We're Not a Cult: We Just Sometimes Act Like We Are

Over this past weekend, the most read article on Foxnews.com was entitled Magazines Featuring Female Pastors Pulled From Shelves, "Treated Like Pornography."

The online article revealed that LifeWay Christian Bookstores, bookstores overseen by trustees of the Southern Baptist Convention's publishing agency (LifeWay), pulled this month's Gospel Today magazine from its shelves. Gospel Today, published for nearly twenty years, is a conservative, evangelical magazine devoted to discussing current events and issues within evangelical Christianity. The magazine is the most widely distributed urban Christian publication in the country, with a circulation of 240,000. What would cause LifeWay to pull the magazine from its shelves and treat it, according to Gospel Today's editor Teresa Haiston, "like it was pornography"?

It seems this month's cover featured five women, dressed in black and smiling, whom the magazine's editors profiled as the most influential women pastors in America. A spokesman for Lifeway Resources, said the cover was not the reason the magazine was pulled from Lifeway's shelves. He gave the rationale for pulling it from Lifeway's shelves:

"The buyers said the statements that were in it took positions that were contrary to what we would say," Turner said. "It wasn't so much that there were women on the cover."

I don't know the spokesperson for LifeWay, and I'm sure he is a fine Christian gentleman. But his statement should send a chill up the spine of every Christian in the Southern Baptist Convention who loves our Convention and desires us to not act as if we are a cult. Now before my Baptist Identity friends burst a blood vessel, let me remind you that there is a difference between being a cult, and acting like we are a cult. We are not a cult, but sometimes we act like one. Let me show you what I mean.

(1). A cult has 'leaders' who determine what everybody else in the group can, and cannot read; what they can, and cannot do; what they can, and cannot think.

Our SBC LifeWay spokesperson said, "The buyers (of the magazine) said the statements that were in (the magazine) took positions that were contrary to what we would say" What? Surely, he can't be serious? Does he (or anybody who told him to say this) really believe that Southern Baptists are incapable of determining for ourselves what is truth? Do we need guardians of truth to protect our senstitive eyes and ears from possibly viewing things contrary to the truth? Who are these "buyers"? Who are these people concerned that Southern Baptists might "read" something that contradicts what we believe? Is it possible that the word "buyers" is in fact code for certain SBC leaders who called and complained? If so, just tell us. Then, we can make clear to those who desire to control what we read that Southern Baptists are mature, adult evangelicals who can think for themselves. We do not need leaders who act like cult leaders in an attempt to protect us.

(2). A cult is a place of pecular standards of "morality," where leaders are afraid that members will be "corrupted" by simply being "exposed" to the "immoral" through reading about them, or having unintentional contact with them, or heaven forbid, actually associating with them.

Our SBC LifeWay spokesperson said, "The buyers said the statements that were in (the magazine) took positions that were contrary to what we would say."

Good night. Does anyone else so the absurdity of this statement? I take Newsweek, Time, USA Today, and other liberal weekly magazines and read them all from cover to cover. I remain a conservative, both political and religiously, not because I "shield" my eyes, but because of my convictions. Further, the idea that a conservative, evangelical magazine might actually say something about women pastors that will cause Southern Baptists to stumble morally if we were to read it is actually laughable. I personally AGREE with the BFM prohibition regarding women pastors, but we are acting like a "cult" if we think we need to shield ourselves (and others) from this "immorality." I am not even going to talk about the incredible illogic required to treat a gospel magazine as if it "were pornography."

Frankly, I wonder if those who made the decision to pull the magazine may somehow be related to those Southern Baptist IMB trustees who told me that blogging was like internet pornography. One of these days some of our well intentioned Southern Baptist leaders might actually understand the definition of pornography. The stupidity of comparing women who preach the gospel to those women who expose their bodies to the world (by hiding the magazine) will one day dawn upon us who are Southern Baptists.

(3). A cult takes an "us vs. them" mentality, and views everyone who is "not one of us" as the enemy.

Our SBC LifeWay spokesperson said, "The buyers (of the magazine) said the statements that were in (the magazine) took positions that were contrary to what we would say"

"They" say - "we" say. "They" believe - "we" believe. "They" - "we."

Sigh.

Come on folks. We who are Southern Baptists need to say "enough is enough."

We are not a cult, and we should not silently stand by while some SBC leaders give others in the Christian kingdom the impression that we are.

In His Grace,


Wade

Fundamentalism's Fury Needs One Who Needles

The Christian Century, an evangelical magazine who once counted Reinhold Niebuhr as a contributing editor, has posted an article about LifeWay's decision to remove the Gospel Today Magazine from their bookshelves because of Gospel Today's October cover story.

In The Christian Century article, the writer quotes several sentences from my blog as I offered my opinion regarding the controversial LifeWay decision. What caught my interest was the phrase the writer used in introducing me:

Burleson, a pastor in Enid, Oklahoma, who often needles SBC officials, asked September 24 on his blog . . .

I paused for a moment to ponder the word "needles." A minute later I looked up the definition and found this:

Needle: To torment with persistent insult or ridicule

Someone once opined that perception is personal truth, reality is objective truth, and rare is the occasion when the two actually meet. I do not perceive myself as a needler of Southern Baptist Convention leadership, but I accept that The Christian Century, my Baptist Identity friends, and a handful of SBC leaders see me that way. I perceive myself a supporter of the SBC (I led my church to increase Cooperative Program giving last year), a defender of SBC missionaries, agency employees and administrators (we hired them to do a job, and we should trust them to do it well), and a Southern Baptist for the long haul (I've been a Southern Baptist my entire life, and I willingly continue my affiliation with the Southern Baptist Convention).

To Question Stupid SBC Decisions Is Not Needling, It's Needed

My wife and I were rocking along the earlier part of this decade, raising a family, pastoring a church, loving Oklahoma and our Southern Baptist Convention, when we both were awakened to a radical change occurring within the SBC - a change that caught us by surprise.

We discovered missionaries were being fired. At the time we said nothing because, like most Southern Baptists, we believed the issue was a denial of the Bible as the inspired, inerrant Word of God - and by golly, we want Bible believers on our mission field.

Then, when I became a trustee of the International Mission Board, I realized to my horror that the issue in the Southern Baptist Convention was not a battle for a belief in the the inspired, inerrant Word of God. I trust my moderate friends will be patient as I restate what I just wrote in the preceding sentence. Had it been proven to me at the grassroots level of the SBC that the problem with our Convention was a denial by some of the sufficiency, inspiration or inerrancy of God's Word, I would never have second thoughts about my involvement in "The Battle for the Bible." Some may wish to debate with me the propriety of using the word "inerrant" to describe the Bible, but The Chicago Statement on Inerrancy defines the word inerrant for me, and I have absolutely, positively, not one iota of a problem using the Chicago understanding of "inerrancy" as a descriptive adjective of the Bible.

But, I discovered as a trustee of the IMB that inerrancy is no longer the issue in the Southern Baptist Convention; we have a much worse problem we are battling. Frankly, because of the way I have seen some of my fellow Southern Baptists who hold to inerrancy treated in this new millenium by other Southern Baptists who also profess to hold to inerrancy, I now have doubts about the veracity of the claim that the issue in the Southern Baptist Convention was ever a battle for a belief in the inerrant Bible in the first place. Let me illustrate.

The Problem in the SBC Is a Rejection of Conservative Evangelicals Who Disagree With Fundementalist Interpretations of the Sacred Writ.

I have seen an excellent Hebrew professor fired from teaching Hebrew at Southwestern Theological Seminary (Sheri Klouda), forced to sell her own blood to meet expenses, all because of a Fundamentalist interpretation that a woman should not teach men. I have seen an outstanding female supervisor (Wendy Norvelle) at the International Mission Board promoted by Dr. Rankin to be the Vice-President, only to see Rankin's recommendation overturned by Fundamentalist trustee leaders who forced their Fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible that "no woman shall lead a man" upon IMB administration. I have seen IMB trustees force their Fundamentalist interpretation that certain spiritual gifts have ceased, a belief that exceeds the BFM 2000 and in some minds contradicts the inerrant Word of God, and so close the door on otherwise qualified Southern Baptist missionaries from serving on the mission field. I have seen IMB trustee leaders force their Fundamentalist Landmark beliefs on an entire board, and thus remove from the possiblity of missionary service any Southern Baptist church member whose baptism did not take place in a Southern Baptist church. I have seen Fundamentalist trustees fire a missionary couple in Africa because they refused to "cease and desist" from cooperating with another conservative, evangelical missionary couple - who happened to be non-Southern Baptist - in planting a church among the bush tribes of Africa. I have personally been witness to Southern Baptist Fundamentalist leaders spreading vicious rumors against people (other than me) who dared speak out to oppose their views. I have seen Southern Baptists threatened, Southern Baptists excoriated, Southern Baptists fired, Southern Baptists mistreated, Southern Baptists lied about, Southern Baptists dismissed - all because they dared to express an opinion different than the Fundamentalist interpretation of sacred Scripture on tertiary matters that have nothing to do with being Christian or even Southern Baptist. The best way to identify these Baptist Fundamentalists is with the label "Baptist Identity" for truly, the Fundamentalists would rather demand people conform to their interpretation of what it means to be Southern Baptist than to cooperate with people who view things differently than they do. In other words, their "Baptist Identity," as they interpret it, precedes any identification with Christ and His commandment to love one another.

That, my friend, is why I speak out. The people in leadership who are hurting Southern Baptists by their demands for conformity must be removed from Convention leadership. Let me say that again: Those who demand that all Southern Baptists conform to their Fundamentalist views of Baptist Identity must be removed from leadership. Why? The Convention is built on cooperation (i.e. "The Cooperative Program), and demands for conformity disqualify any man who is to lead out in cooperation. I will continue to speak out until the sleeping giant we call the Southern Baptist Convention wakes up and realizes that what began as a "Conservative Resurgence" somewhere along the line became a "Fundamentalist Fury." It's time the fires of Fundamentalism's fury be quenched.

If my writing plays any part in quenching those fires, and if in so doing, the Christian Century writes that I "needle" the SBC leaders who exalt Fundamentalism (Baptist Identity), then so be it.

I plead guilty.

In His Grace,


Wade Burleson

My Commitment Not To Exclude The SBC Minority

_______________________________________________

Now that Lifeway has affirmed that my views on the gifts of the Spirit are held by the majority of Southern Baptist pastors and churches, I affirm my commitment to not remove those Southern Baptists who hold to the minority view of cessationism from future SBC leadership, missionary assignments, or trustee service.

There is room in the SBC for us all, even those of you who disagree with what the majority of Southern Baptists believe. By the way, I have a tendency to put more trust in a Lifeway study - an official, scientific survey of the 'majority opinion' - than I do a subjective fiat from an institutional leader of what 'most' Southern Baptists believe. Of course, some might now argue that the 'majority' opinion is not what counts, but what Scripture teaches. I think I have proven over the last two years that this doctrine of 'gifts' is a tertiary issue, one in which Southern Baptists disagree, but one over which we as Southern Baptists should not divide. However, I happen to believe the majority have it right as far as our interpretation. But I say to those of you in the minority, there is room for you in the SBC.

I promise not to make the gifts an issue.

Now that Lifeway has revealed the actual majority position on 'private prayer language,' I call upon all of you who are also in the majority to join me in not seeking to remove 'cessationists' from leadership. I love all my fellow Southern Baptists and will work hard to maintain a spirit of cooperation and fellowship with those SBC brothers and sisters who hold to the minority viewpoint.

Amen?

In His Grace,


Wade Burleson

P.S. Alan Cross has written a brilliant analysis on this survey.