NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--Responding to charges that he has
defamed the Baptist World Alliance, Paige Patterson issued a
statement June 22 saying he stands by comments he made at the
Southern Baptist Convention annual meeting.
Patterson was responding to a statement by Baptist World
Alliance General Secretary Denton Lotz, who said the BWA was
slandered and maligned during the annual
meeting June 15. While not referencing Patterson by name, Lotz
alludes to statements made solely by Patterson.
Patterson, president of Southwestern Baptist Theological
Seminary, served on the committee that recommended that the SBC
withdraw from the Baptist World Alliance. Speaking to messengers
prior to the BWA vote June 15, Patterson lamented what he called
a leftward drift in the BWA and said the American
Baptist Churches USA tolerates churches friendly to the
homosexual movement. The ABC denomination is a member of the
Baptist World Alliance.
Patterson referred to the Evergreen Baptist Association, a
group of 31 churches that joined ABC last year. Based in
Washington state, the association has two churches that condone
homosexuality and support same-sex marriage.
We can no longer afford in this particular day, when the
press for gay marriage is on, to be in an alliance of any kind
with those denominations which support in any form or fashion gay
marriage, Patterson told messengers.
The SBC and the ABC approach the issue of homosexuality
differently. While the Southern Baptist Convention withdraws
fellowship from churches condoning homosexuality, the American
Baptist Churches USA leaves the issue of homosexuality up to each
church.
Lotz criticized Pattersons statement, saying that there
is not one BWA member body that affirms, promotes or
approves of gay marriage! He quoted a resolution adopted at
the BWA meeting in 1994, which states that the organization
proclaims the biblical definition of the family, a
permanent, monogamous, heterosexual union, as the original divine
plan for family life which must continue to serve as the
foundation and ideal for an ordered and effective society.
Patterson, though, said in his June 22 statement that some BWA
members do accept homosexuality.
Southern Baptists have not said that the BWA promotes
gay marriage or homosexuality, he wrote. We have
said, based on a press release from one of those unions, that
some unions now tolerate churches which welcome practitioners of
homosexual behavior. We have also said that if the BWA tolerates
a convention or union which is accepting of churches with this
anti-biblical agenda, then we can no longer lend our name or
resources to that alliance.
Worthy of note is that there has been no denial from the
American Baptist Convention about the Evergreen Association and
its two gay-friendly churches. Neither has the BWA
denied the existence of these churches in good standing with the
ABC, which in turn provides much of the leadership for the BWA.
Pattersons comments at the SBC led to both the ABC and
the Evergreen Association issuing statements addressing his
charges. An Evergreen Association statement said that while two
of their churches are Welcoming and Affirming, the association
remains united with the goal of spreading Gods love
and peace.
Meanwhile, an ABC official, Richard W. Schramm, pointed to the
denominations statements on marriage and heterosexuality,
which he said support traditional, orthodox teachings.
Nevertheless, some ABC churches do stray from biblical teachings
on the issue of homosexuality. Nearly 50 of its churches are
aligned with the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists
- a group of churches that supports homosexual, bisexual
and transgender rights. One of those is First Baptist
Church in Seattle, an ABC church that is a member of the
Evergreen Association that Patterson criticized.
On Mothers Day, the churchs coordinating pastor,
Stephen D. Jones, preached a sermon on inclusive sexuality
in which he said that being gay is good and being
bisexual is good. Using 1 Corinthians 6:20 as his text,
Jones told those present that if youre a lesbian ...
you glorify God in your sexuality and that if you are
a questioning 14-year-old ... you glorify God in your emerging
sexuality.
One week later one of the pastors, a practicing homosexual,
told members, [A]s a gay man, I say: Give us the right to
marry. Another pastor subsequently told the congregation
that the church would work to overturn Washingtons defense
of marriage act, which bans same-sex marriage in the
state.
But current and former ABC officials assert that the reason
the SBC withdrew from the BWA is not because of homosexuality,
but rather because the Baptist World Alliance accepted the
Cooperative Baptist Fellowship into its membership. Lotz
previously had made a similar assertion.
Patterson, though, disagreed.
While that was the smallest and least significant piece
of the puzzle, there is something to be learned here,
Patterson wrote. The CBF admits that it severed ties with
the SBC because the CBF wished to have a more moderate
-- read neo-orthodox -- position than the SBC. The CBF openly
rejects the inerrancy of Scripture. Now, the SBC is criticized
for leaving the BWA, but no word of criticism is offered by the
BWA for the schism, to use their favorite word, in
Southern Baptist life brought about by the CBF departure.
Not only does this strike us highly inconsistent, but
also it makes crystal clear that whatever it is that Dr. Lotz
means by conservative evangelical, it is clearly
quite different from what is usually understood by the term.
In his statement Lotz said that the BWA is not a liberal
organization and that it neither promotes nor condemns the
issue of women as pastors.
Since we affirm the autonomy of Baptist bodies, it is
the prerogative of local churches and their member bodies to make
decisions on ordination, Lotz wrote.
Patterson said while the BWA does not advocate the role of
female pastors, neither does it call for a biblical
position on the matter.
In ways sometimes subtle, sometimes overt, some
leadership in the BWA has, in fact, sanctioned such practices,
Patterson wrote. Again, that is their right and privilege
-- just as it is our right and mandate to hold to a biblical
position and not lend name and resources to the promotion of
views that we honestly view as antithetical to biblical truth.
Although not included in his statement, Lotz was quoted in the
media as saying the BWA was a conservative, evangelical
fellowship. Patterson said that if that is so, a statement of
faith should be developed.
[A]re we expected simply to take his word for it,
especially when our ears have repeatedly heard the contrary?
Patterson wrote. If Dr. Lotz is right, where is the
confession of faith? Even if such were minimal, surely the BWA
could officially declare that people are saved only
through conscious faith in Christ, that the church is a
fellowship of twice-born individuals who have witnessed that
faith by immersion, and that the Bible is the flawless and
absolutely truthful Word of God!
In countering the liberal label, Lotz had pointed to a
statement adopted by the BWA Executive Committee in March of this
year stating, We wish to affirm again for all to know our
adherence to the historic doctrines of our faith ... and our
joyful affirmation of faith in the mediation of Jesus Christ as
solely and entirely sufficient for salvation, for there is
salvation in no one else.
Patterson said while some members of the Baptist World
Alliance affirm biblical orthodox teachings, others do not.
We gratefully acknowledge that many, perhaps even most,
participants in the BWA are godly, conservative, Christ-loving,
Bible-honoring people, Patterson said. But, freedom
of faith also includes the freedom to associate in ways which do
not compromise cherished convictions. Freedom of faith recognizes
the right, and, yes, even the necessity of a group or an
individual to determine alliances or to choose not to affiliate
with a group on the basis of conviction. This has always been a
critical plank in the free-church history of convictional
dissent.
The full statements by Paige Patterson and Denton Lotz
follow:
Paige Patterson:
The Southern Baptist Convention is a convention of
40,000 plus churches, which, like most mainline denominations,
began a leftward drift into liberal theology and neo-orthodoxy --
a less strident but more damaging form of liberalism. At great
cost, the vast majority determined to return to the faith of the
Bible and of our fathers as an act of gratitude to God and a
stewardship of His mercies. As a part of this stewardship, the
SBC determined that it would no longer lend its name or its
resources to groups or alliances which to the best of our ability
to discern, were not fully faithful to the Word of God.
Over the past 15 years, Southern Baptist representatives
have made repeated appeals to the BWA leadership to cease giving
platforms to neo-orthodox and liberal leaders, Baptist or
otherwise. Some leaders ignored our pleas while other promised
imminent change which never materialized. These pleas were both
oral and written, all to no avail.
Southern Baptists believe that all should be free to
practice their faith as they wish. We gratefully acknowledge that
many, perhaps even most, participants in the BWA are godly,
conservative, Christ-loving, Bible-honoring people. But, freedom
of faith also includes the freedom to associate in ways which do
not compromise cherished convictions. Freedom of faith recognizes
the right, and, yes, even the necessity of a group or an
individual to determine alliances or to choose not to affiliate
with a group on the basis of conviction. This has always been a
critical plank in the free-church history of convictional
dissent.
Under no circumstances do Southern Baptists seek to
isolate themselves from the world, let alone from our Baptist
brothers and sisters of common conviction throughout the world.
We will continue to have co-operation and fellowship with any of
these Baptist friends who so desire. We will simply elect to
sustain this fellowship in a forum other than the BWA.
Neither have we slandered Baptists anywhere,
including the BWA. What we have said is exactly what Dr. Lotz has
essentially admitted. Liberal and neo-orthodox presenters such as
Desmond Tutu, Jimmy Carter, Tony Campolo, Paul Fiddes, and Eric
Geldbach, etc., are frequent speakers at BWA events. We are
prepared to hazard our lives to protect their freedom to do so,
but we are no longer desiring to lend our name and resources. The
freedom to choose not to support what is to us unconscionable is
just as important as the freedom of the BWA.
Southern Baptists have not said that the BWA promotes
gay marriage or homosexuality. We have said, based on a press
release from one of those unions, that some unions now tolerate
churches which welcome practitioners of homosexual behavior. We
have also said that if the BWA tolerates a convention or union
which is accepting of churches with this anti-biblical agenda,
then we can no longer lend our name or resources to that
alliance. Worthy of note is that there has been no denial from
the American Baptist Convention about the Evergreen Association
and its two gay-friendly churches. Neither has the
BWA denied the existence of these churches in good standing with
the ABC, which in turn provides much of the leadership for the
BWA.
The BWA says that it does not advocate the role of
female pastors. But neither does it call for a biblical position
on the matter. In ways sometimes subtle, sometimes overt, some
leadership in the BWA has, in fact, sanctioned such practices.
Again, that is their right and privilege -- just as it is our
right and mandate to hold to a biblical position and not lend
name and resources to the promotion of views that we honestly
view as antithetical to biblical truth. In the end, I suspect
others will join us, but if not, we, like all our Baptist and
Anabaptists forefathers, must stand true to our consciences.
No charge has been made that the BWA is anti-American or
anti-Southern Baptist. Those sentiments are not infrequently
stated, but we are all big boys here and can handle criticism.
That to which we have objected is that when these charges come,
no effort has been made in those same forums for participants to
hear the other side or receive an answer that might put matters
in a different light.
Finally, Dr. Lotz insists that the BWA is a conservative,
evangelical fellowship. Maybe so. Doubtless, many member
bodies fit this description. But, are we expected simply to take
his word for it, especially when our ears have repeatedly heard
the contrary? If Dr. Lotz is right, where is the confession of
faith? Even if such were minimal, surely the BWA could officially
declare that people are saved only through conscious faith
in Christ, that the church is a fellowship of twice-born
individuals who have witnessed that faith by immersion, and that
the Bible is the flawless and absolutely truthful Word of God!
Dr. Lotz insists that the real issue is the admission of
the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship into the BWA. While that was
the smallest and least significant piece of the puzzle, there is
something to be learned here. The CBF admits that it severed ties
with the SBC because the CBF wished to have a more moderate
-- read neo-orthodox -- position than the SBC. The CBF openly
rejects the inerrancy of Scripture. Now, the SBC is criticized
for leaving the BWA, but no word of criticism is offered by the
BWA for the schism, to use their favorite word, in
Southern Baptist life brought about by the CBF departure. Not
only does this strike us highly inconsistent, but also it makes
crystal clear that whatever it is that Dr. Lotz means by conservative
evangelical, it is clearly quite different from what is
usually understood by the term.
Southern Baptists have no intention of engaging in any
further tit for tat with BWA leadership. That leadership knows
through both written and oral sources exactly the nature of the
problem. They apparently intend no change. That is their
privilege. We in turn exercise our privilege as Americans and as
free-churchmen to lend our name and resources only to what we can
support with conviction. There is a world to reach for Christ.
Southern Baptists shall now turn our attention to that. We would
risk the suggestion that the BWA do the same.
Denton Lotz:
When reviled, we bless; when persecuted, we endure; when
slandered, we try to conciliate.... (I Corinthians 4:12-13)
NOTE: Because of enquiries from around the world due to
misrepresentations and misunderstandings printed in the press, it
is necessary that the BWA issue the following statement
clarifying our stand on critical issues of faith and practice.
(Denton Lotz)
On Tuesday, June 15th in Indianapolis, Indiana, Baptists
of the world, and the Baptist World Alliance in particular were
slandered by statements made to messengers at the annual meeting
of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) which resulted in the
withdrawal of the SBC from membership in the BWA. Websters
New Collegiate Dictionary defines slander as: the
utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and
damage anothers reputation.
The good name of the Baptist World Alliance, and
Baptists generally, has been maligned. But more than that, the
evangelistic potential of Baptist churches worldwide has been
severely harmed. Most of all, the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ
has been tarnished and the body of Christ brought into schism.
How can we reclaim the good name of Baptist? That is the
challenge for millions of committed and dedicated believers in
the Southern part of the USA, in North America, and worldwide!
The Washington Post on June 16th wrote an
article that began, The Southern Baptist Convention voted
to pull out of the Baptist World Alliance, accusing the worldwide
organization of a drift toward liberalism that included growing
tolerance of homosexuality, support for women in the clergy and
anti-American pronouncements. This statement
summarizes, unfortunately, the false accusations that have been
sent around the world and have appeared in newspapers all over
the USA and the world.
The Apostle Paul endured slander and yet said that we
must try to reconcile. This is indeed what the BWA attempted to
do on April 20th when we met with SBC leaders. We had agreed that
we would not make false or accusatory statements against one
another. Therefore, the blast from Indianapolis was like a
bombshell in a crowded building. Millions of Baptists have been
spiritually hurt, their witness maimed and our good name
besmirched.
The tragedy of misrepresentation and slander is that
there is no way to inform the secular or religious public or
media of the truth. The secular and religious press tends to
accept statements made by religious leaders and print them as the
final truth. We have seen for example that accusations are made
and then printed in newspapers without any commentary or checking
out of the facts, or opportunity to correct erroneous statements.
BWA president Billy Kim, pastor of Central Baptist
Church in Suwon, Korea, one of the largest Baptist churches in
the world, has had to respond to letters from all over the world
and has made a crystal clear statement: The Baptist World
Alliance does not sanction or promote homosexuality!
How sad that the BWA has been defamed and our strongly
Biblical and evangelical stance has been irreparably hurt by
innuendos, false accusations, and guilt by association. Scripture
reminds us to make a defense of the hope that is within us. (I
Peter 3:15) Therefore, we affirm the following so that the word
might go forth very clearly where we in the BWA stand:
1. The BWA is not a liberal organization! It strongly
affirms the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith as
proclaimed in Holy Scripture which we accept as the authoritative
Word of God! The BWA Executive Committee, meeting in March, 2004,
made the following clear statement on March 10th: We wish
to affirm again for all to know our adherence to the historic
doctrines of our faith
.and our joyful affirmation of faith
in the mediation of Jesus Christ as solely and entirely
sufficient for salvation, for there is salvation in no one
else. (Acts 4:12)
2. The BWA does not promote women as pastors of churches
nor does it argue against that practice. Since we affirm the
autonomy of Baptist bodies, it is the prerogative of local
churches and their member bodies to make decisions on ordination.
3. The BWA is not anti-American. The fact that
Archbishop Tutu, the chair of the South African Truth and
Reconciliation Commission, addressed the BWA General Council in
Durban, South Africa was a testimony to Baptist concern worldwide
against racism and the tragedy of apartheid. It is absurd to
consider his invitation by South African Baptists as
anti-American!
We are citizens of the Kingdom of God and loyal citizens
of our own nations. As Baptists who believe in the authority of
the Word of God we believe that all of us must be open to the
prophetic voice from God as it applies to our nations and to the
world! We believe that Baptists should be good and patriotic
citizens of their countries, but patriotism must always be
limited to and judged by the Bibles call for ultimate
loyalty to Christ who is above all!
4. The BWA does not support homosexuality as an
acceptable life-style, believing it to be incompatible with the
teachings of Scripture! It affirms without reservation that
marriage is a holy state and only between a man and a woman
forever.
There is not one BWA member body that affirms, promotes
or approves of gay marriage! On the contrary, at the BWA meeting
July, 1994 in Uppsala, Sweden, the BWA General Council passed the
following resolution confirming that the BWA proclaims the
biblical definition of the family, a permanent, monogamous,
heterosexual union, as the original divine plan for family life
which must continue to serve as the foundation and ideal for an
ordered and effective society.
Baptists worldwide look forward to a glorious BWA
centenary celebration in England next year with the sure
confidence that Christ will complete the work He began in us! We
invite Baptists worldwide to come to Birmingham, England July
27-31, 2005 and celebrate with us. By Gods grace the
Baptist World Alliance represents the most widespread movement of
Baptist believers all over the world.
We are a democratic movement respecting the autonomy of
national bodies and local churches, representing the rich and
poor, the educated and uneducated, those in the North and South,
the East and West. Indeed, we belong together because we belong
to Christ!
We do believe that God is the judge and he will justify.
We have been encouraged by hundreds of telephone calls, e-mails,
letters and statements of support. A young Southern Baptist
seminarian wrote: For whatever reason, God has allowed
these events to take place. I know that He is sovereign over our
times and is using these current circumstances for His glory that
more will come to know Him. He is my comfort and my hope. I know
that He will continue to bless the BWA.
As we have stated before, the Baptist World Alliance
hopes for and will work for reconciliation with our Southern
Baptist brothers and sisters and prays for their return to the
historic and international Baptist world family. To God be the
glory!"