In the meantime

Radical Democracy

The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure." --Thomas Jefferson, 1823
 

Among our Founding Fathers, no one was a more steadfast advocate for the freedom of the press than Thomas Jefferson. His belief in this fundamental tenet of democracy was totally unshaken by the horrible mistreatment he suffered at the hands of the newspapers during his political career and especially during his presidency.  In 1798 he wrote to Washington aide Peregrine Fitzhugh, "I have been for some time used as the property of the newspapers, a fair mark for every man's dirt."

Jefferson knew that the "agitation" produced by the unrestrained flow of information and opinion was a necessary evil.  Plus, he saw the truth as his best and only defense. "The man who fears no truths has nothing to fear from lies," he said.

The most famous Jefferson quote about the press was written to Edward Carrington in 1787:

The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them.

One must remember that when he was speaking about newspapers, Jefferson was dealing with the latest in communication technology of the day. There were many who wanted to see restrictions on the flow of information via newspapers.  The only qualification to become a newspaper publisher was to have a printing press and an opinion! Newspapers made it difficult for those in positions of power and influence to control the flow of information.  How easily we forget that the lack of control over the flow of information is the single most important distinction between a free nation and totalitarianism.

I doubt that even with his brilliant, forward thinking, inventive mind Thomas Jefferson could ever have envisioned the flow of information via the Internet and personal publishing.  But I have no doubt whatsoever his opinion about the need for unrestrained access to information would be the same.

Since the advent of the Blogosphere, many in positions of power and influence have been heard to cry foul.  Some of them would like to see restrictions on the free flow of information via blogs. After all, the only qualification to become a blogger is to have a PC and an opinion! Blogs, like newspapers, radio and television before them, can make it difficult if not impossible for those in positions of power and influence to control the flow of information.  And that was exactly Mr. Jefferson's point.

Doubt the power of blogs?  Ask Dan Rather about it.  He still can't believe that a bunch of online nerds caught him and his cohorts at the once-upon-a-time "Tiffany Network" manipulating a story and knowingly utilizing forged documents.  They are professionals, and they know, after all, what is best for us.  We should have just trusted them that the "essence" of the story was real even if the facts and the "evidence" were false.  Rather is still incredulous that it ultimately cost him his job.

Within moments of the 60 Minutes broadcast on September 8, 2004, bloggers were pointing out errors in the documents and displaying evidence they were forged.  With all of the righteous indignation he could muster, Rather went on the defensive, portraying his critics as the latest incarnation of McCarthyism:

“Powerful and extremely well-financed forces are concentrating on questions about the documents because they can’t deny the fundamental truth of the story. If you can’t deny the information, then attack and seek to destroy the credibility of the messenger....I think over the long haul, this will be consistent with our history and our traditions and reputation. We took heat during the McCarthy time, during Vietnam, during civil rights, during Watergate. We haven’t always been right, but our record is good.”

As it turned out the "fundamental truth of the story" was that it was not true, and the supporting documents were complete fakes.  Furthermore, Rather got the analogy backwards - he and the 60 Minutes staff were the ones who were being McCarthy-like by misusing their power and influence and distorting the truth for their own ends.

The title of this post is derived from the stated goal of Web 2.0 technology - "Radical Democratization."  The problem sometimes with democracy is that it is so, well, democratic.  Democracy, especially the radical variety, can be problematic if you believe the unwashed masses that are setting the agenda are wrong, or just plain stupid.  The experience of history would seem to dictate that in that case, you adopt an elitist stance and decry the unfairness of a system that allows the untrained, unlearned, or undeserving to have or exert influence. ("We are professionals... Don't try this at home!")

This scenario continues to play out in areas where the advent of personal publishing is shaking up the status quo, including the church.  Recently in Southern Baptist circles, a cadre of passionate pastoral bloggers (with a few dedicated laypersons in the mix) was largely responsible for the surprise election in 2005 of Dr. Frank Page to the SBC Presidency and with growing sentiment to stop narrowing the definition of what constitutes a "true" Southern Baptist.  Some in denominational leadership and in positions of informational gatekeeping have cried foul as these bloggers have gained an larger and larger audience and as a result, more influence.  (Sound familiar?) Here are some recent harsh words for the Baptist Bloggers:

Rather than blogs being primarily used for new content written by pastors for the edification of their own congregations, too many SBC bloggers take their cue from the legacy of Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, except that the latter were actually professional journalists who could be sued for libel or fired for incompetence. Neither of these actions are likely to take place in the wild west atmosphere that has become Baptist blogging. No matter how amateur and uneducated an opinion-giver may be, harsh words and sensationalism will always garner a lot of attention... within the world of blogging, the life experience, education, and countless hours of study of someone like Dr. Al Mohler can be shouted down by a 2nd year seminary student with access to a keyboard. 

(Rev. Scott Lamb, ostensibly reviewing Keen's "Cult of the Amateur" in the latest issue of MBC Pathway.)

It is ironic that those words come from a pastor who apparently is in possession of both two years of seminary and a keyboard.  His words reflect the same sense of entitlement and superiority espoused by Dan Rather and countless others since the time of Jefferson whose position and influence (or those of his mentors) was being threatened or undermined by some form of populist media.  When taken to extremes, this sense of entitlement and superiority results in calls for controls, limits or some other method of censorship of the populist media in question. 

At this point, no one with any amount of credibility is calling for the censorship of the Blogosphere (although I'm sure Dan Rather would vote for that in a heartbeat!)  But we are hearing rumblings along those lines in recent days with regard to talk radio.  For whatever reason, moderate and progressive (liberal, if you please) talk radio seems to always result in commercial failure, as in the case of the ill-fated Air America.  The result, for better or worse, is the market has clearly spoken in support of right wing talk radio.  Now those who don't see eye to eye with conservative hosts are crying "Unfair!" and musing that the government should silence these voices or require them by law to present both sides of every issue by reviving the Fairness Doctrine.

For what it's worth, bloggers and radio hosts should be flattered. If they were not being effective, if they were not having an impact, no one would be trying to silence or discredit them.

I'm with our Third President on this.  The unrestricted flow of information via the latest and most efficient technology at our disposal is our best hope to insure our freedom. 

Memo to elitists:  We aren't stupid.  We aren't easily manipulated.  We can discern truth from hyperbole.  We don't need you to filter our information for us.  And as Mr. Jefferson so aptly said, if you have nothing to fear from truth, you have nothing to fear from lies. 

This one made me laugh out loud...

Will There Ever Be Another Billy Graham?

The month of June has seen the dedication of the Billy Graham Library and the passing of his beloved wife Ruth.  At both of these events we've been reminded again how frail Dr. Graham is.  He retired from public ministry a while back, but these events have also reminded us of the awesome impact this son of a North Carolina dairy farmer has had on the world.

The vast majority of Americans don't remember a time when Billy Graham was not the most famous evangelist in the world.

What is it about Billy Graham that made him the most popular evangelist and religious figure in the last 100 years (and arguably in history)?  He was a compelling speaker, but he wasn't spellbinding like Martin Luther King.  He possessed a mesmerizing gaze with deep set eyes, but most of his ministry was to huge crowds who couldn't see his facial expressions. The content of his messages were simple and he wasn't especially deft at turning a phrase.  But there was something about Billy Graham that made him the world's pastor for the last sixty years.

It wasn't what he could do, it was who he is.  It is the essence of the man that we admire, whether we are the President of the United States, the Queen of England, or a man or woman struggling to make ends meet.

There are two basic things about Billy Graham that made him Billy Graham.

First, he is a man of steadfast integrity.  Over the 60 years of public ministry he never allowed himself to be in a room alone with a woman that was not his wife or daughter.  He never even allowed himself to be photographed with a woman unless Ruth was with him.  He instructed his organization, The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, to pay him a salary equal to that of a local church pastor in a metropolitan area.  He turned over all royalties (which amounted to millions of dollars) from his best selling books to the BGEA.  He was and is above reproach, in every sense of the phrase.

Second, Billy Graham belonged to the entire body of Christ.  He was a Southern Baptist, but he sure didn't act like your typical Southern Baptist evangelist.  He didn't condemn or reject those who didn't agree with him on every theological jot and tittle.  He gladly partnered in his crusades with any church with a desire to help win people to Christ.  As a result, Billy Graham belonged to the Baptists, but he was also claimed as one of their own by the Methodists, the Presbyterians, the Pentecostals, the Charismatics, the conservatives, the moderates, the young, the old and everyone in between.

He also belonged to the world. He was respected, even loved by the people he was trying to reach with the gospel.  People didn't feel that Billy Graham was preaching against them or at them.  They sensed that he cared about them and that he was sincere in wanting them to have peace with God. I remember my agnostic Jewish biology teacher in high school seeing a copy of Billy Graham's book "The Jesus Generation" on my desk in class.  He picked it up and said, "Billy Graham.  I like Billy Graham.  There's someone who knows what he is talking about."

Billy Graham was color blind long before it was politically correct to be color blind.  In the 1950s and 1960s he demanded that his crusades be completely integrated, much to the consternation of many of the prejudiced church members who expected the crusades to be as segregated as the churches they attended on Sundays.

Billy Graham united the church behind the common goal of winning people to Christ. He didn't try to get everyone to agree with him, he just wanted them to join him in an a crusade to share Christ with their lost friends and neighbors.   

Over the last twenty years, our culture has become more and more polarized... just look at a map of the "red" and "blue" states.  We have taken sides on the left or the right and have nothing but disdain and condemnation for those on the opposite side from us.  Sadly, the church has mirrored society in this.  We've taken sides on the left or the right and have nothing but disdain and condemnation for those on the opposite side from us.  (In the case of my denomination, we divided up on the right and the far right and have nothing but disdain and condemnation for those on the opposite side of the same side as us.)

Will there ever be another Billy Graham?  Will there ever be someone again who can unite the Body behind the common goal of winning others to Christ?  I certainly hope so. 

Greater Love Has No Man...

The image is burned into our memory.  It haunts us while at the same time inspiring us.  The image of a lone firefighter heading up the stairs in the World Trade Center on 911 as people rush by him heading out of the building to safety.  That firefighter, along with more than 300 of his brothers gave their lives on September 11 in a desperate attempt to save lives in the face of our greatest disaster since Pearl Harbor.  Those who perished were a part of the largest rescue operation in history.  There were approximately 25,000 people in the twin towers when the planes hit.  Over 22,000 of them got out alive.

It's not natural, what they do.  While people are fleeing in terror from a disaster, they head with steely determination into the danger zone.  They put themselves in between us and harm.  They are the epitome of the word "hero."  We toss that term around flippantly.  We use it to refer to people who play sports, as if throwing a baseball 90 miles an hour or a basketball into a hoop makes you a hero.  A hero is someone who puts themselves in harm's way to save or protect another.

The city of Charleston, SC, and in a sense the entire nation is grieving today.  Last night, fifteen of Charleston's best and bravest went into a burning furniture store.  The roof collapsed and only six of them got out alive.  It was the deadliest day for firefighters since 911.

After September 11, a fire truck became a rolling symbol of liberty and freedom.  I remember the first time after the attacks that I saw a fire truck going by on the way to a call with a large American flag flying behind it.  There was a lump in my throat and tears in my eyes. 

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, we stopped firefighters and police officers to shake their hands and thank them for their service.  We had been reminded that these people were ready if called upon to sacrifice their lives to save ours.  They were our heroes, each and every one of them.

It's been six years.  Life has returned to some semblance of normalcy.  We no longer stop and applaud when we see a fire truck.  But we should.  Last night, we were reminded again why.

Charleston mayor Joe Riley summed it up this way: “This time yesterday, they were firefighters. Today, they are heroic, historic figures in our city.”

IN MEMORIAM
Capt. William “Billy” Hutchinson (30 years)
Capt. Mike Benke (29 years)
Capt. Louis Mulskey (11.5 years)
Engineer Mark Kelsey (12.5 years)
Engineer Bradford “Brad” Bait (Nine years)
Asst. Engineer Michael French (18 months)
Fire fighter James “Earl” Drayton (32 years)
Fire fighter Brandon Thompson (Four years)
Fire fighter Melven Champaign (Two years)

Turning Into Dad

I guess I figured he would live forever
That I would always have a place to turn
A shoulder I could always lean on
And a teacher for those lessons yet unlearned

I will treasure the high
And the finer things within him
And I know as he would have it
I will lay aside the bad
Of all the things that I could still become
I could do a whole lot worse than turning into Dad

It was early on a springtime morning
The small hours of the twentieth day
I was shaken from my fitful sleeping
In the not so very merry month of May

I cannot explain it, I just knew it in my heart
That my hero had breathed his last and said goodbye
We are flesh and we are spirit
It's appointed to us once to live... once to die

But good fathers, too, are only mortal
They long to rest in Jesus' arms
They want to walk the golden streets of heaven
When the vanities of earth have lost their charm
   
So I will treasure the high
And the finer things within him
And I know as he would have it
I will lay aside the bad
Of all the things that I might yet become
I could do a whole lot worse than turning into Dad.
I could do a whole lot worse than turning into Dad.

(Wayne Watson, © 2000 Word Music, LLC | Material Music)

      

Happy Father's Day, Dad.  I sure do miss you.

    

Ruth Graham, 1920 - 2007

One of the world's great love stories ended yesterday with the homegoing of Ruth Bell Graham.  Ruth Bell and Billy Graham met in the early 40s when they were both students at Wheaton College.  She was the strikingly beautiful daughter of well-known missionaries to China, he was a tall, lanky, somewhat awkward "preacher boy."  Ruth was determined to follow her parents into the mission field.  Billy was not really sure what he wanted to do, but sensed God's call in his life to preach.   He was ordained as a Southern Baptist minister in 1939. 

Billy and Ruth were married in 1943.  He served for a time as the pastor of First Baptist Church in Western Springs, Illinois, just outside Chicago (his first and only pastorate).  While serving at that church, Billy took over a failing radio program called "Songs in the Night."  They enlisted the services of a remarkable bass-baritone named George Beverly Shea.  In 1944, Billy co-founded Youth for Christ with friend and colleague Charles Templeton, and he became the traveling speaker for YFC. One year into their marriage, Billy hit the road preaching.  That would continue for the next six decades.

In 1949 Graham's spectacular tent revival in Los Angeles put him on the map and established him as the leading evangelist of his day.  Because of decisions made the year before, Billy Graham was well prepared for success.

In November of 1948, two preachers (Billy Graham and Grady Wilson), a radio singer (Bev Shea), and a trombone player/song leader (Cliff Barrows), met in a motel room on South Ninth Street in Modesto, California.  They were determined to set themselves apart from other evangelists who were accused of (and usually guilty of) financial irregularities, sexual immorality and exaggerating numbers.

The decisions made that day came to be referred to as the "Modesto Manifesto" but it never existed in written form.  The Manifesto consisted of decisions and commitments made that day that would guide the Graham team through the next sixty years of ministry. They agreed to go to extrordinary lengths to avoid the appearance of financial abuse, sexual misconduct, and in the reporting of crusade attendance and results.  They also pledged to cooperate with any church willing to participate in united evangelism efforts and to avoid criticism of local churches or ministries.

The Manifesto was responsible for the Graham Team always being above the fray and miles away from any hint of scandal.  But there was one primary reason that the lanky preacher boy from North Carolina became the most famous and respected evangelist since the Apostle Paul: The love, support, encouragement, and sometimes admonition of Ruth Bell Graham.

She was content to be in the shadow of her famous husband, but her personality and integrity made her the focus of public attention anyway. Her gentle sense of humor and independent spirit won over all who met her.  Her quips became legendary.  Once Ruth was asked if she ever considered divorcing Billy Graham.  "Oh, no, never, " she replied, "Murder, maybe, but never divorce."

Ruth's health has been declining since a bad fall in 1974 while putting up a swing for a grandchild.  She has rarely been seen in public in the last 8 years.  Billy has made references to her condition at the few public appearances he has made.  He was thankful for the last few years that they have shared together in the mountains.  "I am so grateful to the Lord that He gave me Ruth, and especially for these last few years we've had in the mountains together. We've rekindled the romance of our youth, and my love for her continued to grow deeper every day. I will miss her terribly, and look forward even more to the day I can join her in Heaven."

A few weeks ago at the dedication of the Graham Library, Billy paid tribute to and declared his love and respect for the love of his life, while sharing that Ruth had been bedridden for six months.  Earlier this week, she slipped into a coma and her husband said her homegoing was near.

I heard today from a colleague whose parents have served with the BGEA for many years, that Billy is understandably taking his wife's passing very, very hard.  For the first time in 64 years, he is without Ruth.

Their story is, to me one of the great love stories of all time.  Two people who are known and loved worldwide who consistently chose for the last six decades to always put family first.  A couple who remained faithful to each other in every sense of that word despite worldwide fame and adulation.  Two dedicated servants who steadfastly refused to ever put themselves first, who never allowed themselves to profit personally from their fame, but who always saw that fame as a tool to win others to Christ.

The old cliche says behind every successful man there is a woman.  That cliche was never more true than in the case of Ruth and Billy Graham.  The millions of decisions made for Christ over the years because of the ministry of Billy Graham and all those who continue to come to Christ through the ministries of Franklin Graham and Anne Graham Lotz, are due in large measure to the person and persona of Ruth Bell Graham.

How Many Baptists Does it Take to Change...

With appropriate apologies to non-Southern Baptist readers of this blog, this will be (I promise) the last post for a while dealing with SBC matters.  There is a reason, though, why you should know about happenings in San Antonio this past week.  More on that in a minute.

My company again provided the video streaming for the Convention, so I was able to closely follow events in San Antonio.  There were excellent messages both at the Pastor's Conference and at the Convention from Chuck Colson, James MacDonald, Rob Zinn, Frank Page and others. (CLICK HERE to watch the 2007 convention on demand on 316 Networks.) 

The 2007 SBC Annual Meeting was an unusual gathering, even by SBC standards.  For one thing, the theme of the event was "Lord, Send Your Holy Spirit," which was more than a little ironic, since we've spent much of the last year squabbling over speaking in tongues, private prayer languages and whether or not believing all of the gifts of the spirit continue to this day disqualifies you from serving in various areas of service in SBC life.  Also, a sense of tension has been growing in the SBC for the last 18 months.  There have been numerous issues that have ignited discussions but the core of the tension centers around two schools of thought - those who feel the convention's focus should continue to be, as it has since 1979 on the doctrinal purity of the convention and it's agencies and institutions, and those who feel continued narrowing of the SBC's theological parameters harms our witness to our culture and that the convention's focus needs to once again be on missions.

There are many who feel this was inevitable, that at some point the rightward shift of the Conservative Resurgence would lead to a course correction of sorts.  Then there are those who are convinced that those who are attempting to bring that course correction about are dangerous liberals who are attempting to undo the Resurgence and return the SBC to the pre-1979 bad old days. The problem with the latter theorem is that those who are advocating the course correction have impeccable conservative credentials and a number of them took an active role in the Resurgence.

What is at stake here is whether or not the world's largest protestant denomination will make a genuine impact on our culture or marginalize itself by becoming more and more fundamental and exclusionary.  Some of the voices from the Baptist blogosphere put it this way:

Wade Burleson:

The Southern Baptist Convention, through the trustees of our boards and agencies, is narrowing the parameters of fellowship and cooperation to the point that real, genuine conservatives are being excluded as unfit for service in the SBC. Our convention hated liberalism twenty years ago and we expelled it from our midst, but at this hour we better hate legalism and Fundamentalism as much as we did the former liberalism or we will find ourselves so fractured and fragmented that we no longer have the ability to cooperate about anything, including missions.

Ben Cole:

Southern Baptists are in real danger of having our theological attention distracted away from the Bridegroom due to an inordinate fascination with the Bride. In this way, we are being led to think that our churches are His Church, and our kingdoms His. This, quite simply, will prove the undoing of our ministry fruitfulness. If we aren’t careful, one day we will wake up to find that our little vine has withered altogether.

The San Antonio messengers passed a resolution affirming the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 as a "consensus statement" that is a work in progress rather than a divinely inspired creed, which (angry statements by a couple of seminary presidents notwithstanding) was a clear statement by the messengers against further narrowing of the definition of what constitutes a "true" Southern Baptist.  (Click here to view the Tuesday evening debate on the BFM2K motion)

I am encouraged by the words of much of the convention leadership during the meeting. SBC President Frank Page in his address to the convention on Tuesday had this to say:

For 30 years we’ve been trying to raise baptism levels among non-revived churches among non-revived people who’ve lost their passion for the lost. But interestingly enough, we’ve become strangely passionate about our own agendas... We've become unfulfilled and bitter in our walk before God; we find faults in everyone else; and we develop a pattern of dishonesty in which we will not deal with what the problem really is.  And when we take it to a convention level, are we not all apt to point out the failings of others?

Or this from Executive Committee President Morris Chapman:

For Jesus’ sake, and the sake of His Kingdom on earth, we must not make every doctrinal issue a crusade or a political football. We are wasting time when we are given to harshly debate disputable doctrines that lead to destructive distractions. We have no right to judge others with whom we disagree about secondary and tertiary doctrines. Only God is our Judge. But we do have the right to engage in spirited debate where we differ.

Why should you care about the latest Southern Baptist fuss?  Because at it's core, this controversy is identical to the one that plays out again and again in local churches all over the country.  Is our focus going to be on reaching others for Christ or on maintaining our traditions?  Are we going to be known by what we are for or what we are against?  Is it about us or about Him?  Are we going to be more like the Pharisees or more like Jesus?

Nothing was concluded or decided in San Antonio, but the results so far are encouraging.

Remembering Jess Jackson

God called my friend Jess Jackson home today very unexpectedly.  This is a day of victory for Jess, but an awfully difficult one for those of us who love him. 

For ten years, Jess was my pastor, my mentor, my confidant, and above all, my friend.  He forever ruined me for any other pastor that I would serve with for the rest of my ministry career, because they would all be compared to him.  I always wanted to again be that close to my pastor.  I have served with some wonderful, godly men, but it was never the same.

When I met Jess Jackson twenty years ago, I was managing a video production facility in Chesapeake, Virgina.  I had left vocational ministry two years earlier and never intended to return to it.  I was filling in as interim worship pastor at the church we were members of when Jess came to serve as its new pastor.  God knit our hearts together.  A few months later, I left Telesystems to serve full time at Westwood Hill.

We were very much alike. Jess was an aerospace engineer with Grumman before God called him to preach, so we were both uber geeks. We loved computers and all things technical.  We were both fans of The Three Stooges, The Pink Panther and Monty Python.  We shared a passion for youth ministry.  We both used humor as a defense mechanism, a communication device and a survival tool.

We were also very different.  Jess was very analytical.  I was very touchy-feely.  Jess was systematic and organized.  Clutter and filing stacks and were the order of the day for me.  Jess planned, I procrastinated.  We balanced each other out perfectly.

The church where we served was fraught with problems.  Through all of those problems Jess remained upbeat, positive and faithful.  I never heard him say an unfair or bitter thing about those who opposed or maligned him.  His experiences did not sour him on the ministry or on people.  I wish I could say the same about myself.

During our time together his boys, Luke and Josh, went from being middle and high school students to young adults.  Jess never missed a game that his boys were playing in.  I learned by example from him that you only get one shot at being a Dad and your family always comes first.

He adored and cherished his wife Carol, the love of his life.  They were partners in parenthood, in ministry and in life.  They completed each other.  I can only imagine the emptiness she is feeling tonight.  My heart breaks for her.

In the ten years since we left Virginia, Jess and Carol have remained close to us.  Whenever one of us faced a tough decision or a crisis, we were on the phone to each other.  If one of our kids had a problem with algebra, I would e-mail the problem to the "Algebra Hot Line, c/o Jess Jackson."  Within 24 hours, he would e-mail the problem back to us with a detailed explanation.  On one occasion, he got a different answer than the book gave.  At the next class, the teacher announced that there was an error in the book on one of the problems.  You can guess which one it was.

I've known a lot of doting grandparents over the years, but Jess surpassed them all.  He and Carol were loving being grandparents.  They kept us supplied with pictures of their beautiful granddaughters.

Our thoughts and prayers are with Carol, Luke and Josh, and the entire family, as well as the church family at New Song Fellowship.

Thank you, Jess for all of your help, advice, and counsel over the years.

Well done, good and faithful servant.  Well done.

To Speak or Not To Speak... so to speak

For those of you who don't keep up with happenings in the Southern Baptist Convention, there has been an interesting (I use that term somewhat loosely) discussion in Southern Baptist circles of late on the subject of the gift of tongues.  This recent version of this discussion began a few months back when Texas pastor Dwight McKissic revealed in a Chapel sermon at Southwestern Seminary (where he serves as a Trustee) that a "private prayer language" was a part of his personal worship time.  This subject was already an issue with the SBC's International Mission Board.  Despite the fact that IMB's President, Dr. Jerry Rankin, acknowledged that he employed a prayer language in his personal worship, the agency decreed that use of a prayer language would disqualify a person from serving as an SBC foreign missionary.  Pastor McKissic's admission elevated and expanded the discussion.

The McKissic sermon was removed from the Southwestern's archives, but the proverbial cat was already out of the bag.  Usually in such a situation, the Baptist course of action would be for those who felt strongly that McKissic was wrong to launch a scathing attack on the "offender" personally, but that did not happen in this case.  You see, Dwight McKissic is a successful pastor, a spellbinder speaker, a man of integrity and (I can testify from personal experience) a very nice guy.  And, oh yeah, he's black.  There is no doubt that the reaction to McKissic in terms of public vitriol has been muted because folks didn't want to attack a black SBC pastor.

On the plus side, there has been a lot of healthy, and for the most part civil discussion about this issue on the SBC-oriented blogs over the last month.  Pastor McKissic publicly called for the SBC to clarify the denomination's official position on this issue at this year's convention.  He also hosted a well-attended and very successful conference on the Holy Spirit that featured thoughtful presentations from both the cessationist and non-cessationist point of view.

As the discussion expanded, Ed Stetzer, NAMB's resident research guru (who is currently on loan to Lifeway) initiated a study to gauge the opinions of evangelical pastors - both SBC and non-SBC - on this subject.  Their findings, released earlier this week were surprising, to say the least.  The study found half of all Southern Baptist Pastors believe that the gift of tongues and/or a private prayer language are legitimate biblical gifts.  The study and its findings were reported in most Christian media and some secular wire services as well, as well as in the infamous SBC Blogs.

Some in the cessationist corner of the blogosphere reacted to the study results by questioning the timing and methodology of the study (Strategy: When faced with facts you don't agree with, question timing, methodology, or the motives of those who report the facts.)

North Carolina Pastor Tim Yadkin said the study didn't have enough respondents who were SBC pastors.  Now, I'm sure Pastor Tim knows a thing or two about homiletics, systematic theology and Baptist Polity, but he obviously snoozed through his statistics class.  For the Lifeway study, over 1,000 evangelical senior pastors were surveyed and over 40% of those were SBC pastors.  Can you say "representative sample" boys and girls?  Gallup, Zogby, et al regularly poll 2,500 - 3,000 people to gauge the opinion of the whole country, so I think 405 SBC pastors constitutes a healthy sample size for the 15,000 or so SBC Senior Pastors.

My favorite comment was by Malcolm Yarnell, assistant dean for Theological Studies at Southwestern Seminary. Dr. Yarnell didn't like the way the survey questions were worded and especially took issue with the "blatant assumption that a 'gift' may be used privately."

Again, I am sure that Dr. Yarnell is a brilliant theologian, but theological truth is a moot point in an opinion survey.  The survey's questions were designed to gauge what evangelical pastors believed about the gift of tongues, not whether it is biblically correct or appropriate.  And as for the "blatant assumption," let's not forget the current debate among SBC folk is about the use of a private prayer language... "private" being the operative word there. 

Stetzer responded that - biblically correct or not - many people, even many pastors, make a distinction between public vs. private prayer language.  "As we asked the question in the survey, I think some would make a distinction between the two," he said.

The simple fact is, no matter how the questions were asked, they would have gotten the same answers— 50% of them believe God gives some people a private prayer language.  I seriously doubt that any of the pastors who responded to the survey were confused about the answers they gave. 

I have no doubt whatsoever that the topic of private prayer languages will come up at the SBC's annual meeting next week in San Antonio, which in my opinion is unfortunate.  Not that this isn't an issue that we should have a healthy, loving debate about.  It's just that Southern Baptists are about as good at healthy, loving debate as Paris Hilton is at explaining quantum physics.  Especially at our annual meetings, where we always put our worst foot forward for the world's news media, who are always there because they love it when an already politically incorrect organization shoot itself in the collective foot.

To me, the study points out yet again the diversity (I realize that buzz word has negative connotations for many of us, but deal with it) of opinion among Southern Baptists.  That diversity can be both our greatest strength and our biggest hindrance.  The study also revealed a perfect example of that: 41% of SBC Pastors held cessationist views - in other words, they believe the gift of tongues ceased to exist at some point in the past.  That means there is very little middle ground between the two divergent opinions.

Read the article reporting the study's findings here.

Read the article about the backlash to the study here.