SWBTS issues statement…
Topic: Faith and Politics, News Releases, SBC News, SBC Seminaries| Written by: Benjamin Cole|The trustees of SWBTS have issued a statement of full support for Drs. Dorothy and Paige Patterson. We reproduce that statement here for blogger parsing.
SBCOutpost would like to issue our compliments to the President and First Lady on a well worded statement. We just love how criticism of the First Couple is a threat to the Kingdom of God and jeopardizes the eternal souls of men. SBCOutpost will have a statement of our own, very soon. Until then, we hope no more lost people go to Hell because Paige and Dorothy Patterson have had a rough year.
Jesus calls Southern Baptists, and indeed, all Christians, to reach a lost world with His Gospel. Additionally, we are to model Christ in the way we live our lives and in the way we treat one another. As Trustees of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, we believe that the incessant public attacks on Dr. and Mrs. Paige Patterson and other Baptist leaders of late are harmful to our mission of reaching the world with the Gospel. What the world, both Christians and non-Christians, sees is not Christ-like. Indeed, some of the actions are contrary to what the Bible teaches. Therefore, the Trustees at SWBTS would like to make the following statement of support for Dr. and Mrs. Patterson.
The Trustees of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (SWBTS) take seriously the responsibility given to us by our Lord Jesus Christ and the Southern Baptist Convention to provide oversight and guidance to SWBTS. Therefore, we want Southern Baptists to know the following:
- The financial records of the seminary are examined (audited) annually by an independent auditor. To date, no audit has indicated any financial mismanagement or impropriety. Indeed, the administration of the seminary works diligently to assure that financial integrity is always maintained, and that is what the audits reveal. Southern Baptists can have assurance that contributions given to the seminary are spent wisely according to the leadership of the Lord and according to the donors’ requests. A contribution given to SWBTS is a wise investment in God’s kingdom work!
- The work of the administration, faculty, and staff is evaluated at least annually according to policies that are designed and/or approved by the trustees. The president is included in the evaluation process, and all trustees have the opportunity to contribute to the evaluation process of the president. The president has welcomed these opportunities of evaluation, and he hears and respects the counsel of the trustees.
- The president has always been open with the trustees and answers their questions fully. We cannot conceive how anyone can be any more open and honest than is Dr. Patterson! Dr. Patterson understands the trustee process and recognizes that he provides leadership to the seminary under the Lordship of Christ by the authority granted to the trustees by the convention. The trustees likewise recognize that they serve the Southern Baptist Convention under the Lordship of Christ. Just as Dr. Patterson is accountable to the Lord and to the trustees, so the trustees are accountable to the Lord and the Southern Baptist Convention.
- Our Baptist forbearers were wise to set up the trustee system that Southern Baptists have in place. It works extremely well! The relentless attacks on Dr. Patterson are also a subtle attack on the trustee system of oversight that the convention employs.
- We join with other Southern Baptists in urging that public attacks against Dr. Patterson and other leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention that hurt the spread of the gospel to an unbelieving world cease for the sake of those who are headed to utter destruction. There is a place for constructive criticism of the leadership of our agencies, and Southern Baptists have set up a trustee system to primarily allow for that need. Scripture does tell us to speak the truth, but it also says it is to be done in love and gentleness, with the goal of redeeming a brother in Christ. Above all, there is a watching world that needs to see Christ’s love in all of our words and deeds.
- The trustees of SWBTS have found no reason to question the integrity of Dr. Patterson. Indeed, we find him to be a man of exemplary integrity. We are thankful for the leadership of Dr. Patterson and heartily commend him for the work that he has done as president of SWBTS. We also look forward to many years of his continued leadership.
October 18th, 2007 at 11:58 am
Amen to the trustees. It is good to know that there is still a system that will defend the God called leaders of the day. Also, amen to Dr. Patterson’s silence as he patiently awaited the meeting of the trustees. Both of these [trustees and Patterson’s] have exemplified how a Christian should deal with unfounded attacks and accusations. Oh, that the SBC would raise up many men with the strength and integrity of Paige Patterson! And to Outpost… thanks for making this report available!
October 18th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
Yes, John.
Amen and amen.
Let the tenfold hallelujahs sound.
BSC
October 18th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
It is always a good strategy to present a united front while facing legal battles.
Karen
October 18th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
It really is a good thing that Dr. Patterson isn’t a football coach. When I hear an AD or school president using such language of their coach, I know the next announcement will be that he’s decided he needs to spend more quality time with his family and seeking a new direction in life.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Steve:
Trust me. Quality time with family is not an option.
BSC
October 18th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
Are these the same trustees that hired Dr. Klouda or different ones?
Why shouldn’t they present a united front? After all, whatever the outcome of the lawsuit, the trustees won’t be out a personal penny. It’s all tithe dollars, remember? OPM.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
“Above all, there is a watching world that needs to see Christ’s love in all of our words and deeds.”
Yes. And they saw how Dr. Klouda was treated by Christian men.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
I’ll leave it to others to respond fully to the trustees, but #1 is ridiculous.
An audit does not indicate financial integrity. An audit just shows the seminary is not overtly breaking any laws and that is complying with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The audit says NOTHING about whether the seminary follows standards of Christian ethics or scriptural commands in how it spends money.
For a Christian institution, all an audit can do is rule out some possible sources of poor integrity, i.e. those recognized by society.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Is it just me, or is there a sort of lack of submission to our leaders of our convention? We have the Presidents of our Seminaries, our convention, and our missions agencies standing behind Dr. Patterson, yet you still doubt his integrity.
There is a group of those who care more about getting on here everyday to see what the newest SBC bashing is going on. Even more sadly, you do it more than you share the Gospel. Many are more concerned with these things than they are the Gospel.
I believe the Trustees were suggesting that many waste time dealing with these bloggers and their countless questioning of the integrity of our leaders than they do focusing on Sharing the Gospel. Meaning, we lose opportunities everyday to share the gospel because we spend our days checking our blogs, responding to blogs, and writing new blogs…about our Leaders.
I just think it’s sad!
October 18th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
“Is it just me, or is there a sort of lack of submission to our leaders of our convention?”
Robin, Authority comes ONLY from how well someone accurately handles the Word of God and lives in Holiness. It has NOTHING to do with a ‘man conferred’ title or position.
If you believe it does then NO ONE could leave Osteen’s apostate church because they should submit to him. Get it?
And btw: I know this is obvious but you are here a lot, too instead of out witnessing.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
Oops, you are Ronnie…not Robin. Sorry.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Ronnie….I submit to no man..only God. Yes I question the integrity of Patterson and also the Trustees of SBTC.
Can we not learn from Oral Roberts University. Richard Roberts and his wife are under attack and he now has taken a leave of absense. Their trustees are also under attack.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Yeah, Ronnie, not Robin. This is only my first time, well second now, posting. It took someone only 15 minutes to respond to my post. Lydia you have posted on here 4 times already today. My concern is that we have a lot of folks who are going to stand before God to be judged one day hoping to hear God say what a great blogger he thought they were. I’m just not sure this is going to be the case.
About Joel Osteen, I mean come on. He is not supported by or endorsed by any of our SBC leaders. They do not come to investigate him or seek the truth. We all agree that he is unbiblical in his approach. That’s ridiculous. Yet with Patterson, practically every leader in our convention has stood behind his integrity. Yet we, who do not know him and can investigate him, take aim and fire at him without knowing the details. When you disagree with our leaders, who God has placed over us, you are disagreeing with our whole convention. It’s just wrong.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:42 pm
Heb. 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you
I don’t see Paul qualifying obedience based on the sermon quality, and clearly if they are in visible sin (lack of holiness)we are required to remove them…just brought this up b/c there seems to be an anti-authority ethos creeping up.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Sorry, not Paul, author of Hebrews, also, I am not saying Patterson is a legitimate authority, I think the author here is talking about church leaders, which does not inlcude Patterson; however, I am making the point that obedience to leadership is very Biblical, refusing to obey anyone but God is not supported by scripture.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
>>>Our Baptist forbearers were wise to set up the trustee system that Southern Baptists have in place. It works extremely well! The relentless attacks on Dr. Patterson are also a subtle attack on the trustee system of oversight that the convention employs.
By way of reply:
1. This is a classic example of poisoning the well. If criticized, attack your opponent by asserting that to “attack” one person is to “attack” many.
2. It’s also a classic example of the fallacy of composition, as if what applies to one applies to all or vice versa. This may or may not be true. It requires a supporting argument.
3. Anybody else seen this before? No? Well how about this:
Our Catholic forbearers were wise to set up the Magisterium that Roman Catholics have in place. It works extremely well! The relentless attacks on The Holy Father are also a subtle attack on the Magisterium that the One True Most Holy Apostolic Church employs.
–Of course this sort of thing is probably what you get when some of those sitting on trustee boards probably took church history because they had to do so to get their Master’s degrees, not to actually, you know, learn something from it. Add a Baptist version of high churchmanship to it, and - well, you get the idea.
Moving on…
>>We join with other Southern Baptists in urging that public attacks against Dr. Patterson and other leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention that hurt the spread of the gospel to an unbelieving world cease for the sake of those who are headed to utter destruction.
Really, so it’s okay to attack, let’s say, a certain soteriological perspective in general via numerous articles in prominent publications, sermons, and mailings - all public activities - and that doesn’t hurt the spread of the gospel to an unbelieving world, but talking about the propriety of the leadership and their activities does hurt the spread of the gospel.
Hmmm, one of these is not like the other. One of these actually affects, in the long run, the perspective one has on the gospel itself and thus the way one does the work of “spreading the gospel” and the other does not.
Also, maybe we wouldn’t be having this conversation if there weren’t problems that were not be addressed. They have only themselves to blame.
I also don’t think Paul would have felt that way. Did calling Peter out serve to hurt the spread of the gospel to the whole world? Did the public confrontation of men by name in Paul’s letters do this? Etc?
>>>When you disagree with our leaders, who God has placed over us, you are disagreeing with our whole convention. It’s just wrong.
So, according to Ronnie, it was wrong for Luther, Zwingli, and Bucer to take issue with Rome.
It was wrong for our Baptist forebears to disagree with the leaders of the Anglican Communion from which they separated.
The Revolutionary War was also wrong. We could go on and on with this analogy. That’s the problem with a majoritarian rule of faith - it will eventually break down. Ronnie, your statements sound remarkably like the arguments put forth by Roman Catholics to defend “apostolic succession” during the Reformation.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
>>>obedience to leadership is very Biblical,
Yes, Hebrews tells us to submit to the leadership of the local church - the elders - but how does this apply to a Convention of autonomous churches? Are you duty bound to “submit” to every elder of every other local church?
October 18th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Good point Robin. Of course, in our postmodern, individualistic, relative, and subjective society (and many times churches), what is “authority?”
Too many of us hate authority or leadership. It is sad and unbiblical.
October 18th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
Gene,
Not saying it applies to Patterson, you are right about local church leaders, but the comment above about submitting to no man but God seemed a little over-reactionary and I just want to point out the biblical precedent for submission to local leadership
October 18th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Robin, You cannot take ONE verse and then ignore all the others about false teachers, wolves, etc.
Are you saying we submit to local church leaders…no matter what?
I stand by my earlier assertion: Authority is to the extent that one accurately handles the Word and lives in Holiness. We are a Holy Priesthood. I think the SBC conveniently forgets that these days.
Follow Christ…not man. Isaiah 2:22
October 18th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
This whole “response” is really funny. Its wording and timing are extremely cumbersome. It is defending Dr. P. (Note: Dr. P is in no way my leader and I see no reason to regard him as one. He manages an institution that is supported to a degree by the SBC of which I am a part.) However since Dr. P had been relatively silent (publicly anyhow) for the last several days there have been no significant “attacks.” This “response” comes out in a quite time and will no doubt produce a generous helping of what it condemns.
Bennett Willis
October 18th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
>>>> Above all, there is a watching world that needs to see Christ’s love in all of our words and deeds.
Yes, the world is watching when a Hebrew professor was unfairly discriminated against for just the simple fact she is a woman. That’s one of the the things that hurts our witness to the world.
Also, pulling the plug on McKissic’s chapel message, then having lunch with him as if nothing’s wrong, then issuing a statement that McKissic is preaching a message that is damaging to the churches is another example of how the SBC witness to the world is being hampered.
October 18th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Ronnie P: It’s not your imagination, there is a lack of submission to the current leadership, hallelujah. I am included in that number, when the saints go marching in….sorry I got carried away there.
When there is leadership that is trustworthy and quits using Christ, the scripture out of context while saying they believe in both and quits going behind closed doors with paper shredder in hand, then I may submit. Until then……
October 18th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Lydia,
If you follow baptist theology you have three choices: (1)joyfully submit to your local leadership (2)If leaders are in sin or theological error biblically discipline them through the church government which may include removing them from office (which we can do locally as baptists or (3)remove yourself from that local congregation and place yourself in another one and joyfully submit to their leadership…the only thing that is blatantly out of bounds is to say “I obey no man but God” and remain under sinful leadership that you disobey.
October 18th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
As for the statement given by the trustees, it not only gets my blood pressure up, but also causes me to petition God further for reform or an overhaul whichever God chooses to give.
October 18th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Robin: I agree with Lydia solidly.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
“An audit does not indicate financial integrity. An audit just shows the seminary is not overtly breaking any laws and that is complying with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.”
The Baptist Foundation of Arizona, met complied with all Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and several thousand of us good baptists lost our shirts. Criminal convictions were the results for some of those who were following accounting rules but breaking the law and stealing from widows.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:13 pm
You can add to your comment the far more recognizeable cases of Enron and MCI, Hershel.
Auditors essentially measure compliance with policy and procedures…especially when those policies and procedures are considered to have elements of fiscal impact on the organization or on the interests of the shareholders, owners, or the general public.
Good auditors will disallow questionable schemes and will provide a subjective analysis of the intention of the company to follow the law and of the employees of the company to use good judgement in applying policies and procedures.
What auditors cannot do is determine whether the organization is being operated according to the intention of the owners. That is the job of directors or trustees.
The trustees are claiming that they are equally accountable to the Lord and to the Convention. I assume that means that they can reject direction from the Convention if the Lord tells them to do so.
Greg Harvey
October 18th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
Greg and Hershel,
I agree with you. Sorry if my original comment wasn’t clear. I was trying to say that an audit can only point out failures to meet legal and GAAP standards. Getting a clean bill of health in an audit does not mean that you’re obeying Scripture with how you use your money. It’s dishonest for the trustees to claim that a good audit necessarily means the school has integrity in its finances.
October 18th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
“we believe that the incessant public attacks on Dr. and Mrs. Paige Patterson and other Baptist leaders of late are harmful to our mission of reaching the world with the Gospel…”
I was a student at SWBTS in the 90’s. I would like to make a slight change to the argument above. I wonder if Dr. Patterson would still agree with his trustees?
we believe that the incessant public attacks on Dr. and Mrs. Russell Dilday and other Baptist leaders of late are harmful to our mission of reaching the world with the Gospel. What the world, both Christians and non-Christians, sees is not Christ-like. Indeed, some of the actions are contrary to what the Bible teaches.
October 18th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Looks to me like the Old SMA is at work. Dr. Paige Patterson has the Board of Trustees in the SYA position in all that is going on at SWBTS.
In His Name
October 18th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
Isn’t this the same Paige Patterson who lead the attack on the Baptist World Alliance and its leaders that truly was harmful to our mission of reaching the world with the gospel.
October 19th, 2007 at 7:36 am
Ben Cole,
Lets see now, Dr. Klouda was hired in 2002, fired in 2004, and chairman of SWBTS trustees, Van McCain, stated the reason she was hired represented a “momentary lax of the parameters.”
Since that “momentary” lasted two years, how do we know their latest statement of praising Patterson is not a “momentary lax of the parameters”?
October 19th, 2007 at 8:09 am
Ron West,
Now that you mentioned it, the president of SBC executive board pointed the finger and said it was Patterson who wrote the report on the committee’s study of the BWA that was caught in a lie by the records when the report misquoted a German professor.
Also the last ‘speech’ made in 2004 before the vote was taken at the SBC to leave the BWA was Patterson, without any proof, saying the BWA was homosexually friendly.
Reminded me of Patterson (after he had preached at Prestonwood in Dallas) telling the ‘well wishers’ that the Criswell Study Bible had answered ALL the discrepancies of the Bible, but in my ear he said, “We got all we could.”
Is it strange that after his preaching, that church switched from the old to the new convention of Texas, and their pastor became the president of the SBC?
October 19th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Paul B,
You mentioned the attacks on Dilday. Seems like what goes around comes around, or he who lives be the sword will die by it.
How much harm was done in reaching the world with the Gospel when over 100 of our missionaries were made to resign, and in one day 15 long time missionaries were fired just because they wouldn’t sign the/his BFM 2000?
Who are Southern Baptists?
Oh, they’re the Christians that made their doctrinal guideline their God and practice ‘our way or the highway.’
Wonder how Patterson will feel if the law teaches him Christian principles?
Wonder if the judge will be a woman?
October 19th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
“If you follow baptist theology you have three choices”
I follow Christ. I am a Baptist second. And there was a time when Baptists took Priesthood of Believer very seriously.
Don’t forget…SBC churches are autonomous. Mine does not have magistrates. Yet. I joyfully submit to humble, spiritually mature elders who are not power hungry nor go around ruining the lives of a Christian sister just because she is a woman.
Rex, If the judge is a woman, I may just have to come to Texas for a visit. :o)
December 24th, 2007 at 2:00 am
I wished those so adamantly saying, “We as SB should always submit to the authority that is in place right now.”
Where were you from 1979 to 1992? It was the greatest and most needless rebellion of authority I have ever seen. I was a pastor in the Ft. Worth area from 1966-1985. I know what went on.
As child of WW II, I love to resist authority and just to be fair here is one of my resistances. All (as in a conservative “most”) say Paul never wrote Hebrews.
I believe Paul wrote Hebrews (seven letters during Acts and seven letters after Acts making fourteen). I don’t like the theology of the Nicene Fathers very much, but for historical purposes they were pretty accurate. These are a few things I have found over the past forty-five years:
Origen said that he was prepared to show that “the epistle was Paul’s” in reply to those “who rejected it not as written by Paul (Ep.ad Afric.9); and in another place, preserved in a Latin translation, he speaks of “fourteen epistles of St. Paul.” (Hom. in Jos. VII). I get this from Westcott’s Epistle to the Hebrews, p. lxviii.
Eusebius, included Hebrews among Paul’s letters, and he cites Hebrews in twenty-seven passages in his own correspondence. There is little doubt at all that the earliest tradition of the Eastern Church associated Hebrews with Pauline authorship.
Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons (born about 130 AD), was among the first to cite the NT books by titles, but he rarely mentions Hebrews at all and never declares it to be Paul’s.
“Grace be with you” is Paul’s sign in every letter (2Th 3:17-18), and it ends every letter written by him, including Hebrews (cf. He 13:25). No other letters in the New Testament ends with this sign, for it was Paul’s very own signature.
Romans – “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen” (16:24).
1 Corinthians – “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you. My love is with you all in Christ Jesus. Amen” (16:23-24).
2 Corinthians – “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen” (13:13b).
Galatians – “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you spirit, brothers. Amen” (6:18).
Ephesians – “The grace be with all who love our Lord Jesus Christ in incorruptibility. Amen” (6:24).
Philippians – “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen” (4:23).
Colossians – “The grace be with you. Amen” (4:18c).
1 Thessalonians – “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen” (5:28).
2 Thessalonians – “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen” (3:18).
Hebrews – “The grace be with you all. Amen” (13:25).
1 Timothy – “The grace be with thee. Amen” (6:21b).
2 Timothy – “The grace be with you. Amen” (4:22b).
Titus – “The grace be with you all. Amen” (3:15b).
Philemon – “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen” (25).
I have a number of other reasons, but these are the most important to me.
Phil in Norman, Oklahoma
Now, if you do not believe this we should break all fellowship with you because this a primary doctrine and your very salvation depends on it; as for this great fact truth, you must be a consummate theologian having correct belief on closed communion for there is no other right communion, and you must have the right kind of baptism, and the right, far right that is, kind of baptizer, and the right kind of right authority for the right kind of baptizer to give you the right kind of baptism. This belief on the right authorship of Hebrews is far more important. And if you disagree, God will let you go far awhile in wrong belief, but be aware judgment is coming. As to your wrong belief on the authorship of Hebrews, I will begrudge you not at all for you have right to be wrong if you so wish. I know I talked to Judge Pressler about it last night.
Phil in Norman
March 7th, 2008 at 1:56 am
I must be blocked. Thanks Mr. Cole