An Interview with the Pattersons June 17, 2008

This interview was conducted during the 2004 SBC Convention in Indianapolis, IN.

Autobiography of Paige Patterson

Paige Patterson is a native of Texas. He was born in 1942 while his father, T.A. Patterson, was completing his Th.D. degree under the guidance of W.T. Conner at Southwestern Seminary. Dr. Patterson was ordained to the ministry at age 16 by First Baptist Church of Beaumont (Baptist Standard 2003). He became a legendary figure among Southern Baptist conservatives when his and Judge Paul Pressler’s plan to topple the liberal leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention succeeded in 1979—the beginning of the Conservative Resurgence (Sutton 2000, 74, 99). Dr. Patterson was then elected as president of the SBC for two consecutive terms in 1998 and 1999 (Baptist Standard 2003).

He is currently the eighth president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. His twenty-eight years of experience include 17 years as president of The Criswell College and 11 years as president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina. Dr. Patterson is intensely committed to evangelism on a global level. He is a graduate of Hardin-Simmons University, and completed Th.M. and Th.D. degrees at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. He was elected as president of the Southern Baptist Convention twice, serving during 1998-2000. It was during his time in office that he appointed a committee to revise the Baptist Faith and Message.

During his time at New Orleans Seminary, Dr. Patterson was a pastor of a church, but it was through the coffee-house ministry that he was able to witness to gangsters, homosexuals, prostitutes and runaway teens. Dr. Patterson served as pastor to several churches in Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas and helped to plant churches in New Hampshire and other states. He and his wife have traveled to 85 countries and have witnessed to several “heads of state,” Yasser Arafat and Menachem Begin to name a few.

Due to Dr. Patterson’s love of scuba diving and hunting exotic animals, he started a sportsman banquet ministry. Through this ministry he is able to express the importance of the father in a boy’s life, and through Dr. Patterson’s witness during these banquets, he has come to see over 2,000 men accept Christ as their personal Lord and Savior.

Dr. Patterson is married to the former Dorothy Kelley, a professor of theology in women’s studies at Southwestern. The Pattersons have two children- Armour, their son who is married to Rachel and residing in Arizona, and Carmen, their daughter who is married to Mark Howell and residing in Arkansas. Dr. and Mrs. Patterson have two grandchildren- Abigail and Rebekah Howell. They are also “parents” to a black Labrador, named Noche (SWBTS 2004).

Autobiography of Dorothy Patterson

Dorothy Kelley Patterson is the wife of Paige Patterson. She is a homemaker, mother, grandmother, author, lecturer and Bible teacher at women’s conferences. She is also the sister of Chuck Kelley, president of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. She is a professor of theology in women’s studies at Southwestern, but sees her most important role as that of wife, mother, and grandmother. She studied at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary (Th.M.), Luther Rice Theological Seminary (D.Min.), and the University of South Africa (D.Theol.) (Good News & Crossway 2004). Mrs. Patterson authored several books, including Where’s Mom: The High Calling of Wife and Mother in Biblical Perspective (Crossway Books, 2003), A Handbook for Minister’s Wives (Broadman and Holman, 2002), Should Women Serve as Pastors? (Magnolia Hill, 2002), The Family: Unchanging Principles for Changing Times (Broadman, 2001), BeAttitudes for Women: Wisdom from Heaven for Life on Earth (Broadman, 2000), and A Woman Seeking God: Discover God in the Places of Your Life (Broadman, 1992). Her memberships include the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Council for National Policy, Eagle Forum Council, Evangelical Theological Society, Society of Biblical Literature, Adjunct Panelist of Television Broadcast- American Religious Town Hall, Baptist World Aid Committee- Christian Ethics Commission Baptist World Alliance, and the Board of Directors- Middle Creek Bible Conference in Pennsylvania. Mrs. Patterson resides in Texas with her husband and their dog, Noche (SWBTS 2004).

The Interview

The interview was conducted in the morning of June 14, 2004—the day prior to the Southern Baptist Convention’s annual meeting in Indianapolis, Indiana. It took place in a large vacant room adjacent to the exhibit hall, where Jason Duesing, Dr. Patterson’s personal assistant, said would provide us more privacy. The questions were initially directed solely at Dr. Paige Patterson because Mrs. Dorothy Patterson was delayed at a book-signing venue.

Q: What are your duties at the SBC during the year?

PP: Seminary presidents are required to serve in the Executive Committee and attend the meetings, serve on the board and council of presidents, the historical society, great commission council (along with entity heads of NAMB, WMU, etc.). Attend state conventions (five to six seminary presidents are to represent the SBC), and there’s also the influence factor, so we do a lot of consulting.

Q: Where do you see the SBC in the next 10 years?

PP: I have some concerns about the next ten years. We have a 45-60 year old gap of pastoral leadership training. The good leadership that we have in that age group are not biblically based because of the seminaries. If we can survive the next few years, we can get good leaders that are coming out of our seminaries. There is a price to be paid though, leaders can’t be selfish. They need to vote, serve and attend boring meetings—they just have to pinch themselves to get through it. Some of the other concerns are the question of the efficiency of the Bible, should it be the rule? There’s also the gender issue and where women should serve. Mrs. Patterson started a women’s studies MDiv at Southeastern. Other seminaries have followed the same format. Women are going to go to school so we can either curse the darkness or light a candle. We need women bible teachers who are going to teach the Bible.

Q: Do you see an Armenian/Calvinism divide in the future of the SBC and how could we avoid it?

PP: The Armenian/Calvinism debate can’t be avoided. Armenianism isn’t an option for Southern Baptists. Moody was the last one in fact. There’s actually two things that feed into the SBC—Charleston (who are reformed) and Sandy Creek. What we need to do is tolerate each other to make it work. Reformed theology scares the bejabbers out of me. It frightens me very very much. Of course I believe in election, but what does it mean? Knowing the mind of God…but who knows the mind of God? There are a good number of Southern Baptists who are Sandy Creekers. Sandy Creekers terrify me too because of wanting numbers. They’ll water down the message to increase their numbers. Charleston and Sandy Creekers are a good balance and are helpful to each other.

Mrs. Patterson joined the interview.

Q: How difficult were the early days during the Resurgence on your marriage and family?

DP: It was hard for me personally during the Resurgence. People who were our friends would not speak to us in public. They’d send notes, but they’d never talk to us in public. It was hard for our children because you don’t want your children to see Christians act like the world. They would act one way in public and another in private. It left scars on them.

Q: How were you able to support your husband during that time?

DP: I encouraged my husband by giving him a scripture plaque. It was an idea I got from Mrs. Spurgeon who did the same thing for her husband—she put an encouraging scripture verse on the ceiling of their bedroom so he would see it when he first wakes up and when he goes to bed, but Dr. Patterson is so busy and doesn’t sleep much that I decided to put the plaque in the bathroom—opposite of the throne. I talked about this in my Minister’s Wives book. The children also cheered their daddy up and we talked about things.

PP: Women have more faith in situations like that. Her faith (Mrs. Patterson’s) was remarkable to me. She was an encouragement to me during those difficult times.

Q: Did you ever receive verbal or written threats and how did it affect your family?

DP: We had a telephone call after Dr. Patterson dropped the children off at school. The person described what they were wearing and warned us to keep our mouth shut. (Mrs. Patterson starts to cry).

PP: Our telephone was tapped for two years…we had no security or protection at that time. We had a threat a week for a four-year period. I was involved with the Reagan administration, especially with the Israelis and Palestinians, so it was hard to tell where the threats were coming from. Most of the threats arrived through the secretaries…the ones toward the children were bad. We still receive threats…it’s almost part of the territory. At Southwestern, we receive threats by email, but they’re nothing big. We have a big dog too.

DP: We always let security know when we have our grandchildren over.

Q: What made you decide to get a seminary degree, especially since it was uncommon for women at that time?

DP: There were two other women (students) in theology—one completed and the other did not. It was Dr. Patterson’s idea that I continue my education—he thought it would be good for our ministry. I had taken a Greek class in college and I did pretty well and he suggested I take seminary classes. We took many of the same classes, but we didn’t get the same degree. I was able to finish with a ThM with Dr. Patterson’s strong encouragement.

Q: You mentioned that it was Dr. Patterson’s idea that you pursue a seminary degree—was this something you did not intend on doing?

DP: No, I wanted to get the education, but I became ill with asthma and would have quit if it wasn’t for Dr. Patterson. He took notes for me when I was unable to attend classes—he doesn’t have to take notes for himself. I dropped out of the ThD program at New Orleans because of my asthma, but got a DMin. We work as a team. I love studying. Getting a seminary education has been good for our marriage. I’m able to talk to my husband about common interests.

The interview concluded 40 minutes later. It was an incredible testimony of faithfulness in how this couple supported each other during the most volatile time in SBC history.

Later that evening at the Resurgence Reunion in the Indianapolis Convention Center, Dr. Patterson emotionally recounted the time he received the threatening phone call aimed at his children. He told the audience, “I almost quit (the Resurgence) then.” Dr. and Mrs. Patterson relied on God and supported each other during the difficult times. They showed diligent perseverance despite the opposition they faced. This is reminiscent of a passage in Romans 8:35 that is poetically translated in the NLT Bible: “Can anything ever separate us from Christ’s love? Does it mean he no longer loves us if we have trouble or calamity, or are persecuted, or are hungry or cold or in danger or threatened with death?” If it were not for the fortitude of Dr. Patterson and Judge Pressler, Southern Baptist seminaries and the SBC would continue its downward spiral into liberal obscurity. Praise God that He was able to use these men to bring Southern Baptist institutions back into the light.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bush, L. Russ and Tom J. Nettles. Baptists and the Bible. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999.

Good News & Crossway [on-line]. Accessed 9 June 2004. Available from http://www.gnpcb. org/product/1581345348/contents#extra. Internet.

Hankins, Barry. Uneasy in Babylon: Southern Baptist Conservatives and American Culture. Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama Press, 2002.

Leonard, Bill J. God’s Last & Only Hope: The Fragmentation of the Southern Baptist Convention. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990.

Pressler, Paul. A Hill on Which to Die: One Southern Baptist’s Journey. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2002.

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Faculty Profile [on-line]. Accessed 9 June 2004. Available from http://www.swbts.edu/faculty/dpatterson. Internet.

________, President Profile [on-line]. Accessed 9 June 2004. Available from http://www. swbts.edu/faculty/ppatterson/index.cfm. Internet.

Sutton, Jerry. The Baptist Reformation. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

The Baptist Standard [on-line]. Accessed 18 June 2004. Available from http://www. baptiststandard.com/postnuke/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=display&pid=277. Internet.

Copyright © 2008 M. Teresa Trascritti

Spiritual Leadership by J. Oswald Sanders June 14, 2008

Sanders, J. Oswald. 1994. Spiritual Leadership. Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers.

Godly leadership is more than being the most qualified to lead. Leaders in Christian ministry must understand and practice servanthood as taught by Jesus. Sanders compares the characteristics of “natural” leadership to spiritual leadership. In “natural” leadership, the emphasis is on power— specifically the ability to get subordinates to do things “they don’t want to do” and forcing people to act (27). Spiritual leadership is “influencing others spiritually” (28).

Spiritual leaders must not only possess leadership skills, but be ready and prepared to fight a spiritual battle (53). Sanders reminds readers that “God prepares leaders with a specific place and task in mind” (51). Even though many Christians are not called to a full-time ministry, all Christians are leaders since they influence people (109). Sanders insists on a leadership model in which leadership is “from the top down”—“never” from the “bottom up” (113). This philosophy is consistent with his other statement, “no cross, no leadership” (116).

Sanders’ description of spiritual leadership seems bleak by “natural” standards: a leader “lives with loneliness” (117), “fatigue is the price of leadership” (119), and “no leader lives a day without criticism” (119). Sanders’ leadership model is very biblical in that it reflects the principle of leadership under God’s guidance—“ Be strong and courageous! Do not be afraid of them! The LORD your God will go ahead of you. He will neither fail you nor forsake you” (Deu. 31:6 NLT).

Leadership “from the top down” starts with God at the top. God is the Lord over creation, man, and the Sabbath and all is consecrated to Him. Ezekiel 37:23-24 explains, “They will truly be my people, and I will be their God.  My servant David will be their king, and they will have only one shepherd. They will obey my regulations and keep my laws.” In the same way, leaders should think of themselves as a vessel that is accountable to God.

Copyright © 2008 M. Teresa Trascritti

Foundational Issues in Christian Education by Robert W. Pazmino June 14, 2008

Pazmino, Robert W. 1997. Foundational Issues in Christian Education. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Christian education encompasses more than traditional teaching based on historical practices, sociological and psychological theories. It incorporates Biblical and theological truths with educational philosophical ideals. The foundation for such education is based on the fact that all people are created in the image of God, but due to the Fall have been separated from the Creator God, and that everyone in faith can be reconciled to God through the redeeming power of Christ’s death on the cross (70). The main goal of the Christian education is “passing on the commandments of God to the next generation” (20). The task is to incorporate students into the Christian community by loving others, building and sharing one’s faith, worshipping God, and actively participating in ministry (45).

In compiling a thorough book, Pazmino examines the contributions of educational, sociological, and psychological theorists. Utilizing the insights of people such as Cremin, Pazmino suggests that Christian educators should “carefully assess” the effects of secular educational institutions on their students, and to offer ways for people to share their knowledge with others (149). Christian education should incorporate ideals such as liberty, equality, and fraternity by reframing it in Christian terms. For instance, Pazmino redefines liberty as “the freedom made available in Jesus Christ,” and fraternity as “the common humanity of all persons and the unique relationships that exist in Christian community” (151).

Pazmino reminds readers that the acquisition of knowledge occurs through all modes—communities, institutions, and groups (175). However, ultimate knowledge is “transcended by being known by God and encountering God’s love” (177). Though the book contains good information regarding education, too much emphasis is given to the various theories. Pazmino dedicates a couple pages to discuss an “interactive Christian model,” but it would be better if he dedicated a whole chapter to this topic. The main educational topic of the book is true to its title—“foundational issues.”

Copyright © 2008 M. Teresa Trascritti

Teaching to Change Lives by Howard Hendricks June 14, 2008

Hendricks, Howard. 1987. Teaching to Change Lives. Sisters, OR: Multnomah Publishers.

Communication and caring compassion is the key to teaching. Hendricks uses the acronym, “TEACHER,” to relate his concepts. The examples of teacher-student interaction shared in his book illustrate the importance of communication and show of care that motivates students to learn. He states, “The greatest teachers are not necessarily the people up front with high visibility. They are the people who have great heart. They communicate as a total person, and they communicate to the total person of their hearers (87).”

Another way to be a “person of impact,” is to be “vulnerable” with one’s students. Not only is communication and compassion important, but preparation. Hendricks relates, “Teaching involves a delicate balance between facts and form, between content and communication, between what you teach and how you teach it (77).” If teachers want to prepare their students to “think, learn, and work,” then four skills need to be taught: “reading, writing, listening, and speaking” (48). Though this book is written for Sunday school teachers, it contains helpful suggestions for use in other teaching venues. For instance, Hendricks suggests a “self-examination” in which teachers ask three questions: “What are my strengths; what are my weaknesses, and what do I have to change?” (35).

Great teachers are the ones who continue to grow in their own personal learning. Hendricks’ book is a good reminder for all teachers of the main purpose for Bible teaching. Even if the teacher teaches in a secular institution, the basic principles of the book can be utilized. For instance, students will be more willing to try harder and put more effort into their school work if they know the teacher truly cares for them. This book has changed the way I teach. It made me realize that teaching is more than lecturing to students.

Copyright © 2008 M. Teresa Trascritti

“A PASTOR’S SKETCHES” BY ICHABOD SPENCER– A STRATEGY FOR EVANGELISM February 18, 2008

“A Pastor’s Sketches” by Ichabod Spencer–

A STRATEGY FOR EVANGELISM

 

Ichabod Spencer was born in 1798 in Rupert, Vermont.  He became a believer at the age of eighteen.  Spencer became an educator and was offered two positions as president of a college or university, but he declined them both because he felt that God had called him to preach.  In the first few years of his ministry he witnessed the conversions of 250 people in Northampton, Massachusetts.  In 1832 he accepted the call to pastor at Second Presbyterian Church in Brooklyn, New York.  This was the church he remained until his death in 1854.  His pastoral style of ministry won him the nickname of “The Bunyan of Brooklyn.”  He was remembered as a “true shepherd” who preached the Word in season and out of season.[1]

 

Principles of Spencer’s Approach to Evangelism

Be Aware of the Spiritual Condition

Spencer was very insightful to the spiritual condition of his congregants.  His approach to evangelism depended on the actions or verbal expressions of the person he visited.  Sometimes he met with people who countered the gospel message with “logical” arguments or diversionary tactics.  For this type of person, Spencer used a form of apologetics to appeal to their intellect.  In one example, a man questioned the existence of God, to which Spencer presented a lengthy explanation of “cause and effect” (17).  In his argument he stated that God was the cause of all creation (creation being the effects of God).  Spencer challenged the man with a humorous illustration, “You do not fling dust in the air, and find it come down a man or a monkey” (17).  Spencer engaged in theological debates and allowed himself to be available for questions.  He patiently listened as they presented their opinions, and always answered their query from a biblical perspective. 

Keep the Gospel Basic

Spencer kept the gospel message very basic yet true, using common terms and words that were understandable.  He believed that to use more words than necessary leaned on “crazy philosophizing” which tended to “awaken doubt than call forth faith” (59).  Once the gospel had been presented, he called for a response.  Often people did not respond positively because sin prevented them from doing so.  Spencer had the uncanny ability to know what sin a person suffered, in fact he referred to this as “conspiring” with the Holy Spirit (153).  In one case he presented the gospel to a man and his family.  The response seemed positive in that they all knelt and had a prayer together, but the man never showed up at church.  Through a chance meeting on the road, Spencer realized the man was an alcoholic.  With much deliberation, the man threw his bottle away, went back home, and soon after became a “child of God” (256-63).

Counter False or Erroneous Beliefs

Sometimes the people Spencer encountered had erroneous beliefs about the Bible.  They were either confused or, for some reason, were hostile against the Word.  Spencer did not allow anyone to pick apart the gospel in order to discount the whole message nor did he allow faulty thinking to fester.  In one account, a young man wanted to get baptized and insisted on getting immersed.  Spencer interrogated him about the meaning of baptism.  After much discussion, Spencer decided to baptize the man in the river just as Philip baptized the eunuch.  The man was hesitant and Spencer confronted him about his “vanity” and desire to gain attention through immersion baptism (which is not practiced in their denomination) (167-73).  Another facet of faulty thinking was that some did not come to Christ because they thought it should be done through their own volition (165).  Others thought they were too sinful for Christ to accept them, but rather than interpreting this as a form of humility, Spencer saw it as an indication of pride, self-righteousness, and a “wicked heart” (227-28).

Know the Limit

Spencer realized that there were times when he could do no spiritual coaxing since God uses “gloomy months” to bring people closer to Him (223), because there were times when he was powerless in evoking a positive response from people (275).  Though it was never too late to repent and receive salvation, there was one particular episode when Spencer was at a man’s deathbed.  The man refused to accept Christ.  His reason was that he had led a life in opposition to God and had made his choice long ago.  His father had influenced him to believe that there was no hell and all people who died went to heaven.  During his final days of life, he advised his younger brother to cling to Christ and ignore their father’s Universalist beliefs.  Though he apparently knew the truth, he never prayed for God’s mercy to be upon him.  He died eternally separated from God because he could not forgive his father for leading him astray (264-77).

 Never Compromise the Word

The gospel was never compromised.  There were situations in which Spencer could have downplayed the gospel in order to cater to people’s liking, but he never did.  In one episode, a woman was lying on her deathbed and confessed to Spencer that she would have preferred “fanciful” sermons, but instead he preached Scriptural doctrine and insisted that people read their Bibles (283).  She acknowledged that his biblical teachings and urging allowed her faith in God to become stronger.  In another instance during a revival, Spencer was faced with a small group of people who complained about the Bible’s message of God’s judgment, the law, and the human condition prone to wickedness (125).  Spencer could have apologized and promised to give milder messages in the future, but instead he presented a much harsher discourse that evening on the “wickedness of men” and the “anger of God against the wicked.”  As a result, the majority of those people who complained became believers (125-26).  Spencer understood that people, who were “convicted sinners,” had no idea what was best for their soul  (124).  Spencer’s philosophy was that “truth is never injurious” and anything other than biblical truth was a “trick” (115).

Strengths and Weaknesses of Spencer’s Approach

Strengths

Spencer’s approach was very direct and confrontational.  This was a strength because many of the people he encountered denied their need for a Savior, and confronting them with their true sinfulness and depravity forced them to realize their dire state.  Some who felt they were not very sinful needed this direct approach in order to truly compare themselves with God.  This approach spurred others to examine their faulty belief systems and break down barriers erected from intellectual philosophizing and rationalizing. 

The ability for Spencer to adapt his presentation based on the audience is a strength.  He either kept the basic gospel simple and understandable or used apologetics to appeal to intellectuals.  Although he altered the presentation, Spencer never compromised the truth of the gospel and followed up the gospel message with a call to respond.  Insisting on a decision following a gospel presentation forced the person to personalize the message then verbalize their understanding of it.  Though Spencer called for a response, he knew his limitation and in the case of the dying Universalist, he did not push the man to concede to Christ. 

Spencer was very knowledgeable about various counterarguments to the gospel, which is a strength for any Christian.  There were examples of his lengthy discussions, one about creationism and the other about the doctrine of election.  Spencer was able to find the core issue of a person’s objection.  In the case of “The Young Irishman,” he elaborated on the topic of matter, Spirit, the mind, human perception, knowledge, power and will.  Since Spencer exhausted the topics, the young man had no recourse but to admit that Satan had misled him and “renounce his infidelity” (49).  Regarding the doctrine of election, Spencer spoke about predestination, free will, obedience, and receptiveness to the Word.  For each subject Spencer gave two or more points to support his statement.  His arguments seemed to flow naturally and without hesitation, which resulted in the man to make a public profession of faith.

To show empathy and genuine concern for people was another of Spencer’s strengths. He was not afraid to touch people who were deathly ill.  There were many instances in which Spencer visited those who were dying.  An illustration of empathy was shown when the young Universalist was dying.   Spencer was not afraid to show his emotions and while sharing a moment of silence with the wife and mother of the man, he became “subdued to tears” (272).  Spencer’s genuine concern for the dying was shown in the amount of time he spent with them.  He did not think of it as an inconvenience to visit the same person day after day for several hours.  The most loving thing Spencer did was to present the gospel and correct any biblical misconceptions to those who were dying.  When he ministered to a dying young woman, he held her hand and patiently listened to her concerns as she voiced them between labored breathing (89-103).  Those he ministered always appreciated his care and concern, and would thank him for his time even if they did not agree with him.

Weaknesses

There were no weaknesses to Spencer’s approach to evangelism because the encounters he had with the majority of the people resulted in a conversion.  His upfront and candid presentation style worked for his personality.  This confrontational approach may not work for an introverted woman, but it was effective for Spencer, who seemed to be very extroverted and opinionated. 

Strategy of Evangelism to Follow in Ministry

Know Your “Stuff” 

All Christians should be aware of the world’s objections to the gospel, and be prepared to defend the Word.   Spencer dealt with various issues such as creationism, predestination, universalism, and ignorance.  Each time he faced opposition, he had a ready answer.  Spencer clearly practiced Colossians 4:6—“Let you speech always be with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one (NKJV).”  When Spencer discussed creationism with the Irishman, he reiterated Romans 1:18-20 in the form of “everyday” language.    Spencer took to heart what Jesus advised believers— to be “wise as serpents” (Matthew 10:16). 

Be Lovingly Confrontative

As Spencer noted, sinners do not know what is best for their souls, so the most loving thing a Christian can do for a non-believer is to engage and disseminate faulty thinking or any misconceptions of the Bible.  If the person is living in an obvious sin, a Christian must direct him or her to God’s Word.  Spencer personally lived 2Timothy 4:2— “Preach the Word! Be ready in season and out of season.  Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching (NKJV).”  It seemed that Spencer’s reason for trying hard to convince people of the truth was so that they “may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil” (2Timothy 2:26 NKJV). 

Demonstrate Care and Concern

Christians should be willing to spend time with non-believers and present the gospel to them.  Spencer exemplified Matthew 5:44 & 46—“Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you…for if you love those who love you, what reward have you?  Do not even the tax collectors do the same (NKJV)?” All believers should follow Spencer’s example for his patience with skeptics, his ministry to the terminally ill, and his persuasion of people to live godly lives. 

Never Compromise or Minimized the Gospel

Spencer knew that sinners did not know what was best for their souls, and because of this fact, they might have preferred hearing a different gospel than the one he told.   However, he did not change the gospel to suit their tastes.  He recognized that the Word was the only way to free them from their state of being.  Spencer believed the truth of John 8:32—“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free (NKJV).”  Believers should never be afraid to tell the whole gospel because it is a message of hope.

Conclusion

Christians should be in the habit of building their own lives on the foundation of their “holy faith,” praying for the direction of the Holy Spirit, living to honor God, to “show mercy” to people whose faith is inconsistent, and having the courage to “snatch” others from the “flames of judgment” by sharing the gospel with them (Jude 20-23 NLT).  The purpose of every believer is to “go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things commanded by Jesus” (Matthew 28:19-20 NKJV).  Spencer accepted and fully carried out God’s command, and as such, he was a great example for all dedicated followers to imitate.  He never cowered from the truth, and went out of his way to convince people of their fate and spiritual circumstances in the light of God’s Word. 

---

[1] “Introduction to Spencer and his sketches,” A Pastor’s Sketches, Vestavia Hills, AL: Solid Ground Christian Books, 2002.

Copyright © 2008 M. Teresa Trascritti

An Examination of the CBF’s Views and Disagreements with the 2000 BFM November 5, 2007

BibliographyAn Examination of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship’s

Views and Disagreements of Specific Areas of

The 2000 Baptist Faith and Message

 

The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship is an organization whose stance on inclusiveness has lead to diverse interpretations of the Bible and a misunderstanding of the pastoral office. They vigorously support the ordination of women and sidestep the issue of homosexuals in ministry by overtly proclaiming “soul competency” and the autonomy of the local church. This paper will examine the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship’s opposing views of soul competency: “freedom in religion” and the “priesthood of all believers” in the current Southern Baptist Convention’s Baptist Faith and Message.

Brief History

    The 1963 Southern Baptist Statement of Faith was revised to, “build upon the structure of the 1925 Statement, keeping in mind the ‘certain needs’ of our generation.” Conservatives felt that changes to the statement allowed moderates “theological loopholes.”  These ‘loopholes,’ labeled as “Biblical criticism,” “documentary hypothesis,” or “historical-critical method,” were taught to students at institutions like Southern Seminary, making reformation in Southern Baptist seminaries a priority issue.
Friction between the moderates and conservatives escalated, especially after the presidential election of Adrian Rogers in 1979, which conservatives called “The Conservative Resurgence.” The election of a conservative president allowed conservative appointments to the Committee on Committees, which was crucial to the process of hiring conservative seminary presidents. The moderates soon became the minority of the convention’s board and agencies. Out of frustration for being continually “shut out” of convention leadership, the moderates created the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship in 1991.

The conservatives considered the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message to be “ambiguous” on the issue of biblical interpretation and “theological matter.” The moderates’ misuse of “criterion” was a reason the statement of beliefs was rephrased. The Baptist Faith and Message was rewritten in 2000, at the dismay of moderates. The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship claimed that Baptist distinctives were forsaken in the revised statement.

Soul Competency: Freedom of Religion

“Soul Competency” was defined as, “that inner authority through which persons recognized and responded to biblical truth.” Moderates criticized Conservatives for their interpretation of the Bible, which they felt had been limited to “only one understanding and one interpretation.” Moderates felt that every person was “free” to interpret the Bible in “their own way,” which included the exploration of Jewish and Muslim religious views.Conservatives were seen as “separatists” who “avoided associations with religious ‘liberals’” but affiliated with other denominations if they agreed with the “plenary inspiration of the Scriptures.” Conservatives seemed strict in their regard of Scripture and doctrine by staunchly adhering to the “truth of inerrant Scripture,” which was not to be “disputed” or “reconciled” with new scientific or philosophical theories but rather “held and proclaimed.”  Moderates, on the other hand, were more “change minded,” in that “doctrine and revelation do not change, but that interpretation in the light of changing knowledge do.”Daniel Vestal, leader of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, claimed that the difference between Moderate and Conservative Baptists was simply a “different understanding and interpretation of Holy Scripture.” He insisted that the Bible does not “claim nor reveal inerrancy.” In fact many Moderates interpreted the Bible based on the “culture and times in which it was written.” If there were perceived contradictions (“paradoxical passages”) in Scripture with the sayings of Moses, Jesus, and Paul, Moderates upheld Jesus’ words over other Scripture. This is what was referred to as the “criterion.”

Moderates believed “Biblical inerrancy” meant that the Bible acted as the “arbiter” of the Godhead, which made it the object of “idolatry” by “de-emphasizing” the role of Jesus as the criterion. Moderates blamed Conservatives for “humanizing God” by describing Him as being “exclusive, intolerant, and legalistic.” Moderates preferred to convey God as being “inclusive, forgiving, and accepting,” which influenced their mindset to allow “liberalism” and “neo-orthodoxy” into their midst. To Moderates, “Freedom in Religion” meant “blessing one another amidst our differences and finding ways to build bridges.” The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship sought to cooperate and unify itself with all believers in Christ and reasoned, “Baptists are only a part of that great and inclusive Church.”

In addition to the freedom of interpretation, Moderates thought one’s experience was important in the quest for God, which was epitomized by Vestal’s use of Walter Rauschenbusch’s quote, “When we Baptists insist on personal experience as the only essential thing in religion, we are hewing our way back to original Christianity.”

Soul Competency: Priesthood of All Believers

The Core Values of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship included the autonomy of the church to “ordain whomever they perceive as gifted for ministry.” Moderates often used Galatians 3:27-28 to justify the call and ordination of women to the pastorate. Any opposition to a woman’s call to the pastorate was seen as “contrary to Biblical and Baptist heritages,” which emphasized the “priesthood of all believers and congregational authority.”

To Moderates, excluding women from pastoral leadership was similar to the biblical defense of slavery in 1845. The ordination of women was a Moderate’s response of “affirmation” of females and was rationalized thusly: “He (Jesus) called women to follow him; he treated women as equally capable of dealing with sacred issues. Our model for the role of women in matters of faith is the Lord Jesus.”

Conservatives required a pastor to be the “husband of one wife,” which made women disqualified for the position. Women in the pastorate did not fit into God’s “order of authority,” where God is head of Christ, Christ is head of man, and man is head of woman. Although women were “held in high honor” for their work in Christ’s kingdom, women could never be considered for pastoral leadership because “man was first in creation and the woman was first in the Edenic fall.” Women felt “devalued” and “wounded” by Conservatives of the Southern Baptist Convention, but found “healing” with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship’s endorsement of women in ministry.

The “priesthood of all believers” also included homosexuals. Moderates in the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship believed God could call homosexuals to ministry, and their lifestyle was left to “freedom of individual conscience” and the “autonomy of the local church.” Although the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship claimed they reject homosexual practice, the organization regarded homosexuality as merely a “different perspective.” A Moderate expressed the thoughts of many Cooperative Baptist Fellowship members, “Do we really want to sit here and say God’s Spirit cannot call a homosexual (even a practicing homosexual) to follow God’s call?”

In conclusion, the Moderates’ efforts to be inclusive lead to diverse interpretations of the Bible and a misunderstanding of the pastoral office. “Soul competency” was advocated to allow individual freedoms of interpretation that took precedence over Biblical truths, which in turn adversely affected the teaching at Southern Baptist seminaries. Many disenfranchised Southern Baptist women, who sought affirmation for their call to ministry, were drawn to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship because of their emphasis on “soul competency” and the “priesthood of all believers.” The unwillingness for the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship to convey a solid Biblical position on a person’s call to ministry made the ordination of homosexuals a viable option. Although the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship divorced itself from the Southern Baptist Convention in 1991, they continue to denounce the activities of the Convention and have acted contrary to their stated purpose of being “the presence of Christ in the world.”

Copyright © 2007 M. Teresa Trascritti

 

 

<!–[if !supportEndnotes]–>

---

<!–[endif]–>

End notes:

[i]<!–[endif]–> David Hull, Baptist Understanding our Faith and Message [online], accessed 26 June 2003, http://www.cbfonline.org/resource/sermonfile.cfm?forumid= 1111; Internet.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[ii]<!–[endif]–> William L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith. Valley Forge, VA: The Judson Press, 1969, page 393.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[iii]<!–[endif]–> Jerry Sutton, The Baptist Reformation: The Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist

Convention. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000, page 415.

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[iv]<!–[endif]–> Sutton, Reformation, page 417.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[v]<!–[endif]–> Ibid., page 82.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[vi]<!–[endif]–> Ibid., page 63.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[vii]<!–[endif]–> Bill J. Leonard, God’s Last and Only Hope: The Fragmentation of the Southern Baptist

Convention, Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990, page 4.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[viii]<!–[endif]–> Steve DeVane, Patterson Predicts SBC Split in Article for Baptist Paper [on-line], accessed 24 June 2003, available from: http://www.abpnews.com/abpnew/story.cfm?newsid= 3192&srch=1; Internet.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[ix]<!–[endif]–> Sutton, Reformation, page 415.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[x]<!–[endif]–> Michael Foust, Seminary Magazine Addresses Issues Involving Baptist Faith and Message [on-line], accessed 30 June 2003, available from: http://www.sbts.edu/news/archives/ fall2000 /NR033.php; Internet.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xi]<!–[endif]–> Leonard, God’s Last, page 75.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xii]<!–[endif]–> Walter B. Shurden, and Randy Shepley, eds., Going for the Jugular: A Documentary History of

the SBC Holy War; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1996, page xvii.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xiii]<!–[endif]–> Ibid, page xv.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xiv]<!–[endif]–> James C. Hefley, The Truth in Crisis- The Controversy in the Southern Baptist Convention, Volume 1, Hannibal, MO: Hannibal Books, 1999, page 17.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xv]<!–[endif]–> Hefley, Truth vol. 1, page 46.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xvi]<!–[endif]–> Ibid., page 46.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xvii]<!–[endif]–> Shurden, Jugular, page 267.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xviii]<!–[endif]–> Bob Allen, Two Churches Targeted Over Women Pastors [on-line], accessed 24 June 2003,

available from: http://www.abpnews.com/abpnews/story.cfm?newsid=3094&srch=1; Internet.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xix]<!–[endif]–> Baptist General Convention of Texas, 1963 and 2000 Baptist Faith and Message Statements Comparison and Commentary [on-line], accessed 26 June 2003, available from: http://www.bgct.org/bfm; Internet.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xx]<!–[endif]–> Ibid.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxi]<!–[endif]–>Shurden, Jugular, page xviii.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxii]<!–[endif]–> Daniel Vestal, Daniel Vestal Q & A: A Conversation with Coordinator Daniel Vestal [on-line], accessed 23 June 2003, available from: http://www.cooperativebaptist.com; Internet.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxiii]<!–[endif]–> Ibid., page 268.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxiv]<!–[endif]–> Daniel Vestal, Why I am Baptist. Atlanta: CBF Resource Center, 2002.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxv]<!–[endif]–> Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, Who We Are: Identity, Vision, Mission, Core Value and Initiatives [on-line], accessed 6 June 2003, available from: http://www.cbfmf.net/ about/mission.cfm; Internet.

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxvi]<!–[endif]–> Hull, Understanding; Internet.

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxvii]<!–[endif]–> Ibid.

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxviii]<!–[endif]–> Leonard, God’s Last, page 152.

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxix]<!–[endif]–> Ibid.,page 268.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxx]<!–[endif]–> Ibid., pages 151-152.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxxi]<!–[endif]–> Shurden, Jugular, pages 122-123.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxxii]<!–[endif]–> Robert O’Brien, Woman Calls CBF Chaplaincy Endorsement a ‘Healing’ Moment [on-line], accessed 7 July 2003, available from: http://members.aol.com/cbfinva/news/woman.htm; Internet.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxxiii]<!–[endif]–> Bob Allen, CBF Council Adopts Value Statement ‘Welcoming but not Affirming’ of Gays [on-line], accessed 6 July 2003, available from: http://www.abpnews.com/abpnews/story.cfm? newsid=2016&srch=1; Internet.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxxiv]<!–[endif]–> Ibid.

 

<!–[if !supportFootnotes]–>[xxxv]<!–[endif]–> Cooperative, Who We Are, Internet.

 

The Good Samaritan – a different angle October 6, 2007

People tend to read the story very literal—the religious leaders in the story ignored the injured man and continued on their way, but one man stopped and helped him. This is an accurate interpretation; however, in many of Jesus’ stories, there are always at least two lessons to be learned.

 

The “Good Samaritan” is not only about busy religious people, but it is also a story about spiritual salvation. Everyone has worth because everyone is created in the image of God. Everyone is redeemable— even a person who is “face-flat” in the gutter. Some “upstanding” religious people have forgotten that they were in the spiritual “gutter” at one time. We had no hope, until God reached down and picked us up. Just like the man who was beaten and left to die, our clothes were torn and dirty, but He gave us new clothes to wear. He bandaged up our wounds and saved us from impending death. Jesus said, “Go and do the same.” But how can a person do the same as Jesus?

 

This story not only talks about spiritual salvation, but it also refers to spiritual renewal. We can see the story from a different angle— Christians will be beat spiritually and fall down for various reasons. Some will turn to alcohol or drugs, some will be abused, and others might be overcome with the feeling of hopelessness. We who are Christians are to pick up the person, lead them back to Christ, and walk with them in their Christian journey.

 

It is so easy to say that a church member who has fallen into sin was probably never saved, but is that not the same as the religious people who walked past the beaten man in the story? We are to do the same as the Samaritan, not the religious people. No Christian should ever say that he or she will never fall into sin, because we are no better than the unsaved. It is God who separates. We should never think of ourselves as better than others—we are still made of flesh. These are easy words to say, but very difficult to practice. The longer we are Christians, the more likely we are to set higher standards for other people. The truth is Christians are nothing without God. Some of them may feel they are special, but they are being deceived.

 

1 John 3:17, James 2:15-17, Prov. 17:17, John 14:12

 

Copyright © 2007 M. Teresa Trascritti

Fashion Me a People by Maria Harris August 24, 2007

According to an online dictionary, the meaning of “curriculum” is “all the courses of study offered by an educational institution” or “a set of courses constituting an area of specialization” (dictionary.com). In “Fashion Me a People,” Maria Harris paints a multi-dimensional picture of “curriculum” within a church context. In fact, “curriculum” is not “reducible to resource materials” (8), nor is it simply “indoctrination” or “giving instructions” (48). Curriculum is “an activity, a practice of a people” (8), carried out by the “whole community” of believers (46). According to Harris, there are five forms of curriculum: (1) koinonia—the curriculum of community; (2) leiturgia—the curriculum of prayer; (3) didache—the curriculum of teaching; (4) kerygma—the curriculum of proclamation; and (5) diakonia—the curriculum of service (5). In other words, “curriculum” is the teaching about God (didache), how to worship God (leiturgia), how to love God’s people (koinonia), how to love those outside the church (diakonia), and how to tell others about Christ (kerygma). These five forms of curriculum must be done by all believers.

Weaknesses of the Book

The idea of “curriculum” is said to be a type of education that “includes education to and by community” (48). The title clearly shows that the curriculum in question is for the church, so it is unclear if the author intended to include the community of unbelievers in the context of curriculum. It makes sense that the church’s curriculum would be to the community, but this type of education cannot be reciprocated unless the “community” are Christians. In the same sense, her chapter on “the curriculum of service” was essentially social care. There is nothing wrong with helping people to meet their need for food or clothing, but if the five forms of curriculum are to be fulfilled then there must be some sort of teaching or proclaiming about God intermixed with the act of service to the community.

In one part of the book, Harris uses Paulo Freire’s description of “human beings as subjects” (67). Although its inclusion was to expand one’s understanding of the “many layers of subject matter,” the descriptive words used to show the tension of every human seemed confusing. For instance, Harris quotes Freire, “for human beings the essential decision is between speaking or remaining embedded in a culture of silence, between naming ourselves or being named by others, between remaining an object or becoming a subject” (67). One could assume that the intent of this quote was to illustrate that people are in need of “knowing” and “being known,” a “need” expressed by Maslow.

Harris takes old concepts and presents them as something new. For example, she shares, “in a newer educational ministry framework, the whole community is educating and empowering the whole community to engage in ministry in the midst of the world” (46). This concept is found in Matthew 28:19-20 and Acts 2:44-47 which essentially states that Christians ought to support one another and proclaim Christ to all people. She claims that the “present direction” is to “engage in ministry in the midst of the world,” but it has already been mentioned by Paul in Romans 12:2.

In her chapter on the “curriculum of prayer,” Harris includes that prayer toward “God our Mother” or “God as the Great Sphere” is acceptable because some people are “desiring imagery for God” in order to pray (96). This act of creating a god does not properly convey leiturgia, didache, and kerygma.

Strengths of the Book

The author did an incredible job of expanding the definition of “curriculum.” She made it very clear that “curriculum” was more than just a textbook—it was the activity or duty of all Christians. In fact, Harris shared that the word “curriculum” came from a Latin word that meant “to run,” and she stressed, “Curriculum is a course to be run” (55).

Her use of the word “curriculum” is very much in line with the Bible’s use of the term “run.” In the Book of Hebrews, Christians are told to “run with endurance the race that is set before us” (Heb. 12:1), while Isaiah reminds believers that those “who wait on the LORD shall renew their strength…they shall run and not be weary” (Isa. 40:31), and Paul tells Timothy in his last letter, “I have finished the race, I have kept the faith” (2 Tim. 4:7).

Following each chapter, Harris included questions that induced rumination and contemplation that directed the reader to practical application of the chapter’s content. One exercise in particular was an examination of the church’s overall curriculum—the “explicit,” “implicit,” and “null” forms of curriculum as it pertained to the five forms of curriculum. Earlier in the chapter she had pointed out that the “explicit” curriculum was anything written, while “implicit” was the aesthetics or “patterns, organization, or procedures” of the explicit curriculum (i.e. “attitudes” or “design of a room”) (69). The “null” curriculum was basically the unwritten rules or the curriculum that is unmentioned, such as “points of view” or “design of worship” (69).

Applicability of the Book

Harris’ redefinition of “curriculum” makes it possible for churches to evaluate their whole ministry in terms of the congregation as a “curriculum,” meaning that the aspects of “community, prayer, teaching, proclaiming, and service” is taken into consideration when seeking the best way to engage God’s Word (175). I would say that the book is written for the church, although it would not help in actually finding written curriculum.

 

Copyright © 2007 M. Teresa Trascritti

 

Someone asked me… August 24, 2007

Do you feel called to be a pastor’s wife, and as a pastor’s wife, what do you feel your role is in the ministry?

I have to admit that no one has ever asked these questions before, so it took me by surprise. I never really thought of myself as being “called.” But once I had a chance to think about it, I guess the best answer is as follows:

When God called my husband to be a pastor, He called me to be a “pastor’s wife.” I think God has been preparing me for this calling even before we knew we would be called to full-time ministry. God has prepared me by giving me the ability to listen well, to encourage, and to teach. I have a burden for people, and a desire to help them transform into the image of Christ (to become Christians). I want to encourage Christians, in particular, to “never give up,” even if they feel they have disappointed God by their actions. We are all sinners in need of God’s grace and forgiveness.

I feel my role is to support my husband—to be his “help-mate” (Genesis 2:18). I think God has prepared me for my role as a pastor’s wife by equipping me through education (I think the MA in Christian Counseling has trained me to see harmful behavioral patterns in people, and the PhD I am working on getting is helping me to understand how to address basic needs and guide people in the right direction). My husband and I have a burden to help marriages in crisis (Malachi 2:16). In addition, I want to help women grow to be more godly (Titus 2:3-5).

So, to answer the question, I feel that God has called me to be a pastor’s wife and my role is to support my husband in bringing people to Christ.

 

Mormon debate continues July 6, 2007

Some of you may be aware that there has been a Mormon debate on “Viewpoint” (this blog).

I was surprised to find out that the Mormon debate continues in another arena. I encourage you to check out the site and read through the comments.  I’m sure you will find it very interesting.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/blogalogue/2007/07/the-church-of-the-devil.html#more