Voddie Baucham Joins Mike Huckabee, Charles Stanley, and Others on Steering Council of Conservative Baptist Network

Ironic that a member of the Conservative Baptist Network’s Steering Committee is Charles Stanley, who continued to pastor a church after his divorce. Maybe not so conservative.

Is a pastor no longer a “one woman kind of man” if his wife divorces him and he remains single?

Much more complicated than that. So many questions to answer in those situations. Additionally: Stanley promised that if he ever became divorced, he would resign. When it happened, he suddenly decided, with his church’s approval, to continue as pastor. Ethical Problems. Conservative Baptist Network not so conservative.

Conservative Baptist Network not so conservative.

That issue alone wouldn’t make the unconservative. There are plenty of conservatives who believe that in some cases a divorced man can still be a pastor.

I would question the conservative credentials of someone who believed Stanley’s remaining a pastor after his divorce is ethically honorable, when he explicitly stated that if he ever divorced, then he would resign. He used his church as the excuse when he asked them if he should remain as pastor, when of course they will react emotionally to the question. The issue is not whether a divorced man may become a pastor. The issue is whether a pastor who divorces should remain a pastor. I question the conservative consistency of the CBN because of Stanley being on their Steering Committee.

Wally, that seems like a very inadequate basis on which to question someone’s conservative credentials. But that’s not even what you did. You essentially claimed that the Conservative Baptist Network’s Steering Committee wasn’t conservative because of Stanley’s presence. There is simply no basis for that that I can see. Is a whole committee or organization not conservative because one member did something that might be questionable? I don’t think that is a fair standard. The committee might not be conservative, but this isn’t the reason.

The distinction between a divorced pastor and a pastor that divorces is slicing it pretty thin. But the beautiful thing about being Baptist is that if the church approves, they can call who ever they want as pastor, even you or me. Perhaps you have never changed your mind on something but some of us have. That doesn’t necessarily indicate a lack of ethics. It may indicate any number of things. I think we should stay out of it.

When evaluating a group, you start somewhere. This is as good a place as any. I would love to know what the other members of the Steering Committee REALLY think about Stanley’s divorce. Stanley’s divorce is more than “questionable”.

I suspect many, including Charles himself, see the divorce through a different lens, that his wife abandoned him. So they feel justified in continuing ministry.

When evaluating a group, you start somewhere. This is as good a place as any. I would love to know what the other members of the Steering Committee REALLY think about Stanley’s divorce. Stanley’s divorce is more than “questionable”.

Why is the marital status of one person “as good a place as any” to start evaluating the conservative-ness of a group? You actually have to make that argument. You can’t impute the actions of one to the views of all. I am sure you are part of a group somewhere and yet would not want to be defined by the actions of a single person in that group. And I am sure the groups you are a part of feel the same way about you. If you want to argue that Stanley’s presence on this committee someone how make them less conservative than they would be otherwise due to his divorce, have at it. But actually make the argument. Don’t just throw accusations into the wind.

I have no desire to defend Stanley or this committee. I don’t really care. Personally, I think Andy was right. He should have resigned; the church would have likely begged him to stay. But we must be better about arguments.