SBC Wrapup: San Antonio 2007

      Last week at this very moment, thousands of Southern Baptists from the Southeast--including my Georgia--were anxiously taking care of final details before heading out the door for Texas, excited to be attending the annual event that brings more Baptists together than any other event (Unless, of course, it is a Church Barbecue Cook-off).

Today those same Baptists find themselves scrambling to catch up from so many duties left undone while they were away.  Plus the excitement is now over.

I offer the following as closure for SBC 07:

• All of the political hollo-ballo that San Antonio would be a defining moment for Southern Baptists appeared to be just that:  hollo-ballo

• The highly publicized flexing of Neomoderate muscle lead by Ben Cole, Marty Duren and Wade Burleson proved less than impressive not only to traditional conservatives, but disillusioned many Neomoderates themselves

• Neomoderates received what only can be called a political deathblow when their candidate, David Rogers, garnered only a few hundred votes.  Neomoderates predicted Rogers' election and traditional conservatives themselves scrambled fearing Neomoderates were correct.  They assumed since Rogers was not only a current foreign missionary serving Southern Baptists in Spain, he also was the son of the legendary, Adrian Rogers, one of the chief architects of the Conservative Resurgence, which, they felt could easily bring him in on his father's coattails.  Even to traditional conservatives' surprise, that did not happen.

• As for David Rogers, he's perhaps the biggest loser of all from the SBC 07.  His heritage has been a rich one in SBC life, serving faithfully as a foreign missionary, taking the gospel to unreached areas of Spain--not an easy responsibility to which our Lord has called him and his family.

Now, however, his persona may be tarnished because of his public alignments with Neomoderates.  Especially the discovery of his naive editorial dependence on Ben Cole for his public answers to simple questions asked by the Florida Baptist Witness marked him as a political partisan, sympathetic with Cole's apparent obsession with destroying Dr. Paige Patterson, President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, rather than being an independent person.  Simply, a political pawn, if you will.  And whether or not they admit such, Neomoderates have Rogers' blood on their hands for dragging him into their political fiasco.  He did not deserve that.

• Marty Duren has apparently thrown in the towel with SBC politics.  Duren is decidedly one of the greats in Baptist blogging.  His site made almost a million hits in approximately two years.  And, though sometimes his posts were much too provocative, even for his own community--he pulled a post on the humanity of Jesus because his own community broke out in rebellion against it for fear he made Jesus too, shall we say, "worldly"!-- Duren brought cutting edge discussions to the surface.  Personally, I think reverent dissent is not only good but necessary for healthy systems.  I will miss Marty Duren's analysis.

• Wade Burleson's support base already shows signs of cracking apart.  His latest post brought scores of critics to his blog, which, from last August up until this week,  it was only a few others (me included) who offered dissenting comments to his agenda.  Now, however, Wade  appears lonely there, many of his usual defenders strangely silent.  And, I don't blame them.  Dr. Greg Welty, Professor of Philosophy at SWBTS, continues to hammar Wade with logic, Scripture and Wade's own words.  The best Wade can do is offer Professor Welty a light one-liner and a smiley-face.  I feel your pain, Wade.  I've sat where you sit.

I am glad SBC 07 is over.  I don't like politics.  Nor do I think Southern Baptists need nor desire more politics.  Rather what Southern Baptists need is a move from Heaven only our Lord God Almighty can offer. 

Systemic problems in our convention exists. No one denies that. But politics cannot help us.  Only Spirit-driven transformation can.  I hope both Neomoderates and traditional conservatives learned that in San Antonio.  Indeed, most of all, I hoped I learned that.

With that, I am...

Peter   

Comments

[Jim Champion]

Peter
Interesting analysis.

How many speeches do you think that Ben Cole wrote for Paige Patterson over the years - I dont know but my guess is more than a few. My point is that it is common for people in the business world - and politics to run responses by others to make sure that they make sense. I believe that you are being unjustly harsh on David Rogers here.

Ben cole makes a great point over on his blog about Jim Richards. The BGCT is a larger state convention than is the SBTC. Jim has now been elected to a national office - will he represent the BGCT equally now - an organiztion he has taken many pot shots at over the years?

I think we saw a bit of the old machine in action in San Antonio - dont know if messengers were bussed in to vote this time, but I think the old guard did its best to get its folks there to vote for Jim. I think the old guard is sufficiently worried about Wade's blog that they have started to recruit folks like Welty to flood Wades blog with negative comments in an attempt (failed I might add) to marginalize Wade. I wouldnt be too proud of some of the ones they have recruited if I were you - there are some pretty big haters over there. Wade to his credit lets them spew and does not attack back.

[peter]

Jim,

Thanks for your view. First, your citing the liason between Cole and Patterson, Jim, and Cole's probable writing of Patterson's speeches validates the very point I was making--namely, for Rogers to naively partner with Cole, considered the hottest sparkplug in SBC life, tarred him political fodder, NOT the credible, irenic person he seems to be.

And, what is "unjustly harsh" about my comments about David? The blood is David's but Neomoderates spilled it.

If I recall, Jim, it was Cole who "leaked" his boast of a block of rooms secured to accommodate the "Neomoderate Resurgence" not Conservative "bussing" in the votes. You are the first one to mention this that I've read.

Finally, Wade is marginalized. And, there are dissenters there who give him a roughly hard time. It is not the one I mentioned though. Dr. Welty asks questions to which Wade simply cannot respond adequately. Thus, he goes funny and attempts to move on to another post as quickly as possible.

Have a great weekend, Jim. With that, I am...

Peter

[Jim Champion]

Wade is responding to Dr Welty - and doing a good job of it. I am enjoying their exchange.

So Cole and Rogers are friends, and Cole is a great wordsmith - common knowledge in the SBC. I dont think it hurt Rogers reputation in the larger SBC at all. The only ones it bothered were not going to vote for him anyway.

my comment about the busses was a reference back to 89 when the machine rolled the busses of voters in. Who knows if cole really had 1000 rooms reserved - if a few of those people had not shown up it would have killed his credit cards! It is not a stretch to me to think that the SBTC did everything it could to get its folks there to vote for Richards. And I hope that he is able to rise above his partisanship and represent all SBC (including BGCT and BGAV or whichever the moderate version is in VA).

In your opinion Wade is marganilized - but you have held that opinion from the beginning (or close to it). I think Wade is very prophetic and the SBC needs to heed his warning. If we dont we will see more and more churches doing thier own missions (it is already happening) and less money to the CP. Even now, CP revenues, while up, are not keeping up with inflation.

By the way - I think the most balanced analysis of the convention is Nathan Finn's over on SBCwitness.

Happy Fathers Day!

[volfan007]

peter,

you did an excellent analysis, bro. you are dead on! and, i saw no busses hauling in scores of conservatives just to vote on one or two issues. i do know that ben did have a block of rooms reserved at the marriott. of which, i was kicked out of mine. i can only speculate why.

peter, also, where were all the fireworks that we were promised by the dark side? where were all the accusations and insinuations and astounding, incriminating facts presented? it didnt happen.

peter, also i would just say that the sbc this year was uplifting...it was a tremendous blessing. it was good from the music to the preaching to the votes to the fellowship. it couldnt have been much better. well, i wouldnt go quite that far, but it was good.

david

[Paul Burleson]

Peter,

I disagree with much of your analysis of the Convention. [I was there.] I disagree with much of your analysis of bloggers. [I am one.] I disagree with much of your analysis of the Wade/Welty exchange. [Perhaps for obvious reasons.] But I sure do like you.

Seriously friend, have a great Lord's day Sunday.

[Paul Burleson]

By the way,

I don't know him but I sure agree with what our friend Jim Champion is saying.

I guess it really does boil down to perspective about much of what happens.

I saw the vote on the Ex. Com. report differently than did Volfan. I see the exchange between two on a blog differently that do you. I see what Jim is saying as correct.

I guess we'd better learn to love each other on some basis other than agreement on how we see things, because we won't suceed if that's our basis for it. I think we can and do have a different basis for relating to each other. Maybe it's still just the Grace of God. I'm glad for that.

[Debbie Kaufman]

And I agree with Paul. Even on the loving part.

[SelahV]

Peter: I'd hate to see what Wade's blog would look like if all the people who agree with you were to comment. I don't want to see it, because it would work everyone up in a lather. Suffice it to say, that there are those who silently read and agree while never commenting (for multiple reasons). However, I do find Paul Burleson, his dad, as one of the finest defenders of his son and his views. Whenever I read Wade, I play a great deal of attention to him, his graciousness, his diplomacy, and his Christian witness. While I don't always agree with him on topics I do like him very much. And because of his attitude I am able to swallow more of the unpalatable things I read from others.

I do feel sad about how David Rogers (whom I still have a great deal of respect for) was put in the middle of all the confusion.

While I have no clue what the PPL consists of, I do respect those more learned than I in the debate. I will sorely miss Marty Duren also. I rarely commented on his site, but loved the conversation he brought to the table. Also, I was quite surprised he hadn't already completed the education he now seeks to embark upon. I know one thing, he writes remarkably well. I look forward to reading his blogs on the mission of churches. It should be wonderful!

The rest of your post, I'm not equipped with any opinion worth hearing. selahV

[Tim Guthrie]

Great points. You are accurately describing the situation. I wonder why so many are checking out and almost waving the flag of "we failed". If they really won, I don't get it.

TG

[peter lumpkins]

Jim,

And do you also think the 'Wanna-be' Guard did their darnest to get their people there? Again, it's Ben's leak about the block of rooms, not my making it up.

Also, Jim, you must be kidding, of course, to even remotely believe I have held Wade Burleson to be marginal from the beginning. I most certainly have not. I do believe post-San Antonio influence will now wane, wane away.

And if you choose to believe being associated with Ben Cole did nothing to tarnish David Roger's credibility in the wider SBC, I think that's just peachy. I honestly hope you are correct. Like I said, David does not deserve such from my view.

To you also, Jim, a great weekend. With that, I am...

Peter

[peter lumpkins]

David,

That's interesting about you losing your room. What was the management's reasoning?

Also, I am glad it was uplifting.

SelahV,

Hear, Hear! We'll have none of it! Your opinion counts. Especially to Debbie!

Just kidding girls...No scratching now :^)

With that, I am...

Peter

[peter lumpkins]

Paul,

Do we ever disagree? I hadn't noticed. Well, maybe sometimes ;^)

There is a divide between us on some of the political meanderings. True.

Ah, but the inner camaraderie we have together in Christ far surprises the divide, do you not agree?

Know also, my Brother Paul, no comments I make on your son's blog do I consciously make out of either disrespect of him or dishonor toward him. I count Wade a brother in Christ.

I'm aware many supporters who perpetually read my dissenting comments view me as simply out to get him.

And, frankly, I doubt little I could write will change their mind. But it does not make it so.

Indeed I've mentioned this more than once on Wade's blog: Wade at least will dialog about his ideas, making his blog one of the better ones around, in my view.

Many others--including the most popular bloggers--become "testy" after a single question toward their post. I was banned from a site for asking twice the evidential source of a strange-sounding claim the blogger made on his post. So much for scholarship.

Any way, thanks Paul for stopping by. I trust you have a great Father's Day too. With that, I am...

Peter

[peter lumpkins]

Debbie,

Glad you dropped by. You're doing that more and more often. Wait a minute! I think I am commenting on your site more and more often. Holy thunder! Could it be we actually are beginning to sing the same song?

Perhaps we may become the model of SBs everywhere. Diversity may dwell together after all.

Grace, Debbie. I hope you have a peace-filled week-end. Tell Wade hey for me on Sunday.

With that, I am...

Peter

[peter lumpkins]

Tim,

Thanks for the encouragement. And, I'll take a peek at your new site.

With that, I am...

Peter

[volfan007]

peter,

i guess you missed all the discussion about my hotel room situation. reluctantly i tell it again. but, bill dodson had promised me a room at least a couple of months ago. a couple of weeks later i found out that bill and ben cole had this block of rooms thing going as a sort of partnership. i was still assured that i had a room in this block. the monday before the convention.... five days before i was to fly to san antonio, bill dodson told me that i did not have a room and that i would have to find one myself. shortly after that, ben was commenting in different blogs saying things to me like....where are you staying? ...i hope you enjoy your free continental breakfast...two rooms came open and we got some more people from our side in....we were able to work art rogers in....things that made me and many, many others think that ben had gotten bill to take my room away from me and my wife.

but, the Lord took care of us like He always does, and i was able to find a good room to stay in....although, the whole deal ended up costing my church about $300 more dollars than what i would have spent.

that's the story.

david

[SelahV]

PETER: I like the new look! I tried it out on my blogs, but didn't like if for me. Wish you'd try using plain type instead of bold. I see spots when I click away from reading. Hey, maybe that's old age! Won't be long, I turn over another year to life's allotment. And so will you! SelahV

P.S.Me scratch Debbie? Wha'cha talking about? obviously you didn't know I bite my nails. No need to worry, Deb.

[grosey]

Peter I took a look at Cole's blog.. can I say how disgusted I am!

"Late Monday afternoon, Wade Burleson and I discussed the reality that the motion could suffer defeat if either of us made or spoke to the motion. Wade approached Rick Garner, whom we had both come to know, and Rick agreed to make the motion. On Monday evening, Wade and I hosted over 40 people in our suite for a time of briefing about the motion. I explained the parliamentary rule, fielded questions, and highlighted the times in the convention schedule when these messengers would need to be prepared at a microphone."
"When the camera switched to a microphone to speak against, I saw Art Rogers standing there. He said, politely, “No, Mr. President. I am speaking for the motion.”

Standing behind Art, and barely visible except for his pompadour of strangely red hair plugs, was Richard Land. Next to him was Hershael York. With these men warming up in the bullpen, I knew we had to have a vote fast. The question was called, and after a near 2/3 majority vote to end debate, Frank Page allowed the messengers to continue. "

"At one point, the microphone in front of us was empty. Wade ran up and pushed the “for” button. When the number was called, Wade pointed to Dwight and said, “you’re up.” Without fair warning and completely extemporaneous, Dwight moved quickly to the microphone and spoke – the only black pastor to do so from the convention floor this year."
"Knowing that Richard Land or Hershael York was next up, I went to a switchbox and pushed “Point of Order.” My question was going to be about whether or not the time had expired, and then I was going to move the question again.
Before I had the chance, Frank Page informed the messengers that the time for debate had expired and asked for a 2/3 vote to extend debate."

Cole and his 40 coalitioners did all that they could to deprive the SBC of a fair hearing on this matter.
Where is the sense of thinking of attempting to discern the mind of Christ on a matter where political expedience and power by deceit is so deliberately utilised. The Messengers were played as fools by this partisan power group.
"Truth, however, makes an unwelcome ally when power is the prize."

On these admissions associational membership should be withdrawn from this party.
Steve

[peter lumpkins]

Steve,

That's the political machine at work. The interesting thing I think is the "no shame", cocky attitude portrayed by some of these guys who are openly political in the SBC.

I trust your Lord's Day was well. With that, I am...

Peter

[Joe Stewart]

I missed you at the Alamo. Thanks for your contributions