Trouble in Fundy Paradise?

Discussion in 'Baptist Colleges / Seminaries' started by Jimmy C, Sep 23, 2003.

  1. Jimmy C

    Jimmy C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    The following is an article from Associated Baptist Press, evidently Paige Patterson's brother in law, Chuck Kelly, does not care for the political meddeling his types brought to the SBC!

    NEW ORLEANS (ABP) -- Trustees of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary will decide this fall whether to continue as the lone holdout among Southern Baptist Convention entities by refusing to make the SBC Executive Committee the "sole member" of their corporation.
    The Executive Committee asked all the SBC's schools and mission boards to make the legal change to prevent its trustee boards from exercising the kind of break several colleges have made with state Baptist conventions.

    For example, trustees of Baylor, Samford, Wake Forest and Furman universities have amended the schools' charters to elect most or all of their own board members. Similar action by five agencies of the Missouri Baptist Convention is being challenged in court.

    New Orleans Seminary President Chuck Kelley says he opposes naming the Executive Committee as the seminary's "sole member" out of principle. He conceives no situation under which the seminary would or could depart from the SBC.

    The legal change requested by the Executive Committee would not alter the way seminary trustees are elected, nor would it change the current governance of the seminary. However, it would give the Executive Committee legal authority to overrule or remove the elected trustees if those trustees acted against the wishes of the convention.

    Kelly opened the academic year at New Orleans Sept. 4 with a convocation address explaining the situation to faculty, staff and students. His topic was the autonomous organizational structure of Baptists.

    To accede to the Executive Committee's request "could start a fundamental change in historic Baptist polity and compromise our practice of organizational autonomy," he declared. It also would introduce a form of connectionalism into Baptist life, he said, and start "a movement away from the decisive influence of the SBC and toward a direct control by the SBC."

    As evidence of where this connectionalism could lead, Kelley pointed to recent debates over the future of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, Mo. In a recent address to members of the Missouri Baptist Convention's Executive Board, Missouri pastor David Tolliver reported that an SBC Funding Study Committee was considering closing or changing the focus of Midwestern Seminary.

    When Tolliver, who was in a small-group meeting with the study committee, asked what would happen if Midwestern's trustees didn't go along with the proposed change, he said he heard SBC officials intimate they would ask the convention to remove the seminary's entire trustee board.

    In an attempt to quell the concern Tolliver generated among Missouri Baptists with that report, the president of the SBC Executive Committee released a letter to state Baptist newspaper editors Sept. 18. In the letter, Morris Chapman says no such threat was made.

    Chapman concurs that the question was asked about what would happen if Midwestern's trustees did not consent to a change in status proposed by the SBC. But he recalls a different nuance to the answer: "I answered the question by saying: 'The SBC has left itself no recourse to overturn governing actions of an entity's trustees. The only course of action available to the SBC is the possibility of removing the trustees by vote of the convention in session.'"

    Chapman added in his letter that such a step never has been taken and he can't imagine it happening.

    Nevertheless, Kelley saw danger in the mere suggestion.

    "To my knowledge, this stunning suggestion is unprecedented in Southern Baptist history," he said. "Knowing that Midwestern Seminary had already made the SBC the sole member of its corporation, these members of the SBC Executive Committee were assuming the power of sole membership made it possible to change an entire board of trustees at one convention. Whether they were right or wrong in their interpretation, such a suggestion would not have been made prior to the sole membership strategy."

    Kelley warned the New Orleans family: "The change to sole membership suggests a new power would be in play at the denominational level. … I believe it is impossible to say sole membership would never be used for anything but its original stated purpose."

    Kelley lamented that SBC conservatives, after gaining control of all SBC boards through presidential appointments in the 1980s and '90s, would resort to such tactics to ensure they wouldn't have to call on God for a miracle again.

    "It saddens me that the biblical conservatives would be the group of record taking the first step toward connectionalism at the national level of SBC life," he said.

    The risks of allowing SBC entities to remain fully autonomous are more palatable than the risks of connectionalism, Kelley declared.

    He posed several other alternatives as possible ways to accomplish the Executive Committee's desire:

    -- Asking each person elected as a trustee of an SBC entity to "sign a covenant with the SBC to uphold all SBC guidelines for the entity he or she will serve."

    -- Amend the charters of SBC entities to require financial penalties for unauthorized charter changes.

    Trustees of New Orleans Seminary are scheduled to take up the matter when they meet Oct. 6-8.
     
  2. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, it won't be long now. Kelly won't last long. I wonder who will take his place. Coppenger? Pressler?

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  3. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    ABP and Wingfield have zero credibility. Much ado about nothing, as usual, from such empty sources.
     
  4. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,655
    Likes Received:
    189
    Yeah... the same "empty" sources that said Patterson was going to be the president of Southwestern.
     
  5. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    What a statement! As you probably already know some of the new leadership are bad mouthing some of those who were their teachers and some who taught their professors who have already died. SWBTS has never had a problem with any kind of liberalism. Of course A.T. Robertson had the same thing happen with him. Isn’t it amazing how well respected these men have been by Baptists over the years and then some of the current leaders attempt to tear them down.

    You probably are aware that Leon McBeth was asked to write a boon on the role of women in the SBC. He wrote and they sold a handful of copies and the book was killed. You may also know that many boks are writen by those who are teaching at SBC seminaries but are not published by the convention. The professors don’t want the hassle of dealing with the SBC press. Another professor I had wrote a book. While I read it I realized that it wasn’t exactly what he believed. when I talked with him about it we were walking&gt; I could tell he didn’t want to say much inside the building&gt;but what he told me outside made me have no respect for those in leadership at all. They had full editing rights to the manuscript and did just that. They said what they wanted to say and have his name on it. But it was not what he wrote and not what he believed. I call that dishonesty. I have been published by a secular publisher as a professional in a very different field. I was never treated like that. The publisher did not have full editing rights. They paid me an up front fee initially. If for some reason they decided not to publish what I wrote or we could not come to an agreement once the manuscript was submitted the initial fee was what I kept as a kill fee. That allows me to take my manuscript somewhere else. I have the copyright rights to what was published. The only stipulation is that I must reference it where it appeared the first time. I can completely publish it somewhere else but I must put in writing where it was first published. . But Broadman is not like that. They are different. Somehow they are special. They are better than any secular publisher who don’t even claim to be Christians. How’s that for integrity in publishing? Isn’t it amazing how few professors publish with Broadman?

    You may have read that Patterson has stated publically that women professors should never teach men students. I just wonder who will replace the woman Hebrew and OT professor that is there now. How many women take Hebrew anyway? Very few. Just imagine she was hired by the former president recently but is now under another man who thinks differently.

    You might have read or know about the new addition on the president’s home. It is 1500 square feet to house his books. Why doesn’t he just give them to the library. SWBTS has the largest theological library in the US already. So I don’t think he will be needing any books soon that are not already there. Isn’t it amazing how all the previous presidents who lived in that home found the home sufficient. I wonder who paid for all those books too. If he had started reading 600 boks each year since he was 20 he would have the same number of books he has now. I wonder how many of those he has actually read?

    One of those in SBC leadership just a few years ago was put in jail. You probably know that many of them are related to each other. Do we have case of nepotism? Does SBC leadership stay in the family.

    [ September 24, 2003, 02:14 AM: Message edited by: gb93433 ]
     
  6. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah... the same "empty" sources that said Patterson was going to be the president of Southwestern. </font>[/QUOTE]Forrest Gump could've broken that story [​IMG] Is there anyone that didn't?
     
  7. Jimmy C

    Jimmy C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tom,

    You may not like the messager, ot the truth about what Chuck Kelly said, but the fact is Associated Baptist Press quoted directly from the source. APB quoted Chuck Kelly from a chapel address that Kelly gave.

    It has been my contention for along time, that once the fundies siezed total control it would not be long before they began turning on each other. It looks like it is now starting to happen. It shows the truth that the problem was not and never has been theological but political.

    What I do find very interesting is that it is Patterson's brother in law the is the first one to really begin the break!
     
  8. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Does he know some things in more detail than many others? Does he see something on the horizon? I would think he would know some things the rest of us don't.
     
  9. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    My understanding is that the article is referring to a a behind-the-scenes issue from earlier this summer when the SBC Executive Board and Chapman proposed creating a single chancelorship who would have final authority over all six seminaries and to whom each of the seminary presidents would answer. Patterson and his brother-in-law at New Orleans fought this hard. because Dr. Mohler at Southern Seminary was poised to assume that position and become their boss. Patterson dislikes Mohler more than he dislikes SBC “liberals.”

    This agreement represents a supposed compromise, which is being spin-doctored now to make it look like they're trying to protect the seminary control from 'liberal' take-over. In reality, they don't trust one another any more than they trust the “liberals.” Patterson is working overtime behind the scenes to kill the whole idea. If they fail, then Kelly gets the criticism and Patterson comes out looking good like he supported the idea all along.

    Kind of sounds like SBC politics to me.
     
  10. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
    TomVols said:

    Actually, Baptist Press comes to mind ...
     
  11. TaterTot

    TaterTot
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Dr. Kelly is a theological conservative, but he is NOT a "fundie".
     
  12. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    As an SBC Seminary student I have a real problem with those who attempt to run our seminaries as if they are churches. They are not autonomous Baptist Churches. They are Southern Baptist institutions of Christian higher education that are funded directly by the SBC Cooperative Program. Therefore, Dr. Kelly's concern about "connectionalism" or whatever he called it is invalid. The six seminaries are connected to the SBC because they are funded by the SBC Cooperative Program. To try and act as if one (or all) of the SBC seminaries is some type of autonomous church body is quite frankly ludicrous.
     
  13. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    I happen to know Dr. Patterson personally. I have never heard him say that he "dislikes" Dr. Mohler. I think, sir, that you are spreading unfounded gossip with that statement. If Dr. Patterson "dislikes" Dr. Mohler so much why did he invite Dr. Mohler to preach on several occasions in Chapel at SEBTS between 1998 and 2003? You are talking trash man.

    Do you guys ever get tired of cooking up conspiracy theories? :rolleyes: Moderates and liberals do not have to play in the conservative SBC sand box. ;) They are free to leave at any time they wish. [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] The CBF will welcome them with open arms. [​IMG] However, if they choose to remain in the SBC then they have to learn to compromise with the conservative majority. [​IMG]

    [ September 26, 2003, 02:55 AM: Message edited by: BibleboyII ]
     
  14. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    "Dislikes" might be a little too strong of a word. But I know of two people who has known him probably longer than you have been alive and tell me a little different story. One has used the word dislikes and the other a word similar to it. It is one thing to be a student and another to be his peer.

    Don't you know there were some who would have liked Dr. Mohler to be in charge of the SBC seminaries? Doesn't it strike you strange that someone in the Patterson family is in charge of a seminary now. I would call that nepotism. Wouldn't you?

    Obviously you are a Patterson supporter. That is your right. But there are some professors at SWBTS who at one time taught at Criswell College while Patterson was there and left for one reason. Why do you think that is?

    In the Baptist history class they talk about why there is more trouble in the SBC now than before. Professors and others stay and fight now instead of leaving because of the annuity board--retirement. Many of them own a home and are near retirement. Ever ask them what they get paid? You would probably get a real shock when you do. The fact is that almost every faculty member at SWBTS has left since 1995. That's in just eight years. ATS only gave SWBTS a short term accreditation primarily because of the way the seminary was run. It was run by the current leadership.

    A friend of mine just left teaching at one of the SBC seminaries and he told me that he does not trust anything the SBC does. Can those people just tell a straight story once instead of wondering how it will affect the SBC by the way they tell the story. They say one thing to cover up something and do another. Just check out the archives of the SBC papers and the local paper in Ft. Worth and read about the time Dilday was fired. You can read about how the trustees gave him a great evaluation and then fired him the next day. Then you can read the lies that the trustees told for several days until they were caught. They finally admitted they didn't want much press. But their lies caught up to them. I have copies of all that the local paper reported and from The Scroll.

    Why do you think that some of the professors at SWBTS left Criswell College and then went to SWBTS?

    Personally I think the whole bunch stinks, SBC and CBF. Can any of them tell a straight story? Perhaps you need to talk with some of the retired faculty so that you can know all the facts better. So you know Dr. Patterson personally. How personally do you know him? As a student do you really think he will tell you much? I was in Dr. Dilday's home for several months. I talked with him many times. Never once did he ever say anything about anyone. It was the aame with the professors. But now ask them once their job is not in jeopardy. Why do you think the trustees wanted to pay Dilday hush money. If the truth was not damaging why hush money? Do you call that integrity and honesty? There is only one reason for hush money. To cover up what you don't want exposed. Did you see any of the SBC leadership speak out against that practice and say what they did was wrong? One trustee did that was all. They are leading the SBC!

    Your cooperative money was going to be used for hush money! Imagine that! Your cooperative giving money that could be used to support some missionaries or other professors during a time when giving is low is now going to the new library of 1500 square feet at SWBTS attached directly to the presidents home. Do you really think he needs that when all the other presidents found the home quite nice? Dr, Hemphill even had children there.

    I guess you forgot how the Baptist Foundation of Arizona lost over 400 million dollars for Baptist people. Some churches had over one million dollars with the BFA. That was the SBC leadership of today &gt; and yet some of them saw nothing wrong with having an investment corporation that was too good to be true. They were supposedly giving almost twice the return that ohter simple investments were giving. People were told the money went for churches. I talked with two pastors who borrowed money from the BFA and said it was just like borrowing money from a bank and that they would not do it again. The churches were charged interest just like a mortgage company. So the BFA was about collecting interest money not starting churches with the money they made.

    Does that sound in accord with scripture about borrowing money from other Chrsitians? Does it sound like a good business practice to allow offering money from Baptist churches to be investeed in a scheme. I always thought offering money was for ministry not investments. But God took it away. The BFA was investigated. The leaders reported that there was not a problem at the state convention meeting. All along the leaders were stealing using a ponzi scheme. Nobody thought they would lie. Nobody believed it could happen. But it did. Conspiracy? Try truth. Read it for yourself. The story about the BFA was on national news.

    After a few more years of this do you really think there will be a sand box to play in. BP reported a reduction in giving so they are needing to cut staff. Seems like I read in BP a few months ago that giving was up some. Did I read it wrong or did something else happen?
     
  15. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  16. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,655
    Likes Received:
    189
    What kind of 'documented evidence' would you find acceptable?
     
  17. Jimmy C

    Jimmy C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bible boy

    As quoted by Dr. Kelly:
    ______________________________________________
    To accede to the Executive Committee's request "could start a fundamental change in historic Baptist polity and compromise our practice of organizational autonomy," he declared. It also would introduce a form of connectionalism into Baptist life, he said, and start "a movement away from the decisive influence of the SBC and toward a direct control by the SBC."
    ________________________________________________

    This is the entire crux of the moderates argument all these years, it is not and never has been truly about theology, but about politics. The SBC has defacto direct control over the SBC seminaries, but that is not enough for some. And there already has been a fundamental change in the historic Baptist polity that has been accomplished with the BFM 2000 and many other areas. It is not suprising to me that the executive committee is trying to usurp the authority of the trustees, just suprising that it took this long. As Kellys last statement reads, for the fundy's it is all about control!

    What is most suprising to me is that it is Kelly who is going to take the bullet for this. I imagine that Paige is not happy about this either as he has just taken control of the best SBC's top seminary and has been given carte blanche to do what ever he deems appropriate - unlike Hemphill who had the millstone of Craig Blaising tied around his neck the last two years he was there.
     
  18. neal4christ

    neal4christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you have proof of this? I just wonder because it is stated as fact.

    In Christ,
    Neal
     
  19. neal4christ

    neal4christ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Messages:
    1,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oops.....double post! [​IMG]

    In Christ,
    Neal
     
  20. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Do you have proof of this? I just wonder because it is stated as fact.

    In Christ,
    Neal
    </font>[/QUOTE]You are right. I forgot it could have come from donations either directly to the seminary, cooperative program money or some other source. I do know the trustees approved it. I guess we will find out for sure sometime.
     

Share This Page

Loading...