The significance of this BP article is seen in the fact that it came on the heels of two separate “conferences” involving the “controversial” Mark Driscoll and Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, one of the Southern Baptist Convention’s six seminaries.  The first conference was the Acts 29 “Boot Camp,” held February 4-5, which included as one of its speakers Southeastern Seminary president, Danny Akin.  The Acts 29 Boot Camp was promoted on the seminary website and praised the host church, Vintage 21, as a “thriving missional congregation.”[2]  But according to Acts 29, the “official Vintage 21 hangout” is Mitch’s Tavern, which is where this Acts 29 church holds its “Theology on Tap” night.[3] 

The second conference was Southeastern Seminary’s 20/20 Conference, held February 6-7, which included as its featured speaker Acts 29 president Mark Driscoll.  Less than a month earlier, the New York Times introduced Driscoll to its readers as the one “whom conservatives call ‘the cussing pastor.’”[4] 

The BP article dealt with a growing concern among many Southern Baptists about Driscoll’s vulgarity – specifically his recent sermon series entitled “Peasant Princess,” and the sexually explicit Q & A that followed and was posted on his church website.  The most recent round of criticism against Driscoll was the result of the Q & A where he places his theological stamp of approval on “anal sex” within marriage and the use of “sex toys.” 

In answering the question, “Can I perform anal sex on my wife?,” Driscoll writes:  “The body is not well suited for this so make sure your wife is agreeable, do your homework, be careful if she is willing, and do not go from this to normal intercourse since you will infect her with bacteria.”[5]  In regard to the use of sex toys, Driscoll writes:  “This is a matter of conscience” and notes that the use of sex toys “should be used together [with your wife] for building oneness.”[6] 

In regard to the issue of anal sex, Driscoll refers his readers to a website called “Christian Nymphos.”  Stating that he does not endorse everything on this website, Driscoll writes:  “…if you want to read some commentary on the issue [of anal sex] from Christian married women, you can go to Christian Nymphos.”[7] 

In regard to the issue of sex toys, Driscoll writes:  “If you choose to purchase toys discreetly and without indecent packaging, www.covenantspice.com is a Christian-run website that can assist you with this, although we do not necessarily endorse everything on the site.  Please be aware that the typical ‘toy’ stores and Web sites contain pornographic images that can be disturbing.”[8] [emphasis ours]

While much more could be said about Driscoll’s Q & A materials, the websites he links to and his willingness to direct his people toward “pornographic images,” we shall leave it at this.    

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary:

Using Mark Driscoll to Attract New Students

Southeastern Seminary has become a place where Driscoll and his Acts 29 Church Planting Network have made incredible inroads into SBC life.  Claiming to be “theologically conservative and culturally liberal,”[9] Driscoll banners his inerrancy view of Scripture, which has caused many within SBC life to look the other way and ignore his “cultural liberalism.”  Just as Acts 29 has been at the heart of the highly publicized controversy in the Missouri Baptist Convention, it is increasingly becoming a significant issue within the larger Southern Baptist Convention.   

Despite the never ending controversy that swirls around Driscoll, Southeastern Seminary’s decision to bring in Driscoll as a featured speaker at their 20/20 conference is just part of the story.  According to the seminary website, Driscoll was also listed as the seminary’s chapel speaker for February 5^th, 2009.  The website also states:  “In conjunction with the 20/20 Conference, Mark Driscoll will be the featured speaker during Preview Days at Southeastern.”[10]  Preview Days at Southeastern is for potential new students looking at the possibility of attending the seminary.  The seminary website states: 

Preview Days at Southeastern are unique opportunities to see firsthand what God is doing at Southeastern, to hear from our faculty and students and to fellowship with others, just like you, who are discerning a call to ministry. Sit in on classes, tour the campus, meet with President Akin and his wife during a reception at their home, ask questions and find answers.

Our Preview Days will allow you to seek God’s calling in your life, whether He leads you to Southeastern or elsewhere. While on the campus, you will not only meet the faculty, you will get to know them at a dinner. An informal information panel led by a handful of professors will revolve around questions from you and other prospective students.[11]

Why would Southeastern Seminary feature Mark Driscoll, a non-Southern Baptist pastor known for his vulgarity -- especially in light of his most recent Q & A statements?  In the minds of a growing number of Southern Baptists, if Mark Driscoll personifies what it means to be “missional,” and “culturally relevant” – and if Driscoll’s approach to “ministry” is what it means to “contextualize the Gospel,” then it may be time for SBC leaders like Danny Akin to explain in simple terms exactly where he is leading Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.  And considering Dr. Akin is currently the chairman of the SBC’s Great Commission Council, in what direction might he be attempting to steer the SBC? 

Southeastern Seminary and the Acts 29 Boot Camp:

Driscoll and Akin – Helping Each Other

This year’s 20/20 Conference is not the first Southeastern Seminary conference where Driscoll was a featured speaker.  On September 21-22, 2007, Driscoll was a featured speaker at the seminary’s “Convergent Conference.”[12]  And just like this year’s Southeastern conference, Acts 29 held their “boot camp” in conjunction with the 2007 Convergent Conference as well. 

At the September 19-20, 2007 Acts 29 Boot Camp, the featured speaker was former Acts 29 board member Ed Stetzer, president of Lifeway Research.  Stetzer was also a featured speaker at Southeastern’s September 2007 Convergence Conference.  And just like this year’s Boot Camp, the 2007 Boot Camp was hosted by Acts 29’s Vintage 21 Church.    

It is also important to note that prior to Driscoll’s first appearance at Southeastern Seminary, president Danny Akin was fully aware of Driscoll’s position on alcohol and his “unwholesome language.”  The following is an excerpt from a letter written by Dr. Akin to his student body.  The letter was written shortly after the 2007 SBC annual meeting in San Antonio and about three months before Driscoll would appear for the first time at the seminary.  He states: 

We also are glad to sponsor a conference on the Emerging/Emergent Church with participants like Mark Driscoll and Ed Stetzer on September 21-22 [2007].  I applaud neither Pastor Driscoll’s view on alcohol nor his less than wholesome language.  The former is unwise and runs the risk of compromising his witness.  The latter is blatantly sinful. However, we need to hear and learn from persons like Mark Driscoll in how to effectively engage an increasingly secular culture with the life changing gospel of Jesus Christ.[13] (emphasis ours)

He further stated regarding Driscoll:  “I believe it is appropriate to invite to a college or seminary campus those you would not invite to speak or lead in worship when your local church gathers for worship.  It seems to me that a clear difference exists between the two.”  But now, a year and a half later, Dr. Akin brought to Southeastern Seminary Mark Driscoll for Preview Days (the recruitment of new students) and as a chapel speaker (to lead the seminary students in worship).

Southeastern Seminary:  Angry that Baptist Press

Reported on Driscoll’s Vulgarity

The Baptist Press article dealing with Driscoll’s “vulgarity” was published February 11, 2009.  The following day, the Southeastern Seminary website responded calling the article “inaccurate in content and harsh in tone,” but oddly enough, offered no examples of either.  Yet, the seminary was careful to include the usual “Driscoll disclaimer,” noting that:  “We by no means agree with everything Mark Driscoll says or does.”[14] 

The seminary response to the BP article also states:  “We suggest that those who have concerns about Mark’s ministry actually listen to his sermons and read his books.”  But apparently, Southeastern Seminary doesn’t understand that a growing number of Southern Baptists have listened to Driscoll’s sermons, read his books and have read his blogs.  That is why the concerns swirling around Mark Driscoll are growing so rapidly among those who are both “theologically conservative and culturally conservative.” (See Quotes from Driscoll’s books and Blogs at www.mbla.org/Driscoll_Quotes.htm)

But it is also important to note that no one is challenging Driscoll’s claim to be “theologically conservative.”  The problem is not his “theological conservatism,” but the many manifestations of his self-professed “cultural liberalism.”  And the outcry against Driscoll and his Acts 29 band of church planters has far less to do with Driscoll than with his SBC supporters who have determined that they are going to force-feed Driscoll on Southern Baptists who increasingly find him distasteful at best. 

The most bizarre seminary response to the Baptist Press article came from Southeastern Seminary professor Alvin Reid, who claims to be the one who invited Driscoll to Southeastern the first time in September 2007.[15]  In an article entitled, “I Have a Problem,” Reid elevates Driscoll to the level of Martin Luther, John Wesley, George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Spurgeon and W. A. Criswell by pointing out that, “I have a problem” with each of these men.  He then notes that he also has a problem with Mark Driscoll, himself (Alvin Reid) and the Southern Baptist Convention. 

Luther, he says, “liked beer too much.”  Wesley “was a terrible example as a husband.”  Whitefield “had slaves.”  Edwards was “a little too reformed.”  Spurgeon “smoked a cigar.”  Criswell “allowed his [church membership] numbers to be inflated.”  But in regard to Driscoll, he simply states that his “language is a little edgy.”  Reid also notes that he interprets the Bible differently than Driscoll “on the place of alcohol.”   

Reid then goes to the heart of the growing controversy within the SBC.  He writes:  “I have a problem with my convention.”  He has a problem, he says, with those who “seem more intent on witch hunts than on contextualizing the gospel in our time.”  He further notes that he has a problem “when we continually confuse personal preferences with unchanging truth.”  In regard to “secondary issues” and “nonessentials,” Reid writes:  “I was a supporter of the conservative resurgence before it was cool.  But the resurgence I supported did not include a Pharisaical legalism that expects conformity in nonessentials.”[16] 

Simply stated, Reid has a problem with those who have a problem with Driscoll and all that he has come to represent.  As has been the case in the Missouri Baptist Convention, there has been much talk of “secondary and tertiary issues” and “non-essentials,” but none of Driscoll’s defenders like to talk specifically about what those “secondary and tertiary” issues actually are.  Rather, they talk in high-sounding generalities while issuing their “disclaimers” to insure they cannot be connected to defending what Driscoll advocates.      

In the case of Southeastern Seminary professor Alvin Reid, he was literally willing to tear down men like Luther, Wesley, Whitefield, Edwards, Spurgeon, Criswell and the SBC (which pays his salary) and throw them under the bus in order to salvage Mark Driscoll and minimize the damage that Southeastern Seminary has rightly earned.  Reid was willing to assault the character of all these men and the SBC in order to create the illusion that there really is no problem with guys like Driscoll and his Acts 29 Church Planting Network.  

Like all of Driscoll’s SBC supporters, Reid failed to address the issues that keep Driscoll engulfed in controversy.  Rather, he just attacked those who “have a problem” with Driscoll, using such terms as “Pharisaical legalism” and “witch hunts.”  All the issues that caused the Executive Board of the Missouri Baptist Convention to no longer allow the use of Cooperative Program funds for Acts 29 church plants are referred to by Reid as “nonessentials” and “secondary issues.”

Ed Stetzer: President of Lifeway Research and

Chief Defender of Mark Driscoll and Acts 29

Driscoll’s most committed apologist in SBC life is Ed Stetzer, president of Lifeway Research, a former Acts 29 board member and a “Visiting Professor” at Southeastern Seminary.[17]  Almost immediately after the BP article was released, Stetzer writes that he is “Disappointed to see a Driscoll article in Baptist Press quoting a heresy hunting blogger and no mention of his repentance [of cussing].”[18] 

The problem with Stetzer’s initial comment is that Baptist Press did not even mention the issue of Mark Driscoll as “the cussing pastor.”  However, the day after the BP article was posted, Baptist Press responded to a complaint from Stetzer and, at Stetzer’s request, [19] added the following section to the article: “REVISED Feb. 12 to add new paragraphs 5 and 6.”  Following is the entire addition: 

Driscoll also had gotten into hot water over the use of profanity before, at one time having the reputation as the “cussing pastor.”  In that case, he repented, starting with a public apology for having become known for “good theology, a bad temper, and a foul mouth.  This is not what I want to be known for,” he said then.

On Friday, February 13^th, Stetzer published an article in defense of Driscoll on his Lifeway.com blog.[20]  There, he reveals his contempt for those who have concerns about Driscoll and his Acts 29 organization.  He writes that, “The usual folks have complained” about Driscoll’s “appearance” at Southeastern.  However, Stetzer also covers himself by issuing three separate disclaimers regarding Driscoll as he issues his defense: 

·         His first disclaimer: “Look, it’s not my job to defend Mark Driscoll.” 

·         His second disclaimer:  “Now, I’m not saying that everything Mark Driscoll does is right.” 

·         And his third disclaimer:  “I am not going to defend everything Mark says about it [sexuality], or how he says it…” 

Stetzer’s primary attack against Baptist Press as well as his primary defense of Driscoll had to do with Driscoll’s long-standing label as “Mark the cussing pastor.”  Stetzer writes:  “Mark has repented for the ‘cussing pastor’ reference…”  But again, there are two problems with Stetzer’s defense of Driscoll.  First, Baptist Press did not even mention the issue of “Mark the cussing pastor” in their article.  It was added to the article in defense of Driscoll after Stetzer made it an issue.  Secondly, it is not accurate to say that Driscoll repented of all of his “foul language.”  

In a March 6, 2007 article posted on the Acts 29 website entitled “Interview with Mark Driscoll by Dr. Ed Stetzer,” the article reveals that Driscoll “repented” of his “shock jock language,” but kept the door open for his “strong language.”  Under the subtitle “Mark the Cussing Pastor,” the article quotes Driscoll as follows:  

Our church has gone from 1,200 to 6,000 in four years.  It is very intense.  I have had no one else to lean on.  So for me, telling jokes and being light hearted is my way of coping with stress.  But sometimes when I get overly stressed, my mouth and anger gets me into trouble.  My tone, my attitude and my mouth are indicators of how closely I walk with Jesus.  I have come to realize that I speak for more than just Mark Driscoll.  I speak for Jesus.  I know I can’t be this foul-mouthed, gunslinger for Jesus.  I still think strong language and a prophetic edge is appropriate.  But shock-jock language isn’t.[21] (emphasis ours)   

Driscoll’s “shock-jock” language, which Stetzer is claiming that Driscoll has repented of, is detailed in Tony Jones’ book entitled “The New Christians.”  Jones, one of the early leaders along with Driscoll in the emerging church movement, went on to become the Coordinator of Emergent Village, the far-left wing of the emerging church movement.  Jones writes: 

He [Driscoll] was becoming known as the “foul-mouthed preacher.”  When Brad Cecil invited Mark to guest preach at Axxess Church in Arlington , he explained to Mark that unlike Seattle , swearing from the pulpit in Texas just wouldn’t fly, and he asked Mark to please keep his language clean.  Mark used the F-word in the first sentence.[22]

Regarding the “cussing” issue, Stetzer goes on to say in his defense of Driscoll:  “But, let’s remember that to bring up someone’s old sin flies in the face of Scripture and contradicts grace.  And let me also say, I am so thankful I am not continually evaluated on the basis of my past mistakes.”  But again, the problem with Stetzer’s defense of Driscoll is that he fabricates an issue that wasn’t there.  Baptist Press did not deal with the issue of “cussing,” but with Driscoll’s most recent episode in “vulgarity,” which apparently is part of the “strong language” and “prophetic edge” that Driscoll still thinks is “appropriate.”  And just like Southeastern professor Alvin Reid, Stetzer also failed to deal with the highly controversial material that Baptist Press exposed.  

In his defense of Driscoll, Stetzer also invoked the name of our current SBC president Johnny Hunt.  Stetzer writes: 

…I agree with Johnny Hunt, our SBC President on the issue.  Johnny and I discussed this on Tuesday – and he was a bit surprised (and concerned) of the complaints leveled at Southeastern.  To quote Johnny, “It’s a seminary!  We often bring in people even when we disagree with some things.”

But the real question might be, did Johnny Hunt read the BP story, the New York Times article or the latest “vulgar” material on Driscoll’s church website?  Did Stetzer tell Hunt that Driscoll wasn’t just brought to the seminary for an opposing view on a particular topic in a conference, but was also (according to the seminary’s website) a chapel speaker and the featured speaker for potential new students.  Did our SBC president fully understand that Driscoll’s appearance was not an issue of “academic freedom,” but a reflection of the course Southeastern Seminary has charted under the leadership of its current president?  Or shall we now conclude that our current SBC president agrees with Stetzer and was “disappointed” that Baptist Press dared to report the facts to Southern Baptists about a culturally liberal  “innerrantist” that some SBC leaders would like to make the new rising star within SBC life?  

Lastly, Stetzer defends Driscoll’s “frank talk about sexuality.”  He writes: 

And, yes, some people won’t like frank talk about sexuality (or they will think it is too frank).  However, I think frank talk on sexuality is essential.  I am not going to defend everything Mark says about it, or how he says it, but I definitely believe most of our churches need to teach more on the subject.[23]

Under normal circumstances, such a statement might sound reasonable.  But in light of the material Baptist Press was exposing (and what Stetzer is now defending), it raises serious questions about where Stetzer and his fellow Acts 29 advocates want to take the SBC. 

Shall we conclude that Stetzer wants more Southern Baptist pastors to lead their churches in a “frank” discussion about the acceptability of “performing anal sex on their wives” or on “the use of sex toys” and where to buy them?  How about “frank talk” from the pulpit about how a wife “can better masturbate her husband?”  Shall we conclude that Stetzer would encourage more SBC pastors to direct their church members to websites like “Christian Nymphos” for lessons in sexual behavior? 

While such statements should sound ludicrous, these were the topics the Baptist Press article exposed and the reason Driscoll continues to come under fire.  It is disingenuous at best and down-right deceitful at worst for Stetzer to downplay this whole ordeal as he has, portraying Driscoll as the repentant cussing pastor who is being mistreated by “the usual folks” and “heresy hunters.”   

For a growing number of SBC leaders like Ed Stetzer, everything Mark Driscoll does and says must be ignored, excused or defended if necessary, because Driscoll is an “inerrantist.”  Stetzer justifies his defense of Driscoll because “He reaches a lot of people, teaches the scriptures, and has a passion for planting [churches].”[24] 

But Stetzer also identifies the very reason a growing number of Southern Baptists are so concerned about Driscoll.  Stetzer wrote in his interview with Driscoll that “Mark is one of the most influential pastors – particularly among young pastors.  He has written three books and his podcasts are downloaded by the thousands each month (over one million every year).”[25] (emphasis ours)  This goes to the heart of the issue and explains with absolute clarity why Driscoll was the featured speaker at the Seminary’s “Preview Day.”  Mark Driscoll is an icon among many young SBC want-to-be pastors and “church planters.”  Moreover, Driscoll and his fellow Acts 29 church planters are portrayed as the elite “special forces” of American Christianity.    

But there is another area where Driscoll is at odds with most Southern Baptists.  In his book, “Radical Reformission,” in a chapter titled, “The Sin of Light Beer,” Driscoll states that as he was studying the Scriptures for a sermon on Jesus’ first miracle of turning water into wine, he writes: “My Bible study convicted me of my sin of abstinence from alcohol.”  He then began to drink alcohol that day “in repentance.”[26]  Driscoll’s church website also notes that the church has “beer-brewing lessons whenever a large group of [Mars Hill] men get together.”[27]  This would be in keeping with Driscoll’s view of Jesus, who, according to Driscoll, began His public ministry at a wedding, where He “kicks things off as a bartender.”[28]  (MBLA published a 51 page “Internet Resource Document” on the subject of Acts 29 and Alcohol.  http://www.mbla.org/Acts_29_MBC.htm) 

Acts 29 and the Missouri Baptist Convention:

When it all started

This latest SBC controversy over Mark Driscoll, Acts 29, Southeastern Seminary and Baptist Press is a near mirrored image of the highly publicized controversy that has raged within the Missouri Baptist Convention. 

Missouri Baptists had their first significant encounter with Acts 29 and the “emerging church” in December 2005 when MBC Executive Director David Clippard recommended to the Executive Board a $200,000 loan to a new church plant in St. Louis called The Journey.  According to our state news journal, the Pathway, the loan was to “help facilitate a church planting center in St. Louis .”[29]  But the MBC Executive Board, which approved the loan, was completely unaware of the various issues surrounding the Journey.  Soon after the loan, an intense debate over such issues as alcohol and the “emerging church” within the MBC would ensue.   

In response to growing concerns among Executive Board members about rumors and accusations of alcohol use, MBC president Ralph Sawyer requested at the July 2006 Executive Board meeting that the church plant workgroup of the Executive Board look into the issue and report back to the full board.  Amazingly, the workgroup issued their report in August of 2006, finding no evidence of alcohol related issues at the Journey, among MBC church plants or among MBC-funded church planters.  However, the Church Planting Work Group Report did make the following statement: 

Discussion also included concern over a church in the St. Louis area [The Journey], which recently received MBC funds for a building program, where some members have been suspected of drunkenness.  In light of the lack of evidence present when we met, and considering the favorable reports we received from their Associate Director of Missions, Darren Casper and others, this concern was dismissed for the time being.[30]

Casper , who was a member of the Journey and associate DOM of the St. Louis Metro Baptist Association, would become a leading defender/advocate of Acts 29. 

By the October 2006 MBC annual meeting, concerns about alcohol use were stronger than ever as David Clippard declared in his convention address that the Journey’s pastor, Darrin Patrick, was a modern-day “Caleb” and portrayed the Journey as a church plant model.[31] 

In a sign of what was to come, Gerald Davidson, pastor emeritus of First Baptist Church Arnold, preached the 2006 MBC annual convention sermon, which he began with an unexpected attack on the Missouri Baptist Laymen’s Association (MBLA) and a strongly worded call for support of David Clippard.  Earlier that morning, former MBC president Mitch Jackson went to a microphone and attempted to have MBLA Research Director Roger Moran removed from the MBC nominating committee.  One year earlier, as president of the MBC, Jackson was the one who appointed Moran to serve as chairman of the nominating committee.     

The Facts Come Out About Acts 29

It wasn’t until the December 2006 Executive Board meeting, one year after the $200,000 loan was approved by the board, that the facts began to surface about the Journey and Acts 29.  Just prior to the December 2006 Executive Board meeting, it was discovered that there were indeed significant alcohol related issues and that the Journey had been operating a bar-room “ministry” in a St. Louis micro brewery for nearly two years called “Theology at the Bottleworks.”  It was also discovered that the Journey’s website invited their members to “grab a brew, [and] give your view” at the monthly bar-room meeting. 

In an article about the December 2006 MBC Executive Board meeting, Baptist Press reported that the Journey’s mission pastor, Jonathan McIntosh, a regional coordinator for Acts 29, included in his bio on the Journey’s website that he “enjoys drinks with his wife ‘at the almost secret bar beneath Brennan’s on the Central West End.’”  BP also noted that the Journey’s website included “a picture associated with an essay by [senior pastor Darrin] Patrick that shows a small group of people raising glasses of beer in an apparent toast.”[32] 

Patrick responded to BP stating:  “I did not know that was there, and it all will be removed immediately.”  He further noted:  “I’m embarrassed that this is still on the website.”  However, while the offensive materials were removed (for a while) from the Journey’s website, a few months later (June 2007), the church website resumed advertising the bar-room meeting stating:  “This large and lively discussion combines cold beer and hot conversation on the relevant issues of our times.”[33]  Currently, the “grab a brew” verbage that Journey pastor Darrin Patrick was “embarrassed” over is on the churches’ website once again.[34] 

By New Year’s Eve, 2008, the Journey was following the lead of Acts 29 president Mark Driscoll, advertising on the church website their “First Annual Black and White Ball.”  According to the promotional materials, “two drink tickets” would be included in the admission cost.  The evening would include “Art, Music, Film, Dancing” and a “Champagne Toast.”[35]   

By January 28, 2007, the front page of the Sunday edition of the St. Louis Post Dispatch carried the headline, “Beer and the Bible, It works for one growing St. Louis church.  But it’s got Missouri Baptists hopping mad.”[36]  On March 4, 2007 the Journey was featured on NBC’s Today Show in a report entitled, “Beer and Bibles: New Churches Lure Young Members.”  Shortly after that, the Journey was featured on MSNBC. 

But the issues surrounding the Journey were much more significant than just a bar-room ministry and church members drinking alcohol.  It was also discovered that Journey pastor Darrin Patrick served as vice president of Acts 29.  On March 20, 2007, Baptist Press released another article entitled, “Alcohol, Acts 29 and the SBC.”[37]  Thus, serious concerns began to surface across the state regarding the issues of church planting, alcohol, the emerging church and Acts 29.  It was also discovered that Darrin Patrick served together with Ed Stetzer as co-chairs of NAMB’s Young Leaders Task Force.[38]  Stetzer was serving at that time as resident missiologist at NAMB and was serving on the board of Acts 29. 

Ed Stetzer, Acts 29 and the MBC

Stetzer has been a regular speaker at Acts 29 events and other events with Acts 29 leaders.  One of the more recent events was on May 22, 2008, when Stetzer was a featured speaker along with Darrin Patrick at a “White Board Session” in Virginia .  In an email promotional from NAMB to an MBC pastor, it states: “The Whiteboard Sessions is sponsored by NAMB’s Missional Network, Lifeway, and the SBCV [Southern Baptist Conservatives of Virginia].”[39]  The “NAMB Missional Network” came about as the result of the Young Leaders Task Force, led by Patrick and Stetzer.[40] 

On April 20-23, 2009, Patrick and Stetzer will join Acts 29 Director Scott Thomas and Acts 29 church planter Matt Chandler for the 2009 National New Church Conference, which includes as its co-sponsors: Lifeway, IMB and NAMB’s Missional Network.[41]  On April 28, 2009, Stetzer will be the featured speaker at the Acts 29 Quarterly meeting for the Midwest region to be held at the Journey.[42]

In Missouri , MBC Executive Director David Clippard identified Stetzer as his “go-to guy at NAMB,”[43] causing some to question what role Stetzer may have played in Clippard’s embrace of the Journey and Acts 29.  On June 6, 2006, Stetzer was brought to the MBC Baptist Building for a one day conference for convention staff.  In a Pathway article entitled, “Stetzer urges churches to connect with culture,” Stetzer cited the Journey Church in St. Louis as an emerging church that has a “missional mindset” and that also holds to “traditional Southern Baptist doctrines such as the inerrancy of Scripture.”[44] 

On October 12-13, 2006, Acts 29’s Stetzer and Patrick were the featured speakers at the MBC’s “Young Leader’s Encounter,” held at Ridgecrest Baptist Church in Springfield .  According to the promotional materials, the conference was “for any pastor and staff member under the age of 40.”[45]  Two weeks later, Stetzer would again be the featured speaker at a luncheon during the 2006 MBC annual meeting.  This meeting was hosted by the MBC church planting group.[46] 

Stetzer has been on the frontline of efforts encouraging Southern Baptists to embrace Acts 29 and their approach to “ministry.”  In a February 17, 2006 presentation entitled “Toward a Missional Convention,” delivered at the “Baptist Identity Conference” at Union University , Stetzer expressed his “hope” that the “biblically-faithful traditional church” would be willing to “partner with the scripturally-sound emerging church.”[47]  In case there is any doubt about who Stetzer was referring to, the March 20, 2007 Baptist Press article, titled “Alcohol, Acts 29 and the SBC,” quotes Stetzer “defend[ing] his board member status with Acts 29” and stating in regard to Acts 29: “I think it is a good thing that there is now an inerrantist wing of the emerging church with solid theology.”[48]  

But the MBC was moving toward Acts 29 in other ways as well.  On October 1, 2005, just prior to the $200,000 loan to the Journey, Acts 29 church planter Ron Cathcart joined the MBC staff as a church plant specialist.[49]  Cathcart is the son-in-law of Gerald Davidson, long-time pastor of First Baptist Church , Arnold .   

Clippard’s Agenda: Tapping into Acts 29

to Plant 100 New Churches Each Year: 

One of Clippard’s top “priorities” was church planting.  After arriving on the MBC field in September 2002, a goal of 60 new church plants was set for 2003.  Forty seven new churches were planted.  For 2004, a goal was set for 100 new plants.  Fifty-five new churches were planted.  For 2005 and 2006, the goal remained 100 new church plants each year.  In 2005, sixty new churches were planted.  It was at this point that the $200,000 loan to the Journey was approved by the Executive Board, to “help facilitate a church planting center in St. Louis .”  The problem was, in 2005, nobody on the Executive Board knew anything about the Journey or Acts 29.  However, questions were soon being raised about the churches that were being planted across the state.  What did these new churches look like?          

The December 2006 Meeting of

the MBC Executive Board 

At the December 2006 meeting of the MBC Executive Board, three major issues that would severely affect the peace and unity of the MBC came together at the same time.  Not only did the facts about the Journey and alcohol surface publicly for the first time, but a special investigative committee was also formed to look into various issues involving, primarily, MBC Executive Director David Clippard.  As would later be acknowledged by the MBC “Peace Committee,” Clippard was actively “pitting” conservative Missouri Baptists against each other for his own political gain. 

Lastly, another special committee that was appointed by MBC president Mike Green was approved by the board that would look into the “theological soundness” of the official ministry partners of the MBC.  This committee would ultimately discover that Acts 29 was listed as a ministry partner with the MBC. 

Sounding the Alarm:  SBC Executive Committee Hears Concerns Regarding Acts 29 and Emerging Church

At the February 2007 meeting of the SBC Executive Committee, Committee member Roger Moran issued a statement before the full Committee during the plenary session regarding Acts 29, the emerging/emergent church and the issue of alcohol.  In his speech, Moran spoke in favor of referring to Lifeway Research a motion calling on the SBC Executive Committee to research the emerging church movement.  Moran opened his remarks with the following: 

One of the most dangerous and deceptive movements to infiltrate the ranks of Southern Baptist life has been the Emerging/Emergent Church Movement.  Not since the stealth tactics of the CBF have we seen a movement operate so successfully below the radar of rank and file Southern Baptists.

Marked by their fascination with alcohol, their commitment to theological ambiguity and their embrace of religious rituals steeped in eastern mysticism, this movement has made its greatest inroads in the area of “church planting.” And we are now beginning to see the evidence of what’s to come.

In my home state, the Missouri Baptist Convention is on the brink of a near civil war – and at the heart of our struggle has been the blatant dishonesty of those who are determined that Missouri Baptists will embrace this new postmodern approach to ministry.

Moran concluded his comments stating: 

The seriousness of the emerging/emergent movement and the degree to which it has infiltrated the SBC warrants a full and thorough investigation.  And I would argue that the investigation needs to start at the North American Mission Board, and most specifically in the area of church planting.[50]

The speech was immediately picked up by SBC bloggers angered over Moran’s comments.  On a blog called SBC Outpost, over 100 pages of blog posts followed the brief speech.[51]  Executive Committee president Morris Chapman stated that Moran’s comments would be attached to the referral to Lifeway.[52]  But two months later, on April 20, 2007, Baptist Press announced that the newly formed Lifeway Research, a collaborative effort between IMB, NAMB and Lifeway, would be led by former Acts 29 board member and NAMB Missiologist Ed Stetzer.[53] 

MBC Executive Board Dismisses Clippard as Executive Director:

Anger over the Board’s Decision Spreads

Reporting on the December 2006 MBC Executive Board meeting, Pathway reported the following in regard to the formation of the “Investigative Committee”: 

The formation of this “investigative” committee is the most recent development in a growing controversy between MBC Executive Director David Clippard and leaders of the conservative resurgence in the state.  A variety of issues surrounding Clippard ranging from church planting to personal character and integrity have become increasingly contentious in recent Executive Board meetings. Board members who have raised concerns have been wanting answers or investigations into their concerns, while other board members have argued that all the controversy is a veiled attempt to “micro-manage” the executive director.[54] (emphasis ours)

On April 10, 2007, the MBC Executive Board voted 44-7 to dismiss David Clippard as Executive Director.  The vote came after the Investigative Committee, which included Clippard’s own pastor, brought forth a recommendation to terminate his employment. 

However, there was a group of Missouri Baptists that was angry over the Executive Board’s decision to “fire” Clippard.  Some members of that group began publicly calling for full support of Clippard before the Investigative Committee was even formed. 

On September 15, 2006, Bill Smathers, a Director of Missions that also served on the search committee that called Clippard, sent out by email an “Open Letter to Missouri Baptists” calling for support of Clippard.  According to Smathers, “’the word on the street’ is that the MBC Executive Board is being filled with nominees that will follow a plan to micro-manage the MBC Executive Staff and which calls for Dr. Clippard’s dismissal.”[55]  On September 21, 2006, DOM Jim Plymale responded to Smathers with another widely circulated letter calling for support of Clippard.[56]  On September 11-12, 2006, Fellowship Association was the first association to pass a resolution calling for support of Clippard.  (Pastor Wayne Isgriggs was chairman of that resolutions committee.  Isgriggs would later become one of the 11 leaders of the political group called SOC - “Save Our Convention.”) 

On Feb. 12, 2007, with the Investigative Committee in full swing, the St. Louis Metro Baptist Association passed a resolution in support of Clippard, which stated:  “…we express our appreciation, encouragement, and support for Dr. Clippard and the Missouri Baptist Convention staff; and be it further resolved that we encourage all Missouri Baptists to support the leadership of Dr. Clippard and the Missouri Baptist Convention staff.”  (This resolution was written by SOC leader David Sheppard according to a Pathway article about the resolution.[57]  SOC leader Jim Breeden is the St. Louis Metro DOM.) 

On Feb. 15, 2007, The Fellowship of Director of Missions passed a resolution stating:  “…we encourage the Missouri Baptist Convention Executive Board and all Missouri Baptists to join together in prayer for and full support of the leadership of Dr. Clippard and the Missouri Baptist Convention staff.”   (This resolution was almost identical to the one passed by the St. Louis Metro Association.)  

On March 13, 2007, the Laclede Baptist Association passed a resolution stating:  "…[we] express our appreciation, encouragement and support for Dr. Clippard and the MBC staff…  Be it further resolved that we encourage the MBC Executive Board and all Missouri Baptists to join together in thankful prayer for the leadership of Dr. Clippard and the Missouri Baptist Convention staff."  

The MBC Investigative Committee and MBC Attorneys Respond

to Those Angered over the “Firing” of David Clippard

In response to Missouri Baptists who were angry and/or confused over the firing of Clippard, MBC attorneys compiled a special Q & A to answer some of the concerns and provide some degree of insight as to why the board voted 44-7 to dismiss Clippard.  On April 19, 2007, Baptist Press published the special Q & A.  The article included twenty questions and answers and the six “findings” from the Investigative Committee.  According to BP, the six “findings” appear as redacted or rephrased by legal counsel, indicated by brackets.  The “Findings” are as follows: 

·         Finding One: Employee morale at the Baptist Building is low because of David Clippard.

·         Finding Two: The reputation of Missouri Baptists' is being portrayed unprofessionally because of David Clippard's conduct and comments.

·         Finding Three: [David Clippard has not always been sufficiently forthright when confronted on various issues.]

·         Finding Four: [David Clippard acted unwisely in managing the settlement of a lawsuit against the Convention, the Executive Board and himself,] [by providing insufficient information to the Board about the facts of the case and the terms of a settlement and confidentiality agreement entered by Clippard on behalf of himself, the Convention and the Board, his employer, in a case in which he was the employee-defendant accused of wrong-doing, and by asserting the authority to sign the settlement and confidentiality agreement for the Convention and the Board, without adequate knowledge or approval by the Board.]

·         Finding Five: [Attorney client communications regarding the risk of future lawsuits or liabilities being brought against the MBC.]

·         Finding Six: David Clippard demonstrated a spirit toward the Investigative Committee that was divisive.

On top of the six findings, many considered the most damaging part of the Q & A to be item #18 dealing with a lawsuit against Clippard for “sexual discrimination,” “libel/slander and retaliation” and his severe mishandling of the entire ordeal.[58]  

Clippard was “fired” on April 10, 2007.  By December 10, 2007, Clippard was working at the International Mission Board as managing director of the Church Services Team.[59] 

Interestingly, as the controversy continued to grow over the issues of Acts 29 and alcohol, the Executive Board also voted at their April 2007 meeting to strengthen the board’s statement on alcohol, which is required to be signed by all MBC-funded church planters.[60] 

The MBC Theological Study Committee:

Acts 29 Should Not Be MBC Ministry Partner

At the same December 2006 meeting of the MBC Executive Board that produced the special Investigative Committee, the board also approved a special Theological Study Committee.  This committee was formed in response to a motion referred to the Executive Board during the 2006 annual meeting of the Missouri Baptist Convention.  The assigned task of this committee was “to study the theological soundness of all relationships the MBC has with non-political, parachurch organizations.”[61]  One of the organizations this committee would be investigating would be the Acts 29 Church Planting Network, which appeared on a list of approved MBC ministry partners. 

On April 16, less than one week after the dismissal of Clippard, the Theological Study Committee met and heard a presentation from Dr. Mark DeVine on the topic of the emerging church movement.  DeVine, a professor at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, took a strongly pro-Acts 29 position.[62]  Nevertheless, the committee issued a preliminary report which included the following statement: “Acts 29 should not be an organization with which the Missouri Baptist Convention networks by means of our Cooperative Program money, missions emphases and church planting.”[63]  The committee was in unanimous agreement regarding Acts 29 with the exception of one member, David McAlpin, pastor of First Baptist Church , Harvester. 

A New Political Organization is Formed…

 to “Save Our Convention” (SOC)

On April 25, 2007, two weeks after the Executive Board voted to dismiss David Clippard as Executive Director, a small group of pastors angry over the board’s action met at Second Baptist Church , Springfield specifically to discuss the “firing” of Clippard.  The group formed a new political organization called “Save Our Convention” (SOC) with 11 predominately large-church pastors listed as the group’s leaders.  Three were members of the MBC Executive Board and two were former MBC presidents.  According to SOC materials, they are: 

·         John Marshall, pastor of Second Baptist Springfield

·         Mitch Jackson, pastor of Miner Baptist Church and former MBC president

·         Jim Breeden, Director of Missions, St. Louis Metro Baptist Association

·         Dwight Blankenship, pastor of Parkway Baptist, St. Louis

·         Kenny Qualls, pastor of First Baptist Arnold and former MBC president

·         Wesley Hammond, pastor of First Baptist Paris and Executive Board member

·         Tom Willoughby, pastor of First Baptist Eldorado Springs and Executive Board member

·         David McAlpin, pastor of First Baptist Harvester

·         David Sheppard, pastor of First Baptist St. Charles

·         Wayne Isgriggs, pastor of First Baptist Lincoln and Executive Board member

·         Lee Sanders, associate pastor of First Baptist O’Fallon (The pastor of this church was Gary Taylor, but he was hired by Clippard just prior to his firing to serve as director of evangelism.)[64]   

About three weeks later, on May 15, 2007, SOC publicly launched their new political organization at First Baptist Harvester.  The political rhetoric coming from this group was deeply divisive and virtually identical to the political rhetoric now coming from pro-Acts 29 SBC leaders.  While there was no mention of Acts 29 or its president Mark Driscoll at the May 15^th SOC meeting, at the heart of the SOC/MBLA controversy in Missouri has been the issues of Acts 29, the “emerging church,” and the issue of alcohol (which is inseparable from the issue of Acts 29.)      

At the May 15^th SOC meeting, SOC leader Kenny Qualls began his presentation with the following statement as he referenced SOC handout materials:

You see Roman numeral three on your sheet here, “Our Concerns.”  Number one, let me share what this is not about.  These are very important issues in Baptist life today, but this is not what this [the formation of SOC] is about:  It’s not about Calvinism; It’s not about alcohol -- I think I clearly understand where everyone in this room would be on the issue of alcohol.  It’s not about that; It’s not about the emerging church.  And number two, it’s not even about the recent firing of Dr. Clippard.  That needs to be very clear.  It’s not about the recent firing of Dr. Clippard…[65] 

The problem with Qualls’ statement is that it is fundamentally dishonest.  The MBC controversy was absolutely and undeniably about the emerging church (Acts 29); absolutely and undeniably about alcohol; and absolutely and undeniably about the “firing” of David Clippard.  If in fact the issues of alcohol, Acts 29 and the firing of Clippard were not the issues that brought about the formation of SOC, then there was no reason for the existence of their new political organization.  These were the underlying issues that divided the MBLA/Project 1000 guys and those who chose to align with the group called SOC.  It was, however, accurate to say that the “controversy” was not about Calvinism.  “Calvinists” have lined up on both sides of the MBC controversy. 

On behalf of the SOC group, Qualls continued with increasing vagueness:  “We are concerned about a spirit of legalism that refuses to cooperate with those who are not in total agreement, and set parameters that exceed the Baptist Faith and Message.” (emphasis ours)  Qualls then stated:  “I have no desire to be a part of a convention in which we swap out liberal Sadducees for legalistic Pharisees.”  However, Qualls failed to mention exactly what the issues were that “exceed the Baptist Faith and Message,” or what exactly it was that the “spirit of legalism” refused to cooperate with.    

Qualls served as chairman of the search committee that called Clippard in 2002.  Clippard began his new job as MBC Executive Director on September 9, 2002.  By December 15, 2002, Qualls had resigned his church pastorate after being hired by Clippard to serve as an MBC associate executive director.  About two years later, on February 27, 2005, Qualls was unanimously elected to serve as co-pastor with Gerald Davidson at First Baptist Church Arnold, and one of Clippard’s most vocal supporters.   

One of the most significant statements of the SOC meeting came from Qualls, who stated:    

And then finally, we are concerned that these two forces -- a political powerbroker machine and a spirit of legalism -- in our opinion, will lead to the destruction of the Missouri Baptist Convention and also potentially to bring harm to our institutions. 

But less than two years after Qualls made this statement, he would announce in his March 2009 church newsletter that as pastor, he had made a “strategic change” relating to the churches’ Cooperative Program giving plan.  Rather than 8.7% of the church’s general budget going to the Cooperative Program, only 2% would now go to CP.  However, Qualls notes in the article that the total percentage of giving will stay the same, but will just be divided differently.   According to Qualls, only 2% will now go to the Cooperative Program (MBC), 4% directly to the SBC International Mission Board, 1% directly to the SBC and 1.7% for First Baptist Arnold.[66] 

As a former SBC Executive Committee member and a former state convention associate executive director, Qualls is fully aware of the importance of the Cooperative Program in both MBC and SBC life.  Ironically, if every MBC church followed the lead of Qualls and reduced their CP giving by more than 75%, the Missouri Baptist Convention would cease to exist as we currently know it.  This is indeed odd behavior for a man who says he is so concerned about the “destruction of the Missouri Baptist Convention” and the potential “harm” that could come to our MBC institutions.  Qualls’ cut in CP giving also comes in the midst of SBC and MBC campaigns to firm up support for the Cooperative Program.[67] 

Also addressing the May 15^th meeting was SOC leader Dwight Blankenship, who answered the question, “What is our purpose?”  Blankenship stated:  “What is our purpose?  To halt the spread of a legalistic spirit and allow for diversity of opinion on non-essentials.” (emphasis ours)  He further stated that the purpose of SOC was “to include all those who want to work together with Baptists [with] the Baptist Faith and Message as our guide.”  However, Blankenship also failed to identify any of the “non-essentials” to which he referred.  (Blankenship is currently chairman of the MBC Nominating Committee, appointed by MBC president Gerald Davidson.)    

SOC leader Jim Breeden, speaking as a DOM, stated on behalf of Missouri ’s DOM’s their commitment to the “essentials of the faith,” but, their “strong rejection” of “dividing over non-essential issues.”  Breeden stated: “There is strong conviction and commitment across the DOM’s… to the essentials of the faith but equally strong rejection of the dividing over non-essential issues.”  However, Breeden offered no examples of what those “non-essentials” might be. 

SOC leader David McAlpin addressed the May 15^th meeting as a member of the Theological Study Committee.  In regard to “secondary and tertiary issues,” McAlpin stated: 

…on this [Theological Study] committee, I see an alarming, an alarming degree of insistence that we narrow and narrow and narrow our theological stream, until we exclude more and more and more folks who in the past, they affirmed the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 – [but now] that’s not good enough.  And so we see a narrowing and a narrowing and a narrowing of the stream of what is acceptable.  And we see a growing -- I see a growing intolerance for those who may disagree on secondary and tertiary issues with those that are right now in control of our Executive Board.  And I am deeply alarmed.

But as with all the SOC leaders, McAlpin also failed to identify what the “secondary and tertiary issues” might be.  However, what we do know about McAlpin and some of his fellow SOC leaders is their strong support and involvement with Acts 29.     

SOC Leaders and Acts 29

David McAlpin:  As pastor of First Baptist Harvester, McAlpin assisted Acts 29 vice president Darrin Patrick and his church, the Journey, in planting a new Acts 29 church in St. Charles called the Refuge.  The pastor of the Refuge, Trey Herweck, served as an intern at the Journey before launching the new Acts 29 church plant.  According to the Refuge website: “In January 2006, a core team of St. Charles dwellers from the Journey and elsewhere began to meet.  That summer, our friends at First Baptist Church of Harvester allowed us to use their facility to start meeting together.”[68] 

This church, like the Journey, conducted a bar-room meeting in a downtown St. Charles micro brewery called “Theology on Main .”  On January 1, 2007, approximately three weeks after Baptist Press first exposed the bar-room ministry of the Journey, pastor Herweck announced that his new Acts 29 church plant would launch their own “Theology on Main,” to be held at the Trailhead Brewing Company, a microbrewery in downtown St. Charles.  Discussions would include such topics as:  “Beer, Bombs and Biotech in the Economy of St. Louis.”[69] 

The name was later changed to “Topics on Main” (TOM) and meets at a bar called “Undertow on Main .”  For those interested in attending the “TOM” meeting, the church website links to the Undertow website at, http://www.myspace.com/undertowonmain.  This website includes highly offensive items and links to additional sexually explicit materials.  According to the St. Louis Post Dispatch, in February 2009, the Undertow was one of five downtown St. Charles bars charged with selling alcohol to minors.     

St. Charles officials on Wednesday slapped five North Main Street bars with liquor license suspensions because of allegations of serving alcohol to people younger than the legal drinking age.[70]

(The footnote provides four articles from the Post Dispatch regarding the under aged drinking “sting” operation of the St. Charles Bars.)  Both the Journey and the Refuge are part of the St. Louis Metro Baptist Association, led by SOC leader Jim Breeden.[71]     

SOC leader David McAlpin was the lone voice on the MBC Theological Study Committee opposing the committee’s recommendation that the MBC not partner with Acts 29.  McAlpin’s strong support for Acts 29 was seen most clearly in his one-man “minority report” of the Theological Study Committee.  On pages 6-11, McAlpin issued his defense of Acts 29.  But by the time McAlpin would submit his minority report to the MBC Executive Board in December 2007, his son Stephen would be an intern at the Journey, serving as a personal assistant to Darrin Patrick.[72]  After the formation of SOC in 2007, McAlpin was hired by Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary to serve as Dean of Midwestern Baptist College.  In late 2008, he was moved to vice president of student development.[73]  

Jim Breeden:  SOC leader Jim Breeden, Director of Missions for the St. Louis Metro Baptist Association, serves as a community group leader at the Genesis Church , an Acts 29 church plant in Breeden’s association.  Breeden’s Associate Director of Missions, Darren Casper, was a member of the Journey, but now serves as both associate DOM and lead pastor of CrossPointe, a new Acts 29 church plant in Breeden’s association, whose mother church is the Journey.  Casper is listed as an Acts 29 Church Plant Candidate on the Acts 29 website.[74]  Under Breeden’s leadership, St. Louis Metro association has become one of the strongest and most active pro-Acts 29 associations in the SBC.  Four of the 11 SOC leaders are from the St. Louis Metro Baptist Association (Breeden, McAlpin, Sheppard and Blankenship).  And if Darren Casper’s new church plant is included in the count, there is a total of eight Acts 29 church plants in the St. Louis Metro Baptist Association. 

Kenny Qualls/Gerald Davidson:  SOC leader Kenny Qualls, pastor of First Baptist Church Arnold, replaced long-time pastor Gerald Davidson.  Davidson’s son-in-law, Ron Cathcart, is an Acts 29 church planter from Wentzville and a former MBC church plant specialist.  As one of David Clippard’s most outspoken defenders, Davidson would later become the SOC group’s candidate for president of the MBC in 2007. 

John Marshall:  SOC leader John Marshall, pastor of the influential Second Baptist Springfield, would see two of his staff members plant new churches -- one in 2004 and one in 2005.  One was an Acts 29 church plant in Ozark called LifePoint Church .[75]  This church was planted by Lane Harrison in 2004.  Harrison served as Singles Minister at Second Baptist from 1999 through 2005. 

The other church plant is called The Core Fellowship.  The pastor of this 2005 church plant is Ryan Wiksell, who remained on staff at Second Baptist Springfield in “communications” until December 2007. 

In a joint fundraising letter sent out by the Core Fellowship and the Greene County Baptist Association, the church offered to those making a contribution to the Core Fellowship a copy of a book by Brian McLaren.  McLaren is a religious icon among the far-left wing of the Emerging Church Movement.  McLaren is best known for his statements calling for a 5 to 10 year “moratorium” on any “pronouncements” against homosexuality and his statement rejecting the substitutionary atonement of Christ.

On the website of the Core Fellowship, Wiksell used his blog to bash the name “Christian” stating that he doesn’t want to become “known as a bad tipper, judgmental jerk, or a nationalist warmonger.” He concludes by stating:  “By that token, I believe Jesus would be a terrible Christian. I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if he chose never to show up in church on Sunday, or had a beer at a frat party, or frequented a gay bookstore. And you know what the Christians would say? ‘This man doesn’t honor the Sabbath’ or ‘This man hangs out with sinners.’”[76] 

In response to the St. Louis Post Dispatch article about the Journey Church entitled, “Beer and the Bible,” Wiksell wrote a piece on the church website entitled, “St. Louis Church Fighting Our Battles In Advance?”  The article states: 

Everyone needs to read this [Post Dispatch] article…  Phil brought it to my attention and I think it is crucial that we’re aware of the alcohol controversy.  Although I’m sure that we, as leaders, would all be willing to forego alcohol consumption if necessary (most of us don’t drink as it is,) we have to be true to our commitment to raw scripture, and be wary of any attempts to ladle extra-biblical rules on top of people.  In addition, there are many opportunities to connect with people outside the church world through the responsible use of alcohol.  If we’re going to forfeit those opportunities, I think we’d need a pretty powerful reason.  I hope to get in touch with the pastor of this St. Louis church [Darrin Patrick]… see what advice he might have for us.[77]   

Lastly, according to the website of a new Acts 29 church plant in Springfield called “The Way,” pastored by Acts 29 Church Plant Candidate Seth Shelton, his church was invited to Marshall’s Second Baptist Springfield August 17, 2008 because Second Baptist Church “wants to interview us during their evening service to feature other ministries that are starting up in our community.“[78] 

Since the formation of SOC in May 2007, Marshall has been elected to MBC second vice president, MBC first vice president and was elected in 2008 to preach the Convention sermon at the 2009 SBC annual meeting in Louisville , Kentucky .[79] 

SOC Sweeps Election of MBC Officers:

But Can’t Get Away From Alcohol Issue

Following the May 15^th meeting at Harvester, the SOC group held a series of rallies around the state with a very specific political plan to sweep the elections at the 2007 MBC annual meeting.  SOC leader David Sheppard, pastor of First Baptist Church St. Charles, presented the political strategy for the group, which was primarily to identify MBLA leaders and those who made up the core leadership of Project 1000 (even though that group was no longer in existence), as “powerbrokers” and “legalistic Pharisees.”  On October 30-31, 2007, at the MBC annual meeting, SOC won all four elected positions. 

In an interview with Baptist Press, newly elected MBC president Gerald Davidson contradicted the public statements of his fellow SOC leaders as he stated that the primary reason for the rise of the SOC political organization was the firing of David Clippard.  He stated:  "The thing that sort of, I guess, broke the camel's back, so to speak, were the actions taken against our executive director (David Clippard) this past year and his dismissal.  I think that sort of culminated all of it."[80] 

But the 2007 MBC annual meeting will also be remembered as the year that 42% of the messengers voted against a resolution on alcohol.  Messenger Roger Moran submitted a resolution opposing alcohol that was identical to the one passed by the SBC in 2006.  However, the Resolutions Committee opted not to report it out of committee.  Moran in turn made a motion to bring it to the floor for a vote.  The vote was so close that MBC president Mike Green called for a ballot vote.  When the ballots were counted, the resolution passed by a vote of 58% to 42%.[81] 

Among those opposing the resolution was pastor Micah Fries, a leading defender and advocate of Acts 29.  Speaking before the convention, Fries argued that “the wording of the resolution specifically encourages that we move beyond the words of Scripture in our expectations of our leadership.”[82] 

Fries, one of the better known SBC bloggers from Missouri , also chimed in on the most recent controversy over Mark Driscoll/Southeastern Seminary and Baptist Press.  According to Fries, who will preach the annual sermon at the 2009 MBC annual meeting, the Baptist Press article was “unfortunate in its content and uncharitable in its tone.”  Making the same arguments as Ed Stetzer and Alvin Reid, he further states: 

Essentially all of the article is either unfair in its representation or is speaking of something which Driscoll was formerly known for and has since repented of.  As a guy who listened and/or watched a ridiculous amount of Driscoll messages, I can assure you that the article is not a fair nor accurate representation.[83]

MBC President Gerald Davidson: 

Acts 29 and Alcohol -- “A Straw Man?”

The elected slate of SOC candidates for 2007 MBC officers was led by long-time pastor of First Baptist Arnold, Gerald Davidson.  On November 5, 2007, just days after his election as MBC president, Davidson made the following statement in an interview with Baptist Press, referring to the issues of alcohol and Acts 29 as a “straw man”: 

One of the issues that (the Project 1000 leaders) raised this year was the alcohol issue.  They talked about an Acts 29 (network of church planters), and I don't know anything about the Acts 29 group, but people say that they are basically conservative but they believe in the use of alcohol.  And truthfully, I know churches all over the state of Missouri but I don't know any churches that condone the use of alcohol.  I don't know any pastors that condone the use of alcohol.  I don't know any pastors or church staff members that drink.  Now, there may be -- I'm sure probably there are -- but I don't know who they are.

But that's sort of a straw man, I think, for the Project 1000 or Missouri Baptist Laymen's Association to try to rally people around.  It was basically a straw man because that's not a problem in Missouri .[84] (emphasis ours)    

On November 6, 2007, the day after the Baptist Press article was published, Davidson’s son-in-law, Ron Cathcart, was one of the featured speakers at the Acts 29 Regional Quarterly meeting held at the Journey Church in St. Louis .[85]  As mentioned earlier, Cathcart was hired by former MBC Executive Director David Clippard in October 2005 as a church plant strategist for the MBC.[86]

In a sermon preached by Cathcart to his Wentzville congregation, he addressed the issue of alcohol.  His sermon was in response to the Post Dispatch article about the Journey entitled “Beer and the Bible.”  On the sermon audio posted on the church website, he states: 

“Deacons likewise are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine and not pursuing dishonest gain.”  There are so many Baptist deacons out there that don’t know that verse is in the Bible, because they’re hiding everywhere -- when all the Bible really says is don’t drink a whole lot of wine.  They can quit sneaking around. [Pause and laughing]  That’s a nervous laughter, because you know it’s true.  You know it’s true.[87]

Cathcart will be one of the featured speakers at the NAMB sponsored ”X Factor” conference, May 5, 2009 in Birmingham , Alabama .[88] 

It is also important to note that on November 3, 2007, just days after the 2007 annual meeting, the St. Louis Post Dispatch reported that, while MBC Interim Executive Director David Tolliver was preaching against alcohol to the messengers:

…another group of pastors gathered at a lake house a couple of miles away, drinking Red Stripe and Fat Tire beer, watching football and talking shop…  The young men are part of Acts 29, a network of more than 100 emerging churches across the country that have a conservative theology but a more liberal take on some aspects of the culture than do traditional Southern Baptists. The group's focus is on starting more new churches. The Journey in south St. Louis is one such church, and there are others across the state — in St. Charles, Eureka, Hannibal, Columbia and Ozark.[89] (emphasis ours) 

In contrast, on November 29, 2007, under the leadership of chairman Rodney Albert, the MBC Nominating Committee unanimously approved a motion calling for an “alcohol abstinence provision” to be added to the 2008 profile sheets for nominees to MBC boards and agencies. 

The provision stated:

At the 2007 Missouri Baptist Convention annual meeting a resolution on alcohol was passed stating: ‘Resolved, That we urge that no one be elected to serve as a trustee or member of any entity or committee of the Missouri Baptist Convention that is a user of alcoholic beverages.’

The new profile sheets then ask this question: “Have you consumed alcohol as a beverage in the last 12 months?” Nominees are then required to check either a yes or no box. That is followed by this statement: “My signature below indicates my agreement to refrain from alcohol use as a beverage.[90]

Acts 29 and the MBC Executive Board:

No Cooperative Program Funds for Acts 29 Church Plants

At its December 10, 2007 meeting, the MBC Executive Board voted to “receive” the report of the Theological Study Committee[91] but rejected a “minority report” by SOC leader and committee member David McAlpin.  In a lengthy section of the committee’s report entitled, “Findings Regarding the Emerging Church,” it states the following:  “The Acts 29 network should not be an organization with which the Missouri Baptist Convention networks by means of our Cooperative Program money, missions emphases and church planting.” 

The board also voted by a nearly 3-1 margin in favor of a motion to cut off state convention Cooperative Program support to Acts 29 church plants in the state.  However, according to Pathway, MBC president Gerald Davidson spoke in opposition to the motion on two separate occasions, arguing that “only a handful of board members were informed enough about the Acts 29 Network to be able to vote on any motion that was critical of it.”[92] 

Yet at the same meeting, Pathway reported that Davidson also “declared that he has never been soft on alcohol.”  Quoting Davidson, Pathway reported:  “I’ve said time and time again alcohol is one of our greatest evils in our society.”[93] 

One of the two Acts 29 church plants that lost their funding was Karis Community Church in Columbia , pastored by Kevin Larson.  According to the Columbia Tribune, after the board voted not to use CP dollars for Acts 29 church plants, “the MBC offered to reinstate the $6,000 of funding if Larson agreed to end Theology at the Forge.  Larson refused.”[94] 

“Theology at the Forge,” formerly called “Theology at the Tavern,” is Karis’ outreach ministry that is common among Acts 29 church plants.  The Journey calls their meeting “Theology at the Bottleworks.”  The Refuge calls their meeting “Theology on Main (now Topics on Main) and the Mystery Church in Joplin (a Missouri Acts 29 church but not affiliated with the MBC) calls their meeting “Theology on Tap.” 

According to the Tribune, Larson lost his funding “because Karis allows its members to imbibe alcohol during the theology meetings.”  Quoting Larson, the Tribune further stated:  “’The Bible doesn’t teach that you should abstain from alcohol,’ Larson said, adding the Baptist perspective on abstinence comes from a traditional legalistic mind-set. ‘That’s not the way we’re going to do it, ever.’"[95] (emphasis ours)  Ironically, Larson admitted on his church blog on December 19, 2007, less than two weeks after the MBC Executive Board de-funded Acts 29 church plants, that Theology at the Forge “has not been a very successful ministry, quite honestly.”[96] 

The Tribune also noted that the second defunded Acts 29 church, Believers Church in Hannibal , also refused MBC funding unless Karis received their funding as well.  A third Acts 29/MBC church plant, the Genesis Church, rejected further MBC funding earlier in the year when the MBC Executive Board voted to strengthen its requirements for church planters regarding alcohol.[97]  (This is the church plant in the St. Louis Metro Association where SOC leader Jim Breeden has been taking “new members classes.”)        

But the Acts 29 debate at the December 2007 Executive Board meeting went beyond the subject of alcohol.  According to Pathway, board member Vic Borden “broadened the debate beyond alcohol by stating he is even more offended by the Journey’s movie ministry that includes R-rated films.”[98] In fact, four films are currently listed on the Journey’s website for their “Film Night” ministry.  Two of the four are R-rated and one is PG-13.  One of the films is rated R because it uses the “F-word” 24 times.[99]   

It should also be noted that, in regard to the recent Baptist Press article dealing with the vulgarity of Mark Driscoll, in a letter to the editor (Pathway), Larson writes that “the SBC must beware of legalism” and that we should “ignore secondary matters.”  However, as with other Acts 29 defenders, Larson failed to state specifically what those “secondary” issues might be.  While brutally attacking Baptist Press and Pathway, Larson issues the usual Driscoll disclaimer, stating that he does not “necessarily endorse everything he [Driscoll] has done.”  In contrast to his attacks on BP and Pathway, Larson then praises Southeastern Seminary, where he claims that “Driscoll’s influence is massive.”  He goes on to argue that Southeastern Seminary “has sought formal partnerships with him [Driscoll].”[100]  Thus, Larson has articulated exactly what the larger battle in the MBC has been about.  There is no reason to think that the next generation of young SBC pastors won’t increasingly look like Mark Driscoll and his band of Acts 29 church planters. 

On his church blog, Larson reveals what appears to be at the heart of the SOC political strategy of “moving the MBC back to the center.”  Larson writes: “We have no intentions of leaving the MBC, but rather we plan to stick around out of love for the people that have been so good to us and strive for change that will be more welcoming to young pastors and planters such as me.”[101] 

SOC:  What is Your Position on Alcohol and Acts 29?

Missouri Baptists Want to Know!

The Executive Board’s decision to no longer allow the use of Cooperative Program funds for Acts 29 church plants caused a flurry of reactions.  Pro-Acts 29 MBC activists (primarily SOC supporters) were angered by the action and came out strongly in defense of Acts 29.  The MBC elected officers, however, (SOC leaders Gerald Davidson, Bruce McCoy and John Marshall) received letters from two associations requesting that each officer publicly declare their positions on the issue of alcohol, the Emerging Church and Acts 29.   

Responding to the requests, Bruce McCoy wrote the response for the three officers, which was published in Pathway.  In regard to alcohol, McCoy writes:  “I oppose the use of alcohol:  Further, I oppose funding any church-start that uses alcohol.”  However, McCoy also noted that he “opposed the vote against Acts 29 by our Executive Board because it was not necessary.”  Referring to the Executive Board vote on Acts 29 as “superfluous,” McCoy considered the action to be the “micro-management” of Interim Executive Director David Tolliver, who, according to McCoy, already had “the authority to nip this thing in the bud-wiser.” 

McCoy concludes his lengthy statement to Missouri Baptists by stating what is clearly the opinion of the vast majority of faithful Missouri /Southern Baptist pastors -- including MBLA and those who supported Project 1000.  He states: “To those who want our financial support, but insist on using alcohol:  It offends us.  We want to love you; perhaps we cannot change your point of view.  If not, please do not ask us for financial support.  Go in peace; go with our love; but, not with our funds.”[102]  The letter was signed by McCoy, Davidson and Marshall.  But what is hard to understand is this: Why is the above position on alcohol and Acts 29 an acceptable position when stated by SOC leaders, but when stated by MBLA or those who supported Project 1000, it’s “legalism,” the work of “Pharisees” and the “dividing over non-essentials?”      

By March 2008, in response to an MBLA press release and an accompanying document entitled, “Alcohol, Acts 29 and the MBC,”[103] SOC leader David Sheppard also stated publicly his position regarding the issue of alcohol.  Like McCoy, Marshall and Davidson, Sheppard also took a hard line position against alcohol and those using alcohol as “an outreach event.”  Claiming that the formation of SOC was not about alcohol, Acts 29, the emerging church or the firing of David Clippard,”  Sheppard went so far as to suggest that “discipline” may be needed for some young Missouri Baptists pastors.  He stated: 

For the record I am 100% opposed to the use of alcohol.  I have never supported and never will support the use of alcohol.  I do not support any church that uses alcohol as an outreach event.  I think some of our young pastors may have overstepped their freedom boundaries and should be counseled in a biblical way.  If discipline is needed then so be it.[104] (emphasis ours)

SOC, Acts 29 and the Bloggers:

Growing Inconsistencies

While SOC leaders were publicly taking a strong stand against alcohol, other emerging SOC supporters did not take the Executive Board decision to defund Acts 29 church plants so lightly.  Micah Fries, who would later be appointed by Gerald Davidson to serve as chairman of the MBC Committee on Convention Committees, wrote the following on his blog the day after the Acts 29 vote (December 11, 2007): 

…I am very upset about a decision that was made this week to formally preclude any Acts 29 church from being considered a partner worthy of receiving funds from the Missouri Baptist Convention.  This decision was approved by the Executive Board of the MBC.  This decision is ill conceived and certain to create increased division within the MBC.  I cannot express how strongly opposed to this decision I am, nor can I adequately communicate how frustrated I am with it.[105]     

Writing on December 18^th, Fries states that “in my mind the Acts 29 issue is far from settled.”  He continues:

…I also believe that if those who made this decision [the MBC Executive Board] are of the opinion that we who disagree will simply fade into the background now, because their decision is finalized, they are sadly mistaken.  This decision is a blow to biblical faithfulness, in my opinion, and as such cannot be left alone.  My commitment to the sufficiency of God’s word and my commitment to living under its authority alone, will not allow me to simply sit idly by.  To believe that this issue is settled appears to be naïve it seems to me.[106]    

But none of this should come as a surprise.  The day after the St. Louis Post Dispatch published the front page article about the Journey’s bar-room ministry entitled, “Beer and the Bible,” Fries stated:  “I can assure you that at least one Missouri Baptist church in good standing is applauding the efforts of Journey and [Theology at the] Bottleworks.”[107] 

In another blog entry entitled “ridiculous, ridiculous, ridiculous,” dating back to April 26, 2007, Fries assaults the Theological Study Committee for its initial statement regarding Acts 29.  Writing in defense of Acts 29’s use of alcohol, he writes: “The ‘Theology Committee’ of the Missouri Baptist Convention have released a statement today that, in effect, separates the MBC from ever working in partnership with Acts 29 and their organization of church planters again.”  He continues:  “The Chairman of the committee had this to say, ‘We are living in a day and age where we need doctrinal precision and we need to be definitive in what we believe,’ which begs the question, how have you concluded that the use of alcohol is a significant enough issue to sever partnership?”[108] (emphasis ours)     

On April 30, 2007, Fries again writes regarding the Theological Study Committee.  Referring to the Theological Study Committee’s concerns about Acts 29 as “baseless,” he writes:  “Acts 29 has posted a statement mostly dealing with the baseless accusations made by the Missouri Baptist Convention ‘Theological Sub-Committee.”[109] 

Micah Fries has become a SOC/Acts 29 advocate of interest for various reasons.  In 2008, Fries was appointed to serve on the SBC Committee on Committees by SBC president Frank Page.  As already noted, he was appointed by MBC president Gerald Davidson to serve as chairman of the 2008 MBC Committee on Convention Committees, which in turn, appointed SOC leader Jim Breeden to serve as chairman of the Committee on Convention Preacher, which in turn selected Micah Fries to serve as the 2009 MBC Convention Preacher. 

Between March 6^th and May 16, 2009, NAMB, Lifeway and IMB will co-sponsor a series of six conferences across the nation called “Impact 2009, Small Church Leadership Conference.”  Featured speakers will include Ed Stetzer and Micah Fries.[110] 

In an August 18, 2008 blog entry, Fries writes that:  “I will attend the Acts 29 Quarterly [meeting] hosted by the good folks at Journey Church.”  He further writes that:  “I have been looking for ways to connect with our Acts 29 guys here in Missouri .”[111]

Fries is also listed as the website designer for the Church Plant page of SOC leader Jim Breeden’s St. Louis Metro Baptist Association.  Breeden’s association was on the cutting edge in opposing the Executive Board’s decision to cut ties with Acts 29.  According to an article appearing on the Acts 29 website, dated Dec 16, 2007, it states:                                                  

In response to the de-funded church planters in Missouri , the St Louis Metro Baptist Association, under the direction of [associate executive director] Darren Casper has formed a Church Planting Fund called "Show Me Partnership."  It is a way that people can assist those [Acts 29] church planters whose funds from the Missouri Baptist Convention will be cut off January 1, 2008 (18 days from now) because of a decision made on December 10, 2007.[112]

Regarding MBLA research director and former Project 1000 coordinator Roger Moran, Fries writes in a May 19, 2008 blog post:  “The good news, however, is that it appears that in Missouri at least, Moran’s influence has crumbled and may be close to gone.”[113] 

Speaking of the SOC political strategy, Fries begins to provide a glimpse into where SOC supporters are attempting to take the MBC.  Writing on a blog called SBC Impact, Fries explains why SOC leaders could not do more for their cause as MBC officers:  “It will take aprox. 2-3 years at least before the new regime [SOC] has a majority on the [MBC Executive] board.  There is little the new leaders can do. That’s why I’ve been trying to communicate to people in Missouri that the real ability to make changes is not at the MBC annual meeting, or in an elected position other than the ExComm [Executive Board]. If changes are to be made, they will happen through that group.”[114] 

In a comment and follow up question directed to Micah Fries on the same blog regarding the MBC Executive Board’s decision not to fund Acts 29 church plants and the issue of alcohol, the following statement was directed to Fries: 

The officers [SOC leaders Davidson, McCoy and Marshall] are a part of the Ex.Com [MBC Executive Board]. As a matter of fact the BP [Baptist Press] reports say; “MBC Chairman Gerald Davidson declared that he has never been soft on alcohol, saying “I’ve said time and time again alcohol is one of our greatest evils in our society.” Tolliver said the convention will have no working relationship with churches “participating with alcohol,” which specifically means that Cooperative Program funds will not be used for “sinful outreach ministries.” And at the end of his report about Southwest Baptist University, President C. Pat Taylor pleaded with board members to “preach, and teach our youth, that alcohol is an evil thing” to counter what he said is “a soft attitude toward it” by non-drinking students.” So, we have the newly elected President saying he is not soft on alcohol along with the President of SBU. Micah, there seems to be a unity in the new leadership on this issue. (emphasis ours)

Fries responded as follows:  “I am fairly confident that there is not unity on this issue among leadership, in fact I know that there is not. I also know that the officers [Davidson, McCoy and Marshall] are in attendance at ExComm [Executive Board] meetings but cannot vote unless a tie is in place.  I am of the understanding that our Ex. Dir. as well as others asked the ExComm not to approve this change [defunding Acts 29] and the ExComm voted in favor of the change anyway.”[115] (emphasis ours)  

SOC’s Stated Political Agenda: Move the MBC

“Back to the Center”

SOC leader and chief organizer David Sheppard, pastor of First Baptist Church St. Charles, was by far the most vicious of all the SOC speakers at the May 15^th 2007 SOC meeting at Harvester.  Attacking MBLA and Project 1000 leaders as “power brokers” and “legalists,” Sheppard stated that these groups “started out with a good purpose, and yet has moved [the convention] from here, and gone to the opposite extreme.”  He continues by stating:  “And basically, we have exchanged one set of power brokers for another set of power brokers.” 

According to Sheppard, the political agenda and primary objective of the SOC group was to move the Missouri Baptist Convention back “to the center where it needs to be.”  As the various SOC leaders addressed the crowd at the Harvester meeting, the central theme was repeatedly reiterated:  The MBC is in a crisis and needs to be saved from those in leadership before the MBC is “destroyed.”  The MBC Executive Board, the MBC Nominating Committee, the Pathway, the Missouri Baptist Laymen’s Association and most specifically, Roger Moran, who served as Coordinator of Project 1000, had moved the Missouri Baptist Convention too far to the right and a course correction was desperately needed.

According to Sheppard, if his political strategy was followed, it would produce “1100 people to go to the state convention” in order “to elect a full slate of officers.”  Sheppard was adamant that if SOC supporters could produce the numbers, it would be enough to move the convention “back from the legalism to the center where it needs to be.”[116]    

The political accusations coming from SOC leader Kenny Qualls paralleled those of Sheppard and were equally divisive.  He stated: “We are concerned that these two forces -- a political powerbroker machine and a spirit of legalism – in our opinion, will lead to the destruction of the Missouri Baptist Convention and also potentially to bring harm to our institutions.” 

SOC leader Dwight Blankenship, who now serves as chairman of the MBC Nominating Committee stated:  “What is our purpose?  To break the power hold that a small group has on Missouri Baptist Convention.  Two: To halt the spread of a legalistic spirit and allow for diversity of opinion on non-essentials.”    

However, neither Sheppard nor any of the other SOC speakers bothered to define the meaning of the term “legalism” within MBC life.  And tragically, few seemed to care about the details or the accuracy of the accusations made by the SOC group. 

Sheppard did, however, explain the basis of his accusation of “power broker.”  Using the liberal St. Louis Post Dispatch to make his point, Sheppard states: 

Many of you get the St. Louis Post Dispatch and you read it. And I don’t know what’s being reported around the state in other areas -- in Kansas City , and the Southern part of the state, but there’s been some front page articles in the St. Louis Post Dispatch recently about the situation in our Missouri Baptist Convention.  One of those articles began with this statement:  ‘For Roger Moran, the most powerful Baptist in Missouri , the past represents victory and personal grace.’  Now folks, I don’t know about you, but I don’t think anybody ought to be labeled as the most powerful Baptist in Missouri or the Southern Baptist Convention or anywhere.  And when I see that headline in the newspaper, it just grates on me.  That’s the image that’s being given, to not only Missouri Baptists, but the whole state of Missouri . (emphasis his)   

Two points need to be made about Sheppard’s accusation.  First, why did it not “grate” on Sheppard a few weeks earlier when the front page of the Sunday edition of the Post Dispatch published the story entitled “Beer and the Bible” about his fellow St. Louis Metro Baptist Association pastor Darrin Patrick?  Why did it not “grate” on Sheppard that this church, which was featured by our former Executive Director as a church plant model, was causing people across Missouri to question the MBC’s position on alcohol?  Nor did Sheppard bother to mention that the Post Dispatch article he was quoting was actually about a speech made by Moran before the SBC Executive Committee regarding Acts 29 and the Emerging Church Movement.[117] 

Secondly, Sheppard attempted to create the illusion that the Post Dispatch had called Roger Moran “the most powerful Baptist in Missouri .”  However, the Post Dispatch article was not an editorial, but a news article.  The Post Dispatch was actually quoting one of Sheppard’s fellow St. Louis Metro Baptist Association pastors[118] that is affiliated with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.  According to the Post Dispatch article cited by Sheppard: 

The Rev. David Johnson, pastor of Overland Baptist Church , said his board voted last year to cut its ties with the Missouri Baptist Convention after 58 years rather than have to deal with Moran’s politics.  Moran is definitely the most powerful and influential figure in the Missouri Baptist Convention in the last 15 years,’ Johnson said. (emphasis ours)       

It is also helpful to know a little about the church that Rev. Johnson pastors.  First of all, former national CBF moderator Cynthia Holmes is a member of Johnson’s church.  Holmes has also served as Missouri CBF moderator and on both the state and national CBF Coordinating Council.  But Holmes has also served as a trustee of the extreme liberal Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a group formerly funded by the MBC.  Holmes also serves as a board member of the very liberal Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs.  This is the organization most responsible for the founding of Americans United in the late 1940’s.  Thus, in the mind of this CBF pastor, it is at least understandable why he would think of Moran as the “most powerful” figure in the MBC, considering it was Moran and the Missouri Baptist Laymen’s Association that successfully led the battle against each of these organizations in the MBC.  But for David Sheppard, who claims to be a theological conservative who supported Project 1000, such political rhetoric fit perfectly into his political agenda, he just couldn’t tell the whole truth.  Thus, it was this kind of deceit and deception foisted upon Missouri Baptists by men like David Sheppard and his fellow SOC leaders that thrust the MBC into the political and spiritual turmoil we are currently experiencing. 

SOC Accusations of Exclusion:

But Who was Excluded  

Speaking at the May 15^th SOC meeting, SOC leader Kenny Qualls made the following statement: 

The concerns you see there in number three are two-fold:  The continued power control of certain Project 1000 leaders and the Missouri Baptist Laymen’s Association that has led to the micro-management of Missouri Baptist Convention staff and exclusion of many fine Missouri Baptists.  (emphasis ours)

While Qualls does not mention exactly who was being excluded or from what, one thing is clear: There was no shortage of people serving in the MBC from the churches of the 11 SOC leaders.  During the 2007 calendar year (the year SOC was formed), 37 people from the 11 SOC churches were serving in MBC and SBC positions of leadership. 

In an attempt to portray the five members of the MBLA board as political “power brokers,” serving in an inordinate number of positions, David Sheppard went all the way back to 1998 (when Project 1000 was first launched) to make his point.  In his assault against Roger Moran, Sheppard made the following statement at the SOC meeting as part of his “evidence” that Moran was a “power broker.”  He stated:   

Roger Moran has served on the SBC Executive Committee.  His term expires this year.  He has served on the MBC nominating committee.  Now folks, in reality, if you were to pick out two entities that are the most powerful entities both in the Southern Baptist Convention and in the Missouri Baptist Convention, it would be the Nominating Committee and the Executive Board -- Nominating Committee and Executive Board.  Those are the two most powerful entities in the Southern Baptist Convention and in the Missouri Baptist Convention.  Roger has served on the SBC Executive Committee, he has served, and is serving right now, on the Nominating Committee, though he is not the chairman. (emphasis ours)

If this is the criteria for being “powerful,” then a brief look at a few SOC leaders may be helpful to show the blatant hypocrisy of Sheppard’s accusations: 

·         SOC leader Tom Willoughby: Willoughby served on the MBC Executive Board, MBC Nominating Committee and the SBC Nominating Committee, all during the 2007 calendar year.  Indeed, based on Sheppard’s criteria, Willoughby is “the most powerful Baptist in Missouri .” 

·         SOC leader Mitch Jackson:  Jackson has served as MBC First Vice President and then as MBC President, during which time, Jackson ’s wife also served on the MBC Executive Board.  Jackson has served on the Baptist Home board and at the 2008 MBC annual meeting, was elected again as MBC Second Vice President as part of the SOC slate.  In 2004, Jackson served on the SBC Committee on Committees (which selects the SBC nominating committee).  However, while Jackson has not served on the MBC Nominating Committee, he did appoint his associate pastor, James Barnhart, to the MBC Nominating Committee while he was serving as MBC President.  In 2008, Barnhart was named chairman of the MBC Nominating Committee by MBC President and SOC activist Gerald Davidson.  Barnhart also served on the SBC Committee on Committees in 2007 among other SBC positions. 

·         SOC leader Wesley Hammond:  In 2007, Hammond served on the MBC Executive Board and as chairman of the MBC Credentials Committee.  In 2008, while still serving on the MBC Executive Board, Hammond was appointed by MBC President Gerald Davidson to serve on the MBC Nominating Committee.    

·         SOC leader Dwight Blankenship:  Blankenship was appointed to serve on the SBC Nominating Committee in 2007 and in 2008 was appointed by MBC President Gerald Davidson to serve on the MBC Nominating Committee.  Davidson appointed Blankenship to serve as chairman of the Nominating Committee for 2009.  Blankenship served on the MBC Foundation and in 2007 served as chairman of the Local Arrangements Committee,

·         SOC leader Wayne Isgriggs:  Isgriggs finished his second term on the MBC Executive Board in 2007.  He was elected to the Executive Board as he finished his term on the MBC Nominating Committee.    

·         SOC leader Kenny Qualls: While Qualls has not served on the MBC or SBC Nominating Committee, during the 2007 calendar year, Qualls’ church had the maximum number allowed serving on MBC boards and agencies.  But Qualls himself has served as MBC First Vice President, as MBC President, as an MBC Associate Executive Director, as chairman of the MBC Executive Director Search Committee (that called Clippard) and on the MBC Legal Task Force.  In 2008, Qualls preached the MBC Pastor’s Conference.  Qualls has also served on the SBC Executive Committee.  Qualls’ wife serves on the board of the MBC Children’s Home. 

·         SOC leader John Marshall:  Marshall has served on the board of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, on the most recent MBC Executive Director Search Committee (appointed by then-MBC president Mike Green) and in 2007, was elected as MBC Second Vice President as part of the SOC slate.  In 2008, he was elected again as First Vice President.  Marshall has publicly acknowledged that he has a “five year plan” as his part of accomplishing the SOC agenda:  One year as MBC Second Vice President, two years as First Vice President and two years as MBC President.[119]  However, during the Project 1000 years, Marshall declined to run as an officer.

Who are the real “Power Brokers?” 

“Tyranny” on the MBC Nominating Committee?

After the election of SOC leader Gerald Davidson in 2007, MBC Nominating Committee chairman Rodney Albert left the state, but not until after the committee met and approved Albert’s sub-committee assignments and chairmen.  After Albert’s departure, Davidson appointed James Barnhart as the new chairman of the Nominating Committee.  Barnhart is associate pastor at Miner Baptist Church , whose senior pastor is SOC leader Mitch Jackson. 

On March 27, 2008, the Nominating Committee met again under the leadership of the new chairman.  However, chairman Barnhart had declared to the committee that he had decided to completely re-configure the committee, stripping the sub-committee chairmen of their appointments and re-naming the Administrative Subcommittee, which deals with the MBC Executive Board.  SOC leader Wesley Hammond, who was also appointed to the Nominating Committee by Davidson to fill a vacancy, was to be Barnhart’s new Administrative Subcommittee chairman.  Under Barnhart’s restructuring plan, the Administrative Subcommittee was also to be reduced in size, from 10 members to six. 

To compound Barnhart’s decision to restructure the committee, he then determined that he would not allow the full Nominating Committee to vote on the re-assignments.  To assure that his decision to restructure would not be overturned, Barnhart declared that the “agenda” for the March 27, 2008 meeting did not include a “business session.”  Thus, when a motion was made to leave the committee chairman and the subcommittee assignments as previously approved by the full committee, Barnhart ruled the motion out of order. 

After an extended period of intense debate, Barnhart stepped aside and appointed SOC leader Wesley Hammond as vice chair, who, according to the Pathway report on the meeting, also resisted the motion to allow the committee to enter into a “business session” in order to vote on the motion. 

After more intense debate, the motion to have a “business session” was finally allowed and the vote to reject Barnhart’s unilateral restructuring plan was 16 to 3 with 3 abstentions.  Committee member Marlowe Scott, who made the motion to leave the subcommittee assignments as previously approved in the November 29, 2007 Nominating Committee meeting, was quoted in the Pathway stating that Barnhart’s behavior was “a classic example of the kind of power politics that those involved in the SOC group have accused others of doing.”[120] 

All of this came on the heels of a 36 minute address to the full nominating committee by Davidson, who used his time to once again attack Roger Moran and the Missouri Baptist Laymen’s Association.  According to the Pathway report on the Nominating Committee meeting, “Davidson used his address to accuse Moran, MBLA research director, of being the source of division among Missouri Baptists.”  Committee member John Garland, was quoted in the Pathway as calling Davidson’s nominating committee speech “uncalled for” and “divisive.”  Stating that it was his opinion that Davidson came to the meeting with “an agenda,” Garland was quoted as stating that Davidson was “pushing SOC.”[121] 

However, the more significant part of the Nominating Committee ordeal was the fact that 12 members of the committee signed a request sent to the Administrative Committee of the MBC Executive Board requesting that Barnhart either be removed as chairman of the committee or be instructed to behave in a responsible manner.  Ultimately, the letter was not dealt with at the April 2008 Executive Board meeting specifically because SOC leader John Marshall declared that it was time to seek peace in the convention.  Thus, it was at the April 2008 meeting of the MBC Executive Board that a motion was made to form a “Peace Committee.” 

On March 6, 2008, about a month prior to the April MBC Executive Board meeting, MBLA held a state-wide meeting to address the political activism and agenda of SOC.  On March 12^th, MBLA announced in a press release that they would begin telling Missouri Baptists “the other side of the story” in a campaign called “Missouri Baptists Still Have a Right to Know.”[122]  Along with the press release, MBLA released a 51 page “resource document” entitled, “Alcohol, Acts 29 and the Missouri Baptist Convention,” countering the public accusations made by then-MBC president Gerald Davidson that the issue of alcohol in MBC life was a “straw man” created by MBLA.  However, when Marshall made his plea for “peace” and the MBC Peace Committee was formed by the Executive Board, MBLA cancelled all activities. 

During the early months of the Peace Committee, there appeared to be a significant degree of progress and success.  However, during the month prior to the MBC annual meeting, the committee’s efforts began to unravel.  At the 2008 MBC annual meeting, the Peace Committee issued a preliminary report to the convention, preceded by opening comments from the chairman of the committee. (The full Peace Committee Report and the Chairman’s opening comments can be viewed at:  www.mbla.org)  

Against the will of the MBLA representatives of the Peace Committee, Bruce McCoy and John Marshall again ran for MBC president and first vice president respectively.  Marshall recruited SOC leader Mitch Jackson to run for second VP and the three were elected during the 2008 MBC annual meeting.  ( Jackson had already served as first vice president and president of the convention.)  A fourth “SOC” candidate for Recording Secretary was nominated but lost to Jamie Hitt, a home schooling mother.      

During his term as MBC president, Davidson appointed a total of 11 new members to the 24 member MBC Nominating Committee and named SOC leader Dwight Blankenship as chairman, who boldly declared at the May 15^th 2007 SOC meeting at First Baptist Church, Harvester that the “purpose” of SOC was “to halt the spread of a legalistic spirit and allow for diversity of opinion on non-essentials.”         

Concluding Thoughts

The “controversy” that was once thought to be nothing more than a “power struggle” in Missouri , has become a significant issue across the SBC.  Southeastern Seminary has become the leader in charting the new course toward a more tolerant view of the “new liberalism” (cultural liberalism) that is infecting the SBC in a significant way.  And tragically, NAMB and Lifeway are following close behind. 

And while this article has only skimmed the surface of all that is happening in SBC life, it is intended to once again sound the alarm.  At the February 2007 meeting of the SBC Executive Committee, MBLA Research Director and then-SBC Executive Committee member Roger Moran sounded the alarm in a speech before the full Committee.  We will end with the full text of that brief speech, which warned SBC leaders in early 2007 of the dangers of both the left and right wings of the emerging church movement.    

One of the most dangerous and deceptive movements to infiltrate the ranks of Southern Baptist life has been the Emerging/Emergent Church Movement.  Not since the stealth tactics of the CBF have we seen a movement operate so successfully below the radar of rank and file Southern Baptists.

Marked by their fascination with alcohol, their commitment to theological ambiguity and their embrace of religious rituals steeped in eastern mysticism, this movement has made its greatest inroads in the area of “church planting.”  And we are now beginning to see the evidence of what’s to come.

In my home state, the Missouri Baptist Convention is on the brink of a near civil war – and at the heart of our struggle has been the blatant dishonesty of those who are determined that Missouri Baptists will embrace this new postmodern approach to ministry.

The most recent evidence of the clash in Missouri came on January 28^th [2007] when on the front page of the Sunday edition of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch there appeared this article, titled: “Beer and the Bible -- It works for one growing St. Louis church but its got Missouri Baptists hopping mad.”

The story is about one of our new churches in St. Louis called the Journey, which received a $200,000 loan from the Missouri Baptist Convention and has what the Post Dispatch called a “beer ministry” in a local downtown bar.  Another so-called ministry is the churches’ “film night,” where secular movies are viewed and discussed – movies that are often rated “R.”

What makes this all the more significant is that the Journey was exalted by the top leadership of the Missouri Baptist Convention as a model for church planting and its pastor is hailed as a modern-day “Caleb.”

And while this may sound like a local church issue or a state convention issue – it is not.  It is a critically important issue facing the entire Southern Baptist Convention.  Let me explain why.

The pastor of the Journey Church is Darrin Patrick and he serves together with Ed Stetzer from the North American Mission Board as co-chair of NAMB’s Young Leaders Task Force.  Interestingly, these two men also serve together on the board of the Acts 29 Church Planting Network (Patrick actually serves as vice president and Stetzer as a board member).

The president of Acts 29 is Mark Driscoll, best known by his peers as “Mark the cussing pastor.”  Driscoll, who claims to be theologically conservative, pastors the non-denominational Mars Hill Church in Seattle , Washington , where this past New Year’s Eve, his church hosted a “Red Hot Bash.”  Those who attended were encouraged to dress “red hot,” and those planning to drink were advised to bring their ID’s.

I mention Driscoll because he is scheduled to appear in chapel at one of our seminaries, and one of our cherished professors from another seminary will be preaching at Driscoll’s church later this year.

These “young leaders” [Patrick, Stetzer and Driscoll] are being hailed as the great church planters in America and through what they call their “Acts 29 boot camp” they are training young church planters across the SBC.  But the question we need to ask is: Exactly what kind of churches are they planting?  Let me give you a glimpse.

The pastor of one particular Acts 29 church plant in the Northwest United States stated in an interview with the San Diego Reader.com that: “Beer is one of our core values. We enjoy it and like to drink it.”  The article continues with an increasingly common argument among young emergents:  “We want to go where people are.  We don’t expect people to come to us.  In [ Pacific Beach ], people are at the bars, parties, and drinking beer, so this is where we go.”

But it actually gets much more serious.  One of our new pro-alcohol emerging church plants in Springfield, Mo., recently offered to those making a contribution to their church a copy of a book by Brian McLaren, the undisputed leader of the far-left wing of the Emerging Church Movement.  McLaren is best known for his statements calling for a 5 to 10 year “moratorium” on any “pronouncements” against homosexuality and his statement rejecting the substitutionary atonement of Christ.  On the website of this new church plant in Missouri , the pastor bashes the name “Christian” stating that he doesn’t want to become “known as a bad tipper, judgmental jerk, or a nationalist warmonger.”  He concludes by stating:

By that token, I believe Jesus would be a terrible Christian. I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if he chose never to show up in church on Sunday, or had a beer at a frat party, or frequented a gay bookstore.  And you know what the Christians would say?  “This man doesn’t honor the Sabbath” or “This man hangs out with sinners.”

In Missouri , most of our people have no idea what emerging or emergent means.  But they do understand the implications of “CBF.”  And what I have found is that the left and right wings of the Emerging Church Movement and the left and right wings of the CBF are near mirrored images of each other.

In fact, leaders within the CBF are now saying that the emerging/emergent movement is a great fit for CBF – and the CBF is currently building relationships with the emergent movement.  CBF is now developing four web pages on their website devoted to the emerging/emergent movement.

One CBF leader, a church planter from Atlanta named Jake Meyers, has noted the best way to describe the emerging church movement is “beer, candles and theologian Soren Kierkegaard.”  (More clearly stated: Beer; ancient and mystical rituals; and an openness to theological liberalism.)

Interestingly, this CBF leader (Jake Meyers) serves on the coordinating group of Emergent Village , the far-left wing of the Emerging Church Movement where Brian McLaren serves as chairman of the board. According to Emergent Village , they have everything from a Texas Baptist pastor to a New England lesbian Episcopal priest.

Also serving on the board of Emergent Village is Chris Seay, an emerging church planter from Houston , Texas who was one of the featured speakers at the Younger Leaders Summit in Nashville , hosted by Lifeway’s Jimmy Draper in 2005 (and in 2006 was led by NAMB’s Ed Stetzer.)

And while I am certainly perplexed as to why a board member of Emergent Village was a featured speaker at our Younger Leaders Summit, I am equally concerned about the particular group of younger leaders we seem to be pursuing for leadership positions in the SBC.

For within this group of young SBC leaders are those who strongly oppose the SBC’s long standing position on alcohol; and those who now want us to move toward embracing the charismatic practice of speaking in tongues; and those who are now telling us that CBF really wasn’t that much of a problem; and those who are now calling for a “revolution” to move the SBC back to what they call the “center.”

Dr. Mohler has stated that: “The Emergent Movement represents a significant challenge to Biblical Christianity.”

And he’s absolutely right, but the greater immediate challenge may be to convince certain SBC leaders to stop lending the credibility of the SBC and its institutions to a movement that is dripping with error – and thus sending out an uncertain sound.

The seriousness of the emerging/emergent movement and the degree to which it has infiltrated the SBC warrants a full and thorough investigation.  And I would argue that the investigation needs to start at the North American Mission Board, and most specifically in the area of church planting.

As we refer this motion to Lifeway, I would ask that the Executive Committee express our deep and serious concern about the emerging/emergent movement and request that Lifeway honor this request for a full and thorough investigation.

Published by the Missouri Baptist Laymen’s Association

April 21, 2009

www.mbla.org