Paige Patterson out as Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary President
- 134 views
[Kevin Miller]Bert Perry wrote:
Can we afford to defer to local church “autonomy” on this, or do we need to follow the New Testament model of outsiders writing letters to churches about these kind of issues?
But weren’t the New Testament authors inspired by God to write the Scriptures? Do we have any outsiders today who are inspired by God to give instruction to churches? If not, then I don’t see how you can make the comparison. I’m not saying things don’t need to be looked at. I’m just not seeing your claim of a New Testament model for it.
No argument that the New Testament authors were under the authority of the Holy Spirit, but if not the example of the New Testament, exactly what example are we to follow? Never mind that while ordinary believers do not speak the very words of God (except as a quote of Scripture), there is an indwelling of the Holy Spirit of every believer, no?
Really, fundamental and evangelical churches need to remember our own heritage of being the people who were outsiders speaking up against the corruption first of Rome, then of Canterbury. We need to recover our own heritage, and quite frankly the very important doctrine of the universal/catholic church.
The objection is simple; not every critic is right. OK, sure. And in the same way, we can all point out a bunch of idiotic things that local churches have done. The solution for both is for believers to actually consult their Bibles and simply ask “you want to stand before God having made that decision?” Now the question doesn’t always get through—great example recently is that Paige Patterson doesn’t seem to think that leering at a teen girl or suppressing an allegation of rape is a big deal—but that messy process is indeed a great way forward.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
http://normangeisler.com/why-firing-paige-patterson-was-a-mistake/
Why Firing Paige Patterson from the Presidency of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary was a Serious Mistake
First of all, it was done at the wrong time. Dr. Patterson was close to retirement age. They should have waited and allowed him to retire honorably and properly.
Second, it was done to the wrong person. He did nothing worthy of being fired. No biblical grounds were given, let alone seriously considered. There are numerous Christian leaders who have committed sins worthy of discipline. Patterson is not one of them; he hasn’t committed any such sins. On the contrary, he has done many things worthy of exaltation. In fact, he is one of the top conservative Christian leaders of our day. Indeed, I have long contended that a bronze statue should be erected in his honor in Nashville. I still do.
Third, it was done the wrong way. It was done too quickly—within hours. This did not give proper time for reflection, interaction, and thoughtful action.
Fourth, it was done on the wrong grounds. The vote was a mere majority of the Trustees present. For a significant event like this it should have been at least a two-thirds or more majority vote.
Fifth, it was done in the wrong spirit. Many who opposed Dr. Patterson were apparently caught up in winds of the #MeToo movement of the day. But no doctrinal or moral charges were even offered, let alone proven by two or more credible witnesses against him. Rather, personal opinions about isolated cases were offered.
Sixth, it was done without proper forethought. Patterson is one of the great evangelical leaders of our day. His departure in this manner will send a strong and wrong signal, namely, one of encouragement to the less-conservative movement in the country.
Much can be said about all of this, but here is something to consider:
Notice how quickly these events proceeded, from the first notification of Patterson’s statements to firing. The subject relates to the broad theme of proper/improper handling/statements regarding a sexual issue. (I’m characterizing this issue in broad terms on purpose in order to make my point.)
Now notice how long it takes a seminary to deal with a professor who teaches doctrinal error. The process takes months of review, questions, more review.
Why the difference? Is perhaps part of the reason due to the emotional & personal nature of sexual issues and the potential legal possibilities? Have sexual issues/sins now taken precedent over doctrinal issues? Make statements about sexual issues which people perceive (and may actually be) unwise and wrong, and you are fired quickly. Deny the historicity of Adam and you keep your job for months.
Just curious.
Wally Morris
Huntington, IN
Don’t assume that simply because I ask questions that you know my position on issues.
So let me ask: So if the government labels certain actions “criminal”, we must report those actions to the government?
Wally Morris
Huntington, IN
Baptist Press update. It’s very fact-focused.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Suppose the gov’t made “conversion therapy” a felony and not reporting someone who practiced conversion therapy also a felony, perhaps using the reason that such practices are “abusive”. Would we obey that law and report someone? If not, on what basis?
I’m well aware of the various laws about handling accusations of abuse. I have had occasion to obey those laws. But where/how would we decide not to obey those laws?
Wally Morris
Huntington, IN
Wally, couple of things come to mind regarding your comments. For starters, failure to comply with fairly simple laws is easier to prove than someone not believing in a literal Adam. Most theologians who compromise on fundamentals tend to hedge their words to make it not too obvious—I’ve even seen that out of John Spong, believe it or not. It’s like trying to nail Jell-o to the wall.
Regarding the example you give, I’m guessing that even the 9th Circus Court is going to have to overturn that the first time a pastor is arrested for that in California, where exactly that is the law. But I would agree that when we’re required to violate God’s Word to comply with the law, then we follow God’s Word, just like Paul didn’t apostasize at the will of Caesar.
And the best way to keep the law correspondent to God’s law is…to follow it when we can, don’t you think? Legislatures are a lot more likely to keep our views in mind if we’re playing by the rules when our consciences ought to allow, no?
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Southern Baptist leader told alleged victim it was ‘good’ she was raped, lawyer says
“I am told he said it was a ‘good thing’ my client had been raped and that her future husband wouldn’t care if she was a virgin or not,” Cochran said of Paige in a statement to the Star-Telegram. “He threatened to sic lawyers on her [mother] for questioning his leadership at the school when she asked why the assailant was allowed on campus.”
https://swbts.edu/news/releases/statement-kevin-ueckert-chairman-board-…
Statement by Kevin Ueckert, Chairman of the Board of Trustees
By Kevin Ueckert on Jun 1, 2018
Based on a number of follow-up questions I have received this week, I am providing this additional statement related to our May 30, 2018 statement. The unanimous decision by the Executive Committee to immediately terminate Dr. Paige Patterson was prayerfully considered and warranted.
We confirmed this week through a student record, made available to me with permission, that an allegation of rape was indeed made by a female student at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in 2003. This information contradicts a statement previously provided by Dr. Patterson in response to a direct question by a Board member regarding the incident referenced in our May 30 statement. The 2003 rape allegation was never reported to local law enforcement. SWBTS will not release the student record to the public without additional appropriate permissions.
In addition, as previously disclosed, a female student at SWBTS reported to Dr. Patterson that she had been raped in 2015. Police were notified of that report. But in connection with that allegation of rape, Dr. Patterson sent an email (the contents of which were shared with the Board on May 22) to the Chief of Campus Security in which Dr. Patterson discussed meeting with the student alone so that he could “break her down” and that he preferred no officials be present. The attitude expressed by Dr. Patterson in that email is antithetical to the core values of our faith and to SWBTS. Moreover, the correlation between what has been reported and also revealed in the student record regarding the 2003 allegation at Southeastern and the contents of this email are undeniable.
Further, SWBTS received a request from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary requesting the return of any documents taken by Dr. Patterson upon his departure from Southeastern. Counsel for SWBTS, Michael Anderson, immediately reached out to counsel for Dr. Patterson, Shelby Sharpe, on May 25 and made inquiry regarding the documents. Mr. Sharpe advised Mr. Anderson that Dr. Patterson only took documents from Southeastern that belonged to him. Yet, independent of that request, following the May 30 Executive Committee meeting, SWBTS located Southeastern documents on the SWBTS campus and began taking steps to preserve them. Mr. Anderson is in contact with George Harvey, counsel for Southeastern, and is working with Mr. Harvey regarding Southeastern’s request for the return of its documents.
The morning after the May 30 Executive Committee meeting, Mr. Sharp provided a few documents he reportedly obtained from Dr. Patterson. The documents clearly dealt with Dr. Patterson’s tenure at Southeastern and should have been previously provided in response to Mr. Anderson’s May 25 request. Shortly after these documents were provided, the wife of Dr. Patterson’s Chief of Staff published a blog and attached these documents without the permission of the students referenced in the documents or appropriate leadership from SEBTS or SWBTS. I believe this was inappropriate and unethical. Regardless, the additional documents do not alter the decision of the Executive Committee.
Ultimately, the decision of the Executive Committee to immediately terminate Dr. Patterson was clear and unanimous.
I also want to reiterate what SWBTS Interim President Dr. Jeffrey Bingham said earlier this week. SWBTS denounces all abusive behavior, any behavior that enables abuse, any failure to protect the abused, and any failure to safeguard those who are vulnerable to abuse.
In this difficult situation, the Executive Committee based its decision on the current performance of the president and did not allow the legacy of Dr. Patterson or the #MeToo pressure to steer the outcome. We did not react; rather, we decisively exercised our responsibility based on the Seminary’s biblically informed core values and integrity.
I join Dr. Bingham in his call for the SWBTS community to join the Body of Christ in praying for healing for all individuals affected by abuse.
This is probably a no-win situation from the board’s point of view. Patterson’s defenders won’t be satisfied; the “epidemic of denial” crowd certainly won’t… and the “never been a leader yet feel quite free to judge the motives of leaders from afar” crowd isn’t even going to slow down. (I’d love to be wrong about this!)
I appreciate the insight here:
In this difficult situation, the Executive Committee based its decision on the current performance of the president and did not allow the legacy of Dr. Patterson or the #MeToo pressure to steer the outcome. We did not react; rather, we decisively exercised our responsibility based on the Seminary’s biblically informed core values and integrity.
In today’s empowered-ignorance milieu, this is very hard to do.
We confirmed this week through a student record, made available to me with permission, that an allegation of rape was indeed made by a female student at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in 2003. …
This is what people with this kind of responsibility are supposed to do: verify facts; draw conclusions … as objectively as possible.
Shortly after these documents were provided, the wife of Dr. Patterson’s Chief of Staff published a blog and attached these documents without the permission of the students referenced in the documents or appropriate leadership from SEBTS or SWBTS. I believe this was inappropriate and unethical.
Yes, inappropriate and unethical. An investigation was underway. In these situations, people need to respect that and let people who have the responsibility do their job. (Then maybe release information afterwards if there are no better avenues of appeal left to try.)
I’m not saying the board made the right decision. I really wouldn’t know. I’m saying us random internet people are not in a position to know, but taking their statements at face value (Golden Rule, here, folks!), they appear to have aimed to do their best.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
….what if the people “with responsibility to do the job” don’t step up and do it, Aaron? Like at BJU, ABWE, SGM, SEBTS, and SWBTS until public outcry shamed them into doing so?
Sorry, this is anything but responsible parties doing their job, as evidenced by the lack of announcements that the people who looked past this nonsense are being fired. It’s more “whoopsie, we just looked past the verbal assault of a victim of forcible rape by the college president, no biggie.” Oopsie, thousands of people watched Patterson vividly describe himself leering at a teenage girl in a sermon, no biggie. Oopsie, thousands of people listened to Patterson praise himself for getting a woman beaten black and blue, with probable concussions and possible broken bones, no biggie.
Printable words do not suffice to describe my view of what went on with Patterson.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Printable words do not suffice to describe my view of what went on with Patterson.
All of this may be absolutely true, Bert, but we do have to keep in mind that the sound clip that was released came out, what, four weeks ago? It’s not responsible or fair to hold the trustees accountable for what they knew if what they knew wasn’t available or public knowledge yet. I don’t know how many trustees there are, but it is entirely possible that some were caught as off guard as you or I.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
Jay, it’s coming out that the BOT knew about the beat-down of the rape victim by May 22. We learned that Patterson got emeritus May 23. Patterson only got fired when confidential SEBTS files were found at SWBTS May 30. So they all knew by a couple of weeks ago.
I guess I can say “OK, then the files were the last straw”, but something rankles that a verbal beat-down of a rape victim wasn’t, especially after a few things spoken in public (the “built” teen girl and the mom with two black eyes) made thousands of people privy to the fact that something wasn’t quite right.
And really, my major comment is a lot more general than the BOT—things thousands of people observed were not acted on. That doesn’t mean that he should have been fired after the black eyes or built comments, but I do think that we need to create a culture where it is safe to say “hey, something is just not right here.” As the one grad student found out, it wasn’t. And he didn’t even know about the files or the rape victims.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
I ask questions simply to explore the principles and assumptions behind what and why people do. That’s all.
As far as joeb’s comments: You are so sarcastic that your posts do not help.
Wally Morris
Huntington, IN
Discussion