Baptist General Convention of Texas "Be On Mission" has become a web-based clearing house for anyone who desires to go, to take a group, or to support one of hundreds of mission projects all over the globe.

The web site is http://texasbaptists.org/beonmission/, and I highly recommend that pastors or youth leaders or anyone else contemplating taking a group on a mission trip take a look at the most complete catalog of opportunity to do missions I have ever seen.

The web site was designed and is administered by Elizabeth Biedrzycki (Pronounced Bid-risky), someone I know very well. Elizabeth grew up being on mission with her family, her church, and sometimes with other groups. It is in her DNA to be on mission, which made her an ideal person to design and work with this web site for Texas Baptists. She was just a small child when her family started taking her to Cuidad Acuna in Mexico to work there. Recently, she went to South Africa with her dad to work in churches there. She doesn't just promote the work, she does it.

I am a big believer in church groups going on mission trips. I strongly believe it is what God wants us to do, and if we cannot go ourselves, I believe we should all help others go and pray for them as they do so.

As you visit http://texasbaptists.org/beonmission/ you will find hundreds of places where you can take a group, large or small. There are map pins for each location and when you click on each pin you will find project details and contact information for helping out. Almost every continent and every state in the USA is shown with a need.

You will see red, green and blue map pins. The red ones are the open opportunities, which the green are on-going projects, and the blue are completed projects. Red is the dominant color on the world map, with so many opportunities open and waiting.

Go ahead. Click on http://texasbaptists.org/beonmission/ and see for yourself.

Tebow Has An Effect

2012-01-11T06:38:00.001-08:00

Tim Tebow, the quarterback of the Denver Broncos NFL Team, has had an effect on the propagation of the Christian message. While he was leading the Florida University team, Tebow usually blacked his eyes with tape on which was stenciled John 3:16.

Last week, while leading his team to a victory in a playoff game over the Steelers, Tebow amassed 316 passing yards, with an average of 31.6 yards on each completed pass. The resulting media flourish was to connect Tebow's John 3:16 eye black with his statistics in the game, a sort of numerology exercise. Google reports that literally thousands of people googled John 3:16 to find out what all the fuss was about. So, without ever saying a word, Tebow was responsible for thousands discovering the central message of the Christian faith, and hearing that God loves them.

Tebow is often criticized for his demonstrations of his Christian faith. Where other athletes pound their chests and celebrate dramatically, which is a complete turnoff to many football purists, such as myself, Tebow usually kneels and offers a pray of thanksgiving to God. His overtly praising God is a turnoff to many in the media. He has been the butt of skits on Saturday Night Live, jokes on Leno and Letterman and in many comedic routines. But, undaunted by all this, Tebow just goes on being Tebow and letting the world know he loves the Lord.

The son of missionary parents, Tebow grew up on a mission field in the Philippines. With his multi-million dollar football contract, Tebow is building a children's hospital in the Philippines. He is being emulated by hundreds, if not thousands, of high school players who are now emboldened to share their faith, as Tebow does.

In a world where so many athletes exhibit a selfishness beyond description, Tebow is a refreshing change. While many of us believe God does not care about football, we all believe God cares about football players. So, to the critics I say, "Chill out." There are a lot worse things a guy like Tim Tebow could be doing to influence our kids. What he is doing is God-honoring, which is more than can be said for the criticism being waged against him.

The Tall Poppy Syndrome

2012-01-08T10:27:00.001-08:00

On one of my trips to Australia, ministering in a church there, the pastor introduced me to what is known down under as "The Tall Poppy Syndrome." The metaphor was to compare some people to a field of poppies, where all the Poppies were beautifully uniform, except for an occasional one that stuck its head above all the rest. My pastor friend told me that in his country they often had to deal with some ministers in their group or members of their congregations would occasionally start thinking they were a bit better than all the rest and would elevate themselves above their peers, at which time the others felt it necessary to cut them down a peg or two.

We have had a marvelous example of this metaphor in the Republican presidential field, where there have been several who found themselves "leading" in the polls, only to find themselves cut down by the remaining candidates. The most dangerous place to be is at the top of the polls. Achieving that immediately places a target on whosever back was te current leader.

Jesus, in Matthew 6, warned those who practiced their religion for the praise of men, rather than the praise of God. Jesus used the word "beware"—a clear warning to those who fell victim to the Tall Poppy Syndrome.

Whether one is a politician, a preacher, a Sunday school teacher, a deacon or just an ordinary lay person, he/she should be careful not to fall victim to the Tall Poppy Syndrome. Standing taller than others in the field makes one an easy target for the Great Cultivator of all growing things.

Fascination in Iowa

2012-01-04T07:34:00.001-08:00

As a news and politics junky, I could not take my eyes off the goings on in Iowa Tuesday night. As I predicted, Senator Rick Santorum surprised all the pundits by coming in just eight votes behind the winner, Mitt Romney. It appears, in Iowa at least, that conservatives have embraced Santorum instead of Michelle Bachman or Rick Perry, neither of whom did well enough to stay in the race. As I stated in my previous post, those two need to step out and allow the conservatives to coalesce behind one candidate. At this writing Bachman has stepped down and Perry has tweeted he will stay on at least through South Carolina.

The big thing is that it all really probably makes little difference. What happens in Iowa rarely ever portends anything for the national election, which makes me wonder what it is that excites so many about Iowa. Except for the fact that Iowa makes it possible for the first votes to be cast in a long campaign, little else of importance comes out, other than winnowing down the field. I guess that is what makes Iowa important.

As the campaign for becoming the Republican nominee continues, there appears to be a real war shaping up between Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney. This is about to get really nasty. The latest salvo has Gingrich calling Romney a liar, overtly, something that one never does in a political campaign. Gingrich is falling and Romney is rising. . There is a slight chance that if Gingrich does well enough in New Hampshire to make it to South Carolina, he can still salvage his campaign. He expects to win South Carolina. If he doesn't, he is done and out.

Conservatives all over the country need to look long and hard at Santorum. Although a bit long, his speech Tuesday night was one of the best I have heard. He truly is the common man all candidates want to be. He won Iowa by driving around the state in a pickup, visiting all 99 counties over and over again. That kind of retail politics is difficult to do on a national scale, but that is what Santorum will need to do if he wants to be the candidate. He just doesn't have the organization or the funding to do anything else.

Even though it doesn't predict accurately for the presidency, what happened in Iowa was fascinating. One thing we learned is that even if you are a social conservative, talking about the economy is what will get you attention. That is what Santorum did. This father of seven seems to be a spiritual man. His offering of thanks to God was seemingly sincere, as he spoke Tuesday evening.

Interesting days are ahead for Republican voters. Many who are lukewarm about Romney, but saw no alternative, now will take a look at Santorum and try to decide if he is electable. That is the only important thing that has come out of Iowa.

The State Of Affairs

2012-01-01T12:06:00.001-08:00

Tuesday begins the eleven month long political marathon for our nation. Well, to be truthful, the political marathon started early in 2011 with the first candidates announcing they are running for president. Already, two of the original announcers have dropped out and after Tuesday I suspect a couple more will do so. At least I hope that is the case after the Iowa caucuses. Of the four true conservative candidates running, it would be helpful if three of them would drop out so that they would not be splitting up that bloc of votes.

While it is true that in comparison to our sitting president any of the remaining Republican candidates looks conservative, those of us who espouse real conservatism understand the differences in the remaining candidates. However, if we listen to the pollsters, the candidate has already been selected, that being Mitt Romney. Since I am writing this on Sunday before Iowa votes, I can say with assurance that no one knows how that vote will turn out. Personally, I don't think it matters much, since the winner in Iowa has rarely been the eventual nominee of the party, insofar as Republicans are concerned. I have been watching this very closely and I am predicting that the surprise of the Iowa voting will be Senator Rick Santorum. While he may not win it, I believe he will be in the top three, which will be enough to keep him in the race. I think Governor Rick Perry will come in somewhere close to the top three, also, which will serve him well as he makes his way to South Carolina, where he expects to do well.

Frankly, I wish Perry was one of those who would drop out. I do not believe he inspires confidence among Republicans, confidence that he could stand toe to toe with the president in a debate forum. Perry has a great personal story and a great leadership story, but he has made too many gaffs to be considered a viable candidate. Of course, they said the same thing about G.W. Bush, and he made it to the top. Whatever one thinks of Bush, he managed to get himself elected twice in close races.

Others who should drop out are Michelle Bachman (whom I think a lot of), and John Hunstman (who looks great, but just has no traction). Bachman may drop out after Iowa, but Huntsman will wait until after New Hampshire to make a decision. Neither of them will be able to beat Gingrich or Perry in the south. Perry will stay in until after South Carolina, where, if he does not do well, he will probably bow out.

It is looking more and more likely that America will have to decide if they can vote for a Mormon. Judging from the national public relations campaign being waged by the Mormons on television these days, it appears the church is gearing up to offer support to Romney in the election. Those Mormon ads are terrific. They make Mormons look much more appealing than some of our brothers would have us believe.

Whomever the Republican candidate is will have a hard row to hoe against the president. The president will have the largest war chest in history to promote his candidacy. If fund raising were the standard, he would be the greatest president of all time, because whatever else he does, he can raise money. His problem is he can also spend it, especially if it is not his own. He has increased our national debt more than all other U.S. presidents in history put together. T make matters worse he is financing that spending with money from China. So now the greatest threat to our security is not China's military, which is great enough, but the fear that they will soon own so much of our debt that they could foreclose on us at any time, virtually destroying our economy. In what universe does that make any sense at all?

From where I stand, four more years of that kind of presidential leadership is extremely undesirable. Our economic woes are beyond what this president has the knowledge to cure. His Harvard professor approach to the presidency is too much to bear. We do indeed need a change.

Never Before

2011-12-30T08:18:00.001-08:00

It is quite impressive when someone can say they have done something that has never been done before, I don't care what it is. But when two teams can say they were part of something that had never been accomplished before in the 99 year history of football bowl games, that, my friend is impressive. Such was the case for the sold out Valero Alamo Bowl, played in San Antonio Thursday, January 29. In a game that was billed the "last" college game for Heisman Trophy winner Robert Griffin III, a little known sophomore quarterback from Washington did his best to steal thunder from Baylor's most famous player ever.

The Washington Huskies gave Baylor all they wanted offensively, but, thankfully, had a worse defense than even the Bears did. Ironically, for a game that had all the offensive fireworks of a 4^th of July celebration, arguably the most important play was a defensive play near the end of the game. When Washington appeared poised to once again take the lead from Baylor, the Bears rose up to finally stop the Huskies on a critical fourth and eight play that might have cost Baylor the game, had the Bears not stopped them for the first time all evening. On the next play Baylor running back Terrance Ganaway put the game in the Bear's win column with a forty-eight yard run for a touchdown.

It was near midnight when the game finally ended, with collegiate bowl records broken for total first downs, total points and total yards gained, and Baylor records for total yards gained (777) and total rushing yards gained (482). Just think—when record books are filled out this morning the Baylor Bears will be in them and will likely stay in them for years to come. That is something. Something no other team in the country can say.

It was a fitting way for R.G.III to end his collegiate career, if indeed he does. He has always spoken about "we", not "I", and this was truly a team victory. After being behind by 18 points in the third quarter, Griffin led his team to a 67-56 win, and he was not the MVP of the game. Exactly as he would have preferred. His teammate, Ganaway, got that big MVP trophy but the team got the winner's trophy, which is an impressive addition to the B.U. trophy case. In what was truly a game for the ages, the Baylor Bears won the game as a team. Griffin's stats were less than impressive, but the team got the trophy. Oh, he was good enough to show why he was the Heisman winner, but , statistically he was not the head and shoulders best quarterback on the field on this night. He was however, the consummate team player, throwing, running and even blocking for his team. He was easily the best field general, leading his team to victory. In short, he was what he always wanted to be, part of a team of hard working, hard fighting, well coached players willing to do what was needed to win their 10^th game of the year.

Hats off to Art Briles, the entire coaching staff, the student body and the vast army of Baylor supporters who showed up at the game. You did yourself proud! You did what was never before done!

Hardage Well Known In Texas

2011-12-21T07:20:00.001-08:00

The news that the search committee had decided to recommend David Hardage as the next BGCT Executive Director may have come as a surprise to many people, but after thinking about it have undoubtedly come to the conclusion that this is an absolutely terrific recommendation. The reason? Because David is well known in much of Texas, has been known as an outstanding pastor, and exhibits the exact kind of humility it takes to be successful in his new role. People who worked in the Baptist Building duri8ng my years there knew David as a cooperating servant leader. Whatever we asked of him, he was willing to do.

As for my own association with him, I remember well being asked to supply for him at First Baptist Church in Sulphur Springs. I have done the same at hundreds of churches throughout Texas, but I have never been treated with more sensitivity and kindness any place else as I was in Sulphur Springs. From the moment I let them know I was in town, I was attended to by staff members in the absence of the pastor (which is why I was in town in te first place). They checked to see if my hotel room was adequate. They let me know what time I needed to be at the church. They gave me a complete rundown on the expectations of the day. When I finished preaching the deacons came and presented me with a "Thank you" gift (in addition to the honorarium). From the time I arrived to the time I left I have never been treated with more kindness and hospitality. In my mind a church that does this has been trained well by their pastor. That was my first introduction to David Hardage.

I sincerely believe the church was reflecting the personality of their pastor. I have always known David to be a sensitive, kind, cooperative individual. He possesses none of the overbearing bravado that many top executives seem to have. The best thing I could say about him is that he is Pinsonesque, that is he exhibits many of the same qualities that my former executive director, Bill Pinson, has. When David hears that I said that he will be absolutely humbled by the comparison. That's just the kind of guy he is.

Not everyone knows David Hardage, just as not everyone would know anyone who would be recommended for this gig. But, those who do know David will say what I have said—"Good choice".

It has already been noted that David is a product of Texas Baptists. That is he received his early training, his education and his experience as a Texas Baptist. Having grown up in a pastor's home, and having spent most of his career as a pastor, he understands what it means to be a pastor in this era. He will be able to empathize with pastors in churches of all sizes, because he has been pastor of churches of all sizes. He will be able to work with Associational Directors of Missions, because he has been one. He will understand our institutional work, because he has worked on the inside of one of our great institutions.

As for me and my house, we can't wait to see where God will take us under David's leadership. I have already started praying for him. Have you?

R.G. III Sells Tickets

2011-12-18T12:03:00.001-08:00

Most people, at least those who do not attend U.T. or Texas A&M, are very excited about Baylor University's Robert Griffin III winning this year's Heisman Trophy. I watched the ceremony and was absolutely blown away by the articulate, humble manner in which this young man accepted the well-deserved award. Perhaps none outside the Baylor family were as elated, though, as the officials of the Valero Alamo Bowl, which will be played in San Antonio December 29. The game between the University of Washington and Baylor University was a sort of ho hum affair in many San Antonian's minds until th awarding of the Heisman.

Ever since the announcement, ticket sales for the game have been brisk. They are actually talking about installing some temporary seating for the game, because they are expecting a sell-out. The game usually draws somewhere around fifty-five to fifty-eight thousand fans of football. This year they expect that number to exceed sixty-five thousand, which would be a sell-out at the Alamodome. Officials state that the reason is that the game will have its first Heisman winner playing in the year he won it. People want to see this remarkable young man play.

I have watched as Robert has made the rounds of early morning and late night television and to be quite honest he has been a model of humility. I am not sure he knew the fame this award was going to bring to him, but I guess he knows it now. He has graced the floor of most of the popular shows and he has purported himself well. He is a credit to his family and to the Baylor family. Not once has he even hinted that he was deserving of the award, as many who have received it have done.

Robert has give credit to his mom and dad, to his teammates, and to his coach, and has been gracious toward the university which gave him an opportunity. Having already graduated, and most of the way toward a graduate degree, he is eyeing law school. Certainly, this indicates he is not only a premier athlete, but an excellent student, as well.

So, congratulations to Robert Griffin III. Congratulations also to the folks at the Valero Alamo Bowl for their foresight inviting Baylor to play in their annual game. Here's hoping he sells out the game for you.

Happy About The New BGC T Exec

2011-12-15T07:23:00.001-08:00

The announcement that David Hardage will be nominated as the new Executive Director of the BGCT comes as happy news for me. I have known David for many years and have watched his growth in ministry. I must tell you that David is a man whose name I did not think about, but now that I have heard it I am absolutely certain he is a good man for the job. I doubt that he was on anyone's radar, which is a good thing. The committee did a great job in landing David for this job. He is well suited for it.

David has been around Texas Baptists all his life. While he was pastor of Sulphur Springs First Baptist Church he was a member of the now defunct State Missions Commission, and served with honor. The only negative about him is that he is so skinny, which comes from the fact that he is an avid runner.

For those who will think otherwise, I can tell you that David is not attached to any political group that I know of in the denomination. He is a BGCT guy, always has been. As the Executive Director of Waco Baptist Association, and a development officer at Truett Seminary, David got to know the folks at Baylor quite well, which should bode well for him in the future.

I hope the Executive Board will give him a resounding vote of acceptance and elect him unanimously.

Should Religion Matter

2011-12-14T07:16:00.001-08:00

I remember how it was back in 1960, when John F. Kennedy was running for president against Richard Nixon. That was the election Nixon lost because of voter fraud in Chicago, even though he refused to challenge it. But, that is not the point of this post. This post is about John F. Kennedy's religion. As you know, he was a Roman Catholic, and such as he had never been president of the United States. Only once before had a Catholic even run for president. In the 1960 election, Kennedy's religion was a big thing, particularly among evangelicals. The point of attack was that, as a Catholic, Kennedy owed allegiance to a foreign government (The Vatican) and the argument was that if it came to a choice between America and The Vatican Kennedy would be bound to take the side of The Vatican. Yes, I know. Absurd. But that was the gist of the anti-Kennedy bloc.

Southern Baptists, me included, predicted dire consequences for America if a Catholic were elected president. There were pamphlets printed, sermons preached, and much hand-wringing at the prospect of a Catholic president. To most of us, that seems a bit strange today, because Kennedy was elected and none of the stuff we predicted ever happened.

On the other side, the strongest argument was that a man should not be disqualified from the presidency on the day of his baptism. The question was, "Should a person be disqualified from the presidency simply because of his choice of church?" Most Baptists answered with a resounding, "Yes!" Other evangelicals felt the same. To those who said a man's religion should not make any difference, we answered, "A man whose religion does not make any difference is neither much of a man nor has much of a religion." It was ugly, as I recall.

It appears that we may be entering another time similar to the 1960 election. The question this time might be, "Should a man be disqualified from the presidency simply because he was born into a Mormon family and has chosen to follow that path?" Republican primary voters will have to ask that question of themselves, and it might well be that Americans will have to ask it in the general election.

I have heard some Southern Baptists say, "I could never vote for a Mormon." It will be interesting to see how that plays out if it is a Mormon against Obama. Some will have to hold their nose and pull the lever of their choice, whichever way they choose. Or, they could just not vote, an option which some will undoubtedly choose.

As I have gotten older I have moderated my views on this subject. I could now vote for a Catholic, if he was the right person for the job. I suppose I could also vote for a Mormon, if he was the right person for the job. I know that will upset a lot of my Southern Baptist brethren, but I have come to accept that this country is not just for people who believe the way I do. This country is for those who believe any way they wish, as long as they support the constitution of the USA.

I would certainly rather have a Catholic or a Mormon who believed in limited government than a Baptist with a liberation theology who believes that government is the answer to all our problems, or who believes that government should take from those who have and give to those who have not. Religious affiliation is the least of our worries. There are more important concerns, as we have all come to understand in the past three years.

The Real Deal

2011-12-11T06:19:00.001-08:00

We live in a skeptical world, a world that would just like to keep on giving and getting Christmas presents, but without recognizing the reason for the season. As I observe the passing events, it seems like every year the war on Christmas gets more and more intense. Maybe it is due to te fact that the atheists are getting more and more organized, so they watch for things to protest against or file lawsuits to correct. A national atheist organization headquartered in Wisconsin is making noises about a nativity scene on the lawn of a Texas courthouse. Same old tired mantra—("We must not allow religion to be promoted on government property.") Every year it is the same and every year courts have ruled against the atheists for whatever reason—that is in most cases.

However, even the skeptics have a hard time dealing with the reality of historical fact. The story of the birth of Jesus contains within it several miracles, unexplained to this day. If for no other reason, the birth of the Lord Jesus should be enough to convince people he is worthy to be followed. As predicted in prophecies of old, Jesus was born of a virgin mother. Science has been unable to explain how such a thing could happen, but it did. Oh, the scorn Mary must have suffered among her friends and kinsmen! Pregnant and not married. Even today that bears a stigma. Imagine what it must have been like in Mary's day. Even her intended husband was ready to put her aside—that is until he had a visit from an angel of the Lord (another miracle) telling him the circumstances of his betrothed's "unfortunate" situation.

In order to be unbelievers of this truly marvelous story, people have to think the Bible, which has endured longer than nearly any other printed material in history, and is revered by literally millions the world over, is nothing but lies, fiction and myths. But, that is what unbelievers think. They think this is all some sort of mythological nonsense, in spite of evidence to the contrary. Simply because they have felt nothing of the spiritual reality of Jesus, they suppose He is a myth. I don't know what it is like to have a heart attack because I have never had one. But I would be foolish to think they don't happen. I have never had cancer, but it would be foolish of me to believe cancer does not exist simply because I have never had it. I believe heart attacks and cancer exist because I have known others who have personally experienced these things. The same is true for those who do not accept Jesus as being Who He said He is. They don't believe it because they have not experienced it, and refuse to accept the fact that I have experienced it.

Atheists are intellectually dishonest people who refuse to accept as reality something spiritual they have not experienced, in spite of the fact that millions around the world have experienced it. They will not accept that Jesus is the Real Deal until they experience Him in their own lives, and they will never experience Him in their own lives because they cannot open up to the possibility He is the Real Deal. These poor people delude themselves with the notion that they cannot be wrong about Jesus. That is why we should pray for them.

Mean while, every year we will have to defend our placing of Nativity Scenes on public property. Every year it gets worse and every year the arguments grow weary. But, we will persevere, if we do not weaken.

Politics Grabs The Attention

2011-12-07T07:39:00.001-08:00

The attention of many Americans is already being grabbed at by those who are running for the various political offices of our state and nation. I have been getting robo-calls from politicians for about two months now and we don't vote until November of 2012, eleven months away. It seems every time we do this the political season gets longer and longer. The man in the White House has never stopped campaigning for a second term, from day one of his administration. Of course, as an American, that is his right and we all acknowledge that he is not the first to do such a thing..

There has been a struggle among those states who want to be the first to hold a primary election or a caucus, and the outcome of all the wrangling is that in order to remain first in line Iowa has had to move their election to early January. It appears they were willing to move it even earlier just to remain first in line. It matters not to anyone, it appears, that the winner of Iowa's caucus almost never wins the presidency. If they did we might have president Mike Huckabee today, because he won last time.

It is amusing to watch all the Republican candidates jockey for position, each trying desperately to win Iowa without giving a thought to the fact that doing so means absolutely nothing in the long run. All it does is give a short burst of momentum, which usually ends when someone else wins the next stop, New Hampshire. A new twist has been added this go round, in that all the candidates seem to be making a pilgrimage to Donald Trump's office, seeking his endorsement. Trump may be a wealthy man, and he may swing a few votes here and there, but to kiss the ring of this clown simply makes the candidates look foolish. All except Ron Paul and John Huntsman, that is. They have correctly refused to cow-tow to this oaf.

The Libertarian branch of the Republican party seems to be growing in influence. Ron Paul has never been anything but a libertarian, running on that ticket several times, without success, before he decided to run as a Republican and got elected. He is no more a real Republican that Mao Tse Tung. It is just more convenient to run as a Republican, because he could never get elected to anything running as a Libertarian. Yet, he has a growing influence on the Republican primary process. Go figure.

All the Re[publican candidates, except John Hunstman, have baggage that will probably keep them from winning against President Obama. Many Southern Baptists are going to have a difficult time deciding between two Mormons (Romney and Huntsman) and a Catholic (Gingrich). Gingrich used to be a Southern Baptist but became a Catholic so he could marry his third wife. See what I mean about baggage?

Now that Cain is out, we are left to decide who is the real conservative in the race. Santorum, Perry, Bachman, and Huntsman are all genuine conservatives, although all but Hunstman and possibly Santorum come with some heavy baggage. Paul is not a conservative in the true sense of the word. As I said, he is a Libertarian, and that brings some stuff most conservatives cannot live with.

It is really difficult to predict this year's races. The Tea Party has thrown in interesting monkey wrench into the machinery. They are a force to be reckoned with, regardless of what you think about their tenets. They will have an influence on the race, as will that clown, Grover Norquist, who has wrangled a no-new-tax pledge out of nearly all the Republican candidates. All of them except Hunstman have signed their name to that pledge, which means it is going to be really difficult for them to lead the country to balance its budget, if they are fortunate enough to get elected.

Yes, politics has gotten our attention, but making a decision is getting harder and harder.

Most People Like Cheerleaders

2011-12-04T06:20:00.001-08:00

My blog has been referred to by some as a "cheerleader for the BGCT." Guilty! I own up to it. I confess that I would much rather emphasize and cheer on the positive things about the BGCT than to harp on the things I have often criticized about it. I am not among those who feel the convention just cannot do anything right. Frankly, I have been able to maintain a few good contacts at the BGCT, and I think I have a pretty good grasp of the morale and the work going on there.

Since I was a teenager I have been attending conferences led by BGCT staff who were out there trying to help us. I started out by attending Palo Duro association Training Union Workshops led by T.C. Gardner and his staff from the BGCT. It was in those conferences that I learned to organize groups, plan programs and speak in public. My first public speaking was in a Baptist Training Union group as a fifteen year old. Little did I know in those days the path the Lord would have for me.

So, yes, I
am a cheerleader for the BGCT, and have been for a very long time. I am also a critic, but once having made the criticism I move on. I try not to ride it to death. I have never been part of any organization that did everything exactly how I thought it should be done, and I long ago learned that when one disagrees he should voice his disagreement, and then move on. No one owes homage to my criticism. They can listen or not. I confess I will still go on loving this convention. There are others who profess to love the convention who have a funny way of showing it. Some people can find nothing positive to say about the BGCT. I find that strange, in light of the many things the convention does to help churches. I have often heard people decry the fact that too much emphasis is placed on starting new churches and not enough on strengthening the existing ones.

When you think about it, all the various departments and programs of the BGCT are to assist the existing churches. Why else would there be a a Sunday school department or a church training department? All the consultants are there to assist existing churches. That comprises about 95% of the BGCT work. We should not overlook that. Most of the work done by the staff is to assist existing churches, and most of those churches are fairly small. There was a time when much of the staff came from the large churches to the BGCT. That is no longer the case. Much of the staff there now came from smaller churches.

I am a cheerleader because I believe in what the BGCT does. If that makes me a strange duck, then so be it. I will leave the hating and the snideness to others. I will let others choose to make statements that are outrageously mistaken, and never corrected when proven wrong.

By the way, having a third of the churches not giving in a twelve months period is not a new thing. As I recall, it has just about always been that way, and I suspect it is that way in just about every one of the older conventions of the Southern Baptist world. Yet, some want to make a sinister thing out that. When I retired from the BGCT in 1999 we had about 6,000 churches in the convention. That number has reduced about 500 now, but the BGCT is still a formidable force in Baptist life with her large number of "cooperating" churches. Frankly, I have always wished we would drop churches that did not give over a period of time, but we have no mechanism to do that. That was true when I was an Association al Director, also. In San Antonio, during my tenure as Executive Director, the only way we could drop churches is if they did not turn in an annual letter for three years in a row. In our association that would mean and automatic drop from the listing of churches. Each year we would spend inordinate hours calling a number of very small churches to tell them that if they did not send in a report that year they would automatically be dropped from the listing of Associational churches because that would be their third year of not reporting. I know of no such mechanism at the BGCT.

So, I accept the "cheerleader" role. It has been my experience that many people like cheerleaders somewhat more than they do constant critics. If you don't like the cheerleaders, you probably don't like the team they cheer for.

Stepping Up For The Team

2011-11-30T07:17:00.001-08:00

Any young person who played team sports at any point in their lives will attest to what it means to "take one for the team." Week after week we are treated to new up-to-date stories of just what it means to be pa5t of a team. Unfortunately, by the time we get to be adults we forget what that means and everything starts to become all about "me". Just this past week, though, we saw once again what a young man thinks about "team".

When Robert Griffin went down for the Baylor football team, hit in te head and suffering from "concussion-like" symptoms, it appeared Baylor would find it difficult to maintain their high level of play against Tech and go on to win the game. Up stepped Nick Florence, who came in and played for a half of the game, his first action of the year, and finished out the game, securing the victory for the Bears. It had been determined earlier that Florence would be red-shirted, assuring him of another year at Baylor, a year he probably would have become the starter.

However, playing that one half of the game has now robbed him of an entire year of eligibility. What a sacrifice! Nick Florence gave up a whole year of eligibility in order to assure victory in the game for his teammates. Folks, that is what being on a team means. Team means more than any kind of personal gain for one member of the team. Team means acting for the greater good of the whole as opposed to what is good for one individual. Griffin stated that after about five or six minutes he was ready to go back in and would have done so had he been needed to win the game. That would have been foolish, risking his own health and future.

No one would have blamed Coach Briles or Nick Florence if they had decided to keep the red shirt on the young man, but they did not do so. They gave up a year of eligibility to assure victory for the team.

There are so many applications we could make of this action. There are applications for church staff teams, for associational teams, and for convention staff teams. However, too often we forget that we are working on a team and instead act like it is all about "me". It has often been said that there is no "I" in team. There are far too many incidents these days when we forget that. Every time we forget that we end up regretting it.

We should all be grateful to Nick Florence for reminding us of what it means to be part of a team.

Convention Leveling Off

2011-11-27T11:50:00.001-08:00

Based on the reported financial figures, the BGCT seems to have reached a leveling off place. Albeit somewhat of a lower place than in previous years, it appears the slide has just about reached the end. The income for this year is just about at budget levels (actually 98 plus %), and the number of churches has stabilized, it appears the new Executive Director, whoever he is, will be able to start at the end of the decline and begin to rebuild. In my view, the number of churches can be rebuilt by helping to fund an aggressive church starting program.

Now, I know that scares a lot of people, because the aggressive church starting program we once had got us in a heap of trouble. However, it is still true that the best way to aggressively seek to fulfill the Great Commission is to start new churches wherever they are needed. This time, however, let them be real churches, in real locations, meeting real needs. Some dream that many of the churches who left the BGCT will return some day, but I think that is a pipe dream. Oh, a few might return, as a few already have, but there is not likely to be a large scale return to the BGCT fold. That means expansion will have to be by starting new churches.

I would like to see the new E.D. become a catalyst for an expanded program of church starting all over Texas. That will do ore to increase baptisms, and increase dollars to the BGCT than anything else we could do. I sincerely hope whoever this new guy is that he will have a vision for starting hundreds of new churches in Texas.

A second thing that I believe would help things in our state is to undo some of te organizational mistakes we made in previous administrations. In particular, I believe we need to show that we really do believe in evangelism by separating the evangelism work from that of the missions department. Both of these pursuits are worthy and both should stand alone. Missions and Evangelism are what define us as Texas Baptists, and I think we would be better served by having them stand side by side instead on inside one another. That is the way they were featured in the best days of our convention and they should be again. We may never again return to the days of the great evangelism conferences, but at least we could show that we mean it when we talk about evangelizing Texas by organizing ourselves to do it.

Finally, a third thing this new E.D. could look at would be a renewed effort to communicate the meaning of Cooperative Program. I recall when Bill Cathey would go all over this state telling people about the C.P. Who is doing that today? As far as I can tell, no one is. There is, as always, a great need for educating people to the virtues of cooperative giving. Unfortunately, we have grown up a generation of Baptists who do not know what that means at all.

The new E.D. has his work cut out for him, but at least he will start from a stabilized base.

Four Stars At Baylor

2011-11-23T07:00:00.001-08:00

In recent years I have often written critically of decisions made by Baylor University's Board of Regents. In doing so I have often stated that I am a big fan of Baylor in many ways. At the present tome Baylor is blessed to have many good attributes, but four stand out to me. I list them here in no particular order.

It is my considered opinion that Baylor President Kenneth Starr is a huge asset to Baylor. Yes, I hear the snickers out there, asking how long the regents will allow him to stay as president, since they have famously fired other good men with whom they got impatient. I have said it before and I will say it again, Ken Starr is a man of high ethical standards, maybe even too high for a couple of those regents. If allowed to stay in place I think Starr will lead Baylor to the heights of academic achievement they have long desired. I also think he will balk at any attempt for Baylor to surreptitiously change their current agreement with the BGCT without negotiating with convention leaders. We all know Baylor's record on that score. However, I do not believe Ken Starr would allow such to happen again. He is a true man of integrity. Baylor is lucky to have him.

Currently, Baylo0r is also blessed to have another on campus that emulates the best of what we expect from young men. I speak of Robert Griffin III, the current quarterback of the Baylor football team. To ay that RGIII is the best ever at B.U. would be a gross understatement. No one has ever played the position as well at Baylor and few have played it as well anywhere. Not only is he a gifted athlete with a future in professional realms, but he appears to be an upstanding young man. Raised in a military home, respectful of others, and disciplined in his life, Robert stands to be highly thought of in this year's Heisman Trophy discussion. In fact one ESPN analyst lists him as number 1 on his list. While early favoritism was placed in Andrew Luck of Stanford, it now appears Robert Griffin will be seen as the nation's best quarterback and perhaps even its best football player. Good for Robert, and good for Baylor in recruiting him.

Another star in Baylor's heaven is its women's basketball team, currently ranked number one in the country, almost unanimously. There are a lot of things I really like about this team, not the least of which is its coach, Kim Mulkey. I love her outspoken demeanor. She has no unspoken thoughts, apparently, and that is something I cherish. She has molded a group of young ladies into a virtual machine of efficiency on the basketball court. While they do have one outstanding superstar in Brittany Griner, the team has four other starters who give Griner the opportunity to be great. She might end up the greatest women's player of all time. In any event, many of us thought they would win the national title last year, but most of us feel they will win it this year, barring any unforeseen tragedy. They are truly another star in Baylor's crown.

Finally, star number 4 is perhaps the most underrated of all. I am referring to Head Football Coach, Art Briles. From the day Coach Briles set foot on the Baylor campus the program has been moving upward. I have watched this man's career for many years, in High school, in college at Houston, and now at Baylor. Briles is not just a good coach, he is a good man, someone any parent would love to have their son playing for. His offense mind for the game is genius. His values are admirable and he makes Baylor a place young men want to come and play.

All Texas Baptists should be pleased with these four stars at Baylor. Now, I know there are other things about Baylor that many of you would have liked for me to mention and I acknowledge that my list may not be your list. But, this is my blog, so I list what I want to list. Good for you, Baylor.

Penn State A Lesson For Churches

2011-11-20T06:06:00.001-08:00

Although laws are different in Pennsylvania and most other states, the lessons from the Penn State debacle are clear. If you know something inappropriate toward children (or senior adults), you better report it. Abuse of children and abuse of senior adults is something that is too often done and not often enough reported.

The situation at Penn State is severely damaging a great university, and has decidedly ruined the long time reputation of some otherwise good people. It appears those who were guilty of terrible deeds will be rightly punished, and those who knew about it and did little or nothing are being punished, also.

Churches should take a lesson from all this. In Texas, at least, laws demand that anyone who knows of any abuse toward a child or an elderly person and does not report it is breaking the law. If you witness something, or if you are told something, it is the same. You must report it. Any knowledge of any kind of abuse is reportable and those who have knowledge and do not report it are subject to penalty.

Many churches already take steps to prevent such things from happening inside their walls by doing background checks on any who work with children. These background checks are designed to keep churches from knowingly placing the care of children in the hands of a potential perpetrator, such as a registered sex offender. While background checks are not free, they have proven to be a worthy investment.

Before doing a criminal background check on any individual, you need to get their permission on a signed form for this purpose. For information on doing this in churches of any size, contact your denominational leadership. There are several firms who do this for churches at a nominal fee, and it should be done before allowing any person to begin working with children, even on a part time basis.

It would be unwise for a church of any size to ignore these suggestions. The ramifications are enormous. Just ask Penn State.

The Basketbawl Saga

2011-11-16T07:34:00.001-08:00

It's hard to know who to blame for the current impasse between the NBA players and the owners of the 32 teams. On the one hand, fans seem to be somewhat chagrined at the players who earn an average of 5.1 million dollars a year for playing a game. (By the way, that average is higher than the NFL and major league baseball players combined. Baseball players play 162 games a year plus exhibition season, NFL players play sixteen games per year plus playoffs and exhibition season should they make the playoffs. NBA players play 82 games a year plus playoff and exhibition games, if they make the playoffs.) So, it is hard to work up a lot of sympathy for the players.

On the other hand the team owners are, for the most part, rich men who invested in a sports team as a place to put some of their millions, hoping to make a decent return on their investment. Our local team, the Spurs, rarely have made money in a given year, in spite of the fact they have won four league championships. The Collective Bargaining Agreement that just ended had the players receiving 57% of the basketball revenue. Even Charles Barkley, the Hall of Fame player who now comments on TNT game nights, said the players "took it to the owners in that agreement."

Now, in seeking a new agreement, the owners have sought a more equitable split, the latest offer being 50-50. The players believe they deserve more than half the revenue and turned down the offer. Of course, there are a few other issues, also, but all issues come down to money, in the final analysis.

It appears now that the 2011-12 season will be cancelled and thousands of people who rely on earnings from the teams, such as concession workers, ticket takers, ushers, etc., are just out of luck. Both the rich owners and the rich players have thrown all these people under the bus, just so they can have a bigger piece of the pie.

Nothing in our modern culture screams greed more than this fight between the rich owners and the rich players. What they are doing to their long term livelihood is inestimable damage. They are alienating the fountain of all their revenue, the fans. They will lose many who will never come back. It is a sorry state of affairs. My prediction is that unless the courts intervene, as they probably will, the players are going to lose more than the owners. Players deserve to be paid for their work. Owners deserve to be able to make a profit. The essential question is ,"How much?" How much do players deserve to be paid and how much do owners deserve to make on their investment?

It appears we will not have an answer to the question any time soon.

Another Theological Crisis In The SBC

2011-11-13T07:01:00.001-08:00

If it seems the Southern Baptist Convention simply moves from one theological crisis to another, perhaps it is because it does. Now, there is a new crisis, arising over disagreement about the meaning of Matthew 27. Here is what Christianity Today had to say: "A fiery debate has erupted over a leading Southern Baptist apologist's questioning of Matthew 27. The question: whether Matthew's reference to many saints rising from their graves after Jesus' resurrection might not be literal history. The theological war of words, spurred by high-profile open letters and retorts on the Internet, has raised questions about the meaning of biblical inerrancy. It has also led to the departure of Michael Licona as apologetics coordinator for the North American Mission Board (NAMB).

You can read the whole article here.

Once again, however, theology comes to the front in the convention, which was virtually decimated by past theological crises. This is what always happens when the focus is theology. There will always be disagreements over minutia. And in my opinion, anything is minutia that has nothing to do with whether one is saved or lost. Making this minutia a test of fellowship will destroy relationships in churches, associations and conventions. It even destroys lifelong friendships and partnerships.

Whenever what we believe becomes more important than what we are trying to accomplish for Christ's sake, we can expect fellowship to be fractured. That was shown to be imminently true when what we believed about the Bible became more important that doing what the Bible says. That is exactly what happened with the inerrancy issue. Because of that issue a more than 100 year partnership between the SBC and the BGCT was completely and utterly destroyed. When people on one side of the issue decided that all must think alike in order to keep working together, which is the very essence of Fundamentalism and legalism, then thinking alike became more important than working together. That was the essence of the fracture, although there were other issues, as well, such as local autonomy.

In any event, it remains to be seen where this latest flap will go. It has already cost one good man his job, and resulted in his disinvitation to several speaking engagements, including one here in Texas. Here we go again. If we disagree with you, you have no right to speak. If we disagree with you, we immediately question your salvation. Surely that must be the case, because we would never disinvite someone we considered a Christian brother. Would we?

Once Again Your Prayers Are Needed

2011-11-11T10:05:00.001-08:00

A couple of years ago I asked for your prayers for my pastor, Don Guthrie, as he faced terminal cancer. You responded marvelously and today he is cancer free. I have just learned that my great friend and former boss, James Semple, has been diagnosed with stage four esophageal cancer, which has already metastasized. Dr. Semple is the last Director of The State Missions Commission of the BGCT. I had the privilege of serving as his associate director for more than ten years. I am calling on all of you to pray for Dr. Semple every time you think about it. I know the efficacy of your prayers and I covet them for my friend. Thank you.

The Non-Religious We have With Us Always

2011-11-09T07:03:00.001-08:00

These days hardly a day goes by without another story of someone suing for the removal of religious symbols from public memorials and other public grounds. We even had one administrator of a national cemetery telling people they could not use the expressions "God bless you" at her cemetery, because it violated church and state separation edicts. At graduation times suits against prayer are becoming routine. There has been a flap in or local newspaper about the paper putting a column by atheist Pen Jellette on the religion and spirituality page, a column in which the famed comedian/magician shared his own "ten commandments". The letters to the editor have excoriated the paper for putting that on the religion page.

What has come out in all of these things is the anger and the fight-back nature of many religious people. It is as though we are surprised that non-religious people have strong feelings against religion in general. It seems to me that we Christians need to understand more than anyone that people who have never had a spiritual experience of rebirth will never be able to understand what we are talking about when we speak of a personal experience with Christ. Jesus himself alluded to the fact that not everyone will understand him.

People devoid of a spiritual experience view religion as some kind of mystical, magical thing, that people of religion are leaning on some kind of unseen, ethereal force of the universe that to them seems kind of fruity. By now we should understand that its always going to be that way with folk who have never experienced the new birth. To these people being born again means starting anew from an experience of divorce or some other human experience. They do not understand it when you speak to the of being born again by the Spirit of Christ. They cannot understand what they have never experienced. So they mock religion and the people who practice it. They do so because they do not know any better.

Now, the thing we need to understand is that when we become combative about these matters, as we are wont to do, we are simply playing into their hands, because we are acting the same way they do when we disagree. Why should the world respect our religion if they do not see that it changes us in any way? If we act the same way they do, what has our religion done for us?

We have to find a way to deal with these people who mock us without becoming like them in our response to them.

Yes, Lord

2011-11-06T06:08:00.001-08:00

Several years ago the church of which I am a member, FBC in San Antonio, did a self study of all her community ministry efforts, seeking ways to both improve our ministry to the community and involve more of our members in ministry. One of the big changes was in what we called our programs. We changed the name from Community Ministries to Yes, Lord Ministries. The obvious effort was to get more of our people to say "Yes, Lord, I will do that…." This church has always had a sophisticated effort at ministry, for years overseen by a staff person. The church was aided in funding by several denominational entities from year to year, and the creativity demonstrated by the church was legendary. However, there was a sort of "Let George do it" mentality, as many people thought that having full time staff people was enough.

Following the self study, ministries were revamped, leadership was enlisted and trained, and a huge effort to get more people involved was undertaken. We still have staff oversight, but not nearly the hands on involvement by staff that we once had. This past week a report to our church revealed the following. "It is significant that volunteers for FBC Yes Lord and International outreach ministries numbered over 550 thus far in 2011. In a time where volunteerism in the US is on the decline, the number of people working in FBC ministries demonstrates that service is still part of our trust in Jesus and our desire to share the Lord's abundance with others."

One of the real blessings God has given us is the influx of more than 400 Burmese refugees. Many of our church members have adopted a Burmese family and sees after their needs. It is impossible to state what a blessing it has been to our church to have these brothers and sisters in our midst. Most of them fled the oppression of their native land and have been living, some for more than ten years, in a refugee camp in Thailand. It is also a tribute to the Foreign Mission program of the Southern Baptist Convention that most of these people were Baptist before they ever came to Texas. They were brought to our state by Catholic Charities, but when they got off the plane they asked, "Where is the Baptist church?" Catholic Charities called to see if our church would be interested in helping and that started it all, insofar as the Burmese were concerned. Most of us were surprised to learn that there are more Baptists in Burma than in any other country except the USA. Chalk that up to the work of Adoniram Judson, who left home to go to Burma and worked for five years before he had one convert.

To some of us the plan of God became clear. What started with Judson was now being played out in Texas. For years our church has had a ministry to Laotian, Vietnamese and Thai refugees. It seems like God was just getting us ready for what was to come. We have had a full time minister to these Asian folks for a number of years, but it seems that was just to prepare us for this influx of Burmese. God even worked out the language issues. Most of the Asian people have a common language, Thai, and our international minister speaks that language quite well. So, when the Burmese got here, we were prepared to minister to them where other churches would not have been. So, the International Ministry at our church has taken off. We now have three international worship services each Sunday morning, as well as our regular worship.

But, the International ministry is not the only ministry where volunteers are working. Our church partners with an elementary school in our neighborhood, filled with needy kids. We partner with the Food Bank and provide workers to help sort and package food. We provide volunteers to help feed the homeless in our city's marvelous Haven For Hope homeless center. Thousands of meals are served each month, all by volunteers. 550 people involved in ministry is a start. Our church only runs about 1200 in Sunday school, so you can see that ministry for our members is pervasive.

All of this is just to say that people are willing to help if they are presented opportunity. Many are more than willing to say, "Yes, Lord. I will…."

Re-think Convention Schedule

2011-11-02T06:53:00.001-07:00

In 2013 the BGCT will move its annual meeting to July in San Antonio in an effort to increase attendance of families. This was a change approved by the handful of Texas Baptists who met in McAllen last year. The effort is designed to make it possible for more pastors to attend on the travel expenses of their churches and bring families to San Antonio for a vacation in conjunction with the convention ala the SBC meetings in Orlando. This ranks way up there in the dumbest ideas we have ever perpetrated on Texas Baptists.

While I love San Antonio (that's why I live here), to expect more people to bring their family to attend in July heat and expensive hotels is just idiotic. Maybe there will be some negotiation on the downtown hotel costs around and near the convention center, but it will still be an expensive outing for families. San Antonio is now one of the nation's premier convention/conference destinations. Facilities here are so sought after that they can charge more for their use than most other Texas cities. While San Antonio boasts one of the more energetic and effective convention and visitors bureaus, their success simply means it is more expensive to meet here. That would be O.K. if it were not for trying to bring families. Family vacations in downtown San Antonio are expensive. Now, meeting out and around other parts of the city make it better for families, but more difficult for convention attendance. What I am saying is that a family vacation in San Antonio is a good thing and a convention in San Antonio once every few years is a good thing, but trying to combine the two is a bad idea.

Another reason it is a bad idea is that it forces pastors to have to choose between going to a convention and going to camp with their kids. They already have to make that choice for the SBC and it is a sad choice to have to make. Not only that, but did anyone think to ask our camp managers about having a July convention? So we have a family vacation during BGCT week in San Antonio. How many of those kids would have gone to a children's camp if they had not gone to San Antonio for the BGCT annual meeting? Camps already have been squeezed down from thirteen weeks to ten weeks because of school schedules. Now the BGCT wants to squeeze another week of camp out of the schedule so families can go to the BGCT meeting. I spoke to one pastor in Amarillo who said he cherishes going to children's camps in July and would have to make a choice he would rather not make.

Also, trying to make a conference program around a convention setting is a bad idea. The convention meets to take care of business and to hear about how it is doing in reports from the various sections of work. The idea of cutting down on that in order to have a conference is ludicrous. There are other settings to have conferences in and we should do it. The conference sessions at this year's convention were terrific. The speakers were great, the break-out sessions were great, and the subject matter (missions and evangelism) was great. The only problem was the attendance was lousy. If we had taken that program and promoted the dickens out of it as a stand-alone conference, without convention business sessions, it might have attracted thousands.

So, I say let Scott Willingham and Wayne Shuffield plan their missions and evangelism conferences and let others plan convention sessions, and let the two stand separately. This effort to combine the two did not work and will not work. Both kinds of meetings are necessary. We need missions and evangelism conferences to rally around and we need convention sessions to hear about how we are doing as a result of our rallying. That is what conventions are for—to do business and to hear reports. We need both conferences and conventions, but for goodness sakes, let's quit trying to combine them.

BGCT Meeting was Sort Of Ho Hum

2011-10-30T13:10:00.001-07:00

Looking back a few days beyond the convention sessions, I am left with some impressions that were good and some that were not so good. Obviously, I was less than impressed with the attendance, especially from the people of West Texas. I was surprised to see so few in Amarillo. However, the lack of controversy, such as we had the last time we met in Amarillo, when the convention took its first steps toward getting rid of Texas Baptists Committed by nearly electing a president they did not endorse (falling short by 68 votes) had a lot to do with the sparse attendance.

This year it became more clear that the BGCT is ready to say "sayonara" to TBC, Michael Bell and Steve Wells. The convention soundly beat back attempts by Bell and Wells to derail the constitutional amendment allowing the affiliated universities to elect 49% of their trustees. Bell retreated from his opposition when it became clear the messengers were going to soundly defeat him, thanks to presidents Lanny Hall and Gary Cook. The messengers did agree with Bell and Wells in voting down one constitutional amendment that would have granted voting rights to ethnic fellowship presidents, regardless of their convention affiliations. This may not have been the first time the convention voted down a constitutional amendment on its second reading, but it is the first time in a long time. In fact I do not remember the last time that happened. However, even though Wells and Bell were opposed to it, I believe it would have failed anyway because messengers recognized that it was not a good amendment as it stood. It will come back again with some revisions.

The Program Planning Committee tried to attract more younger messengers by turning the convention into a conference. It did not work. Modeled after the popular Catalyst Conferences, the program was good, just not well attended. Once again I remind these planners that what we have here is a convention, not a conference and these efforts at attracting hordes of young pastors are futile. By nature this is a business meeting and these dumb attempts at reducing the business and increasing the inspiration are an exercise in futility.

The problem with attendance at the BGCT meetings has little to do with the program and everything to do with how much people care about what the BGCT is about. Lies and innuendos from those who left the convention, needing to give a excuse for doing so, have really hurt the meetings of the BGCT. In addition, the BGCT has done away with so many things that used to attract us and bind us together that we no longer have reason to care.

The number one job of a new Executive Director will be to make the lay people in the churches and their leaders care once again what the BGCT is about. The convention is about reaching Texas for Christ. We are not about fighting the SBC, or railing against churches who choose to do things differently. We are about enabling churches who are cooperating with one another to do what needs to be done to make Jesus the viable choice for all the people of Texas.

That's why I think somebody like Ed Stetzer could really lead this convention into the new century with a flourish. (See my previous post)

This convention will be viable once again when those who love it start supporting it unreservedly and those who profess to love it quit harping on its past mistakes. It is easy to criticize. It is more difficult to be intellectually honest. The leader who led the convention to virtual ruin is gone. Those who would continue that work through the efforts of the TBC are without power. I know there are those in the blogging world who hate to hear this, but it is time to move on. It is time to put aside personal hurt and recognize that there is something to be said for mobilizing the nearly 6,000 churches of the BGCT for one purpose and one purpose only—reaching this state for the Lord Jesus.

Why Not Stetzer?

2011-10-28T15:15:00.001-07:00

As I sat listening to Ed Stetzer at the BGCT meeting in Amarillo I was wondering if I was the only person there who thought this man should be considered as Executive Director for the convention. He is a great communicator and has the ear and confidence of old and young alike. He would automatically bring to his side the young pastors the convention seems to want to reach and has the credibility to appeal to older Baptists in Texas as well.

Ed Stetzer meets people well, is a life-long Baptist, and seems able to put political agendas aside. Yes, his selection would be risky, because he now works for the SBC. However, for that very reason he would be a bridge to the national convention and likely be able to help mend the broken strands that once existed between Texas and the SBC. I believe he has a healthy respect for who the BGCT is and is smart enough to know that we all need each other.

His messages to the convention in Amarillo were right on target, challenging us to what I call old time evangelism. Even considering him would be a step forward for the BGCT, but calling him would be a coup. He is a highly respected researcher and interpreter of data. He understands today's world as well as anyone. His writings have rung bells across the land. I believe he would be a virtual pied piper to the young up and coming leaders in our convention and he would challenge us to start thinking outside the box.

It likely will not happen. Maybe no one else even feels it would be a good thing. But, it may just be that he would be the smartest choice we could make. His selection would tell the world that we are ready to put the politics of the past two decades behind us and once again become the outreaching force for Christ that we once were.

Maybe I was the only one thinking that he would be a great choice, but someone needs to say it. What about it Search Committee? Do you have the guts to even consider this man?

No Blogging This Week

2011-10-21T12:28:00.001-07:00

Due to my attendance at the BGCT convention in Amarillo and a trustee meeting at Wayland in Plainview this coming week, I will not be blogging. My next blog will be up on Sunday, October 30.

The Unsung Heroes

2011-10-19T06:51:00.001-07:00

"….there is the daily pressure on me of concern for all the churches." ( 2 Corinthians 11:28

Having once been a Director of Missions for a metro Association, I understand the pressure of concern for the churches. Since leaving associational work and moving into another phase of denominational service, I also understand how undervalued these men are who serve our churches as Associational Director of Missions. DOMs have never received the attention they should receive for what they do, especially in these days when their churches are lined up with different conventions.

When te new convention came into being, the job of a DOM already difficult at its best, became almost impossible. They have to ride the political fence in trying to serve the needs of churches aligned in different conventions. And we all k now how uncomfortable it is to be on the fence. Several of our DOMs in Texas count on assistance from the BGCT, who supplements their budgets, for their very existence. Yet, they have to treat churches ion different conventions the same. It is not an easy task.

Even those associations who do not depend on supplements from the BGCT find themselves walking a tightrope in their church relationships. DOMs will often be criticized for not doing enough, and when they do enough they are criticized for interfering. They try to be the pastor's friend, but find themselves having to be honest with churches who consult them about pastoral issues. They avoid trying to influence churches on who they should call as pastor, but get criticized when they give an honest evaluation of a prospective pastor, when asked by a church.

If Kermit the Frog thinks it's not easy being green, he should try being a DOM in a Texas Association.

I can tell you from my own experience that even DOMS get called out in the middle of the night to help a church with problems. I remember once being called by a deacon chairman who told me their pastor was driving to a nearby town to find his wife and he was afraid the pastor was going to shoot her. Really. It seems they were having some marital problems and the pastor was hallucinating that his wife, who worked nights in another town, was having an affair and he was heading to where she worked to "take care of the situation."

Situations like that make a DOM ask, "Is this what I signed up for?" And the answer comes, "Yes. And much more."

So, pastor friend, let me suggest you take a minute to go buy your DOM a cup of coffee and just tell him how much you appreciate him. It will make a world of difference.

The Stewardship of Words

2011-10-16T06:30:00.001-07:00

These are the days that many churches are having their stewardship campaigns, encouraging people to support the budgets of their respective churches for the coming year. Through the years, churches have gotten very creative in mounting these campaigns.

Through it all, I wonder if we ever give any consideration to the stewardship of words. I know stewardship of money, stewardship of life and all that is usually what takes front and center, but I wonder if we shouldn't give more consideration to the stewardship of words. If you buy into the definition of stewardship that says, "With whatever we have been blessed, we have a responsibility to share", then we should consider the blessing of language.

There are so many ways that we can talk about this. For instance, God has said, "I forgive you." Since we have been blessed with forgiveness, we should be aware of our stewardship of forgiveness and be willing to say to those who have offended or hurt us, "I forgive you." How good is our stewardship of forgiveness?

Another area of stewardship should be in the arena of comfort. God has said, "I will never leave you or forsake you." Doesn't that mean we have a stewardship of comfort or consolation that we are obligated to share with those who are afflicted? Isn't that what Paul was telling us in 2 Corinthians 1:7:, where he said, "….knowing that as you are sharers of our sufferings, so you are sharers of our comfort." Do not sharers of comfort heap encouragement and consolation on those who are hurting?

There are yet other words of which we are stewards. Receivers of grace owe grace to others. Receivers of joy owe joy to others. All these words, forgiveness, comfort, grace, joy—these are words in our language that our Lord expects us to be stewards of in our relationships to others.

So, it isn't only the stewardship of our financial resources about which h God o9is concerned. He is also concerned about the stewardship of all those graces he has bestowed upon us. That includes words in our language that we often do not think of as words about which we owe a stewardship.

Convention Draws Near

2011-10-12T07:49:00.001-07:00

Time is drawing near for the meeting of the BGCT at Amarillo's Civic Center. While I have in the past railed against having these meetings in such extreme locations (this is two years in a row), I am looking forward to going "home" to the Panhandle for a couple of days. Amarillo is one of my favorite places in Texas, I supposes because it was the place that we went to for good times when I was a high school student at Pampa. I know, I know, there are a lot of better "good times" places in Texas, but when you are growing up in a place like Pampa, even a trip to Amarillo seemed like a treat. At least, that is what I remember.

The format of this year's convention is going to be a bit different, due to the vote at last year's meeting in McAllen. There is a good line-up of speakers, as can be seen on the BBCT web site. I believe the meeting planners have done a good job putting this meeting together, and it appears they were trying to think of some new and better ways to have such a meeting. I suppose time will tell whether or not they truly succeeded. But, at least they are making an effort.

There likely will not be an announcement about a new Executive Director. Since the E.D. is only voted on by the Executive Board, the convention will not be voting on someone. As you know, I am one of those who did not feel it was imperative for the committee to be ready with an announcement at this year's meeting. I was much more interested in seeing them get it right than in seeing them meet a timetable. I still feel that way, so I am not disappointed that there will be no announcement at Amarillo.

As a member of the Resolutions Committee, I will encourage the committee to avoid any controversial resolutions, and stick with issues that will engender universal support. There are a number of things that fit that description and I do feel it is important for the convention to speak on some issues of importance, such as they did last year with the Title Loan issue. Of course, there does not need to be any resolution about national politics, even though we meet during the heat of the national election.

Finally, I strongly encourage those who are interested in seeing the BGCT do well to make an effort at attending the convention sessions. Of course, those who do not wish her well will certainly discourage anyone from attending. It still makes sense to me to make an effort to effect change from within, rather than stand on the outside and take pot shots. Most of us criticize church members who do that kind of thing in a local church, and we should think no less of those who do the same thing at the convention level.

If you see me in the halls of the convention, stop me and say, "Hi".

The Best Advice I Ever Heard

2011-10-09T05:33:00.001-07:00

Sometimes you hear something that convicts you to your very core. As a blogger, I am sometimes given to writing things that I am not quite sure of and it usually gets me in trouble. The other day I received an e-mail from a friend who has Arkansas roots. He said, "Here is some advice from my Arkansas hillbilly relative." The advice was this: "If you didn't hear it with your own ears or see it with your own eyes, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth.

I thought that was a piece of wisdom that needed to be shared. The reason I thought it needed to be shared was because in the blogging world, we bloggers sometimes are guilty of inventing things just because what we invented supports how we personally feel about an issue. Inventing something in writing is the blogging world's definition of lying. When we write about something we think, but have no real evidence of, or blog about something that supports a version of events that we have no real evidence of, is that not the same thing as telling an outright lie?

It is amazing to me that people who would never think about telling a lie would write one without so much as a wink. Here's how that works. We hear about a situation from someone who is supposed to be in the know and we immediately accept it as fact and start writing about it without any evidence of its veracity. How is that different from lying? We are so quick to accept things we hear about if they fit into our preconceived notions. And, when it turns out that what we heard was not exactly what we wrote, we never acknowledge that we were wrong. Never an apology for wrongly accusing someone. Never a retraction. This kind of activity in the blogging world is unconscionable. Not only is it an affront to our readers, it is a sin against our Holy, Heavenly Father.

I appreciate it when I have written something that is less than accurate and someone calls me on it. When that happens I immediately delete what I had written and replace it with more accurate information. To me that is what a person seeking to be guided by the Holy Spirit does.

As a blogger, then, I aim to follow this good and wise advice: "If you didn't hear it with your own ears or see it with your own eyes, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth."

We Must Admit It-The BGCT Is Not What It Once Was

2011-10-05T07:16:00.001-07:00

I recently came into possession of the annual report that will be given out at the Annual Associational Meetings this year and I have to admit a bit of dismay at what I have read, mixed with some gratitude. I know it is not fashionable to talk about what used to be, as compared to what is, but it is desirable, I think, to admit that we have fallen quite a bit from the pre-Wade years. In most categories that we can compare, we are doing somewhat less than what we did in the Pinson-led years at the BGCT. Of course that was before we had two full-fledged conventions in Texas, also.

In 2010 we started 302 new churches in Texas, at least churches the BGCT had a hand in. That is a really good figure and stands as the best of any convention in the SBC. During the decade of 1985-1995 we got to the point where we averaging a new church start every day, although the definition of what a church was is somewhat more realistic today than it was then. All in all 302 new church starts is a very good figure.

In 2010 we baptized 36,093 souls in the BGCT churches. The decade of 1985 to 1995 saw every year with more than 50,000 baptisms and several times more than 60,000, almost 70,000. In my opinion, the steady decline in baptisms has been the result of two things, a diminished emphasis on evangelism at the BGCT, and the loss of some good churches to the other convention. It should be said, though that removing evangelism from a free standing division of work and sticking it into a cubby hole in the missions area bears some blame for the loss of baptisms. You will never convince me that this organizational decision has had nothing to do with the cutting of baptisms almost in half. When evangelism was a priority, and was promoted by the annual evangelism conference and was often the subject of high intensity efforts led by BGCT staff to encourage churches, the count was higher annually than it is now. For a people that claims to believe in "make disciples" as a creed, we suck at the job, compared to what we once did.

There are some good signs, though:

The BGCT endorsed 662 prison, military and hospital chaplains. That is something the BGCT did not do in my day. That is a new area of work that is doing well.
Through the BGCT, the churches that gave to the convention provided $3,000,000 in scholarships to ministry students in colleges and the two seminaries (Truett and Logsdon)
Baptist hospitals cared for 212,500 patients who would have had to seek help elsewhere had those hospitals not existed.
Provided a Christian-based educational environment for 26,449 students in eleven BGCT-related institutions of higher learning.
Cared for 1751 residents in facilities for the aging.
Sheltered and fed 11,620 people in the four child and family care systems.
Saw the Cowboy church movement grow at an astounding rate, a movement indigenous to the BGCT, but now spilling over into many other areas.
Provided over $600,000 for disaster relief from cooperative program funds, in partnership with Texas Baptist Men.
Saw 1791 people come to Christ through the Restorative Justice work of the BGCT.
Treated 3,230,204 outpatient at our hospitals and provided $39,202,007 worth of charity hospitalizations.

This is certainly not all the BGCT accomplished in 2010, but it gives some of the highlights of the work done. Add to that the consulting services offered through the convention in Sunday school, church training, architectural services and many other areas and it shows us that support of the convention is still a good use of mission money. Most of these statistics would place the BGCT at or near the top of all state conventions in the SBC. Of course, that is nothing unusual. And by the way, the BGCT is still one of the top conventions in giving to the Southern Baptist Convention.

All in all, while we could still do better, we should be grateful for this use of our mission dollars. It is accomplishing something good in our state. While the BGCT may not be what it once was in the work of evangelism and starting new churches, it is still giving us something to be grateful for in that every soul that has come to Jesus in a BGCT-related church is to be praised. Every new church that has come into existence is something to be thankful for.

DID ANYONE ASK BAYLOR THE BIG QUESTION

2011-10-02T11:54:00.001-07:00

Given their propensity for violating their agreements with the BGCT, I was wondering if anyone asked Baylor the big question at last week's Executive Board meeting. The board of the BGCT has now agreed to at least the third agreement with Baylor regents. The reason this is the third agreement is that Baylor abrogated the first two, without any discussion with BGCT leadership. Now that a third agreement has been inked, the big question remains unasked.

The unasked question is this: "Does Baylor have any intention of living up to this agreement, or can we expect it to be broken, also?"

After all is said and done, Baylor's breaking of the last agreement with the BGCT has cost them only $900,000 a year in BGCT funding. They will continue to receive more than a million dollars of BGCT funds, funds given by the churches of the convention. Amazingly, even that small reduction was argued by some to be unnecessary and attempts made to restore it to the budget were beaten back. These Baylor alumni are persistent. They continue to feel the BGCT was the one that has persistently wronged their beloved alma mater, instead of the other way around.

Maybe I am wrong about this, but it seems to me that of you make an agreement you stand by it until you can negotiate whatever changes in it that you desire. Baylor has not done that in either of the prior agreements with the BGCT. I tend to think President Ken Starr will be different. I believe he is the kind of man who will ask his university to stand by their agreement or come to the BGCT and negotiate changes in it, as needed. Of course the current agreement pretty well gives Baylor everything they wanted, anyway. That is until they think of something else they want.

Having said all that, I want it known that I think Baylor makes a great contribution to the Baptist family around the world, not just in Texas. Baylor is a world institution, not just a Texas Baptist institution. But, world class universities should stand by their agreements.

Of Theories And Laws

2011-09-28T07:20:00.001-07:00

A lot of the controversies that are taking place in our culture are controversies over theories that some believe to be true and others simply do not. For instance, take the theory of evolution. Some well-intentioned people accept at face value Charles Darwin's postulation that all life stated as a primordial ooze that evolved over millions of eons into what we now call man. Darwin actually theorized that one of man's ancient ancestors was an ape. There was a very famous trial years ago about that very idea.

There are many intelligent scientists that accept as fact, without any more evidence than has been found to date, what Darwin theorized. Schools teach Darwinism as though it is fact. The truth is, though, until we find actual proof of man's common ancestor with the apes, Darwinism will remain a theory, even though it is viewed as fact by many very smart folks. Countering that theory is what many quite religious people call intelligent design. That is the belief that all creation was the design of an intelligent being, called God by most. Many of us believe God created the universe and all its inhabitants, according to his own universal design.

Many believe that God may very well have employed, and is employing, the tool of evolution, that the universe is still evolving, and that there is proof of such. Humans are becoming taller, heavier, and some believe more intelligent all the time. The process of aging is in fact a process of evolution. Those who believe in some kind of evolution will never accept the fact that it includes the idea of man evolving from a monkey. While there may be room in creation for a kind of evolution process, it does not include man evolving from apes. And the controversy goes on.

The same thing is true about the theory of climate change. No rational person can observe the cosmos without believing that there is such a thing as climate change. The argument is whether that change is simply the earth going through a series of cycles or man causing the changes by his abuse of the environment. There is a theory about that says man is causing the changes in the climate. Al Gore has made a religion out of that belief. However, it is still just a theory, and as yet has had no proof offered that changes in the earth are anything more than cyclical. However, Gore's theories have garnered a lot of buy-in from men of science the world over. In recent years, though, many scientists have deserted that religion and come back to the idea that all of that man-caused stuff is simply unproven theory. However, it is taught in universities and most public schools as though it is fact, just as evolution-driven creation is.

Frankly, I have no issues with anyone's theories, as long as we keep them in the realm of theory. A theory is a premise held by some that as yet has not been proven. When it is proven it becomes a law or a principle. The law of gravity started out as a theory that was able to be proven, and is now recognized as a law. There is no such thing as the law of creation or the law of man-made climate change. As of this moment both are still theories and will remain such until someone can prove without a doubt that they should be principles.

My understanding of creation is faith-based. My understanding of climate change is based on my belief that man cannot undo what God is doing and that climate is still under the control of the creating God. I accept intelligent design because I believe in the all-powerful Creator.

As long as the world continues to plod along without any concrete proof of what to this point are still theories, there will be controversies and we human beings will continue to argue about them. I wonder if The Creator smiles at this or if He cares one whit what we think about what He has done and is doing.

Stand By Your Friends

2011-09-25T06:18:00.001-07:00

I'm sure there is someone out there who thinks I am a mean-spirited person, but I do believe that person would be difficult to find. When that person is found I would like to discuss with him/her exactly what I have done that is mean-spirited. I mean that sincerely, because I have no desire to be mean to anyone. I sometimes write critical things, because that is what an honest blogger does. However, I do not try to be mean-spirited, and if I come across that way, it is absolutely unintentional. Even when I disagree I try to keep that on a respectable level, without mean-spiritedness.

For that reason I do not make up nicknames for those with whom I disagree, as do dome of my anonymous commenters. I do not say things about people that are speculation. I do not suggest stuff that has no basis in fact. I do not use innuendo as a tool, nor do I make up stuff that suits my opinions about people or organizations.

Now, I am no angel, although according to the Apostle Paul I am a saint. I make no claims to a lack of forthrightness and being forthright sometimes causes people to think things about you that are far from the truth. People with whom I worked will tell you that you usually do not have to guess what I am thinking, because I have this nasty habit of saying what I think.

I also confess to a high degree of loyalty. I am loyal to the BGCT, because I once worked for them. I understand the convention is far from what it was when I worked there, but I am still loyal. I feel comfortable speaking of things at the BGCT because I still have some very good friends on the staff there. I am loyal to my friends, because that is what friends are supposed to do. I will defend them when I know they are being falsely accused. I will come to their defense sometimes without even checking to find out the facts because I know these people like I know my family members. I know their character, and I know their strengths and weaknesses. I will defend them against their adversaries because that is what friends do.

Admittedly, I sometimes go off half-cocked when I hear (read) something said about my friends that makes me angry. There are things said about them sometimes that are absolutely counter to what I know about them. I know what their jobs are, and I know what they are supposed to do in certain situations. I also know what they are NOT supposed to do. I also know these people are between a rock and a hard place. If they do their jobs they are criticized. If they did not do their jobs they would be criticized. They cannot win with some folks. They understand that and they just keep on doing what they were hired to do. I know all this because I experienced it first hand while on staff at the convention.

For instance, in the current flap about whether or not a pastor whose church left the convention was threatened and insulted, there are only two people who know the truth. They are the people on each end of the conversation. No one else, not me, not anyone else, knows exactly what was said except the individuals who were party to the conversation. When anyone tries to put their own spin on that conversation, not having been party to it, it is just wrong. If that pastor has told someone he was threatened and insulted, and that someone has told someone else, and on and on, it is no secret how things get blown out of proportion. I have spoken to one party in that conversation, and on the basis of that contact I continue to defend my friend. I understand the pastor may have a different perception to the conversation, and he has the right to perceive it in any way he wishes. But, I will look him in the eye and tell him that I do not believe he was threatened. I will do that because I know my friend. And I continue to defend him. That's what friends do.

Now, having said all of this, I do believe that there are staff members at the BGCT that have taken it upon themselves to go beyond their responsibility and abuse their positions. But that is no reason to believe that all of them do that and to paint the whole staff with that brush is disingenuous. And it is mean-spirited. We need less mean-spiritedness.

Everything Written Is Not The Truth

2011-09-21T07:18:00.001-07:00

The only anonymous letter I ever received while serving a church as a staff member was a letter from a woman (I recognized her handwriting) who was berating me for whistling in the halls of the church. In her letter she asked, "Didn't your mother tell you it is impolite to whistle indoors?" I thought back over all the tings my mother did teach me. Take off your hat indoors. Hold the door for ladies. Tell the truth at all times. Keep your elbows off the table while eating. And there were many, many more things. However, I do not believe I ever heard her say it was impolite to whistle inside a building.

Since I am basically a happy person, I do a lot of whistling. I whistle while I work. I whistle while I walk. I whistle to please myself. And I am a very good whistler. I whistle pop music, and I whistle hymns and choruses. I am also a confronter. Thus, when I saw that lady in church I walked up to her and said, "Helen, just so you know, my mother never taught me that it was impolite to whistle indoors." She was a bit taken aback, but at least she knew that I knew she had sent me an anonymous note, and we had a discussion about whistling. I don't believe either of us convinced the other of our position. But, to this day, I do not believe it is impolite to whistle indoors, as long as I am not interfering with someone else's privacy. So that was an anonymous note I refused to believe.

I have long ago learned that just because someone writes something, does not mean I have to believe it. Recently, another blogger wrote something that I do not believe. In it he accused two friends of mine of calling a pastor whose church had voted to leave the BGCT and insulting him and threatening him. Now, I have known both of these men for more than forty years. Both have distinguished themselves for many years by serving churches and the denomination. Both are straight talkers, but I simply do not believe they threatened anyone, or insulted anyone intentionally. Because of some of my own experiences, I understand that when a church makes a decision such as leaving a convention, and someone from that convention calls them, it can seem a bit intimidating. One might even expect that they would be displeased that a pastor would lead his church to make such a decision, especially when that church has been a strong supporter of said convention for many years. But, I do not accept the story that the pastor was threatened. He may have taken their call as an insult, but I can assure you that was not their intention.

It is true that some churches are just a bit too quick to accept their pastor's word that they should leave the BGCT, and accept his reasons as fact. But, I have known too many instances like this where when the people found out the truth they quickly voted to come back to the BGCT. In at least one case that I can document the pastor was terminated when the church found out he had lied to them about the BGCT. In fact, I suggest there has been more than one such case, and I myself have "been guilty" of reminding pastors of that. Now, they may have been insulted by that, or they may not have been.

No one really knows the truth of this except the pastor himself. What he has told others may or may not be true. But, this I do know. Bill Arnold and Charles Davenport did not threaten anyone. That is just not in their character makeup and we should not be so quick to accept as truth what one person may have said about them. Anyone else who knows these two men know that they did not threaten nor intentionally insult anyone. The very basis of our faith suggests that we should know and understand one another well enough, and yes love one another enough, that we do not accept readily the negative things someone may say about them. That is the basis of my belief in Arnold and Davenport. They are good men, wonderful servants. And we should be careful what we accept as truth about them.

Its Best To Keep In Touch

2011-09-18T06:06:00.001-07:00

I love cowboy poetry. My favorite poem is called "The Fence That Me And Shorty Built." Someday I'll publish it here, if I can find who to get permission from to print it. However, this poem is one that someone sent to me recently, and I liked it so much I have to publish it. It came to me without an author attached, so, I apologize to the composer of this little piece. But, it is so good I had to share it.

Cowboy Poetry

Jake, the rancher, went one day
To fix a distant fence.
The wind was cold and gusty
And the clouds rolled gray and dense.

As he pounded the last staples in
And gathered tools to go,
The temperature had fallen,
And snow began to blow.

When he finally reached his pickup,
He felt a heavy heart.
From the sound of that ignition
He knew it wouldn't start.

So Jake did what most of us
Would do if we were there.
He humbly bowed his balding head
And sent aloft a prayer.

As he turned the key the last time,
He softly cursed his luck
They found him three days later,
Frozen stiff in that old truck.

Now Jake had been around in life
And done his share of roaming.
But when he saw Heaven, he was shocked --

Why, It looked just like Wyoming!

Of all the saints in Heaven,
His favorite was St. Peter
So they sat and talked a minute or two,

Or maybe it was three.
Nobody was keeping' score --
In Heaven, time is free.

I've always heard,' Jake said to Pete,

'That God will answer prayers,
But the one time I asked for help,
Well, he just wasn't there.

Does God answer prayers of some,
And ignore the prayers of others?
That don't seem exactly square --
I know all men are brothers.

Or does he randomly reply,
Without good rhyme or reason?
Maybe, it's the time of day,
The weather or the season.

Now I ain't trying to act smart,
It's just the way I feel.
And I was wondering', could you tell me

What the heck's the deal?

Peter listened very patiently
And when Jake was done,
There were smiles of recognition,
And he said, 'So, you're the one!!

That day your truck, it wouldn't start,

And you sent your prayer a flying,
You gave us all a real bad time,
With hundreds of us trying.

A thousand angels rushed,
To check the status of your file,
But you know, Jake, we hadn't heard
From you in quite a while.

And though all prayers are answered,

And God ain't got no quota,
He didn't recognize your voice,
And started a truck in Minnesota!

PRAISE THE LORD!!!

2011-09-16T07:04:00.001-07:00

It is 9:00 A.M. Friday morning and it has been raining for two hours at our house, for a total of nearly three inches. This is our first rain since last October, at least at our house. PRAISE THE LORD FOR HIS GRACIOUS MERCY!!!

Computer Dependency Is Off The Wall

2011-09-14T07:59:00.001-07:00

I am absolutely convinced that one of the worst things ever to have happened was to install computers in the offices of church staff members. Computers are making dummies of us all.

A few weeks ago I found myself out of town, and in a situation where I was without access to a computer. On Friday afternoon at 4:30 the pastor of the local First Baptist Church asked me if I would preach for him the following Sunday. Not only was I there without my preaching Bible, but I had no typewriter, no computer, no lap top, no I-Pad, nothing with which to compose a sermon on such short notice. There was nothing to do but sequester myself in my hotel room and write—with a ball point pen—a sermon. I borrowed a yellow pad and started writing. For the first time in more than fifty years I was writing a sermon by hand.

The finished product was hugely revealing. Not only had my hand writing deteriorated, looking for all the world like hen scratches, but I found that after sitting overnight it was even difficult for me to read. Since it is my habit to write a manuscript for every sermon, not just an outline, what I finished up with was eight yellow pages of hand written work that was barely legible.

Now, my point is this—all the years of having at my disposal a typewriter or a computer had absolutely ruined my hand writing, and when I found myself with no other option, I was just about out of business. Since I no longer own a lap top, mostly because I do not travel much anymore, and the hotel where I was staying did not have a business center for me to use, I had no research material available to me, no word processing equipment and was left with what God had given me, hands and fingers, as well as a memory. With those tools, and borrowed Bible, I accomplished the writing of the sermon. Try that sometime, preacher friend. Just try going off by yourself with nothing but a pen and a writing pad and do your sermonizing.

I have to tell you, it was a refreshing, though humbling, experience. As I started writing I found the words practically flowing out of the pen tip, sometimes amazing me with their fluidity. I felt a freedom from the Holy Spirit that I have not felt in many a moon. Scripture verses kept flooding my mind, verses that illustrated points I was trying to make in the sermon. Now, I am not saying the finished product was a masterpiece, but I am saying that the experience was exhilarating. It was exciting to discover anew how much the Lord wants to help us write sermons, if we would just give Him the opportunity to do so.

The experience brings to mind something I heard Ron Dunn say one time; "You will never know that Jesus is all you need, until He is all you've got."

The Kind Of Baptist I Am

2011-09-11T06:20:00.001-07:00

For the first fourteen years of my life, church was the farthest thing from my mind. At the age of five I sang a solo in church for the first time, in a little church down the street from where we lived. My sisters and I would walk to church on Sunday, without parents.

When I was thirteen my mother had us baptized (sprinkled) in the Methodist church. It was not until I was fifteen years of age that someone explained to me the concept of salvation. When I was led to the Lord it was by a Baptist Sunday school teacher, an old maid nurse, and I was baptized (immersed) into the Baptist church. I surrendered to preach and preached my first sermon about a year later. That was sixty-one years ago.

I attended a Baptist university, and have spent the past fifty-five years working for a Baptist group, either a church or a denominational agency. Those are my Baptist credentials. I have maintained those credentials through lots of travail, conflict, and disagreements. Why? Because I am too proud of what Baptists have meant throughout history to chuck it away. Baptists have made important contributions to the religious liberty we enjoy in this country.

When I work with churches as their interim pastor, I tell them, "We need to decide what kind of church we want to be. It makes no difference to me what we decide, but we need to decide." If we decide we want to remain a Baptist church, then the next question is, "What kind of Baptists do we want to be?" These days that decision has become much more important.

Having been a Southern Baptist for more than,62 years, and even though we aren't perfect, and even though Southern Baptists are no longer what they were when I became one, I suspect I will always be one. Also, I have been a BGCT Baptist as long as I have been a Southern Baptist. Being the kind of Baptist I am makes me part of something really great and opens the door to many opportunities and resources I would not have access to by any other means.

I am not one of those Baptists who believes only those of us Baptized in a Southern Baptist church will be admitted to heaven, and to be quite honest, I do not believe one of the judgment questions will be "What denomination were you?" In fact, I don't think God cares one whit if I am a Baptist, only that I know His Son and call Him Savior and Lord. Having said that, though, I am glad to be a Baptist.

The Parable Of The Orange Mustang

2011-09-07T06:47:00.001-07:00

As my dear readers know, I have opinions about everything. Thus today's post.

Once there were two teen-aged boys. Both had reached the age where they could get driver's licenses and since they were such good friends, and had been since the day they were born, they decided they would go together to get their licenses. They studied the code book together, each helping the other to remember the tough spots. They encouraged each other day by day as the time approached for them to take the test. They went together to the driver's license bureau, took the test together and both passed it with flying colors.

They decided, as they always did, to celebrate together, and did so, patting each other on the back with gusto. After several rounds of milk shakes and lots of mutual congratulations for their monumental achievement, the boys, who lived next door to each other, and had a cadre of mutual friends, decided to go home and celebrate with their parents. It cannot be over stated how much these boys had endured together. They had been like brothers for all the years of their lives. They did everything together, and liked the same things, except for one thing. One of the boys was partial to a maroon shirt, while the other was partial to his favorite shirt of burnt orange.

As they approached their homes, they saw the burnt orange boy's dad waiting for them in the driveway. Grinning from ear to ear he greeted his son with a hug and took him back to their garage, where sat a brand new, burnt orange Mustang convertible. The dad presented the youngster with the keys to the car, hugged him and said, "Son, be really careful when you drive. We want you around for a long while."

Meanwhile, the maroon-shirted youngster watched all this taking place. He looked into his own yard and saw no new car. His dad wasn't even out there to greet his son, as was the next door neighbor. The maroon-shirted youngster was overtaken by a wave of envy. "That lucky devil", he thought to himself of his friend next door. "He gets a new car and I get nothing. It just isn't fair." He slinked into his house and began to rethink his relationship with his life-long friend. "I'll show him. I'll get some new friends. Who needs him anyhow?"

And so in a jealous fit, a snit if you please, the maroon-shirted youngster was suddenly no longer available to his friend, had no more time for him and decided to seek friendships elsewhere. And the boy with the orange Mustang? He all of a sudden had more friends than he knew what to do with. Everyone wanted to be his friend,. He had the cool car. He watched his maroon-shirted buddy of many years make friends elsewhere, and wondered to himself, "How could I ever have been friends with someone who could not be happy with my good fortune? What a jerk he is!"

The meaning of this parable? A jealous snit is poor motivation for making life decisions.

Today's news indicates Texas A&M will be leaving the Big 12 Conference to assume membership with new friends in the Southeast Conference.

Disunity=Immaturity

2011-09-04T12:04:00.001-07:00

Even a cursory reading of the Apostle Paul's writings, which make up a large segment of the New Testament, will reveal what Paul thinks of congregations or bodies of believers who cannot seem to get along. For most of my life Baptists have been known in the world of religion as "Battling Baptists", a name which seems altogether appropriate. Since my new birth experience, I have never been anything but a Baptist, and even I, after almost 65 years of being one, must confess that what the world sees in Baptists is not completely without merit.

Recently, I have been studying, for the umpteenth time, the first letter to the Corinthians, where the great Apostle talked about having to feed the Christians at Corinth with milk instead of meat. We all know that at a certain point in our physical life we have to move from milk to more substantive food, or we will never grow to physical maturity. The same is true of spiritual growth, which is that to which Paul is referring. It is not a coincidence that in the same verses he discusses lack of spiritual growth, or spiritual immaturity, he discusses the divisions in the midst of the body.

It does not stretch credulity to reason that spiritual immaturity and disunity, or divisions, go hand in hand. More than a modicum of that immaturity resides in our leaders, as well as in the followers. That was evident in the break-up of the conventions (BGCT and SBC), two decades ago, a fight which many laymen still see as a "preacher thing." Here's a shocking question—what happens to the followers when the leaders are so spiritually immature that they cannot settle their differences? Who is there to teach the lay people about spiritual maturity if their leaders are not spiritually mature enough to deal with their disagreements? One wonders.

Somehow or other, in most church situations, people find a way to resolve their differences. Battling Baptists are pretty adept at dealing with disagreements, even though it may not appear so to outside observers. My own observation is that it is only when we elevate some doctrines to a higher level of importance than they deserve that we start getting to the point at which we have permanent looking divisions among us. Even then, though, if we will take our eyes off our own understandings and focus on the cross of Christ, as suggested by Paul, we can usually seed our way out of the morass and well on the way to Biblical unity. However, as happened with the conventions, if we cannot focus on Christ and the cross and focus instead on the miniscule differences some of us have with doctrinal issues, we will become intransigent in our positions, and too immature to deal with our differences. That is when disunity clearly wins the day and believers fall out with one another, to the chagrin of our Lord Jesus.

When You Say I forgive You

2011-08-31T06:44:00.001-07:00

In my humble opinion, there is a lot of misunderstanding out there regarding the concept of forgiveness. In fact, I would go so far as to say most people do not understand the concept at all. Some people say that when you forgive you have to forget. I don't believe that. Forgiveness is not forgetting. Unless you are God, that is. God said He would remember your sins no more, but only God is able to do that. If someone offends you and asks for your forgiveness, you can forgive them without forgetting.

Some people think if they accept an apology that they have forgiven. I do not believe accepting an apology is the same as forgiving, although I recognize that some people do. I have heard people accept apologies and then spend the next half hour telling the person who apologized where he was wrong and what they think about him. That indicates that forgiveness has not been extended. At least in my opinion.

I believe forgiveness has some inherent promises. I don't believe forgiveness has been given when the individual who is supposed to forgive keeps rehashing the offense. In my mind, Biblical forgiveness means that you will never bring up that offense again. That is promise number one. Number two is that when one has forgiven he will not allow the offense to come between him and the offending person. Promise number three is that when you forgive someone you should never speak to others about it, except to tell others you have forgiven the person who hurt or offended you.

God deals harshly with unforgiveness. Remember the story of the unforgiving steward? Read it again and see what the Lord says should be done with those who do not forgive, especially since they have been forgiven by their heavenly Father.

I have a little book someone once gave me called Seventy Times Seven and it is all about people who have had the most ghastly things done to them—really bad things, such as was done to prisoners of Germans during WWII. When you have seen your parents taken away and killed, sometimes shot right in front of you, it would be hard to forgive. Yet, some of those who experienced such were able to forgive their captors. Our being offended or hurt by someone pales in comparison.

When you say, "I forgive you", you are promising never to bring the offense up again, never to speak to others about it, and never allow it to come between you and the person you are forgiving.

Is Your Church A John 17 Church?

2011-08-29T06:23:00.001-07:00

Years ago I knew of a church that referred to itself on her church sign as an "Acts 20:20 Church". I thought then and think now that this was a very clever idea. When I went to my Bible to read Acts 20:20, I thought, "This is great! Every church should be an Acts 20: 20 church." The truth is there are hundreds of Bible verses that a church cold pick out and say, "Our church is a _________ church." I would like to submit another one. How about being a John 17 church?

John 17 is a chapter in my Bible I have read many, many times. John 17 is the real Lord's prayer. It is the longest prayer of Jesus recorded in the Bible. It is a sort of benediction to the graduation ceremony for His disciples. It is interesting that John took up one third of his gospel recounting the last 24 hours of Jesus life. John 17 is the prayer Jesus prayed for His disciples, and for all of us who have come after them. The prayer ends with a plea to the Father for believers to live in complete unity so that the word will know that Jesus came from God.

I like to say that unity among believers is the way the world can tell that Jesus is the real deal. It is always interesting to listen to how people describe unity. So many people believe that unity is the complete absence of disagreement. Others think unity is everyone thinking alike. Still others have other ideas of what unity really is.

My own description of unity exists in a group of believers who knows how to deal with one another when they disagree, not that they always agree. When believers disagree they do not allow that disagreement to fracture their fellowship. They understand that brothers and sisters can disagree without becoming disagreeable. That's what I call a John 17 church. A John 17 church allows for disagreements, but understands how to keep those disagreements from tearing apart the fabric of their unity.

Is your church a John 17 church? Can members of your church disagree with one another without shattering the fellowship? Can members disagree with the pastor? Can the pastor handle people disagreeing with him? If the answer to all these questions is "yes" the your church may be a John 17 church.

Do you want the world to know that Jesus is the real deal? John 17 says the testimony to that is the unity of your congregation of believers. Another words, it is allowing the world to see the right way to handle disagreements and other types of conflict in our midst. Our church should be a testimony to the world that there is a better way to live. If we solve our problems the same way the world solves its problems, then the world will see no reason to live any differently than it already does. A John 17 church is a testimony to a better way. The Jesus way!

A Bible Study System That Works For Us

2011-08-23T20:09:00.001-07:00

A few years ago our church stumbled upon a system of Bible Study that has really enhanced the fellowship and enriched the Bible learning at our church in downtown San Antonio. I use the word, "stumbled" advisedly, because as we look back at it I think it was a work of God.

It happened about the same time as we decided to switch our lesson material from Lifeway to Baptist Way, but the particular materials were not the reason for the change in the way we did Bible Study. It just gave us an opportunity to pursue a different course. Prior to that time, Adults and Youth in our church were studying a plethora of different Bible Study materials. There was no uniformity. Whatever that particular class's teacher wanted to use as resource material was O.K. Some used Lifeway, while others used other materials, including one teacher that pretty well wrote his own stuff.

A decision was made, to which all of us agreed, that we would start trying to bring uniformity to our classes. Since several in our church did not particularly like Lifeway's stuff, we started looking for other material on which we could all agree. About that time the BGCT started Baptist Way and we decided to give them a try. To be honest, those early lessons were pretty weak, but the people at Baptist Way sincerely asked for our feedback and we gave it. We began to notice changes that were pleasing.

The pastor decided to try an experiment to try to get people to focus on the lesson material all week long. Next Sunday's Bible study verses were published in our Sunday bulletin and people were encouraged to read those verses all week long. To get people to do it he decided that he would also preach on those same verses the next Sunday. He did, and would almost always take a slightly different approach than the Sunday school lessons.

About that time our church started a small group ministry called Circle of Six, where six people were encouraged to form a group and meet once each week. It was suggested that these small groups might review the lesson from the previous Sunday and the pastor's sermon. All of a sudden we discovered a new focus started taking place in our church. It was a focus around a particular passage of Scripture and we learned of the power of the Bible to change a church if everyone was focused on a singular passage,

When we discovered what was taking place, we started promoting it and low and behold a whole new approach to Bible Study had developed. It was an approach that:

Told the people on Sunday what the passage for the week would be.
Encouraged the people to read the passage and pray for it every day during that week.
Sunday school classes taught the lesson from that passage on the following Sunday.
The pastor preached a sermon from that passage on that same Sunday.
Circles of Six facilitated small group discussion about what the lesson meant and what it should cause us to do in response.

This approach has revolutionized our church and has shown us again how powerful God's word can be when people focus on it together.

Choosing Up Sides

2011-08-21T12:05:00.001-07:00

There are many situations in life where choosing sides is a good thing. However, in a church, when things get to the point to where people are choosing sides, it usually means a depth of conflict that will require meaningful work to resolve. I once assisted a church in North Texas that had been experiencing an on-going conflict for nearly thirty years. Through the years many pastors came and went, a lot of them before even a two year tenure was up. These young men would come to the church, try to lead it to develop ministry in the community and reach out to people, only to find that people in the community knew of the problem at their church, even before the pastor found out about it.

The problem was a man and a woman who had been arguing over the insignificant for three decades. Their argument sometimes got heated, and people in the church knew about it. Both were teachers of adult Sunday school classes, so they were able to tell their small group of adults "their side" and enlist people to take up their battle. Over the years, virtually the whole church knew which side they were on, his or hers. Through the years pastor after pastor would be forced out of their position because they refused to choose a side. By the time I was called in to assist, the two people involved would not even participate in the activities we designed to help the church confront the problem. The people who did participate, most of whom had chosen a side, were wise enough to see that the church could not be sustained if things kept going like they were.

By the end of the weekend activities, the participating church members decided they had had enough of people having to choose sides. Most of those people repented, got right with each other and set about to find a solution to their church's problem Their solution was to confront the two principals and present them an opportunity to either repent or leave. I was asked to go with the pastor and deacon chair and present the ultimatum to each of the two leaders. It was difficult, but we were able to see one who repented and the other who chose to leave the church, proclaiming, "I will take my whole class with me." Imagine the surprise when the class did not go, largely because most of them had been involved in the activities at the church and repented of their involvement in the conflict.

Many times through the years, we have seen churches ripped asunder because people were forced to choose sides in a conflict. We have learned that when conflict in a church gets to the point to where people are having to choose sides in order to remain in fellowship, that church's future starts to look very dim indeed.

I’m Sorry For That Commenter

2011-08-17T07:03:00.001-07:00

Recently, I received a comment on one of my posts that directed readers to another blog, one that I would never visit knowingly. I apologize that I did not catch it and delete it in a timely manner. I know to some that only means that because I did not delete it with due timeliness or comment back to it that I must have agreed with it. That seems to be the case these days, at least with some.

There are many comments received on this blog that I disagree with, but choose not to answer. Some feel that if I do not answer the commenter that I must agree with what was said. I view myself as a blogger similarly to what I view myself when I am moderating a business meeting. Many people may speak and some may speak things with which I disagree, but I do not argue with them on the floor of the business meeting. That just is not the role of the moderator. In private I may go to that person and disagree in a private conversation, but I do not even always do that.

Frankly, after I post I may go a day or two without checking the blog for comments. I have tried not to become a slave to my computer, so I busy myself with other things. That sometimes gets me in trouble with other bloggers because I may let a comment go without responding to it, even when I disagree vehemently. For the record, just because I do not respond to a comment does not by any means suggest that I agree with it. Jumping to such a conclusion is just asinine. We need to be very careful about jumping to conclusions. I once knew of a man named August who jumped at the conclusion of a mule. That was the last day of August.

Insinuating things based on the lack of a response can become a dangerous exercise. Ask any good lawyer about that. Prosecutors and plaintiff's attorneys do that a lot. They insinuate things or conclude things based on their interpretation of the evidence, and that conclusion may or may not be the truth.

For instance, I could insinuate something is wrong at the BGCT. If no one at the BGCT responds to correct what I have insinuated, than I assume it is fact and from that moment on that "fact" becomes a part of any narrative I may compile about the BGCT. It is not a fact, never was a fact, but because no one corrected it, I assume it is fact. That, my friend is intellectual gamesmanship, which is another word for dishonest.

So for future reference, just know that I will sometimes comment on the comment and sometimes I will not. Please do not assume that because I do not that I agree with the comment. That would be like jumping at the conclusion of a mule.

In The Interest Of Full Disclosure

2011-08-14T14:22:00.001-07:00

Some of you may be wondering why I have eased up on my blogs about the BGCT in recent days. In the interest of full disclosure I think it is important to tell you. About the middle of June, my granddaughter went to work in the communications area of the BGCT. With her freshly minted degree in communications, her Dallas pastor was instrumental in her getting this job. I can honestly say I had absolutely nothing to do with it. In any event, I have had to reassess my blogging because I do not wish to make it appear I am using my granddaughter as an inside source. I am not.

In fact, the opposite is true. I have toned down my blogging on the BGCT simply because I do not want to cause her any problems in her new job, which is a very exciting one. A few folks at the BGCT know she is my granddaughter, but most do not and could not identify her as such. In the first place she is a beautiful young woman, not at all like her pa pa. She does look at bit like her dad, whom many of you know. In any event, I have felt compelled to let up on my criticism of the BGCT and I felt it was important for you to know why. I did not want someone to discover what I have just told you and make something ugly out of it.

The job she has been given is to develop a web site where church people can log on and receive information about mission projects all over the country. Recently, she spent two weeks in Joplin and Tuscaloosa logging information about some disaster relief mission projects that youth ministers and others can get information about and take groups to work for a few days. This is going to be a really neat project. She hopes to have it up and running in time for the annual meeting in October in Amarillo. (That is the only inside information I have gotten from her.)

In any event, I have now fulfilled my obligation to fully disclose a fact about which I am very proud. I am so glad that my newly degreed and married granddaughter is now taking up some slack I left when I retired eleven years ago.

Where Does The Vision Come From?

2011-08-10T07:16:00.001-07:00

A few years back it was my privilege to be training a Pastor Search Committee, when I asked them what the first question is that they should ask the candidate. I asked all nine committee members to write down the first question they would ask a prospective pastor. I suggested it would be O.K. if they wanted to discuss it among themselves before they wrote down anything. This is an exercise I often use to try to find out who the real influencers on the committee might be. I would listen and watch, waiting to see who on the committee might impose their will on other members. After a few minutes, I said, "O.K. Now that you have had time to discuss it among yourselves, write down what you think should be the first question posed to a prospective pastor.

It probably will not surprise you to learn that five of the members all had the same question they had written down. In a minute I will tell you what that question was. Just so you understand the exercise completely, when telling me what they had written down I then asked them to defend it. Why did they think that question was the first that should be asked? Through this exercise I discovered where the question came from and the individual that was able to influence four others to write down the same question he had written down.

The question five of the nine had written down was this: "What is your vision for our church?" Now, I understand what people are asking when they ask that question, but I spent the next half hour trying to explain to them why that should not be a question posed to prospective pastor. In the first place, that prospective pastor should not be expected to have a vision for the church. Why should he? He is not the pastor of the church? He has not been praying for a vision. He has not had opportunity to share ideas with the membership. Thus, there is no reasonable expectation for him to have a vision for the church considering him as a pastor.

This gives me the opportunity to pose the question, "From where does a vision for a church come?" Whose job is it to come up with a vision?

There is a lot of thinking these days that the pastor is responsible for coming up with a vision for the church. And in a sense that is true, but not entirely. Certainly it is the pastor's responsibility to cast that vision, but the actual origin of it is in the hearts and minds of the collective membership. My son like to use the analogy of a puzzle. He says that God gives each member a piece of the puzzle and it is the task of church leaders to make opportunity for each piece of the puzzle to be laid on the table.

If the vision is the puzzle, and each of us is asking what it looks like, what it will require of us, and what resources we will need to accomplish it, then members sharing their perspective (their piece) is absolutely needed. Over a period of time, when all the pieces of the puzzle have been laid on the table and extensive prayer has been lifted, the picture starts coming into focus and a shared concept of the vision emerges.

When that vision has been delineated, then the pastor begins to communicate it to the congregation as a whole, seeking buy-in from the people who actually helped to develop it. It isn't the pastor's vision, it is the church's vision.

Coming to a vision is a process employed in a congregation that is actually listening to God as He delivers a piece of the puzzle to every member. It is not a easy process. It is not a quick process. But when a vision emerges, buy-in is much easier because the people helped to develop it.

Whose Side Is God On?

2011-08-07T12:10:00.001-07:00

The San Antonio Express News hates Governor Rick Perry of Texas. They are much like a little child saying, "Nah-nah-nah-nah-nah", giving its readers a steady dose of all that is wrong with the Texas Governor. Having said that, I have to say their piece on the prayer rally in Houston last Saturday was pretty fair, although columnist Scott Stroud could not help himself, so he took shots at the governor in an opinion piece he wrote in the Sunday paper. However, among the things Stroud opined about was the question many have asked throughout history. "Whose side is God on?" He even quoted William Travis' letter from the Alamo that stated, "God is on our side?", to which Stroud asked, "Did God love the people in the Alamo more than he did the Mexican soldiers?" He intimated that Perry and others like him believed God did love the Alamo people more than the Mexican soldiers. People who truly know God know that such a thought is ridiculous. God loves all people—always has—always will.

But the question is certainly one that raises our eyebrows. "Whose side is God on?" I believe I know the answer to that question.

First off, let me say that I do not believe God is either Republican or Democrat. However, Stroud suggested Republicans go to church more than Democrats. That being the case, it is reasonable for many Republicans to believe God is on their side. I hate to break it to my Republican friends, but that is simply not true. God cares not one whit whether you are a Republican or a Democrat and it is not accurate to say that God is on your side because of your party affiliation.

If there is anything that is clear throughout the Word of God it is that God is on the side of those who obey His laws and do His will, regardless of party. I believe it was Governor Perry who said at the prayer rally Saturday in Houston that God does not have a political agenda, He has a salvation agenda. That is an absolutely true statement, and would have been just as true if it had been spoken by Barack Obama. The fact that it was a Republican that said it makes absolutely no difference to God.

If the Old Testament history of Israel teaches us anything, it is that even God's chosen people, if they defy the will of God, forget who he is and what He has done for them, can be defeated by and decimated by even a pagan horde. Does that mean God was on the side of the pagans? No. It only means that God will use whatever tools necessary to chastise His disobedient children. We can elect a totally Republican congress, senate, and president in 2012 and still find ourselves in a mess because we have failed to follow God's laws and do God's will. Part and parcel of doing God's will is to take care of the downtrodden. Here's what I truly believe: If the people of God were doing what they ought to be doing for the poor and needy, there would be no need for the government to do it. If you can read God's word and not find that it requires us to help the needy, then you are reading a different Bible than I am. This is not a Re[publican or a Democrat thing. It is a Christian thing. Instead of lobbying the government to pass more laws favoring the poor, we should be helping the poor ourselves.

Not only should we be helping their physical needs, we should be helping their spiritual needs. It is hard to speak to someone about Jesus when their belly is aching from hunger. Many church budgets are content with a $500 benevolence item in their budgets. Better it would be if they would forgo hiring a staff member or two so that they could mount a really aggressive ministry to help the poor and the poor in spirit.

Of course helping the poor is not the only thing we should be doing to obey God's will, but it stands out because so much of our government's resources go to help the poor. And many churches have simply decided to let the government do what the Lord clearly commands Christians to do.

So, before you decide God is on your side, better remember the people of Judah, who in Jeremiah's time thought the reason they were so wealthy is that God was on their side. They even called Jeremiah unpatriotic when he tried to tell them they were no safer than their counterparts in the Northern Kingdom, who had already felt the wrath of the Assyrians, and that they in the south would be put to desolation just like those in the north had been.

In short, God is on the side of those who keep His commandments, obey his laws, and seek to do His will. Is that us?

Can A Woman Be A Prophet

2011-08-03T07:23:00.001-07:00

Hilkiah and those picked by the king went straight to Huldah the prophetess. She was the wife of Shallum son of Tokhath, the son of Hasrah, who was in charge of the palace wardrobe. She lived in Jerusalem in the Second Quarter. The men consulted with her. In response to them she said, "God's word, the God of Israel: Tell the man who sent you here, 'God has spoken…" 2 Chronicles 34: 22-25 (The Message)

A few years ago I attended an Evangelism Conference in Fort Worth, where Anne Graham Lotz was to be a featured speaker. As Mrs. Lotz strode confidently to the podium, a group of preachers who were sitting behind me got up and left in protest to having a woman in the pulpit. That was not the first time I had encountered this attitude toward women preachers and it would not be the last time, either. I have thought about that event several times, the latest being as my Sunday school class was studying the passage above, regarding a prophetess named Huldah.

It seems when Josiah was King of Judah, he set about to have Solomon's temple cleaned up. They had been using it to worship idols, including Baal. While cleaning up the temple they found a copy of what we believe was Moses' Book of Deuteronomy. Josiah had the priest read some of it to him and he got under conviction about his sin and the sin of his nation who had turned their back on God. He wanted to know what the pages of this book meant for him and for his nation. So, he sent Hilkiah, the high priest, to fetch someone who could interpret the book for him, tell him what it meant for them. Interestingly enough, the high priest went to a woman who was known to be a prophetess, one who could tell them what the word of God was for their nation.

There was no one there to tell them a woman should not speak to men. There was no one to tell them that a woman could not possibly understand what God was saying. There was no one there to tell them they should not listen to a woman. They asked her to speak and she said, "Thus saith the Lord….".

If these straight-laced conservative Jews would listen to a woman interpret God's word, why should we be any different? If God would allow a woman (Deborah) to be a judge over Israel, and a woman (Huldah) to be a prophet of Israel, and several women (Priscilla, Mary Magdalene, etc.) to have prominent roles in the furthering of the gospel story, who in the world are we to say that a woman has no place in the pulpit.

Oh, spare me "Let the women be silent in the church…." Surely we understand Paul to be speaking about at least two particular women who were causing conflict in the church. What else do you have to tell us that God intended for us to judge people by the way they look before listening to them teach His word or interpret His word, as other prophets do?

As they say, "It's in the book.!

Make Reservations For The BGCT

2011-07-31T06:19:00.001-07:00

The housing block is now open in Amarillo for the Texas Baptist Convention, to be held at the Amarillo Civic Center October 23-26. Amarillo is a city with plenty of low priced housing for such a meeting as this. The headquarters hotel is the Ambassador Hotel on I 40. Once again we have chosen to have the convention in an extreme location, which probably means a lot of people from South Texas will do what the people from north and northwest Texas did last year, that is skip the meeting altogether. While I love Amarillo, which is near home for me, I understand that distance will be a factor for many folks, as it was last year when the meeting was held in McAllen, in far South Texas.

The attendance should be better this year, however, because the meeting really is in the BGCT wheel-house, insofar as supporting churches are concerned. The convention support in west and northwest Texas has remained strong. I know I have a lot of readers in far west Texas, so I want to encourage some of you lay people to plan to make at least some of the sessions of the convention this year. Some of you have never attended a convention, and I can tell you that you really should do so this year. Churches, why not plan to help some of your lay people attend the convention? You help staff members to do so, and I think helping lay people will pay big dividends for your church.

The convention may or may not have the opportunity to greet the new Executive Director this year. We just do not know if the Search Committee will have made their report report or not. If so, that will be an added reason to attend. If not, the program will be interesting anyhow.

It appears there will yet again be only one candidate for president this year. Likely there will be only one candidate for each of the other officer positions also. I hate that. I wish there could be several candidates for each office. To me that is a healthy sign. The presidential candidate is a man I do not know, but have heard a lot of good things about. I am sorry Victor Rodriguez has decided not to run for a second term, but it is understandable. He has a church to be pastor of and that alone is a hard enough task. The current first vice president, Jerry Carlisle, will be nominated for president by the outgoing president. Victor has had an opportunity to observe first-hand the work of the first vice president, so few probably no better than he how good a president Carlisle will make.

I suspect there will be some who will rail against any of you attending the convention, boringly asking, "Why should we?" again and again. But, the bottom line is, this is your convention and that is reason enough to attend. I'll see you there.

What Tangled Webs We Weave

2011-07-27T06:52:00.001-07:00

Now that the news is out that Albert Reyes will be the new CEO, it is obvious that those who predicted he would be the new Executive Director of the BGCT were wrong. Therein lies the problem I tried to identify regarding rumors in a recent blog. Far too often, when we put our confidence in the rumor mill, we end up looking bad. Those who pass along rumors look even worse.

I really don't have a lot of room for criticism, though, because I have made predictions, based upon rumors, that did not come to pass. I guess we all do that at some time or another, so we shouldn't be too hard on others who do it.

This does confirm what I have been saying about rumors. There are always rumors flying around about high level positions and we need to be very careful how much credence we place in them. Apparently some sources have revealed that David Lowrie is working to get the job. That is another rumor, and it could be said about virtually every member of the committee. This committee knows, as do the rest of us, that finding the strong leader for this position is not an easy task. They also know that this must not be a political decision, that is calling on someone who has been closely aligned with any denominational political group. That would simply be a disaster, and would assure the BGCT of losing a significant chunk of its support base.. And that is not a rumor. Simply a statement of fact.

The two characteristics mentioned above, strong leader, and politically uninvolved, is what makes the committee work such a difficult task. Some will theorize that such a person does not exist. I disagree with that assessment. I know of such people myself. Some of them are already involved in Baptist life, though not politically. If I had to hazard a guess, I would guess that these people are already on a list in the committee files. In any event, I suspect we will all learn together in due time what the committee decides.

Meanwhile, committee-associated rumors will continue to fly, all from "legitimate sources", and rumors will continue to be proven incorrect. That is simply the nature of such a search as this.

Speaking The Truth Even When It Hurts

2011-07-24T13:30:00.001-07:00

Micaiah was a prophet about whom we know little. He was a contemporary of Elijah, and hated by the wicked king Ahab because he would not prophecy things that were favorable to the king. Micaiah never had a book named for him in the Bible, nor did he ever do anything miraculous, such as Elijah did on Mt Carmel, when he called down fire from heaven. All Micaiah ever did was tell the truth. He told the truth even when he knew it was going to cause punishment for him. He told the truth even when others around him were telling untruths just to be in favor with the king. There are a lot of things people want to be known for, but none should be as important as being known for telling the truth. That was Micaiah.

Years later Paul would come along and reinforce the fact that we should tell the truth, but he added a caveat. We should tell the truth in love, Paul said. It is one thing to tell the truth, but it is quite another to do it with the kind of love that takes away any happiness we might feel in being able to tell the truth about someone. Haven't we all known people who find out something juicy about someone else and just can't wait to tell it to everyone? They want top tell everyone the truth, but they have no love in doing so, except for the love of self that compels them.

There are basically three groups In most churches—those who speak no truth, those who speak the truth with no love and those who speak the truth in love. Unfortunately, it appears in many churches that the first two dominate the conversation. Without the last group, those first two can cause unbelievable conflict in the church. Those who are able to speak the truth with genuine love in their hearts for those about whom they speak, will help a church to heal. People who speak the truth in love are usually seen to be genuine by other people They are people to be trusted, because they have developed a reputation for not only telling the truth, but doing it in such a way as to demonstrate a broken heart for the hurt their truth is causing.

There will be no unity in a church where there are none who can speak the truth in love.

I Am A Blessed Person

2011-07-20T06:00:00.001-07:00

There is nothing that will take the sting out of having another birthday like having family around you. That has been my blessing this week. Our family gathered Tuesday evening to celebrate my birthday, the first time we have all been together I about four years. Although a couple of grandchildren were missing, it was a blessing to have my daughter and her brother together again after so long a time. Separation is what happens when one moves to Hawaii. However, now that our daughter has moved back to the mainland (even though it is to Oklahoma), it gives us opportunity to have our clan together for various occasions.

Few are as blessed as I. Both m y children are professionals who serve the Lord, with exceptional spouses, and both have families that are all within the circle of eternal security. This week we have ad the joy of being together with both children, all but one of the six grandchildren and the two great grand children. It makes it worthwhile to have a birthday, even one as advanced in years as mine.

Being surrounded by family is truly an experience of joy. As I sat at the dinner table Tuesday evening looking at those around me I was made to wonder what I had done to deserve such blessings. Oh, I know others have great families and experience the same kind of joy I was feeling, but I had been missing being with all of them ever since our daughter had moved to Hawaii. In case you didn't know, that is a long ways from Texas.

For so many years I have been tied up with ministry responsibilities, some of which caused me to be away from home a lot during my children's growing years. That's just what ministry demands of us. Now that ministry responsibilities are fading, family has become even more important. We are so blessed to live I the same city as our son and his family, and that has been the main reason we moved back to San Antonio at retirement. But it is a special joy when we have opportunity to have both children and their families with us.

So, I voice a special prayer of thanksgiving this week for two reasons. First and foremost, I have had my family together, and second, the Lord sent us some much needed rain. That's two birthday gifts worth thanking Him for.

Do You Pray For The Search Committee?

2011-07-17T05:40:00.001-07:00

Here we are half a year removed from the formulation of the Executive Director Search Committee for our state convention and we have heard little or nothing regarding their work. To that I say, "Good!" I have five or six good friends on that committee, people I would trust with just about anything, and I have had conversations with most of them regarding this important task. To say that they are being tight-lipped is an understatement, and to that I say, "Good for them!"

As I have said before, there will always be rumors floating around search committees, and I have learned to take them with a grain of salt. What I can say is that this particular group has been quite circumspect about the issue of confidentiality. They are being very cautious about what information they let out. Already several rumors about who would be the next Executive Director have been dismissed, and exposed for what they were, rumors. Some who were dead certain that one particular fellow would be the next Exec have now admitted he will not be. Speculation still runs rampant, however, about just who will be asked to take the job. I have no issues with those who speculate. That is just part of the game. And it is a lot of fun. I have been known to participate in that game myself. As long as it is just speculation, without giving credit for the information to a committee member, we can all enjoy the exercise.

I still believe the most important thing we can do in regards to this committee is not to speculate, but to pray for them. I know many of us were praying for them as they began their work. I wonder if all of us still do so. It is easy to forget, as the days roll on, that prayer is an important component to this process. If you will recall, I once wrote an open letter in this space to chairman Ron Lyles, suggesting that the committee spend the first three or four months praying, listening to each other's heart. Not only does the committee need to pray, but those of us who are not on the committee need to do so, too. I hope you are still praying for these good people.

As I have said before, I am not concerned with how long the committee is taking. I suppose that comes from my own work as an interim pastor, where it sometimes takes a year or more for a committee to do its work. That is as it should be. Personally, I do not believe there is any mandate to have someone to present to the convention in November. It would be nice, but it is not imperative. It is much more important to get the right person than it is to do it quickly. So, I say to the committee, "Keep up the good work. There are those of us out here who pray for you daily. We believe God will lead you to the right person."

Until the committee has something to report, let's keep up the prayer for them. It is the least that we can do.

Personal Responsibility Seems Out Of Vogue These Days

2011-07-13T06:49:00.001-07:00

"Nathan then said to David, 'You are the man!' " 2 Samuel 12:7 (NAS) "Then David said to Nathan, 'I have sinned against the Lord.' " 2 Samuel 12:13 (NAS)

My wonderful Sunday school class, along with all adults and youth in our church, studied the above passages last Sunday, and had a great time discussing the cold-blooded sins of King David, who murdered a loyal soldier just so he could have his wife, a woman with whom he had already slept and had gotten pregnant. In an attempt to cover up his sin, David tried to get Uriah to go home to his wife, which he refused to do, then got him drunk so he would more fervently desire to go home to his wife, which he refused again to0 do, and then sent him to battle with instructions to his general to make sure he got killed, which succeeded. These sins were from a man said to be a "man after God's own heart." Never in all the history of Israel was there a more blatant story of such cold-bloo90ded rebellion against God.

When the preacher, Nathan, confronted David, by telling him a parable of selfishness and greed, David pronounced his own punishment for such a sin, prompting Nathan to proclaim, "You are the man who did this."

The story had as good an ending as possible because David confessed his guilt, instead of denying it, and went on to serve the Lord well for many years. However, his confession of heinous sin did not relieve any of the consequences of his sin.

The point of the lesson, as we studied it together, was personal responsibility. In today's church-world you hear a lot more of "You are the man" than we do, "I have sinned." We are much quicker to pronounce the guilt of others than to assume our own responsibility, and that is why the blessings of the Lord are often withheld.

Our class had a wonderful discussion of this lesson and then applied it to ourselves. Each of us came to the decision to say to ourselves, "I am the man (or woman). No one else is responsible for my sin. Just me."

Only when we are willing to face God and admit that "I am the man" are we ever going to experience all the blessings God wants for us.

Here's an idea. Let's have a little less "You are the man" and a whole lot more "I have sinned."

Politics Get In The Way

2011-07-10T12:28:00.001-07:00

The best definition of politics I have heard is the following: "Politics: (paw-lee-ticks) ( noun) From the Latin, poly, meaning many and tics, meaning blood sucking insects." That pretty well describes how I feel about politics these days, whether talking of national or denominational politics. Nationally, I am pretty well fed up with all those who practice the art of politics, whether Republican, Democrat, Torrey or Whig. It has become increasingly clear that our elected officials have just one thing in mind—remaining our elected officials. It is not clear to me that we have anyone up there who is willing to put the country first. At least that is how it appears to me.

At my house, we do our best to live within our meager means. That simply means that we try very hard not to spend any more money than we know we have access to. We have been down that debt road in the past and now that we are out of debt, we aim to stay that way. Consequently, I no longer use credit cards, nor go to the bank to borrow money to pay my bills. If the bills get bigger than the income, we cut back on the cause of the bills. That seems such an easy solution to me. I label that "personal responsibility". I do not expect others to pay my bills, nor do I expect to have to pay the bills of my neighbors.

We give ample amounts to various charities, because we have been blessed to be able to do so and feel it is our responsibility. We pay our mortgage payments every month and expect to remain in our house as long as we do so. We knew what the payment was when we bought the house, and do not expect anyone to pay it for us. All of this puts in the category of very average Americans, because the great majority of Americans do just as I have described.

That being the case, why is it that we send politicians to govern us who do not seem to feel the same way we do about personal responsibility? Why do we send people to govern us who do not seem to understand that we cannot continue to spend more than we take in without reaching the point of dire consequences? What is it about these people we send to govern us that makes them feel that owing fourteen trillion dollars, much of it to people who want to destroy us, is O.K.?

Day after day I get more and more frustrated at this discussion in Washington about our nation's finances. The frustration comes because they all seem to think it is O.K. to continue year after year digging ourselves deeper into debt. And no one seems to want to make the hard choices to turn things around. Rather, they prefer to demonize one another, for the sake of their ideological leanings, for no other reason than to assure themselves of getting re-elected. And I am not just talking about the president, who is merely doing what all other presidents before him have done. I am talking about senators and representatives who also seem more preoccupied with getting themselves and their ideological brothers and sisters re-elected than with getting this country back on a sound financial footing. They complain about the lack of jobs while passing laws that restrain the creation of such.

I agree with the results of a recent survey where people were asked what the cause of the recent economic recession really was. There were several choices but the overwhelming choice of the people was "Government." The people feel that government caused the recession. Not Wall Street. Not banks. Not corporate America. Government. Now, that speaks volumes.

In my opinion, the reason so many feel that way is that our politicians have placed politics in the way of sound decision-making. Politics get in the way. It is as simple as that!

Not Guilty Is Not The Same As Innocent

2011-07-06T16:57:00.001-07:00

Much of the nation has been transfixed for several weeks with the trial going o in Florida, seeking to convict a young mother of the murder of her two-year-old daughter. I have watched much of the nation's media surrender their objectivity on this case, most of them believing that the young mother, Casey Anthony, did indeed kill her daughter. I have watched pundit after pundit expound eloquently about the case the prosecutors had laid out. I found myself in disagreement with them on most issues.

It is true that the young woman lied profusely, which she was judged guilty for doing. But, just as in the O.J. Simpson trial the message was "If the glove don't fit you must acquit", the phrase which will be long remembered from this trial is, "Just because she is a liar does not mean she is a murderer." How often do you hear a defense attorney admit his client is a liar?

What we need to understand in this trial is not that the jury has declared Anthony innocent. What they have done is tell the world that the prosecution did not prove she was a murderer. The prosecution had nothing but circumstantial evidence, evidence that could be interpreted in more than one way. As I listened to the prosecution I myself thought some of what they said was open to interpretation and was certainly not sufficient to prove first degree murder. In fact, neither the defense nor the prosecution ably theorized about how the little girl died. The prosecution theorized that the girl had been smothered to death by duct tape and the defense said she drowned, but never told us how. What we need to remember is that the defense is under no obligation to explain how the girl drowned, but te prosecution did have to prove their assertion, and failed to do so.

This was clearly a very courageous jury. The whole country believed they would find the mother guilty of murder. However, after hearing the prosecution's case, without the aid of T.V. pundit's opinions, they came back with "not guilty" on the most serious of the seven charges. Four guilty counts on lying to police officers will likely be penalized with some prison time, but some are predicting she will get "time served" and be released.

Thursday morning we will know how the judge is disposed. Some pundits believe the judge favors the prosecution, which means he could sentence her severely.

Most post-trial pundits are raving about the American justice system. They claim it worked the way it is supposed to work. I believe that. While it may certainly be true that this woman in some way was responsible for taking the life of her child, prosecutor's did not prove that she did it maliciously and with malice aforethought.

Forgiveness Is The Answer To Anger Issues

2011-07-03T05:17:00.001-07:00

If anyone should know the ins and outs of forgiveness, it is a Christian, especially Christian ministers. When Christians allow anger issues to control their lives, the only way they can get past that is to practice forgiveness. Christians are like anyone else. Sometimes people do things to us that hurt us deeply. That hurt, if not dealt with, becomes anger, and if that anger is not dealt with, it starts to control us.

I have a friend whose name comes up in conversations from time to time. Almost without exception, when his name comes up, the first thing that is said about him is, "He is still very angry, isn't he?" This is a good person. He is a person I like very much. However, he has become defined by his anger over an incident that happened to him years ago. He still carries that pain around, only now it is in the form of anger. I hate the fact that every time his name comes up, his anger becomes a topic of conversation.

Few of us will get through life without being deeply hurt at one time or another. That hurt sometimes seems magnified when it comes from the actions or words of Christian brothers or sisters. Somehow we expect people of the world not to know any better and we often feel hurt by them, but usually get over it because it is what we expect from the world. However, when another Christian says or does something to hurt us, it seems like the hurt is deeper and more difficult to get over. Something inside us feels that Christians should know better than to tell lies about us or to slander us in some way. And when they do, we are deeply hurt. Before long that pain turns into anger and we start looking for ways to strike back.

Oh, don't bother denying it. You know what I am saying is the truth. You have been hurt and it linger on, becoming anger and seeking retaliation.

Now that we have agreed that a of us are human, because we have felt exactly what I have been describing, may I suggest that the way to relieve ourselves of the burden of that anger is to forgive the one who caused the pain in the first place. Some of us will say that we have forgiven that person, but the truth is if we keep bringing up what he (they) did to us, we have not forgiven. Inherent in forgiveness is the promise to not allow the deed that hurt us to ever come between us again, and a promise to never bring it up again. If we keep bringing up the pain we were caused, we have not forgiven, and if we have not forgiven, we are sinning against the Lord who has forgiven us.

Forgiveness, real forgiveness, will relieve us of the anger brought to us by a painful experience. If we are still angry, we have not forgiven. Protest all you want to, but if you are still angry you have not forgiven the one who hurt you. You may have mouthed the words, but you have not felt the experience of real forgiveness toward that person. Further, if you are still angry, you are still retaliating, even if the other person never knows it. Lingering anger at past events or past painful experiences is a sure sign that the peace of God is not in you, at least insofar as that pain-causing individual is concerned.

Forgiveness is an issue of stewardship. What I mean by that is simply this—since we have been forgiven by the Lord, we have the obligation to share that forgiveness with others, even those who hurt us harshly.

You may disagree, and that is O.K., but I believe that we are sinning against the Lord Jesus every day that we remain angry over that painful experience. The sure cure for anger is true forgiveness. Often I have to ask the Lord to help me forgive someone who has said things about me that are slanderous, sometimes even libelous. I have found that the Lord is the source of forgiveness.

Rumors Always Present

2011-06-29T07:11:00.001-07:00

One of the things we can count on, whether in a church or in a convention, when there is a search for top leadership going on, there will always be rumors. Most rumors come from someone who claims they have inside information about the search. I have watched this phenomena take place over and over again in churches where I have served as interim pastor. There is always a rumor floating around about something or another regarding the search.

For the most part, these rumors are harmless, if not amusing. Usually, the rumors come from someone who purports to have inside information about the search, which information could only come from a member of the committee or the spouse of a member. Ninety-nine times out of a hundred the rumors are false, without any semblance of truth. When I hear such rumors, I usually warn the person who tells me what they have heard that they need to be very careful about sharing that information, because more times than not it turns out to be false and will place the person who tells it in a bad light.

In most of these situations there are a few who know absolutely that the rumors are false, because they know the truth, having been privy to the proceedings. However, sometimes the committee members are so good at keeping their proceedings close to the vest that the only way people can pry information out of them is to start a rumor that the committee will have to reply to, thus giving away information they prefer to keep to themselves.

I say all this to simply say that when you hear something that someone has supposedly said regarding the search committee at the BGCT, take it with a grain of salt. Rumors of committee members doing their own thing, or that so and so has been asked to consider the job, are just that—rumors. Believe them if you want to, but be careful, because you could end up looking foolish. I have had several conversations with people on this search committee and I can tell you they are playing it very cool. They are not loose-lipped people who are telling all their friends what is going on. They are doing what they should do, keeping their work confidential and they are not making deals outside their committee.

It is unwise to pounce on such rumors as those that suggest certain staff members need to resign so that so and so will take the job. That is unfair to those staff members and it puts undue pressure on committee members. Most important, though, it is probably not even true. It is just one of those things that someone would like to see happen and feel they can make it hap[pen if they start a rumor.

In my opinion, there is not one member of the committee that can make anything happen. These are all people of integrity and each of them has his own sphere of influence. However, each of them knows it takes a whole committee to make a decision.

Rumors are inevitable. Just understand that is all it is—a rumor. In every search process it is inevitable that rumors will abound. The current search at the BGCT is no different.

Leaders Know Who They Really Are

2011-06-26T06:12:00.001-07:00

There are leaders and there are perceived leaders. Some people look at a great general and proclaim him to be a wonderful leader. He may be a great general, but could be a poor leader. In the military, things get done by a chain of command. In other words, there is always someone with a higher rank that can order that something be done, and the fear of discipline through the ranks gets it done. This is a command and control form of management, which does not necessarily lend itself to developing good leaders. When you can order something done, knowing it will get done because of the fear of those who are of lower rank, you do not have to be a good leader, just a good order giver.

Some people look at the CEO of a giant corporation and say, "He is a great leader." He may be a great leader, but given the fact that he heads up a corporation and has a bevy of underlings working under him, trying to climb the corporate ladder, he does not have to be a good leader, just a good manager of his human resources.

When you get into church life, you find there are several different kinds of pastors leading their churches. Some of them look at the selves as the general, giving orders, expecting them to be carried out without question. Pastors who operate with a military style of leadership are often very poor leaders, even though they occupy a position of leadership. Then there are pastors who operate like CEOs. They gather their staff around them and give assignments to them, expecting these assignments to be carried out under pain of dismissal. This kind of pastor is not what I would call a leader.

The real leaders among the pastors I know are those who have the ability to rally the army of volunteers whom he leads to accomplish things they never would have believed they could accomplish. He is like a shepherd who walks among his sheep, gently nudging them in one direction or another, walking with them to their destination. He doesn't stand on a hillside shouting directions. He walks among them, showing them the direction as he walks toward it.

The picture of authentic leadership is the shepherd standing in the midst of his sheep, not the military commander sequestered in his tent, standing among his maps. Neither is the authentic leader the one who strikes fear into the hearts of his underlings with a do-it-or-get-out mandate.

It is been my sad experience to know pastors who sincerely believed they had no responsibility to anyone except God. That is not the Biblical model for leadership as established by Jesus. Jesus demonstrated a concern for those who followed him, helping them share His passion for pleasing the Father.

It has also been my sad experience to know pastors of churches who were much more adept at telling than showing what the Lord expects of us. Pastors who aspire to be the tallest tree in the forest can usually achieve that goal, but they are not necessarily leaders. Leaders know that inspiring people to follow is a challenge. Real leaders know that if they think they are leading, but look around and see that no one is following, they are only taking a walk. Real leadership is influencing people by example, rather than by edict.

Would You Vote For Mormon?

2011-06-22T06:58:00.001-07:00

For the second presidential election in a row we will have a Mormon running for the nation's highest office. What is different this time is that there are two Mormon men running for the office. With the announcement Tuesday from John Hunstman, Jr., joining Mitt Romney in the run, Gallup came up with a poll saying that 23% of Americans say they would never vote for a Mormon for president. I have no polls to back this up, but I imagine that the figure among Southern Baptists would be somewhat higher. In my humble opinion, that is a shame.

In 1960 I was about to participate in the presidential election for just the third time in my life. At that point there was, for the second time in history, a Roman Catholic running for the White House. In a very close election, he won, and John F. Kennedy became the first Roman Catholic to hold the highest office in the land. I remember making a lot of statements during that election, telling everyone how bad it would be to have someone in the presidency whose first allegiance was to the Vatican. What an idiot I was. But, I was young, and was smarter than I would ever be again. I had learned all the arguments against a Catholic president and was free to share them with anyone who would listen.

Sometime during that 1960 race I was jolted by someone stating that it would be a travesty in this country for someone's baptism to disqualify him for the presidency. I knew that was a true statement, but I was certain it would be a bad thing to have a Catholic president. I did not vote for Mr. Kennedy, but I am so glad he got elected, if for no other reason than to show all of those, like me, who were opposed to his religion, how foolish we were. I remain convinced that it is a really stupid thing to use a person's religion as a reason not to vote for him.

In this country every person who is qualified according to the constitution (native born and at least 35 years old) should be allowed to run for the office, regardless of who baptized him. There may be a lot of reasons why neither of these men should be president, but the fact that they are Mormons is not one of them, and should not be in anyone's mind. However, if this year's raced is anything like the 1960 or the 2008 race, I suspect we will hear a lot of Southern Baptist preachers expound eloquently on why we should never vote for a Mormon. Some will make it sound like a gross sin, while others will likely use it to tell people they are going to hell if they even consider voting for a Mormon for president..

I sincerely hope we will move past that kind of thinking. My vote will not assist either of these Mormons in getting their party's nomination, but it has nothing to do with their religion.

Mistakes Are In The Past

2011-06-19T06:11:00.001-07:00

A comment on my previous post suggested that the BGCT needs to admit its mistakes. I suppose it is possible for a convention to become associated with the mistakes of its individual leaders, but in the broader sense, mistakes made by individuals cannot be laid at the feet of the convention as a whole. I am a part of the convention, as are many others, and we had no part in the mistakes of some past leaders. Most of us were not members of the Executive Board which failed to hold its leaders to account. We had no part in the mistakes that abounded and grew into a scandal. Just as the SBC apologized for mistakes made in the past regarding slavery, which many of us had no part in, the BGCT cannot apologize for mistakes made by leaders, unless it is assumed all members of the convention were participants in the mistakes.

So, it is not fair to say the convention needs to admit its mistakes. Individuals who served as board members, and leaders who made mistakes are gone. The consequences of their mistakes linger on and perhaps will for a while, but those who made the mistakes are no longer in our sight. There may still be some board members who were serving then, and I suggest that they have for the most part admitted their mistakes and sought to correct them. New policies are in place, new people are in place, and the convention moves on, except in the minds of those who refuse to let them do so.

It wasn't the convention that made mistakes, it was the staff who went around policy that nearly brought the whole convention to her knees. If the convention erred in electing those people to their positions, that situation has been rectified. None of them are around any longer.

It seems to me that if there was a collective mistake by the convention as a whole, it was standing by to allow members of Texas Baptists Committed to get such a stranglehold on the affairs of the body. The convention should have stood up and screamed, "ENOUGH!" years ago, when it became obvious that this body within the body had garnered for itself too much power over the processes of the convention. We must never again allow such a thing to happen. Now that the hold on the convention has been broken, we must be ever more vigilant to see that it never again allows itself to be taken over by any group. It was fear that allowed this to take place, fear that the same thing that happened to the SBC would happen to us here in Texas—that a radical fringe element would gain control and take us places we did not want to go. While we were afraid that a group of extreme right wing crazies would take us over, we allowed another extreme group to do the same thing. We traded one group of "if-you-are-not-with-us-you-are-against-us" loopies for another with the same philosophy.

So, no, I don't believe the convention needs to admit her mistakes, except for our laziness in allowing ourselves to be usurped by TBC. Individuals made mistakes. Those individuals are gone. TBC is mostly gone, although a remnant still exists within the structure, a remnant which no longer controls the processes.

I think it is time for us to forgive ourselves for our lack of vigilance in allowing TBC to take us over. That was a mistake. There—it has been admitted. Now let's get on with the mission.

Facing Our Mistakes

2011-06-15T06:41:00.001-07:00

A lot is written these days about leadership. That is a good thing, because it has not been so very long ago that you could hardly find a good book on the subject and colleges and seminaries virtually ignored it. Some universities thought they were covering leadership in their management classes, but the difference in management and leadership is stark. One can be a good manager and a poor leader. A few years ago the BGCT decided that schools were not going to do anything with the subject of leadership, so they created the Texas Baptist Leadership Center, where courses in leadership were developed and teachers trained to teach them. While the effort was somewhat successful, it got bogged down and somehow lost its way. That entity no longer exists, although the convention does have a very fine leadership team in place to assist in the instruction of needed leadership skills.

All this was brought to my mind again as the events surfaced surrounding Congressman Anthony Weiner. Weiner is supposed to be a leader. However, he once again proved that just because one holds a position of leadership, it does not make him a leader. He did everything exactly wrong in trying to handle the situation, insofar as a leader is concerned. For any leader in a position of leadership one of the most important things to remember is that a leader must be willing to deal with his own mistakes.

These days leaders are called upon to be very brave in many situations. Many of Congressman Weiner's closest colleagues, people who are also known to be leaders in the congress, are using their influence with him to encourage him to resign in the face of his recent lapses in judgment, morality and truthfulness. They are doing so because the congressman lacked the ability to own up to his faults in a straightforward manner, choosing instead to lay the blame on a mythical hacker of his Twitter account. They are doing so because they courageously believe it is best for him and for the country. Point number one—leaders always seek to do what is best for the entity they serve.

In situations like this the congressman's friends must choose whether to stand up for the truth. They must challenge their friend to accept responsibility for his deeds. As for the congressman himself, a true test of his leadership is how he handles his own poor judgment. That's when he must decide if he will tell the truth, own his mistake, or choose to seek to avoid responsibility for it. Unfortunately, initially the congressman chose to lie about his deeds.

In the long ago movie, "Stand By Me", a teacher challenged his class to "stand and deliver". That is the exact opposite of what Congressman Weiner chose to do when his deed was discovered. Instead of standing and delivering the truth, Weiner sought to evade it by lying. In the final analysis, that turned out to be a bigger mistake than the original deed. Point number 2—a leader must accept responsibility for his own mistakes. Failure to do so is usually a greater mistake than the one we seek to evade.

Whether one is a congressman or a pastor, leadership demands that we own our mistakes. Too often these days, especially in churches, men who hold leadership positions, such as a pastor, show themselves not to be leaders at all. Nothing is more uncomfortable than to be in a leadership position but lack the essentials of leadership to hold it. Point number three—too many think that just because they are a pastor, they are automatically a leader. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I will have more to say about this in the future. I hope you will continue to read.

No Way To Run A Country

2011-06-12T05:34:00.001-07:00

It is no secret that I am mostly right wing in my politics, which gives those of you with a left slant enough reason to disregard the remainder of this post. However, whether you are left or right, I think you would have to agree that both parties have pretty well messed things up when it comes to the economy of our country. Whether you lean to the left or to the right, I think you would agree that the way we are doing things these days is not the way to run a country. None of us could run our private finances the way our politicians are running America.

Just listen to this debate over whether or not to raise the debt ceiling. Administration leaders, just the way administration leader did during the Bush era, are trying to tell us that "we can't afford to default on our obligations." Now, just put the pieces together in that argument. What they are saying is that we have to raise the debt limit so that we can borrow more money so that we can pay our debts. Not only that, we have been doing this for a long time. President Obama, when he was Senator Obama, refused to vote to raise the debt ceiling on principles of sound economics. He could see that it was not a good thing to have to borrow money to pay back borrowed money. Now that he is president, he sees things differently, as all men do once they get into that office.

How long could you sustain your standard of living if you were constantly borrowing to pay back what you had borrowed previously? Our country has been doing that so long that we now have a debt of over fourteen trillion dollars, more than $500,000 for every American household.

And here's the rub—news came out Friday that this year we will spend more than a trillion dollars more than we have taken in, so we will have to borrow or print a trillion dollars just to "pay our obligations". If we simply print that money, we will weaken our dollar further and sow the seeds for inflation, which is by definition the availability of too much money. That in turn makes the dollar worth less, so that it takes more of them to purchase goods and services. That is economics 101. Most college students who have had that course know the truth of that.

Borrowing to pay back what we have borrowed is a disaster waiting to happen. China owns more of our debt than anyone else, but we will have to borrow from someone else to pay them back. Most of us live our every day ;lives by these simple rules:

Don't spend more than you make.
Never borrow to pay debts.
When you get deeply in debt, quit spending for anything except the essentials.

This is what the argument is going to be about in the upcoming presidential campaign. Spending less remains the best way to catch up. Increasing revenues is another way. Political parties argue about the best way to raise revenue. One says we need to raise taxes. The other says we need to have a more productive economy so that revenues will rise out of the robustness of the economy. Few are arguing that both will be necessary, but that is likely true.

Whatever the solution is, the way we are going is no way to run a country. Is there a candidate out there in either political party that understands that?

Samurai Is Right On This One

2011-06-08T06:33:00.001-07:00

It is no secret that David Montoya and I have not always seen things the same way, but his recent blog about a staff member seeking to unduly influence the Search Committee is right on the money. Now, in all fairness, David was given this information by a confidential informant, and neither David nor I know if the information is accurate. But, if the informant, who is unnamed, was right, Montoya's analysis is right on the button insofar as the influence thing is concerned. The rest of the blog, which called into question the character of the staff member, is not what I am agreeing with. Just the fact that it is inappropriate to lobby, outside of any effort by the committee to get input from the staff.

There are ways that staff can and should get to give input to the Search Committee. These are perfectly appropriate. But, unless the Search Committee has requested that staff members submit names, they should not do so. And they certainly should not be involved in lobbying efforts.

Most Search Committees, even in churches, give staff members opportunity to suggest qualities a committee should look for in a leader. This helps in the development of a profile. It is unseemly, though, for staff to push for a specific individual. The time will come when the staff will be given the opportunity to endorse a candidate, but that comes much later in the process.

If the allegations of the informant are true, and a staff member is actually lobbying for a specific candidate, that person should be rebuked and disciplined. In any case, if the candidate for which he has lobbied does not get the job, he will find himself in an awkward position. The staff person will then have no choice but to resign or find himself awkwardly trying to support a candidate he had openly lobbied against by lobbying for another.

Not a good situation.

Baylor’s Desires Are Perplexing

2011-06-05T05:45:00.001-07:00

It is difficult for those of us who did not go to Baylor to understand what this great school really wants. They say they want to continue to be a part of the BGCT, but their actions mitigate against that desire. It appears that what they want is to be able to elect whomever they please as a regent, regardless of the guidelines agreed to with the BGCT in the most recent cooperative agreement. From this standpoint, any first year law school student at Baylor's fine law school should be able to see that the school has once again abrogated the agreement to which they had earlier consented. Most law school students would call that a breach of contract.

Initially, Baylor, without the consent of the BGCT, went to Austin to have their charter changed, even though the school had agreed that there could be no charter changes without the consent of the BGCT. That charter change allowed them to elect their own trustees. Later, the school agreed that they would continue to allow the BGCT to elect twenty-five percent of the regents. This was all done, so they say, to prevent Baylor from being taken over by fundamentalist regents potentially elected by the BGCT. If seems Baylor felt the BGCT would be taken over by fundamentalists, as the SBC had been. After the charter change, with BGCT permissions, Baylor and the BGCT settled on the new agreement, allowing one quarter of their regents to be elected by the BGCT. However, the agreement continued the guidelines of the BGCT election process, i.e. that regents had to be members of BGCT churches, if in state, and Baptist, if out of state.

Recently, Baylor decided they wanted another change, so they just arbitrarily made it, again without consulting with or receiving agreement of the BGCT. Baylor now wants to elect regents who are not Baptist. Frankly, I have no problem with Baylor electing non-Baptists. What I do have a problem with is their constant reneging on their agreements with the BGCT, while at the same time protesting that they want to be a part of the BGCT family. What a farce!

In the recent Executive Board meeting all this came to a head. Board members finally stood up and said "Enough!" They adopted a report that criticized Baylor's failure to live up to their agreements or to work with the BGCT to have those agreements updated.

Then, of all things, one member of the board introduced a motion that the BGCT Executive Board APOLOGIZE to Baylor for some of the language in the report. The board, of course, voted down that motion, as they should have. If any apologies were forthcoming they should have come from the Baylor Board of Regents to the Baptist Executive Board for the utter contempt Baylor has shown toward them once again, seeking their own ends without regard to what they had agree to live with.

I want it to be known that I am a big fan of Baylor. I root for their teams, and I take pride in the academic achievements of the university, and in their pursuit of excellence. However, I abhor the actions of the regents. I believe they deliberately took advantage of the fact that the BGCT is without an Executive Director at this time, and used that leadership vacuum to their own advantage. I believe the school has no desire to be part of the BGCT family, in spite of their statements to the contrary. You just do not treat family the way Baylor has treated the BGCT. Baylor has treated the BGCT Executive Board as though they are a bunch of outlander hicks, undeserving of such a fine school as B.U. I do not believe Baylor respects the BGCT board, nor do I believe they care what the messengers think at the annual convention.

Baylor has acted arrogantly and in utter disregard for their agreements with the BGCT. Frankly, Baylor does not deserve the BGCT. They obviously think they are better than the rest of us, elevating themselves to an elitist class, giving themselves permission to do whatever they want, regardless of the family commitments.

For my money, the BGCT does not need Baylor. We should let them go. That appears to be what they want. Take the money we have been sending them for ministerial scholarships and any other money, and divvy it up with the remaining schools who live up to the agreements they sign.

Why I Bother With This Blog

2011-06-01T07:20:00.001-07:00

All my life I have been a proponent of the philosophy, "Finish Strong." I believe that is good advice for an athlete and it is good advice for those of us whose athletic days are behind us. It is rare these days that something does not happen to remind me that my life, like the paper towels, is coming close to the end of the roll. The Lord has allowed me to outlive many of my friends, and it is just a reality of life that people my age do not have a lot of years left. However, that does not mean that we should give up trying to do the things the Lord called us to do. Life must be played out to the very end, or at least until we become so incapacitated we can no longer function.

For sixty years I have been trying to do what God called me to do. I have sought to communicate the principles of the Gospel in every possible way. Some people have suggested that I have had influence in days past, largely because of positions I have held. Those positions are gone now, so whatever influence I have must be taken from other sources. In 2005 I started this blog as a means of trying to set the record straight when I saw things in the blogosphere that I knew to be untrue. To know something one reads to be untrue and not to try to correct it would be a rejection of my calling. After all, God's ministers, if nothing else, should be truth tellers.

Sometimes telling the truth directly contradicts something someone else has said, which makes it seem like a fight between two individuals. Actually, it is usually nothing more than two people viewing the same circumstance through different prisms, thus seeing things differently. We have all witnessed this phenomena. Two people see the same event and see it entirely differently from each other. The result is that two sides, or two opinions, arise.

I believe in the goodness of most of my brethren in the ministry. I work from the premise that all of them want the best outcomes and want to see the best in each other. I, too, get frustrated sometimes when people do things that I disagree with, but that does not mean that I believe they seek a worse outcome than I. Most people, even the misguided ones, want what is best. Sometimes they just do not get what is best because they make choices that are hard to fathom.

This blog is my effort to present a different view than is often seen on other blogs. I do not like to see people hurt. I do not like to read hurtful things about people I know and basically like. I don't know if this blog has any influence, or not. Some people tell me it does. In any event, if it does, I would hope that those who faithfully read this would understand that hurtful criticism of brother and sister Christians must be tempered with a sense that even though they see things differently, they are still our brothers and sisters and the same Christ that inhabits us inhabits them. That means that we can certainly disagree with them, but we have to love them, in Christ, and our language towards them should reflect that love.

Unless I am absolutely wrong on this, I believe we have to be very careful how we criticize other Christians. It is one thing to disagree with their actions. It is quite another to wish them evil.

My continuing this blog is my effort to "finish strong". Months ago I wrote what will be my goodbye post for this blog. I keep it in my drafts folder. One of these days I will post it and Strong Coffee will be gone. I don't know when it will be, but until it happens, I will keep on keeping on. After all, it is just about all an old man can do these days.

Last Saturday Was A Day To Remember

2011-05-29T05:27:00.001-07:00

Those of you who read my son's blog will already know that last Saturday was a monumental day for our family. Martha and I observed our 57^th anniversary, while our son and his wife observed their 29^th. However, on that same day, our granddaughter Elizabeth Coffee, oldest daughter of our son Blake and his wife, Kappie, married her fiancé, Bobby Biedrzycki. Each May 28^th we celebrate marriage and family at our house. The wedding Saturday was a blessing and a testimony to the 500 or so guests who watched it take place in the chapel of First Baptist Church San Antonio.

The wedding was an unusual one in that it featured more prayer than is ordinary at weddings. That is a testimony to the place of prayer in the lives of both the bride and groom. There were also a lot of attendants to the couple, I believe about sixteen in all. That is a testimony to the richness and breadth of many friendships held by the couple. The Maid of Honor was the bride's younger sister, a testimony to the closeness of their family tie. All the music was on tracks, instead of live, simply because the couple has many friends who are in the music business and they did not want to have to choose from among them to have one perform live. That is a testimony to the sensitivity of the couple to the feelings of their friends. The groom is a minister, and four other ministers, all mentors to the couple, participated in the ceremony, a testimony to the respect they have for the position of the clergy.

Both the bride and the groom plan careers in ministry, The groom is a third year seminary student and the bride will soon enter seminary to study Church Communications. Her degree in communications from a Christian school has given her a solid foundation upon which to build a ministry/career assisting churches with their communication needs. The bride will, in fact, be joining the staff of the state convention, working with churches who wish to have a web presence. This will be a new ministry, one which will assist small churches to build, maintain and host a web site.

The whole family is breathing a bit easier now that the wedding is behind us. Except for our son, who now has to pay all the bills.

The Man I Want To Be

2011-05-25T06:32:00.001-07:00

Then he said it a third time: "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was upset that he asked for the third time, "Do you love me?" so he answered, "Master, you know everything there is to know. You've got to know that I love you." Jesus said, "Feed my sheep." John 21:17 The Message

When you stop and think about it, Peter could have been remembered for denying Jesus three times, or for being confused at the tomb on resurrection day, or even for going fishing after having seen the resurrected Lord twice, been commissioned to go out under the Lord's auspices, even as the Lord Himself had been sent by the Father. Those negative things might have been Peter's legacy, if it had not been for the intensely personal encounter with Jesus on the beach early one morning. It was here alongside the Sea of Galilee that the Peter that was became the Peter we now remember.

What an example was set for us modern day disciples by this encounter with Jesus on the beach! The lesson we learn from this encounter serves us well today and we preachers need to be reminded of exactly what it was that God called us to do. This quote by Oswald Chambers sums it up: ""Is that what we have been doing, feeding Jesus Christ's sheep? Take a rapid survey. Have we been nourishing the lives of people in the understanding of Jesus, or has our aim been to maintain our particular deposit of doctrine? According to Jesus, divine loyalty means that we feed His sheep in the knowledge of Him, not feed them with our doctrine."

Too often, it seems, we feel called to feed people our understanding of our doctrine instead of our understand of the essence of Christ. Peter's arrogance love for walking with Messiah had to be altered to his ministry as a shepherd. There is no question that Peter felt before this beach encounter that he was better than a shepherd. After all, He had been called by Messiah. He had walked for three years with a King. "What do you mean feed your sheep? I am not a shepherd, I am your lead disciple!" That attitude had to be torn down so that the new attitude of shepherd could be built.

I find that too many of us who feel called to lead people, to minister to His people, feel we are too good to be shepherds. "After all—I am the pastor! I am somebody special!" And then the still small voice of the Master comes to ask, "Do you love me?" Not "Do you believe in me?" Not, "Do you understand me?" But, "Do you love me?" "Do you love me enough to put aside all your feelings of importance and arrogance and simply walk among my sheep, taking care of them, feeding them with understanding of Jesus, The Great Shepherd.

The Master isn't really interested in what you know about eschatology, or even theology. He is interested in knowing if you can humble yourself to tend His sheep. That's the man I want to be. I want to be the man who smells like His sheep from having walked among them.

You Still Here?

2011-05-22T05:23:00.001-07:00

This was written early last Saturday morning and placed on automatic posting for Sunday, May 22. It was done then so as to be sure this got posted after the rapture and coming of the Lord at 6:00 P.M. last Saturday. I am not trying to be funny, because this is serious business. If all my Christian friends are reading this on Sunday, Monday etc., that means either the rapture did not take place or some of you got left behind. I am taking it that the former is true.

It is a serious thing to make such predictions as those of Harold Camping, because when they do not take place as predicted, the predictor is made to look like a fool, but more than that, the coming of the Lord Jesus is trivialized. People all over the country are laughing at Camping's prediction, but the business of the coming Lord Jesus is not a laughing matter. In fact, judgment will come upon those who bring such disrepute to the whole doctrine of the 2^nd coming.

People like Camping make it more difficult for the rest of us to preach the coming of the Lord, because we have to say we don't know when it is going to happen, only that it is going to happen. When the Harold Campings of the world make this kind of specific prediction and it does not happen, it makes everyone laugh at the whole notion of the Lord coming back. And that is sad. I firmly believe in the bodily return of the Lord on a day of the Father's choosing. I believe it so strongly that I make every effort to get others to believe it, also. It is important that people make themselves ready for this event, because it will happen. It is not my belief that the Father is going to reveal the day and time to anyone ahead of time, so I put no stock in anyone who thinks they have it all worked out.

Those of my friends who have their dispensational charts laid out before them, thinking they have it all worked out are no different than Harold Camping. They think they know something no one else knows. But, they don't.

God the Father and He alone knows the date and time of the coming of the Lord. Publicize that fact, but stay away from predicting or working out God's timetable.

God Leads His Dear Children Along

2011-05-18T06:54:00.001-07:00

Susan and her husband had been missionaries in Africa, where Susan was burdened for the women to learn life skills. Upon returning to Texas, following their missionary appointment, Susan continued writing curriculum to be used to teach life skills to women wherever needed. Therein lies the rub. She had no clue who would want the curriculum materials and no way to market them.

Susan saw an article in the San Antonio paper about a woman who was about to make a trip to Uganda. Susan contacted te woman and made arrangements to go with her. Upon arriving, Susan and her travelling companion met with an Anglican woman who wanted to establish 50 centers to teach women life skills. When asked what the teaching materials would be, the woman replied, "I don't know, but if you will pray, God will provide."

At that point Susan reached into her bag and pulled out the curriculum materials she had been working on, but had no clue who she was working on the for. As the Anglican woman looked at the materials she started to cry and then to laugh at how God had provided an answer to her prayers. At the same time Susan laughed and cried about how God provided someone who needed what he had led here to write all those hours at home in Texas.

The point of this little story is to remind us all that when God leads, even if we cannot see the whole road, we should take the first step on the journey and He will direct the next step as He sovreignly wills.

Most of us are wired so that we do not want to take the first step until we can see the destination. However, we need to learn that God does not always work that way. Often God simply shows us the initial step we need to take, withholding the destination until we have faithfully taken the first few steps in the journey.

Whewn God calls, our job is to respond to that call. God's people do not need to see the destination, just the step we are to take now.

Graduation Time

2011-05-15T06:21:00.001-07:00

It is time again for graduation and this year the Coffees are doubly blessed to have two graduates. Our two San Antonio granddaughters are both graduating, one from high school and the other from college (Abilene Christian University). We are also blessed because both are honors graduates, which is a testimony to the fact that they are smart, but also that they had their elementary years of schooling at home, under the tutelage of their teacher mom.

When they did start public school, one in middle school and the other in high school, they immediately excelled, not only in studies, but in socialization. Both girls were involved in school activities, putting a lie to the accusations of home schooling opponents who said that practice would stunt the social skills of the students. These two girls fell into the mainstream of public school without so much as a hiccup. They had experienced great socialization at their church all their lives, so public school was not a problem for them.

Not only were they involved in school activities, but they excelled in them. However, the most important aspect of their home schooling was the fact that they were prepared. Academically they were prepared. More than that, though, their Christian witness was never compromised after starting public school because they were spiritually prepared.

Now, I am not saying all home schooled students are like these two, but I can say that homeschooling done correctly is not in the least a problem for the students. These two young ladies proved that if it is done correctly, home schooling can prepare a student for anything they will experience in the world. Both these girls are tremendous witnesses for Christ, and have had no problem maintaining their Christian principles in public school. Both started Bible studies in their schools and both were popular with other students even while maintaining their high Christian standards.

Not only were students impressed with the abilities and standards of these two girls, but teachers also appreciated the manner in which the girls went about their business.

So, count this as a post extolling outstanding home schooling by their mother, and outstanding public school work by the girls, proving again that one can be a Christian and be popular without lowering the standards of Christian living. Can you tell I am a proud granddad? Not only am I proud of the girls, but I am proud of the product of my son's home and of his precious wife who sacrificed much to teach these girls in their formative years.

Morale In Good Shape @ BGCT

2011-05-11T07:12:00.001-07:00

Over the past month or so I have had the opportunity to have lengthy sit-downs with three of the Executive Cabinet members of the BGCT. It has been both delightful and enlightening. I have also sat down with two members of the Executive Director Search Committee. Regarding the latter I can tell you this. At this moment in time they have not started looking at resumes, so there is no favored candidate that has surfaced. At least not yet. So, if you read somewhere that so and so or so and so is the favored candidate, it is just plain balderdash.

What I have learned from the cabinet members is that income through April is about even with last year and that morale is high among the staff.

Frankly, as I have spoken with staff members and heard from them by e-mail and over the phone, I have sensed that there is indeed a passion in them for the work they do. This is a good sign and a positive harbinger of things to come. I do not know who the new Executive Director is going to be, but when he gets there he will find a staff that is dedicated to doing everything they can to help the churches of the convention make a difference in Texas. Having a competent team in place will be a tremendous blessing to whomever is asked to assume that role.

Search Committee members are being fairly tight-lipped, as they should, about their work. That does not prevent rumors, however, rumors from some who would like others to believe they know things they do not know. I have said before and I say it again, this is a good committee. The time they spend getting to know each other's heart is important. It is very important that they be able to trust each other and that when something is said that others will know the heart of the person who said it. I am told that thus far there does not appear to be any committee member with an agenda. Of course, that may change when they start looking at resumes, but at least thus far no agendas have come to the fore. Thankfully, even though the committee members with whom I have spoken are good friends, they have not disclosed anything, even to me, regarding the confidential proceedings of the group.

These conversations with committee and cabinet members have left me with a positive feeling about the future. There are still some things I would prefer to change, but we need to allow some time for some of these things to take place. Meanwhile, I feel good about the direction we are headed.

Will You Be Busy May 21 @ 6:00 P.M.

2011-05-08T10:59:00.001-07:00

Most of us have never heard of Harold Camping. He is the 89-year-old co-founder of the Christian Family Radio Network, an engineer by trade. Camping has figured out a mathematical formula that proves that the rapture will take place at 6:00 P.M. May 21, 2011. That's 6:00 P.M. wherever you are. In other words, at 6:00 P.M. here in Texas, it will be 7:00 P.M. in New York and the rapture will have already occurred. Presumably, we will have started hearing about it an hour before it actually happens in our locale.

Let's say that it starts happening at 6:00 P.M. in New York, and Fox News starts reporting that pilots have disappeared from their planes and drivers have disappeared from their cars all over the eastern seaboard. Soon, one of their reporters discerns that it is because of the rapture. That leaves people in other time zones just a few minutes to get their affairs in order before it starts happening in their time zones. At least, that is the thinking of Harold Camping and he has a whole passel of people who believe him. Of course, this is the same man who predicted all this would happen in 1994 and again in 1995 when he supposed he had miscalculated.

Camping puts us in mind of William Miller, whose Millerites stood on mountain tops in 1844 awaiting the coming King. Camping has a whole caravan of R.V.s driving across the USA posting warnings of the coming end of the world.

All my life I have heard and seen people who thought they had it all figured out. Quite honestly, in my opinion it is a complete waste of time to study things like this. Jesus Himself does not know when He is coming again, according to Scripture. Only the Father knows. It is not our job to spend our lives trying to figure out when it is going to happen. It is our job to be ready whenever it happens and to try to get an unbelieving world to prepare themselves for this momentous event. Our faith does not require us to know the time and date of this event, only that we understand it is going to happen "in an hour when we think not."

There are so many people who have wasted so much time trying to get a handle on the "when" of this event that they have lost the urgency of the "what and why." Time spent trying to figure it all out is time we should be telling others it is going to happen. Years ago I had a couple of young preacher boys trying to weasel out of me whether or not I was a "premillenialist" or an "amillenialist". They were absolutely astonished when I told them "I do not know what I am and frankly do not care what I am because it is none of my business. All that is simply up to the Father and he did not put me on the program committee. He put me on the publicity committee." Time studying all this is wasted time as far as I am concerned, because knowing it does not give us any more of a handle on when it will take place than it did William Miller in 1844.

I have seen churches absolutely destroyed in arguments over end times. I have seen fellowship between brothers shattered over arguments about millennial things. Millions of dollars of Christian money has gone into the pockets of individuals who have written books predicting the coming of Jesus at a certain time. Christian people are so eager to get information on this event that they will go to any lengths or any conference to learn of it. Shame on us. That is time wasted because God and God alone knows the times and when He is ready to tell us He will.

On one thing Camping said do I agree with him. "Frankly, I wonder why this hasn't happened sooner." I don't know when it will happen. Perhaps Camping is right and May 21 is the date. I don't know about that. Neither does he.

60 Years And Counting

2011-05-04T07:09:00.001-07:00

It has never been quite clear to me how one measured his years of ministry. Do you measure it from the date or ordination? What about the date of one's first job in a church? Or should it be measured from the time one surrenders to full time Christian service, or perhaps from the date of the first sermon preached?

For me, it is a combination of the last two, date of surrender and date of first sermon preached. In my case the two were separated by about two weeks. I surrendered to preach in the summer of 1951 and preached my first sermon about two weeks later, thanks to a pastor who sought to nurture my call. That means that I will celebrate sixty years in ministry this summer. These have been sixty years of wonderful opportunity and fulfillment. My first sermon was in my home church, Hobart Baptist in Pampa, Texas. My second sermon was in the First Baptist Church of Panhandle, Texas, where Bill Thorn was pastor. He was another who sought to nurture young preachers and when he heard I had surrendered to preach he wanted me to come to his church on a Wednesday evening and persecute His flock.

The third time I "filled a pulpit" was in the First Church of The Nazarene in Pampa, where my two preacher-boy friends, Marvin and Jimmy Bond, were members. After that it was wherever anyone would listen. Sometimes it was on the street, sometimes it was in a nu8rsing hoe, but always with enthusiasm.

When I got to Wayland in 1952, I got branded a singer because I was on a choir scholarship, so preaching opportunities were slow in coming. However, I got to do a lot of singing in churches, youth-led revivals, etc. I even got to have a job leading the singing at a couple of churches on Sundays. I never regretted using whatever ability I had to serve the Lord, even though I always knew I wanted to preach. In my senior year I decid3ed to quit my job as music director at Happy Union Church outside Plainview, Texas and start doing what I knew I had been called to do. Frankly, I had no place to preach, but believed God would take care of that. When I announced my resignation I had no place to preach, Within two weeks I had booked a complete month of preaching. The last engagement I had was to supply at Center Baptist Church out in the country from Floydada, Texas. Just supposed to preach one Sunday morning and that was it. At the end of the service my host deacon asked me to wait for him in the car. When he came out to the car after about 15 minutes he said, "We have just voted to call you as our pastor. Will you accept?" I was astounded, because I didn't have a clue they were thinking about me as a pastor. To make a long story short, I accepted their call and spent the remainder of my senior year at Wayland as their pastor before moving to Ft. Worth to attend seminary….or so I thought.

Already prepared for the fact that I would be a preacher among many preachers at the seminary, I accepted a call to serve as music director at Memorial Baptist Church in Grapevine, with Gene Garrison, a friend from Pampa days, who was pastor. About that same time my bride of two years got very ill and it became obvious that her well being was my priority, so seminary would have to wait. Doctors told me her stress-related illness required that we do something other than school for a short time, until she got better. In the spring of 1958 I was asked to come supply the pulpit at Tabernacle Baptist Church in Pickton, Texas. I went there, about an hour and a half drive and preached. Lo and behold, following the service I was asked if I would become their pastor, which I did. From there I went to be associate at FBC Winnsboro, Texas, where I started learning all I could about educational work.

My early ministry opportunities were all like that. I always tried to serve wherever God called me. When I was called back to a church in Ft, Worth, Oak Knoll Baptist Church, to serve as associate to the pastor, I was told by the committee that I could go to seminary. However, about a week after getting on the field the pastor told me there would be no time for seminary (he had not been to seminary but had a Masters from Baylor), that we had to get six new members every week just to stay where we were. So, I set about to learn all I could about how to grow a church. In fact, I attended every conference I could get to. Tarrant Baptist Association asked me to be the Associational Sunday School Director, a job for which they would see to it that I got to attend Sunday school week at Glorieta each summer. For five years, 1961 to 1966, I did just that, soaking in all I could learn about growing a Sunday school and church.

In 1966 I was asked to come to San Antonio Association as Director of Education and Promotion, which I did. However, I never put aside then fact that God had called me to preach. While on the staff of the association I got to supply at many churches, serving as interim pastor at a few. In 1969 I was called to pastor Harlandale Baptist Church, a 2500 member church in South San Antonio. After three years, the Association asked if I would come back and develop a program for them. I was given the title of Associate Director of Missions in a bankrupt association and for seven years was asked to drive the car from the rear seat ( without the title of Director of Missions). In 1980 the Director of Missions Retired and I was asked to become the Executive Director of San Antonio Baptist Association.

In 1983, April 1, to be exact, I started work at the BGCT as Coordinator of Area and Associational Missions. Later I was promoted to Associate Director of the State Missions Commission, a position IO held until retirement in August, 1999. For the past 12 years I have enjoyed a ministry of interim work in a number of churches.

As I look back at these years, I marvel at how God led me to compensate for the lack of seminary, and how he has blessed my work in so many ways. It hardly seems possible that it has all totaled up to 60 years. But, it has. To God be the glory!!!

Baptists And The NFL

2011-05-01T12:17:00.001-07:00

If I didn't know better I would swear that the National Football League is being run by a bunch of Baptists. That crowd gives new meaning to the phrase, "Can't stand prosperity." This nine billion dollar industry is in danger of going the way of a Baptist congregation that could not agree on anything and soon dwindled away into nothingness. The players want more money guaranteed to them (60% of revenues apparently isn't enough). The owners want to exclude more revenue from that pot, so as to assure covering all their costs.

The player's union apparently had as their strategy to allow the courts to settle the issues, since they decertified themselves (in essence making believe there is no more union), while the owners retaliated by locking their facilities so players could not get in to work out. Any way you look at it the players and the owners are sitting in their bath tubs and slitting their own wrists, endangering the upcoming season.

It reminds me of a church squabble I once witnessed over whether or not to put the front doors of a new West Texas church building facing the west, exposing the entrance to sand storms that invariably came from the west. The building was built, doors facing west, and the pastor, who had insisted on having his way with those doors, and getting it, resigned, while the deacon chairman's wife, who had argued for the doors to face east instead, was so angry that she did not get her way that she quit taking the Lord's supper because she could not forgive the pastor for his intransigence.

While it turned out that the deacon's wife was right and the pastor was wrong about the doors, it was the congregation that was hurt, the innocents who really had no problem with where the doors faced at all. I watched that church disintegrate because of the black cloud of unforgiveness and disunity. The building got built. The doors faced west. The church got filthy dirty each time there was a sand storm, and the congregation was never the same after the door war.

There are those who feel that is what the NFL is doing to itself. They are fighting over issues most people do not understand, and the league is doing nothing but hurting itself with all the bickering over a few dollars and who is going to get how much. To most of us it is just a bunch of rich men (owners and players) messing with our God-given right to have football each week in the fall.

If I didn't know better I would swear it was a bunch of Baptist preachers fighting over the meaning of inerrancy.

Easter Isn’t Over

2011-04-27T16:54:00.001-07:00

Easter isn't over! That's what the sign said on the lawn of the little church in the neighborhood where I live. It got me to thinking. Oh, the calendar the date for Easter has come and gone. Many folks made their annual visit to church and the stores have moved on to displays of Mother's Day items, instead of Easter bunnies and eggs. For all of them, Easter is over. But, for many of us, Easter isn't over, and that is great news. It is news of hope and joy.

You see, the issue is not that Jesus rose from the dead. The issue is …. So what? I know it makes a difference for us in the hereafter, but does it make any difference for us in the here and now? Does it make any difference for a blogger?

In these days of the aftermath of Easter we should all be asking these questions;

"Has the resurrection of Jesus Christ changed my life?"
"If it has, how?"
"Should the resurrection make any difference in the way I live?"

If Jesus is your Saviour, the resurrection has changed your life. It has given wonderfully new things to the lives of each of us who have invited Jesus into our hearts. Even if you have not yet asked Jesus to be your Saviour, His resurrection has changed your life in that it has given you an opportunity you could never have had if the resurrection had not taken place. He has given you an opportunity to share eternity with God.

I contend that we each have a responsibility to live as though the resurrection matters in life, just as it does in death. I like to call it resurrection living. In this post I want to proffer resurrection living. You see, I believe there is such a thing as resurrection living, a kind of living that would not have been possible without the Easter miracle. Christianity is an experience of Resurrection. To me resurrection living means walking humbly before God, walking obediently with God, and walking worthy of our calling.

Diamond No Longer In The Rough

2011-04-24T10:53:00.001-07:00

When the Advisory Council of Wayland San Antonio gets together, we usually hear a testimony of a graduate from the Alamo City campus. As you might imagine, the testimony usually comes from a graduate who is successful and has an inspiring story to tell. Twice each year about 300 adult students who have completed their degree at Wayland San Antonio walk across the stage to receive their official notice of fulfillment. In many cases the graduate is a mom or dad who had interrupted their education earlier in life and now have determined to complete it. When the Advisory group met last week, we heard from Diamond, a graduate with a Criminal Justice Degree. Diamond's story is worth telling.

Diamond's story is about two young men whose life choices led tem in different directions.

Diamond and Keith had been friends since kindergarten. They were like brothers, according to most observers. They walked in each other's shoes for most of their early years. Both were born into crime families, with aunts and uncles selling drugs, using them, and abusing their kids. Diamond's mother left him, and trusted him to the care of Keith's father, her friend. Diamond's biological father had been locked up when he was two. When there were any good times there was food in the house, but the two boys were minimally supervised. Most of the time the two boys took care of themselves. Often there was nothing to east, so the boys ate at school.

When he was in the third grade, Diamond's mother came back into his life. His mother was illiterate, taught to read by Diamond's older sister. The mother tried her best to hold on to odd jobs and when Diamond was in the eighth grade he found himself living with whomever would take him. He was a chronic truant until school officials convinced his mother to take Diamond to Boysville, a San Antonio home for at-risk boys. At Boysville Diamond found the structure he needed to finish school and start college. His school work was interrupted as he married and had children. Finally, he came back to Wayland to finish his degree, and now serves as a staff member at Boysville, where he can mentor other boys who can see how life can change.

Meanwhile, Diamond's fried, Keith, recently stood trial for murder and was convicted. During the trial, Diamond was reminded of how close he had come to making the wrong choices in life, choices that could have resulted in the same fate as his "brother", Keith. Diamond said that his biggest motivation in life was that "he didn't want to be a failure." He testifies that his time at Wayland, meeting godly men who taught him, helped result in the significant change that has led him to success.

Diamond in the rough does not apply to this young man. That term speaks of potential. Diamond is no longer a potential. He is a reality. This Diamond sparkles.

Tearing Down Is Easier Than Building Up

2011-04-20T08:01:00.001-07:00

Whether one is speaking of a home, a church, an association, or a convention, one thing can be said with certainty. It is much easier to tear something down than it is to build it up. I have watched with interest as people have torn their church apart by innuendo, gossip and malicious accusation. What took years to build, took only a few months to destroy. As I watched I became aware of another fact. There are some people whose gifts are to build things up, and there are others who relish tearing things down.

Organizations can be hurt greatly by poor leaders making poor decisions about how to handle problems. The seeds of an organization's destruction are sown in such a manner. However, in most organizations there are enough clear thinking individuals that even the most severe problems can be overcome if there is a will to do so. What happens, however, when lawyers get involved, be it at a church or at a convention, things almost always go from bad to worse. Lawyers are not always known for their openness. In fact, I think it can be safely said that lawyers do not want openness, especially when dealing with law suits. They seem to think the best way to deal with issues is to keep everyone quiet.

Keeping quiet, then, gives rise to those who are not closely involved to become critics. It becomes easy to start quoting unnamed sources and "secret" documents and interpreting them in the most damaging manner possible. Gossip can be the most effective destroyer of churches, and other institutions The problem is that everyone who has any kind of relationship to that organization feel they have a right to talk about it any way they please. Many of us have watched as gossip destroyed a congregation's reputation and ruined the lives of staff members. Too many people have taken the position that "it ain't gossip if it is true." Fact is, that is a false premise. Gossip can be true and still be gossip. Gossip is speaking ill of anyone when they are not present to defend themselves.

Too many blog sites have become places for gossip to flourish, not only by the blogger, but by those he allows to comment on his blog. I have struggled with this myself. Too many people make statements in the comment stream that smack of gossip, and I hate letting it stand. I do let it stand most of the time because I believe strongly in free speech. I think discussion is good for us, if the discussion does not degenerate into name calling and besmirching another's character.

I can't believe we are still having discussions, for instance, about the Valley scandal of several years ago in the BGCT. Most of us understand that it was a bad thing and that some poor decision making by several people allowed it to happen. However, all of those people are gone now and we are still talking about this as though it happened yesterday. I hate to use the term, but it is time to move on. I must assume there are safeguards now in place that would prevent a repeat of that scandal, but I can assure you, in any vibrant organization, vibrant meaning doing something, scandals will happen from time to time and we just have to make corrections and move on. I think I speak for most Texas Baptists when I say "enough already! I'm officially tired of hashing this over and over again."

I did not intend for this post to get into the BGCT specifically, but the principle has been so beautifully illustrated in this incident. Some have used this to try to tear down a wonderful organization that others worked hard to build. Not only has that been the case with the BGCT, but I have seen it in associations, and churches, and in the homes of some good people. There are simply some people whose lot in life is to tear down what others have struggled to build Why? Because it is easier.

BGCT Will Be Fine

2011-04-17T06:15:00.001-07:00

More and more I am convinced that good days are ahead for the BGCT. Things may never again be what they used to be, but maybe that is not all bad. It would be extremely shortsighted of me to insist that the BGCT once again do what they did when I worked there from 1983 to 1999. Those were good days for the convention, under the leadership of Bill Pinson. But maybe it is true that to have good days again does not mean they have to be just like they were then.

In spite of all her critics, including me at times, the BGCT does seem to "get it" when it comes to understanding how things are today. Having to exist and work in a more competitive environment these days, the BGCT is having to reinvent herself in some ways. Now that it is not "the only game in town", things are different than they used to be. Even though I am a trustee at one of our Baptist institutions, I understand that the convention really does exist mainly to assist churches. The institutions are a very important part of the mix, but the convention is much more a convention of churches. The truth is, most institutions and most churches can exist without the convention, and that fact alone makes it imperative that the convention come to grips with her reason for being.

The most unhealthy thing I can imagine is for the churches and the institutions to get in a fuss over who the convention should lean toward. I have always felt that the institutions were an extension of the churches. I know there used to be some argument from some of the institution heads about the convention giving so much of its resources to assisting churches. As much as I think of Ken Hall, I disagreed with him over this very thing. Shortly after I retired it seemed that Dr. Hall was instrumental in leading the convention away from an emphasis on assisting churches. As an institutional head, he felt the convention should give more emphasis to the institutions. While that is a fundamental disagreement between some convention leaders, it is not something that ever needs to be an "either-or". It can be a "both-and".

Here's the main thing the convention needs to remember. 100% of her resources come from the churches. Even investment income has its roots in money given by churches and church members, which in turn is invested. That being the case, it only seems reasonable for the convention to nurture that relationship with the churches. Many large churches give funds to the convention hoping and believing that they will be used to assist churches less fortunate than they in reaching their community. It is still true that 70% of the BGCT churches run less than 100 in worship. That means some of them need a lot of help. Giving to the Cooperative Program, making funds available for the convention staff, helps many of those churches in a lot of ways. There was a day when all the services of the convention were free. These days many services, such as architectural services, have a fee attached, simply because it became too expensive to offer free support to as many churches as requested it. However, even the nominal fees do not begin to pay for the service provided, which can only be provided because of the Cooperative Program.

The main reason I am optimistic about the future of the convention is the quality of young pastors that I see coming up in the ranks. Many of them read this blog and I must tell you I am impressed that they do so. To know that some of these young guys are willing to listen to an old curmudgeon like me is a blessing. In the years ahead some of these young guys are going to be the leaders we look to in this convention. I am absolutely confident that they will be strong leaders and that the days of the BGCT are going to get better and better because of their involvement in it.

Trust Is Difficult To Give

2011-04-13T17:09:00.001-07:00

The situation going on in our national politics these days is a wonderful laboratory for how conflict comes upon us. Those of us who lived through the SBC/BGCT wars also know how conflict comes into our lives. The same thing happens in churches.

Watch what happens when two opposing views come into play in national politics. The essential difference in the two sides is a view of how government is supposed to function. On te one hand, there is a side that says too much government is bad for us. On the other side are those who believe we need more government, more people on the federal payroll to make up stuff to take care of folks who have a difficult time taking care of themselves. The labels we have put on the two sides are conservatives and progressives.

The argument between the SBC and the BGCT was also two views of how conventions are to operate. One side, the fundamentalists, believed the conventions should be more vigilant in guarding ourselves from those who think a bit differently about issues. The fundamentalists believed that we should rid ourselves of anyone who did not accept a particular view of doctrine. Doctrinal purity became the most important thing for those folks.

On the other side, those who were more moderate in their thinking, so we called them moderates, felt that we should have a big tent on most issues, although they were sure there were at least a few things on which we could all agree. These things were not so much doctrine as they were methods, such as cooperative ministry. Moderates felt that we cold disagree on some doctrinal stuff and still cooperate on the big ideas. The issue that fundamentalists used to create the conflict was the Bible. Inerrancy became the watchword and if you would not use that word to describe yourself, your were not welcome in the SBC. Stubborn as I am,. I would not use the word, even though I believed the Bible to be the authoritative true Word of God, and was without error. In fact, I would say that very thing in describing myself and yet someone would ask, "But are you and inerrantist?" When I refused to be limited to that vocabulary, someone would call me a liberal, even though my theology is somewhere to the right of Attila. I could say that God's word was perfect because He is perfect, and that was not good enough, because I did not use the proper word.

The whole argument t was between people, all of whom believed the same thing about the Bible, but who would not be pigeonholed. To be truthful, if it had not been so tragic, it would have been comical. When the SBC got upset because the BGCT would not offer unfettered support for all that they did in Nashville, the divide widened. Many people, like my friend Lee, did not understand that it was not the mission of the BGCT to promote the work of the SBC. The BGCT had its own mission, which did not include being a farm club for the SBC. It had been that way for more than a hundred years, but all of a sudden it was not good enough for those who were hard core in their promotion of the SBC, and soft core in their promotion of the BGCT.

What started as a slight difference over an issue on which we likely all agreed, soon boiled into a full-fledged war of words, not unlike what we see going on in Washington these days.

That is the same way conflict gets a foot-hold in a local congregation. It always has at least two sides warring over who is going to get their way. If the two sides do not trust each other, they will start calling each other names. Before long it is open warfare. Much like the two sides warring over the nature of Scripture, both sides violated every principle of unity in the Bible. People fighting over the Bible simply refused to do what the Bible says. In times like those we learn that maybe we aren't so much a "people of the book."

BGCT Punished For Taking The High Road

2011-04-10T12:47:00.001-07:00

Back in the days when the other convention was getting started in Texas, days I remember very well, as I was a staff member at the BGCT, the older convention was punished by some for taking the high road and not fighting back against untrue things being said to get churches to change. Pastors and laymen were told the BGCT was soft on homosexuals, even promoted the homosexual life style. This was, as any thinking person knows, an outright falsehood. However, many lay people in some of our churches bought into it and punished the BGCT by leaving for the other convention. Some of us were incensed that we were not allowed to fight back against those untrue things being said about homosexuality and the BGCT. Other untruths were also told, which we could have proven to be untrue, if we had been allowed to do so.

Leadership at the BGCT had always chosen to take the high road and not get dragged into a gutter fight with those who wanted say untrue things about the convention. Many churches chose to change their affiliation without even giving the BGCT an opportunity to come answer untruths being told about them. Other churches invited someone from the BGCT to come only after they had made up their mind to change conventions, putting the BGCT in the position of closing an argument with a jury that had already voted "guilty". Over the long haul, I believe the path of little resistance cost the BGCT a large number of churches they could have saved if they had been given the opportunity.

The loud untruths accusing the BGCT of "leaving the Southern Baptist Convention" was another of the misconceptions many churches bought into. The BGCT never left the SBC . In fact, it was the other way around. The SBC sought to ostracize the BGCT because the Texas convention was so large that it could not be bullied by Nashville. The fact that many Texas Baptists disagreed with a whole lot of what was going on in the SBC, when it was taken over by far right radicals, galled SBC leaders so much that they could not stand it. For that reason they gave their blessing to a new convention in Texas that would toe the company line and go along with everything the SBC said or did. The SBC used their appointment powers to refuse to appoint anyone from the BGCT to anything in the SBC. They refused even to use anyone from the BGCT on the programs at Glorieta (except for John Bisagno and one or two others who mostly favored what was being done in the SBC). In fact that got so bad that attendance from Texas at Glorieta was cut in half and the very existence of the conference center became an issue. I know this to be true because the folks from Glorieta came to Dallas and sat with a group of us to discuss why attendance from Texas had fallen off so much. When we pointed out how program planners at Lifeway were excluding BGCT pastors and leaders from the programs, they would not believe programs had anything to do with the poor attendance.

It became painfully obvious that the only thing the SBC wanted from Texas was their money. More and more SBC leaders pulled away from Texas Baptists, making it clear they wanted nothing to do with the BGCT and her recalcitrant manner. When People from my generation started retiring at the BGCT and were replaced by folks who felt less warmth towards the SBC, the breech became even more pronounced. Historians, at least the honest ones, will reflect that the eighties and nineties were dark days in the relationship between the BGCT and the SBC, and that most of the brokenness between them could be laid at the feet of those in the SBC who could not stand the fact that the BGCT could function well without the people in Nashville. Except for a few people like Jimmy Draper, the Lifeway exec, leadership at the SBC completely ostracized Texas. When Lifeway got to the place where they would not use BGCT-related people to write lessons, the BGCT started their own publishing arm, BaptistWay and now publishes Sunday school material as good as that of Lifeway. Some of us think it is even better.

Through all of the controversy, many of us felt the BGCT really did take the high road. We reacted to snubs by going our own way, trying not to diss anybody, even when they dissed us. Oh, there was a lot of discussion among the staff at the BGCT, but I do not believe any of those staff members took out their frustration on any church, even those who left the convention. That "take the high road" stance surely caused a lot of churches to leave the BGCT, when it was felt the BGCT could not or would not defend itself.

Branding The BGCT

2011-04-06T07:16:00.001-07:00

In my previous post I mentioned the need for the BGCT to have a new emphasis on communications. In the discussion I suggested "branding the BGCT" was an important component of that work. Some may not even be aware of what that means. Companies are indeed busily branding their organizations. But, branding is not just for Starbucks or Nabisco. Non-profits, such as churches and conventions need to pay attention to branding, also. For instance, look at the Red Cross. The tagline of the Red Cross is a good example. They say, "Together We Can Save A Life." Every marketing vehicle of the Red Cross includes this tagline, along with their easily recognizable symbol. More importantly, the symbol is suggestive of trust and competence. The BGCT is re-branding itself into the TBC (Texas Baptist Convention). It has a symbol. DO you know what it looks like? What is the tagline of the BGCT? Exactly. One thing is certain, no amount of expertise from the Communications Department, and they have a lot, will be enough to brand the BGCT properly. It is an effort in which every department must participate. The BGCT's brand should serve as a vehicle to promote the benefits of programs, products, and services offered by the extraordinary staff of the convention.

As competition in the convention landscape increases, it becomes more important to clearly brand the BGCT's focus, credibility and whatever unique contributions can be made to the constituents. Benefits to branding are many. If the BGCT cannot convince her constituents that she is an indispensible part of the mix, life will be short for the convention. Personally, I think the BGCT may have taken for granted that her cooperating churches will always be there, so little or no effort has been made to endear herself to them.

The BGCT brand needs to be sold to these churches today more than ever. There is now competition in the convention arena in Texas and we had better start realizing that. The competition can no longer be viewed as inconsequential upstarts. Branding will make it possible for the BGCT to differentiate herself in the minds of the churches. That differentiation is the foundation of quality relationships between the churches and the state convention. The other convention has branded herself as an alternative, with promoting the offerings of the Southern Baptist Convention as her main tagline. The BGCT is not an alternative and should not act like one. She should see herself as primary in the lives of her churches. While SBTC exists to serve the SBC, the BGCT should brand itself as serving the churches of Texas. We cooperate with the SBC, but we are not its farm club in Texas.

Branding will make it possible for the BGCT to convey an overall position of higher quality offerings for their churches than can be offered by the competition. What the BGCT can do to help the churches is what they need to be talking about every day. Our brand should be about helping the churches we serve, rather than calling on the churches to serve the convention.

One of the things that sets the BGCT aside from the competition is the quality of the product offered to their churches. Offering what the churches want, not what the convention thinks the churches should want, is important. For instance, with the rise of the web, branding has become more important than ever. It is on the web site that our brand has an opportunity to be forthright and effective. The web site should use terminology that the churches understand, and that is in common use in the churches. The web site is not a place to teach new concepts, but a place to offer assistance in simple, easy-to-find ways. Webs sites these days must be more than a billboard. They must be truly interactive in a multitude of ways. Having said that, the web is a place where the values, skills, and differentiations of the BGCT, the brand, become more important. One really good thing the BGCT has done is take the web management out of Information Technology and put it in Communications. That is exactly where it belongs.

Things have changed out in the marketplace in which the BGCT operates. People will tell us what they like or dislike, but we have to have a mechanism that allows us to listen. Developing a brand for the BGCT is a strategy that cannot be discounted. A well established brand will help the BGCT carve out a unique position for itself in the minds of Texas Baptists, and can prevent negative images (Valley scandal) from driving the organization's agenda.

Finally, whatever brand the BGCT comes up with must be an assurance of quality and consistency. Taglines and symbols by themselves do not work. There must be quality effort backing them up. There has to be a commitment to deliver worthwhile service, products and programs, consistent with the brand.

In my humble opinion, this should be a priority for the BGCT. I do not know for certain, but I wonder if things like this are even discussed any place other than the office of the Communications Director..

BGCT Staff Not To Blame

2011-04-03T17:49:00.001-07:00

From time to time I have written things in this space that could easily be construed as criticism of the leadership at the BGCT, particularly those of the past who led the convention to do some things I feel were a mistake. Occasionally, I have written about things I really had no knowledge of regarding some of the departments, especially as I believe it is perceived out here in the hinterlands. Once in a while I put my foot in it, out of ignorance. Always, however, I have tried to point out the excellence of the work the staff does on a day to day basis.

When I make statements that I am not absolutely sure of, I usually say as much and I hear from staff members. They usually do not comment on the blog, but I get e-mails, because my e-mail address is widely known and available to the staff. Others simply call me to help me understand that what I might have said was not exactly accurate. On other occasions I even have the opportunity to sit down and discuss my ideas with certain staff members. I will be doing that this week with one staff member whom I do not know very well. I am looking forward to getting to know him and to understand some of the issues he faces every day. This is really helpful to me. Of necessity, I cannot always blog about what I have been told or what they say to me, because sometimes if I broke their confidence they would get in trouble with their supervisors.

The truth is, things have changed a whole lot in the years since I retired from the BGCT. One thing that has not changed is the dedication of the staff to their work. With a couple of exceptions, all the staff members I know are most competent to do the work they have been asked to do. There are a couple, however, who have proven the Peter principle, that is they have been promoted to their highest level of incompetence. There are one or two who are being asked to head up departments of work in areas that they had no expertise in before coming to the Baptist Building. That doesn't mean they are not passionate about their work, nor does it mean they are totally incompetent. It just means they had no experience in that work before coming to the Building.

By far, though, most of the specialists at work in the building are good at what they do. They are to be commended for their commitment to excellence and their desire to help.

In other words, my beef is not with the staff. It is with the environment in which they are being asked to work, an environment that has organized itself to virtually assure misunderstanding, lack of perception, and difficulty in relating to the field. In my opinion two areas of work in the building have been so deemphasized as to endanger the very existence of the convention. Those two areas are evangelism and associational work. Again, this is not a staff issue, but an organizational and promotional issue. It was a mistake to put evangelism under a missions director instead of giving the evangelism director a seat at the table of the Executive Director's cabinet. The Associational Coordinator has a seat at the table, but his program has not been receiving the same emphasis it once did, which has seriously damaged the relationship of the Directors of Missions to the program staff.

Regarding the evangelism director, I have written here previously that I believe we went in the wrong direction when we reorganized. Instead of elevating the director's position to Executive Cabinet level, we demoted him to a staff position in the Missions section. In this position he is now called Director of Church Evangelism, which once was simply one segment of a comprehensive evangelism program. Instead of being in a position to influence all areas of work to keep an evangelism emphasis alive, he now must rely on others to do that, and it likely doesn't get done. If I were the Executive Director I would want an Evangelism person sitting at my right hand helping to assure every area of work kept the main thing the main thing, reaching Texas for Christ. There was a day when reaching Texas for Christ meant trying to see that every person has an opportunity to accept Jesus as Savior. I am not sure that is what we all mean any more when we talk about "reaching Texas." Possibly, this is why our baptism totals have been so abysmal in recent years.

Once again, this is not a reflection of the person who has the job of Director of Church evangelism. He is competent and worthy of support. But his job ought to be more than church evangelism and his position should be near the top of the food chain instead of down in the midst of it with another layer between him and the Executive Cabinet.

I appreciate the staff of the BGCT. Do not mistake that. When you call on them, they respond. That's what we expect and that's what we get. God bless them.

BGCT NEEDS TO LOOK BACK

2011-03-30T06:42:00.001-07:00

Some are asking what the BGCT needs to do to get back to its former glory. In my opinion, they simply need to admit they made a mistake when they reorganized, did away with commissions and coordinating boards and consolidated power in the 90 people who serve on the Executive Board. This will likely never happen because if Baptists are anything they are simply not the kind of people who can say, "We made a mistake." In spite of the fact that we do make mistakes, a lot of them, we just can never bring ourselves to say the words, "WE MADE A MISTAKE." It is almost as though we feel that if we say those words, people will lose confidence in us and everything will go the hell in a hand basket.

Well, let me set the record straight. People are more likely to respect leaders who can say those words, than they are those who arrogantly think they are perfect and never make mistakes. If you need proof of that statement, just look at what is happening to our presidents, who leads the world in refusing to admit mistakes. I am not sure where this feeling comes from in leaders who simply cannot admit mistakes. But I can tell you that people are more likely to respect leaders who willingly accept responsibility for mistakes and take steps to change those mistakes.

Most of what the past leadership of the BGCT led us to do in reorganizing is a mistake and we just need to admit it and make the necessary corrections. When we did away with the deliberative bodies we used to call commissions and coordinating boards, we reduced the number of people who help guide decisions from more than 200 to less than a hundred. Some of the best money the convention spent was in bringing in lay people and church staff members from all over the state to discuss issues, policies, and situations, BEFORE taking them to the Executive Board. By the time the board got them, the issues had been thoroughly chewed over and there was a great amount of support for the solutions brought forth.

I cannot prove this, but I can almost guarantee that the situation in the Valley would never have happened under the old system. When you take way a level of oversight and policy making and concentrate everything in a small group, disaster awaits.

If I were in charge at the BGCT I would run, not walk, to undo the terrible damage done by the last reorganization. I would have four commissions. One would serve all the local church programs, one would serve all the institutions, one would promote evangelism in all BGCT entities, and one would deal with all mission activity. We would not need a public policy commission. That task cold be dealt with from the executive director's office. Each of these commissions would have approximately twenty-five members.

In addition, I would set up a whole new communications division, one which would have as its major task the branding of the BGCT. There is way too much lack of understanding of what the convention does and does not do. Inside this division would be someone to communicate the Cooperative Program information. In recent years we have been utter failures at communicating our brand to the churches and the state. We have not been particularly well served in the area of communications. We have done well in news writing, because we employ writers instead of communications specialists. We are constantly playing catch-up in the employment of technology and modern communications methods. We have employed too many journalists and not enough communications specialists. How many people in our communications department actually have a communications degree? Frankly, I don't know the answer to that question, but I suspect I will find out fairly soon. Communications today is a lot different than it was twenty years ago. Are we up to snuff?

Oh boy. I have really put my foot in it, haven't I?

Baptist Schools Mostly Shine

2011-03-27T06:24:00.001-07:00

Having just attended a meeting of the trustees at one of our Baptist universities in Texas, I can tell you that at least one of these schools is in great shape, proud to be Baptist, and does not wish to change anything about the charter agreement that exists with the BGCT. God is richly blessing Wayland Baptist University, which, according to the International Association of Baptist Colleges And Universities, ranks #2 among the 52 member schools in total enrolment. Baylor, of course, ranks #1, with a total enrolment of graduate and undergraduate of more than 14,800 students. Wayland, with its thirteen campuses, has a total enrolment of about 6,400 students, graduate and undergraduate.

Also, information from the school indicates that Wayland has the lowest total cost of any Baptist school in Texas, and is even lower than its nearby state university, Texas Tech. Considering all costs, fees, tuition, and room and board, it costs less to attend Wayland than any other school in Texas calling itself Baptist. Wayland receives around $800,000 from the BGCT, and is grateful for it, but is not dependent upon it for remaining viable.

At the recent meeting, Wayland Trustees participated in the ground breaking for a new 350 bed men's dormitory on the Plainview campus. Trustees also heard a very encouraging financial report, and anticipates a surplus at the end of the fiscal year.

The Plainview school will begin intercollegiate football in the fall of 2012. They have hired their first head football coach in more than 70 years and already have more than fifty players committed to attend the school. With more than 400 athletes in all sports already on campus, Wayland has carved out an enviable record of achievement in athletics. Here are just a few of those achievements:

Men's Cross Country placed second nationally (NAIA)

Thirty three All-American Athlete awards given to Wayland students in all sports.

Men's indoor track team places second nationally in NAIA.

First year Dance Team qualifies for National Dance Association's Collegiate Championships

Caleb McLean, senior track star from Colleyville, Texas, a Vocal performance major, is a finalist for the most prestigious award given to NAIA athletes, the Leroy Walker Award.

Among 290 NAIA collegiate athletic programs, Wayland ranks tenth.

In December of 2010, the New York Times featured a two page spread titled "Before UConn There Was Wayland", a story which featured the greatest win streak in the history of collegiate athletics, the Wayland Flying Queens basketball team of the fifties. (I was a witness to that.)

Trustees also witnessed the dedication of a second endowed scholarship, given by Dr. and Mrs. Vernon Stokes in memory of their two daughters. Dr. and Mrs. Stokes are both career educators who graduated from Wayland. Mrs. Stokes was a member of the aforementioned Flying Queens in the fifties. The point is that the Stokes had previously endowed a scholarship in their own names and now have endowed a second in the names of their two daughters who were stricken with cancer and taken from this life. What a gift from two people who simply gave their lives and careers to educating young people in the Texas Public School system and now have assured an ongoing opportunity for college students to do the same thing!

It is not always easy to serve as a trustee in one of our Baptist schools. Sometimes it is extremely difficult. It once was such at Wayland, which almost closed back in the eighties. However, these are good days at the school, and all the trustees are careful to give the credit to God's blessings. It makes being a trustee today a delight.

Opinions Do Not Merit Resignation

2011-03-23T05:04:00.001-07:00

This is a case where friends disagree. Some of my friends have suggested, make that demanded, that David Lowrie should resign from the Executive Director Search Committee because he ventured an opinion in support of Houston Baptist University's recent decision to change their charter to allow non-Baptists to be trustees of their university. As regular readers of this blog will attest, I myself disagreed with David's opinion. Now I disagree with those calling for his resignation from the committee.

Nothing in David's opinions about HBU stand in conflict with his work on the Search Committee. To say that he should resign because he might want to find someone who agreed with him to serve as the Executive Director, which is the only thing I can figure out for calling on him to resign, is just not sound thinking. Do we expect our search committee members to forgo venturing any opinions about any part of the work of the BGCT? Can these good people not express any opinions? I think that is a bit unreasonable.

David expressed an opinion with which many Texas Baptist will disagree on the surface. However, many will agree with him. Is he being divisive? Is that why he should resign? Listen, this issue was around long before David served as president of the convention and long before he was asked to serve on the search committee. The division existed in the ranks a long time ago. It is highly likely that many people could tell us exactly how each committee member feels about the issue. Should they resign for having an opinion? Or should they resign just because they might share their opinion?

What about some other issues over which resignation might be expected after an opinion is offered? Unless David feels he cannot serve because of this opinion, I think he should stay in place. His strengths make him a good choice for the committee. His understanding of the convention processes, his wisdom, his prayer life, and his humility make him an ideal choice to serve on the committee. There is no reason for him to resign. On this my friends and I have some disagreement. But, they will remain my friends. At least from my standpoint.

Agreements Worth Little These Days

2011-03-20T12:49:00.001-07:00

Now that Houston Baptist University has done what some of us predicted they would do, changing their charter to allow one third of their trustees to be non-Baptist, it is time to discuss what good these charters agreements with the BGCT are. Every one of our schools had charters that could not be changed without the permission of the BGCT, but now both Baylor and HBU have gone and changed their charters without that permission. That raises a lot of questions, not the least of which is, "What good are these charter agreements anyhow?"

No one disputes that the schools legally could do what they have done, insofar as Texas law is concerned. However, both Baylor and HBU had agreed to a charter that bound them to the BGCT. They had done so voluntarily and with great benefit. Many Baptists contributed to the schools because of their connection to Baptists, as outlined in their charters. The schools have now made the determination that Baptist money is not enough and they need other monies to operate. To get those other monies they wanted to allow some wealthy non-Baptists to sit on their governing boards. In spite of the fact that a vote of the convention messengers said "no" to their proposal, HBU went ahead anyway and did exactly what the messengers had voted for them NOT to do.

As I have stated in this space earlier, both Baylor and HBU were within their legal rights to do what they did. Texas law did not recognize the right of the BGCT to enforce the charter the schools had willingly agreed to in years past. Texas law gives trustees the right to do whatever they want to do. So, I do not dispute the legality of what the schools have done, just the morality of breaking long standing agreements in a manner other than that prescribed by the charter.

Also as I have stated earlier, I believe integrity would make the schools voluntarily relinquish any support they now receive from the BGCT. If the schools do not wish to have BGCT involvement in their affairs, then do not accept funding from the BGCT. The amount of these funds is not really significant, but if what is given to Baylor and HBU was divided equally between the other schools, those who have maintained their full relationship to the BGCT, it would make a difference in the remaining schools. Oh, I know the argument. I know some feel that giving the schools that have bolted the funds maintains at least a semblance of a relationship. But that is a hollow and meaningless relationship because the schools do not want it. All they want is to keep receiving Baptist money, small as it is, while violating their Baptist charter.

If our BGCT Executive Board has any backbone at all they will immediately cease sending ministry funds to both Baylor and HBU. Both schools violated their agreed upon charter. Neither deserves to be included in the budget of the convention. In the case of HBU it is even worse because they went to the convention with a proposal that was voted down. Then they surreptitiously did exactly what the convention said "no" to. How many more slaps in the face does the BGCT need to endure before taking action?

Triumph Through Tragedy

2011-03-16T07:17:00.001-07:00

In what have become some of the most horrific pictures of damage to our Japanese friends, there has arisen another picture worth mentioning. Almost universally when something like this happens you hear a commentator say, "Looters have been seen doing their dastardly deeds." This has not been the case in Japan. The Japanese people are such well disciplined people. There have been no reports of widespread looting, as had been the case in almost every other tragedy in recent years.

This is a tribute to the people of Japan. Although not considered a Christian nation, their behavior in this time of extreme tragedy is certainly noteworthy. It appears more than 10,000 people have been lost in this tragic event. While not nearly as many as the 200,000 who were lost in the Indonesia tsunami a few years ago, it is still an exorbitant loss of life. Property damage will be in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Whole towns have been leveled by the powerful tides that came ashore. If that was not enough, earthquake and tsunami damage has now been made to appear minor compared to the threat of radiation poisoning, which can affect the country for decades.

All this has been painful for some of us to watch, but what great solace has come from news reporters making note of the fact that looting is virtually unseen in the aftermath of this natural disaster. That says a lot to me about te Japanese people. It speaks of their personal discipline as well as their respect for authority. One wonders why that is. Certainly, in our own country we have all seen the looters swarm in te aftermath of disasters such as Katrina. What makes one culture so different from another? Why would the criminal element in Louisiana be so bold, while the criminal element in Japan is virtually unseen. Is it just me? Has anyone else been impressed with this?

When Conditions Are Right

2011-03-13T05:10:00.001-07:00

I must confess that I am clueless as to what constitutes ideal conditions for the trees to bloom in my yard. This spring, my Bradford Pear trees are profuse with white blossoms (see picture at left). These trees are twelve years old and have never blossomed like they did this year. Across the street, my neighbor's trees, which have always been true to their common name, Snowball Trees, are virtually barren of blossoms. The same can be said for the Tulip Tree in my yard.(see picture at right). The past two0 years the tree had almost no blossoms, while this year it is profusely pink-blossomed. All of this occurs with virtually the same care ( or lack of it) each year. What is it that makes these trees blossom in some years and stay barren in others?

Almost assuredly someone has an explanation for it, but I am dumbfounded about it. With almost the same degree of attention, some years they bloom and some years they don't. It's not about water, because I have a sprinkler system and have used it the same way each year. Nature enjoys playing these games with me.

Anyway, this year the trees are absolutely beautiful. It is a lovely spring around my house, but I'll be doggoned if I can explain why.

It occurs to me that my trees are like churches, which are also living organisms. Why is it that some churches grow and others in the same neighborhood don't? Why is it that some churches use their baptistery every week, while others hardly ever use it? Why is it that some churches have great fellowship and others don't? Why is it that one church has a great relationship with her pastor, while her neighbor down the street cannot seem to catch a break?

If I had the answer to all these questions I could be a wealthy man. But, like my trees, churches have a mid of their own. Some of them bloom where they are planted, while others do not. I am sure there are many reasons for it, but I have never known anyone who could absolutely and completely diagnose the situation and recommend the right formula for every congregation. And the reason for that is that ever church is its own organism and what works wonderfully well in one church may not work the same way in another.

Each congregation has to find its own rhythm. There is no one formula that will work in every situation. That's why effective leaders in churches are constantly trying to see what works best for their church. Oh, sure, there are some principles that are common to all churches, but they methodology for applying those principles may be very different in each situation.

I remember a funny story about a pastor who went out to Saddleback Church to their pastor's conference. He noticed that Rick Warren, the pastor at Saddleback, was not wearing any socks. All of a sudden, this visiting pastor from Texas determined that the reason Warren was so successful was that he didn't wear any socks and was seen as a "man of the people". So the Texas pastor went home and the following Sunday went into the pulpit without any socks on his feet, thinking that by doing so he would be as successful as Rick Warren was out in California. Predictably, the little old ladies in the Texas church were appalled that their pastor was wearing no socks. After some severe tongue lashings, the pastor put on some socks in the ensuing Sundays. But, his church still didn't do as well as Rick Warren's.

That little story has been repeated over and over again by young men and old who thought they had figured it out and tried what they thought would work. In some cases it did, but in other cases it was a total flop. Copying what works at one church does not usually produce the same results at another. Those pastors who lead really successful churches have simply discovered the correct formula for his congregation. The combination of his people and his leadership style were just right. However, in his next church he will need to figure it all out once again, because what he has done successfully in this church might not work in the next one.

There used to be a very famous Southern Baptist pastor about whom it was said, "He is pastor of a five year crash program presently located at ___________ Baptist Church." It was a joke because every place this pastor went he tried to do the very same things in the very same way. Frankly, he was never able to duplicate his success at the first place it worked.

Every church is different. What worked well at one place might not ever work at all I another. God bless you as you keep trying to find the right combination for your congregation. Keep trying to bloom where you are planted.

Supremes O.K. Phariseeism

2011-03-09T07:16:00.001-08:00

According to the spell check feature in Microsoft Word, Phariseeism isn't a good word. At least it puts that squiggly red line under it. However, Word notwithstanding, the Supreme Court of the United States has pretty well said it is O.K. to be a Pharisee. In its ruling that the vile speech of The Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas is permitted under the constitution, the Court has pretty well assured military familes of continued harrassment at the funerals of their fallen loved ones. Most of us felt that would be the proper ruling, although we hate what it does, in allowing that vicious group to continue their hateful work.

Westboro Baptist founding pastor, and his family, which comprise most of the congregation, will now take solace in the fact that the Supreme Court has given them license to be the pharisaical jerks they continue to be. Wielding their hateful signs, saying "God Hates You", and "More Dead Soldiers", etc. , this group gives modern Pharisees a bad name. In fact, as the lawyer of the groujp, and daughter of the pastor, said, "this case has given this little church a megaphone." Indeed the group has received far more public ity then they deserve. In my opinion what they do is downright evil, but they think they are doing God's work.

Many of my conservative friends have taken the court to task for this ruling, but either free speech is free speech or it isn't. People have the right in America to say whatever they wish, as long as it does not endanger those around them. Hateful as it is, the Westboro people have a right to say what they wish.

The larger picture, though, is that this so-called church models what many of us would call the pinnacle of legalism, which is what a Pharisee is. They think that they and only they have the correct interpretation of the Word of God and that by being hateful in service of a loving God they are being faithful to Him.

There are many in Christendom who feel exactly as they do. Many people interpret everything by the Old Testament, to the exclusion of the love and grace of the New Testament. These people are exactly what Jesus came to get rid of. That is why the Pharisees of Jesus' time wanted to do away with Him. They could not abide His message of love and grace, so they killed Him. That's what Pharisees do.

The people of Westboro are not serving Jesus by their actions. They are repudiating everything Jesus taught.

The Supreme Court said they have a right, but that does not make it right.

The Blessings of God in Big Spring

2011-03-06T16:02:00.001-08:00

Just about two years ago First Baptist Church in Big Spring got a new pastor. Just two years before that the church was rocked by a wholesale exodus of sixty mostly young families who left the church to start another church in the county. With those young families went the of the four ministerial staff members. You can only imagine that such an event would wreak havoc on the psyche of the congregation. The event caused a serious crisis in the confidence of the people, many of whom wondered what was wrong with them that so many families could leave them.

When the interim pastor came, early in the summer of 2007, one of the first things he said to the church was, "God is not finished with you yet." Over the period of the following twenty-one months, the church got busy learning the truth of that statement.

Fast forward to today. The church's attendance is now equal to or exceeds what it was before the exodus. The budget has grown beyond what it was before the exodus and is being met. People are being saved. New members come into the church most Sundays. A church that had only four young people in its whole youth division following the exodus had about 150 young people in a recent Disciple Now event, under the direction of a new Youth Pastor.

How can these things be? Most west Texas towns are not growing and most West Texas churches are barely holding their own or declining. What makes it so different at FBC Bog Spring? I'm so glad you asked. Here's what I think.

The new pastor and his wife are sold on the fact that churches should be doing missions. This past summer the pastor's former church and his current church came together to begin a work of grace in Big Spring. Members of the church got busy. They helped rebuild a facility for the association's hospitality house for prisoner's families. They started a new Spanish speaking mission, called a pastor for the mission and have been helping him reach out to Hispanic families. They started a food bank in one of the churches and provide food for indigent families. In other words, they managed to get their eyes off themselves out into the community and have found themselves passionately trying to reach their city.

This would be a miraculous story if it had not been repeated over and over again in so many churches. But it has been. When churches get their eyes off their own problems and actually get busy doing what Matthew 28:19-20 told us we should all be doing, great and marvelous things start happening in those churches.

Pastor Mark Lindsey and his wife Sheri will celebrate their second anniversary at the church later this month. And what a two year work it has been! God has blessed, as he always does when we obey Him. It thrills me to see what God has done in just two short years. But, it thrills me more to think what he is going to do in the years ahead.

Good News From The BGCT Search Committee

2011-03-02T12:33:00.001-08:00

The best news coming from the BGCT Executive Director Search Committee is no news. There is no news about any candidates being in the running. There is no news about anyone being the "lead" candidate. No news about how many resumes they have received. No news about how pleased they are with the degree of interest. No news of any kind has been coming from the committee and that is te good news.

The speculation about who is being considered and the outlandish pr3edfictions that so and so is going to get the job or that the track has been greased for so and so's candidacy is just so much poppycock. The committee has rightly decided to take their time and to get this right.

A certain amount of speculation from outsiders is to be expected. It always happens in Search Committee issues. There are always a few who think they have inside knowledge of the committee's workings and most of the time that in side knowledge turns out to be just what it is, blind guesses which have no basis in truth. I suppose as long as we have committees we will have this kind of speculation. I have a few very good friends on this committee and I can tell you they are doing exactly what they should do and that is keep their comments about the committee work very general and non-specific. I believe if anyone was going to get some inside information from anyone on this committee, I could be the one. First of al, though, I have not sought any inside information, and secondly, even if I did I would not expect committee confidences to be broken, even from a friend.

Personally, I have been trying to remember to spend some time in prayer every day for the members of this important committee. We have entrusted to these good people the most important task anyone is ever asked to perform in convention life. We should all be lifting them up in prayer, not trying to out-guess them.

These have been rather quiet days in the BGCT. That is also good. That simply means that our staff is going about their business in a workmanlike manner, seeking to serve the entities of the convention as effectively as possible. I suspect in the days ahead we will be hearing something from the committee, although I do not expect it to be anything but plans for hearings around the state or some other such activity.

So, at this point, I just want to thank the committee for what we have not heard.

Sometimes It’s Hard To Believe We Are In America

2011-02-27T15:12:00.001-08:00

There are times when I watch news reports and find it hard to believe the reporter is talking about the country I live in. I understand the hunger for freedom that causes people to spill out into the streets of places like Egypt and Libya. Watching people risk death in te face of a tyrant's guns is inspiring. I pray for them and wish them well. However, this business that is going on in Wisconsin and other states is different. This is not trying to get a tyrant off their back. This is entitlement gone amok.

I love Wisconsin. I have been there many times. However, I do not believe what I am watching, as I see hoards of people screaming epithets at reporters just to make a point. Signs accusing the governor of being Hitler or worse have no place ion American politics. Whether it is the president or a governor, we should be very careful about this kind of protesting. Over and over again I have watched people trying to shout down reporters who are simply trying to report the news. On one occasion I watched people stick their signs in front of the cameras to prevent a reporter from doing his job, even striking the reporter with the sign.

All of this is condoned by union leaders who fear some of their rights are being taken away. These are public servants? These are people who are teaching children? Isn't it amazing what people will do just to assure themselves more of the taxpayers money?

What I have witnessed in Wisconsin, and what is spreading to other states is unconscionable activity spurred on by union bosses who are telling their minions it is O.K. to call people vile names and seek to suppress free speech by keeping reporters from reporting on what they are seeing. It is not O.K. It is not O.K for a Tea Party protestor, a Republican, a Democrat or a union member to do the kind of things we have seen being done in the name of democracy in the past few years, months, weeks and days. It is not O.K., to call people we disagree with names or hold posters that call into question the character of individuals.

I am not sure where we are headed with all this in our country, but I do know this is not befitting Americans. The kind of stuff we have seen in Wisconsin is doing little but turning people against the union movement in the U.S.A. Unions have done a lot of good in our country, but they have also done a lot of harm. Where they have done harm is using their collective bargaining to force states to raise pay and benefits to an average of 30% more than the people whose taxes must pay them. Congress has wisely prevented federal employees from the right to bargain collectively. Unfortunately, many states have allowed collective bargaining and now are facing huge deficits in benefits packages they cannot pay for simply because the union leaders have used collective bargaining to keep pushing and pushing until we now have an untenable situation.

I do not knbow what the answer is for all these union dominated states and their unfunded employee benefits. But, I do know that what we have been witnessing in Wisconsin is not the way to solve the problem.

Baylor Has Thumbed Their Nose At the Family Once Again

2011-02-23T06:59:00.001-08:00

Here's the way I see it. If you don't want to be part of the Baptist family you don't have to, but quit saying you do and then acting like you don't. After the BGCT beat back a proposal by Houston Baptist University to put non-Baptists on their governing board, Baylor has announced they will do exactly that. Baylor has every right to do that. In my view HBU will eventually ignore the BGCT vote and do it, also. Good enough. But spare me the rhetoric about how much you want to be considered a part of the Texas Baptist family.

Here's my evidence that Baylor no longer desires to be part of the BGCT (Texas Baptist) family.

They went behind the back of the convention to change their charter, denying the BGCT the right to elect all regents, as had been done for more than a 100 years. This was done without consultation or permission from the BGCT.
They elected the first non-Baptist president. Personally, I am a big fan of Ken Starr. I am glad he is president, but you have to admit, they broke the mold when electing him, even though I understand he has now become a Baptist.
Again, without consultation from BGCT leadership, they have voted to allow themselves to elect regents who are not Baptists, after the convention voted down a similar request from HBU. BU decided not to ask, just went ahead and did it, even though the BGCT likely would not have approved it. It is my understanding that they didn't even have the courtesy to let someone at the BGCT know they were doing it. BGCT leaders heard about if from the media.

Here's the simple truth. The amount of money that Baptists give each of our schools is miniscule and frankly is not even needed by most of the schools. What that money does, however, is keep a formal connection to the Texas Baptist family. Most of our schools cherish that connection. Here's an idea. If you don't want to be considered part of the family and show that by your actions, don't take the money. Small as it is, don't take it. Why should Texas Baptists send any money to a school that by its actions shows that it would just as soon go their own way?

Years ago, when Baylor surreptitiously decided to start electing 75% of their regents, dissing the BGCT and their charter-mandated connection, Baylor started on a slippery slope toward what will undoubtedly be a totally non-Baptist identity sometime in the future. Oh, I hear the howls of protest. "We are a Baptist school. We want to be Baptist. We want to be identified with Baptists!" The school's actions in recent years shows that is total poppycock. The school has a right to chart its own course without the control of the BGCT, but spare us the rhetoric about how much you cherish your BGCT heritage. It just doesn't wash.

Some of you Baylor people will argue, "We can be Baptist without being controlled by the BGCT." Yeah, we know. It's like that church member who says, "I can be a Christian without ever darkening the door of a church." Yes, you can. But, what kind of Christian are you when you forsake the fellowship of the family of faith? How Baptist will Baylor be when they forsake the more than 100 years of history in the family of Texas Baptists? Brown University, begun by Baptists, and Harvard University, begun by Christians bow have no relation to their roots. Their heritage is virtually unrecognized today. That is the slope Baylor is on, whether or not they want to admit it. It may take years, but the end result is virtually inevitable. History shows it is true. The same thing happened to Trinity University and their Presbyterian heritage.

Surely you can be a great university and not be Baptist, or even Christian. Harvard and Brown prove that. And if that is the choice Baylor regents want to make, I applaud them. If they would rather be a great university than a Baptist university, good for them. But for goodness sake hush up about how much you appreciate your Baptist heritage. Go ahead and be whatever you want to be. The same for any of our Baptist schools. Either stay in the family, abide by the rules you agreed on to become part of the family, or get out and quit the pretense and quit taking the money.

If the BGCT has any gumption at all they will immediately stop sending ministry scholarship money to Baylor and divide it up among the remaining schools. But, that won't happen because there are too many Baylor alumni on the Executive Board. If I had my way, that is exactly what we would do. The other schools, those who choose to remain indentified with the BGCT, could use the funds well.BU will eventually ignmore the BGCT vote and do it, also.

BGCT IS A VICTIM OF UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS

2011-02-20T12:16:00.001-08:00

Sometimes expectations can do you in. Jesus was the victim of expectations he did not meet regarding his relationship to te Jews. They would not accept Him as Messiah because He was not what they expected their Messiah to be. According to John 6, some people quit following Jesus because he failed to meet their expectations. No matter what signs he did and miracles that were accomplished, expectations not met caused Him to be rejected by His own people.

As an Associational Missions Director, I was often reminded that some people had expectations of their association that were not realistic and not part of our mission. I recall a phone call from a church member one day complaining about her pastor. She felt the pastor was being dishonest with the church and someone from the Association should speak to him and straighten him out. When I explained that was not our job, the lady was quite indignant with me, wanting to know whose job it was, if not the Association's. When I explained it was the church's job to deal with their own pastor she let out an expletive and hung up on me. Some people have unrealistic expectations regarding their Association.

Expectations regarding the job of a pastor are often at the root of problems in churches. There are a lot of people who have no idea what their pastor does all week before preaching on Sunday. They do not think about the hours of time he studies to get ready for Sunday, and expect him to be available to them whenever they feel the need for him. All they ever see the pastor do is preach and they have no idea how he fills the remainder of each week's hours. Some churches expect the pastor to do everything. They want him to do all the visiting, all the prospect calling, all the ministry, all the sick visits, etc. A pastor who tries to do all that generally finds his study time is lacking, thus his preaching starts failing and the first thing you know he is fired because he cannot preach well enough. Unrealistic expectations.

One does not have to be the sharpest tool in the shed to know that a lot of people have unrealistic expectations regarding their convention. Too many people have no idea what a convention staff is supposed to do, so they just assume a set of expectations for them, and when they fail to meet those expectations, trouble rears its head. Some feel BGCT staff members should spend all their time on the field, visiting churches. One of the favorite criticisms hurled at convention staff is that old "How long has it been since a BGCT staff member visited you in your office?" A good many churches were persuaded to join the other convention with just that tactic. "The BGCT doesn't care about you. How long has it been since one of them came to your church?" Trust me. I know it is true that such tactics were and still are being used.

The problem is that most of our seminaries do not require pastors in training to attend a denominational organization class. Failing that, expectations are passed on from generation to generation until today they are totally unrealistic. Many pastors find a lot of help at places outside the denomination. I have no problem with that, as long as they do not start expecting their denominational office to be like the church or loosely organized association they are looking to for help. For instance, I have myself used material I obtained from Willow Creek Church in Chicago. Good stuff. However, Willow Creek cannot do everything I need that the BGCT can do for me as a pastor. The reason is that Willow Creek is a church, not a denominational office. They are not interested in helping my church start a new church. They are not interested in helping my church hook up with a mission field. They are not interested I helping my church develop community reaching ministries. They have a totally different view. It is wonderful as far as it goes, but it is not all I need from a denomination.

Believe me, I understand frustration when someone tries to get help at the BGCT and gets no response. That is inexcusable. Should never happen. Unfortunately, it does. However, that is not the norm. It is fair to expect a response when an inquiry is made to the BGCT, especially if your church is a cooperating supporter of the convention budget. The truth is, most BGCT staff members I know do not check to see if a church is a supporter before trying to respond to requests for help.

Realistic expectations for the behavior of convention staff and administration are acceptable. Unrealistic expectations are not.