SBCOutpost

Readers of SBCOutpost.com who might be interested in hosting ERLC President Richard Land for an event should feel free to contact his booking agent at the All American Talent and Celebrity Network.

Folks, we could not make this stuff up if we tried.

**UPDATE**

As of a few moments ago, the All American Talent and Celebrity Network website will not allow access to Richard Land’s biography or booking information.  In fact, it appears that Richard Land has been removed from their network altogether.

Thank you, Google Cache, for all the memories.

In his February 25, 2008 deposition, Defendant Patterson had this to say about his relationship with ERLC President Richard Land:

Question (Mr. Richardson): Okay. Are you familiar with the Dallas Morning News article in — on May 19th, 2000 where Dr. Land made a statement about his position and belief on this issue?

Answer (Defendant Patterson): No.

[Exhibit 1 is marked]

Q. If you would, go to the last page when you get through. Go ahead and take a minute and look at it.

A. Uh-huh.

Q. It will be exhibit 1. You’ve had an opportunity now to read the document I just marked as Exhibit 1, which is the Dallas Morning News article May 19, 2000 which says “Baptists draft changes to statement of faith.” And I specifically wanted to — wanted to direct your attention to the last page of that article that says, The change — before I do that, let me ask you this. You said that Dr. Land is the president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission; is that correct?

A. That’s correct.

Q. And has been since 1988, correct?

A. I don’t recall the date.

Q. A long time?

A. Yes, a long time.

Q. And would you agree that it is obvious that the Southwestern Baptists see Richard Land as a brilliant, cultural and philosophical thinker, and as well as seen thusly by trustees and administration at Southwestern Seminary?

Mr. Sharpe: Objection, speculative.

Q. Go ahead.

A. The first thing one learns in this life is that you can’t speak for Southern Baptists. So I couldn’t speak for Southern Baptists, I’m happy to tell you that I certainly view him thusly.

Q. Well, let me narrow it down then to the trustees and administration at Southwestern Seminary and say, would you agree that they view Richard Land as a brilliant, cultural and philosophical thinker?

A. I — I’m unable to speak for my trustees, I’ve got 40 of them.

(Editorial insertion: SWBTS established the Richard Land Center for Cultural Engagement on October 17, 2007.)

Q. Okay. And in the exhibit I just handed you, number one, the last page, you have it there before you, see if I read this correctly. “The change in the Faith and Message would not prohibit women from serving as seminary professors or administrative leaders,” Dr. Land said. Did I read that correctly?

A. You read that correctly.

Q. Do you agree with his statement?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. And how is that consistent then with your position that women are not qualified to serve as seminary professors or administrative leaders?

A. Well, you did not state my position correctly.

Q. I — I assume you’re going to say certain seminary classes, right?

A. Certain areas of the seminary, that is correct.

Q. Okay. So you’re saying then that Dr. Land, in your opinion, is not taking into account all positions in the seminary, is that correct?

A. Sir, I can’t speak for Dr. Land.

Q. Have you ever discussed it with him?

A. Not that I recall.

Q. How often do you see Dr. Land?

A. Minimally, three times a year.

Q. And when’s the last time you saw him?

A. It would have been last week.

Q. And did you tell him you were giving your deposition this week?

A. I don’t think I mentioned it to him.

Q. And you’re testifying under oath today, Dr. Patterson, that you have never, to your recall, discussed with Dr. Land the issue of Dr. Klouda’s termination?

A. I — I don’t recall it. It’s not to say that I have not.

Q. Do you have any — and I don’t mean this to be cute, but I need to ask you, do you have any unusual disability with regards to being able to recall?

A. No, sir, I just don’t recall. I live a reasonably busy life and see a lot of people.

Now flash forward three days after Defendant Patterson’s deposition to his chapel sermon of February 28, 2008. In an exposition of Matthew 5:33-38, Defendant Patterson discussed his friendship with Dr. Land by revealing the following, which can be heard at approximate 13 minutes and 21 seconds into the message:

My dear, precious friend, Dr. Richard Land, whom I love with all my heart as you know. We don’t disagree on just about anything, but once in a while we do have a disagreement and when we do it is fun. I mean we get on the phone late at night, and I mean from 11 until 1 in the morning you wouldn’t even know we were Christians. Man, we go at each other, and we have the best time, and then we say, ’see you in the morning,’ you know. And we’re happy about it.

Well, I called him up and I said, ‘Dr. Land I’m fixing to preach on this and not only that I’m fixing to appear in court, and I’ve been getting more and more under conviction about this. What do you have to say about this?’

Then he said, “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s.”

And so I took it that he would not hesitate to swear in court to tell the truth and nothing but the truth so help him God.

But I can’t go there with Dr. Land, who may be listening today. Love you, Dr. Land, but you’re wrong again.”

Baptist Press gets it wrong sometimes. Today, they played nasty.

The headline for the story on Jonathan Merritt’s efforts to help coalesce Southern Baptist leaders to address environmental issues more boldly and consistently reads as follows:

“Seminary student’s climate change project is not SBC’s”

Editor Will Hall has made sure that great lengths were pursued to distance the national convention from the efforts of several prominent Southern Baptist leaders, including current and former presidents. Richard Land was quoted ad nauseum in opposition to the initiative.

Of course, if Southern Baptists measured the sweat pouring off Richard Land when he walks more than a half block, we’d be convinced that global warming was certain.

What really grinds my gears is that Will Hall and the propagandists at Baptist Press are greatly concerned to headline this story in a way that makes sure nobody assumes the Southern Baptist Convention approves. But let Richard Land flap his jowls with insensitive and arguably anti-Semitic invectives, and place your bets whether Baptist Press publishes this headline:

“Denominational executive’s disdain for New York Senator not shared by Southern Baptists.”

Jonathan Merritt tries to do something constructive, and BP wants to make sure we know he’s just a “seminary student” who is out of step with the national convention. Let Dick Land make an ass of himself and we get a First Person so loaded with double-speak and counter-assault that Dick Nixon could have written it.

And bloggers get a bad rap for agenda-driven reporting . . .

Just think what would have happened if Al Shackleford pulled stunts like this. Oh wait, we know what happened to him.

One more thing: Dick Land wants us to be sure that he and the ERLC are responsible to endorse, affirm, and promote only those positions adopted by the messengers of the Southern Baptist Convention. Unless, of course, it is the Cornwall Alliance, which was endorsed by Dick’s right hand Duke, according to Baptist Press.

And while I’m at it: Baptist Press republishes the text of the 2006 and 2007 resolutions on the environment and global warming, presumably to show what Southern Baptists truly think on the matter. Assuming Southern Baptists think, that is. But I suggest that those resolutions were so confusing . . . so complicated . . . as to make their adoption meaningless and to necessitate further amplification of what Southern Baptists truly believe by leaders like Danny Akin, David Dockery, and Jack Graham, and Timothy George.

Sound familiar?

From Baptist Press:

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)–It has come to my attention in the last 48 hours that some people were offended by my reference to Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) as a “schmuck” during the Criswell Lecture Series at Criswell College, Jan. 29-31. In reviewing these criticisms I have learned some consider the word crude, if not obscene. I apologize for my ignorance of that fact. If I had known that, I would never have used the word. I always attempt to avoid crude and offensive language as a matter of conviction.

As Jeffrey Weiss of The Dallas Morning News has pointed out, the idiom means “jerk,” which was my intended usage. I truly apologize to anyone offended by my use of a word they perceived to be crude or obscene. I used the word “schmuck” in my reference to Senator Schumer solely in an attempt to employ a word that alliterated with Schumer’s name and describe my perception of his behavior during the confirmation hearings for Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito — nothing more!

However, I am deeply offended that anyone would interpret my remarks as anti-Semitic. My entire Christian life I have been taught, and believe, that the Jews are God’s chosen people. I have said on dozens of occasions in public that anti-Semitism is the most irrational of prejudices for a Christian, since Jesus our Savior was Himself a Jew. My entire public ministry I have denounced anti-Semitism, and I have sought to combat it wherever and whenever I have encountered it. Anyone who knows me knows this to be true. Once again, as Jeffrey Weis commented, “Elevating a relatively harmless insult into an accusation of anti-Semitism devalues real attacks on Jews and Judaism.”

Anti-Semitism is far too dangerous and virulent in our world to tolerate the luxury of such a trivialization going unchallenged.

Count Dickula has caught the attention of the folks over at Ethics Daily for a recent lecture at the Criswell College wherein he referred to New York Senator Charles Shumer as a “shmuck,” a word of interesting Yiddish derivation.

Senator Shumer is Jewish.

Of course, this bit of news has distracted us momentarily from following the ERLC president’s acrobatics to support John McCain in light of the campaign failures of his preferred candidate Fred Thompson Mitt Romney.

More episodes like this and Criswell College President Jerry Johnson will have to lower his asking price to sell the school.  In related news, it has been reported that Criswell College is receiving an on-site accreditation review today.

“The second thing I feel strongly about is that personally as a Southern Baptist Church member for the last 35 years, I have been deeply hurt and offended by agency heads of the Southern Baptist Convention who have intruded themselves into the process of the selection of our convention presidents. I will not do that. Just as there are responsibilities and privileges that go with working on a gubernatorial staff, [so] there are also responsibilities and privileges that go with being the head of a Southern Baptist agency or institution. There are some things that a pastor of a church may be free to do and to say publicly but an agency head, in my opinion, loses that privilege when he accepts the privilege and the responsibly of being the head of an institution which belongs to all Southern Baptists.”

Taken from Richard Land’s 1988 job interview with the Board of Trustees of the Christian Life Commission (ERLC) Quoted from Volume 4 of James Helfley’s “Truth in Crisis” (pg. 179-180). Subtitled is “The Controversy in the Southern Baptist Convention”

Surely there would be a couple of easy deductions from Dr. Land’s position pertinent for today’s entity heads. Interjecting “white papers” through “Lieutenants” into entity affairs may give “plausible deniability,” but it strikes a blow to one’s ethical framework according to Dr. Land’s assertions.

And, lost in a recent comment thread is the question of ethics for an entity head serving in a capacity (SBC President) that would afford him a position of influence over those who would then be elected to serve as his Board. The commenter serves in an environment where that would not be possible as it is surely a conflict of interest. Here, it seems Dr. Land suggests that once a person assumes the position as entity head he/she forfeits certain privileges. Running for President of the SBC would then seem to constitute both a conflict of interest and assuming a privilege given up once serving an institution that belongs to all Baptists.

Would have been good to find this quote before other entity heads donned the title, “President of the SBC.” Maybe it will help us keep from repeating past mistakes.

Cough! Cough! [He brushes away the cobwebs around here.]

In February, 2005 Time Magazine named Richard Land one of the 25 most influential evangelicals in America.  What we here at SBC Outpost would like to know is: who exactly does Richard Land influence?  Does he influence you?  In what way?  If you’re a balding pastor are you wanting to know who did his hair plugs for him?  If you are fashion-challenged are you wanting to know where you can get your own pair of two-tone wing tips?  If you have an eating disorder are you curious about his secrets to a robust figure?

Ok….those last few comments were just silly and can be ignored.  We don’t want a bunch of humorless whiners complaining in the comment section about how mean we are.  But seriously, what was the last thing you heard or read from Richard Land that influenced you and how did it influence you?  Of all the people we would expect to be influenced by Dr. Land we would think it would be involved and informed Southern Baptists.

I have written before of the comment made directly to me by Judge Pressler when I suggested the SBC may want to let the CBF issue go and continue supporting the BWA while in Spain a number of years ago. In response he said, “Todd, you do not know what they have done to some of us.” Vindictive ethics in the SBC is not new and often rears its head in peculiar ways.

Many wonder what the aims of SBCOutpost may be. Since we collaborate rather than follow a pre-determined script, this could be answered variously. My hope is reform. I, for one, am finding it increasingly interesting that there are those who want to accuse Ben Cole of vindictive posts against Paige Patterson. These same people seem to find it well within bounds that a well orchestrated move to silence Wade Burleson simply falls under the banner of, “he did not abide by the IMB rules of conduct.” Forget that these new rules were put in place specifically “for” Wade Burleson. I seem to recall a Daniel who continued to pray in spite of the King’s manipulated edict he should cease and desist. Daniel landed in a den of lions.

What really grieves me is the simpleton approach that would think this move in Springfield just “came up.” No, a well orchestrated pre-meeting move must have been in the works. Spiked by the vindictive pen of Jerry Corbaley who did not approach Wade personally about his being “wounded” by Wade’s blog. In fact, it is clear by his actions reported on Wade’s blog that he would not in any way speak with Wade. His actions do not deserve censure though they clearly illustrate the harboring of ill will and his 153 page tome e-mail to all IMB trustees surely provoked the move.

Today, Wade posts on his response to the question of how the IMB might avoid any further public distraction surrounding him when asked by the “ad hoc” committee appointed to work out a reconciliation. . He offered to resign. He offered to shut down his blog. Rather than get what they want, a majority of Trustees approved a vindictive measure. Now, I suspect most did not know what this move would mean. Obviously many did not know this could have “gone away.” Instead, we Southern Baptists need vindictive public spectacles. Russle Dilday anyone?

Then to learn today sources note the real reason Dr. Land may not endorse Huckabee for President of the United States dates back some 25 years when Huckabee would not sign on to the CR and rat out his “liberal” friends just adds to the systemic need for reform.

I laughed when reading on another blog were this to have happened 25 years ago when others held the reigns of power they would have supported the move. How soon we forget.

Reform. Yes, if some were to wonder why do I participate in SBC Outpost it is reform. For I taught my grown daughters there is no room for vindictive ethics. I certainly do not want my future grandchildren to grow up knowing we stood by and did not call for the ethic of Jesus above the ethic of vindication.

Rev. Robert Jeffress, the newly installed senior pastor of the downtown Dallas megachurch, has fired both barrels at presidential contender Mitt Romney and Southern Baptist leaders who’ve been genuflecting to make Mormonism appealing to evangelical skeptics.

Read the coverage in the Dallas Morning News.