
The original issue can be found at: http://www.baptistpress.com/issue-02/10/2006

DISCLAIMER: Baptist Press should be credited for any reprinted stories that originate with BP.
Suggested credit line: Reprinted from Baptist Press (www.baptistpress.com), news service of the Southern Baptist Convention. 

Please note that Baptist Press periodically carries stories from other sources by permission. Individuals interested in reprinting non-BP stories should contact the entity where the story originated to seek reprint permission.


--------------------------------------------------------------------

South Dakota House passes ban on abortion, challenging court's Roe v. Wade decision
by Michael Foust
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

PIERRE, S.D. (BP)--In a direct challenge to the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, the South Dakota House of Representatives easily passed a bill Feb. 9 that would ban nearly all abortions in the state.

The bill passed by a vote of 47-22 and now goes to the state Senate, where a vote is expected to be tight. Ten of the Senate's 35 members are sponsors. It is not known whether Gov. Mike Rounds, a pro-life Republican, would sign it.

Supporters of the bill -- which has an exception for the mother's life -- hope it leads to the overturning of Roe, the infamous decision that legalized abortion nationwide. Opponents of the bill tried unsuccessfully Feb. 9 to add an amendment making an exception for rape and incest.

If it passes the Senate and is signed into law, a legal challenge almost certainly will follow.

"I honestly believe that this is the time to address this issue," state Rep. Roger W. Hunt, a Republican and the bill's chief House sponsor, said during floor debate.

The Senate sponsor is Democratic state Sen. Julie Bartling.

"I think South Dakota has always been what I call a pro-life state, and I think it's ready to step up and be in the forefront and make some of these first moves," Bartling told Baptist Press. "I would say the majority of South Dakotans would favor a ban on abortions."

The bill would make it a felony for anyone to perform an abortion. The mother would not be charged with a crime. The language of the bill –- named the Women's Health and Human Life Protection Act -- says that "life begins at the time of conception" and that scientific advances since 1973 have proven that the unborn child is indeed life. The bill says the goal is to "fully protect the rights, interests, and health of the pregnant mother, the rights, interest, and life of her unborn child, and the mother's fundamental natural intrinsic right to a relationship with her child." The bill is based on the findings of a task force that studied abortion.

South Dakota's legislature passed similar legislation in 2004, only to see Rounds issue a "style-and-form" veto, sending it back to the legislature for minor changes. Rounds said in '04 that he agreed with the bill's intent, but was fearful that its wording would lead a court to strike down not only the bill but also the state's other restrictions on abortion. The House ageed to Rounds' changes, but the Senate defeated the reworded bill, 18-17, when a senator who previously had supported it switched and voted against it.

But Hunt told BP he believes he has the votes in the Senate to pass the bill and is confident Rounds will sign it. Since that 2004 vote, an election has taken place.

Although other states are considering legislation that would challenge Roe, South Dakota's strong pro-life legislature and pro-life governor make it unique.

"Whether it's because of our legislation or some other &#91;state's&#93; legislation, the goal is to prohibit the killing and the termination of life of all of those unborn children," Hunt told BP.

The bill, though, doesn't have the support of all pro-lifers, some of whom say the Supreme Court isn't ready to overturn Roe. If the bill becomes law and is overturned by the Supreme Court, these pro-lifers say, then the high court's legal precedent for Roe will have been strengthened.

Of the Supreme Court's nine members, five are on record as supporting abortion rights. But one of those five, Justice Anthony Kennedy, voted with the minority in 2000 to uphold Nebraska's ban on partial-birth abortion. It is not known how new Chief Justice John Roberts and new Justice Samuel Alito would vote on a Roe challenge. But Hunt hopes Roberts and Alito will help shape the court. In addition, Hunt notes that Justice John Paul Stevens, who supports Roe, will turn 86 in April and could retire. A challenge to Roe, Hunt said, could take three years to make it to the high court.

"I believe Roberts and Alito will bring some new philosophy to the court, new arguments," Hunt said. "Coupled with those new arguments are going to be the technological and medical advances that we have seen. We &#91;also&#93; know so much more about post-abortion problems &#91;compared to what was known in 1973&#93;."

Speaking during floor debate, Hunt noted that the unborn child's DNA is different from the mother's.

"It is not just some tissue in the mother," he said.

Pro-lifers have taken advantage of ultrasound technology to make great advances in recent years. Particularly helpful has been the 4-D ultrasound, which allows a mother to see her baby moving in the womb. The tiniest features -- such as the sucking of the thumb -- can be seen.

Hunt compared the Roe v. Wade decision to the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that affirmed racial segregation. It was reversed in 1954 by the famous Brown v. Board of Education ruling.

"There would not have been Brown v. Board of Education had someone not decided they wanted to, in essence, have a prior decision of the United States Supreme Court set aside," Hunt told BP. "And so the point to be made is that somebody has to present the issue to the Supreme Court to give them the opportunity to overrule Roe vs. Wade."
--30--


--------------------------------------------------------------------

Global missions gain $1M from record gifts by Fla. Baptists
by Art Toalston
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

EUSTIS, Fla. (BP)--Southern Baptist resources for reaching the world for Christ have been expanded by more than $1 million from record Cooperative Program gifts by Florida Baptists.

“The generosity of Florida Baptists has been absolutely overwhelming,” John Sullivan, executive director-treasurer of the Florida Baptist Convention, said during a Jan. 27 state board of missions meeting at Lake Yale Baptist Conference Center in Eustis.

“We have received $2.2 million in Cooperative Program overages, $3 million in disaster relief, record gifts in special offerings and the highest state mission offering in history &#91;of nearly $1.2 million&#93;,” Sullivan said of Florida Baptists’ stewardship achievements in 2005.

The mission board earmarked $1,016,139 of the CP overage for Southern Baptist national and international missions and ministries, akin to the state convention’s distribution formula for sending gifts from Florida churches to the SBC. Another $100,000 was included to fulfill a commitment by the board to retroactively provide a greater portion of the 2004 CP overage to CP Missions in North America and beyond. Other state conventions over the years also have allocated part of their CP overages to SBC work at home and overseas.

Glen Owens, the Florida convention’s assistant executive director, describing the state’s Baptists as “the most generous people on the face of the earth,” noted, “In a time of unprecedented hurricane activity that has devastated sections of the Gulf Coast region, our churches have continued faithfully giving through the Cooperative Program and other related offerings at record levels.

“Florida Baptists truly believe we can accomplish more in the Kingdom of God by cooperating together,” Owens said. “It seems rather logical to Florida Baptists &#91;that&#93; God has blessed His work in Florida over and above &#91;and thus&#93; we should be a blessing to our cooperating partners over and above.”

Morris H. Chapman, president of the SBC Executive Committee, said, “I praise God for the generosity of Florida Baptists in their giving through the Cooperative Program. The $2.2 million overage in Cooperative Program income is especially noteworthy given the fact that the state endured two hurricanes in 2005.”

Florida Baptists’ giving “reminds me of what the Apostle Paul said about the Macedonian churches: ‘Out of the most severe trial, their overflowing joy and their extreme poverty welled up in rich generosity’ (2 Corinthians 8:2),” Chapman said. “That Macedonian model is a worthy goal for all Southern Baptists living in these days of unprecedented challenge and opportunity. So we are especially grateful for the more than $1 million that Florida Baptists have provided for SBC missions and ministries.”

Chapman added, “Now more than ever, I am convinced that the Cooperative Program is the most efficient and effective funding method for accomplishing the Acts 1:8 mandate to be Christ’s witnesses -- beginning where we are and ultimately reaching to the ends of the earth. Since no one individual or single church can fully realize this mandate alone, our predecessors wisely decided that we can do far more together by pooling our collective resources and strategically distributing them through the Cooperative Program.

“Because of the faithful giving of Southern Baptists, together we are able to launch disaster relief teams to places of desperate need; dispatch medical missionaries to AIDS-ravaged Africa; repair inner-city homes all across America; offer hope to hardened hearts in our nation’s prisons; speak on behalf of righteousness in the halls of government; train, equip and send out armies of pastors, chaplains, ministers and missionaries; start 63 new churches every day; and baptize 1 person every 37 seconds.

“The Cooperative Program enables Southern Baptists to participate in all of this, and much, much more,” Chapman said. “Yet everything we do has the same goal, aim and mission -- to show and share the love of Jesus Christ with every person in every part of the world.

“I pray that all Southern Baptists not only will take pride in what we are able to accomplish through the Cooperative Program, but feel a renewed sense of urgency to give systematically and sacrificially so that together we might do more to obey the Great Commission of our Lord,” Chapman said.

Sullivan described the Cooperative Program as “God-given and mission-driven” in a column in the Florida Baptist Witness newsjournal.

“Is the Cooperative Program all we do in the missionary enterprise? No, but it is the lifeline of our missionary and education ministries,” Sullivan wrote.

“The Great Commission,” he noted, “is the heartbeat of the New Testament. How can we best keep it beating? By taking all of the Gospel, into all of the world, all of the time at the same time,” he wrote in reference to the unified ministry channel Baptists have in the Cooperative Program.

Sullivan noted that the Cooperative Program “begins with the local church” through the budget decisions for the amount of church members’ gifts to be sent to the state or regional convention.

Those conventions retain a portion of the church contributions for their statewide Cooperative Program outreach and they send a percentage on to the SBC for national and international causes. The percentage of distribution is at the discretion of each state or regional convention.

For the Florida Baptist Convention, the Cooperative Program overage will help underwrite missions initiatives in Haiti and Cuba, for example, along with various urban ministries; missions and ministry needs among the state’s 49 Baptist associations; theological education through the Baptist College of Florida; and sanctity of life efforts through the Florida Baptist Children’s Homes. 

Nationally, CP gifts help support the outreach of 5,364 missionaries across North America engaged in evangelism, church planting and other outreach. Last year, the Southern Baptist Disaster Relief network led by the CP-supported North American Mission Board provided the channel by which 100 percent of Southern Baptists’ gifts for disaster relief after Hurricane Katrina could be directly used to meet victims’ needs. CP funds also under gird the SBC’s six seminaries and its Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

Internationally, CP gifts help support 5,074 International Mission Board missionaries, many of whom are focused on unreached people groups in countries closed to traditional missionary work. SBC missionaries also partner with Great Commission groups around the world in evangelism, church planting and other outreach. After the December 2005 tsunami in southern Asia and the Oct. 8 earthquake centered in Pakistan, the CP-supported International Mission Board provided the channel by which 100 percent of Southern Baptists’ gifts for disaster relief could be directly used in meeting victims’ needs.
--30-—
With reporting by Barbara Denman, director of communications for the Florida Baptist Convention.



--------------------------------------------------------------------

FIRST-PERSON: How the Cooperative Program works
by John Sullivan
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (BP)--The Cooperative Program was adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention in 1925. However, I believe the concept was in the mind of W.B. Johnson and Southern Baptists’ founding fathers in 1845 when they wrote that the SBC was designed to organize “a plan for eliciting, combining and directing the energies of the denomination.” The words still appear in the SBC Constitution.

The word “elicit” means “to call forth,” such as in emotions, feelings and responses. I think the founding fathers used the word “combining” because they believed we could accomplish more together than individually because of the common cause of the Great Commission.

Is the Cooperative Program all we do in the missionary enterprise? No, but it is the lifeline of our missionary and education ministries.

In taking a look at how it works, it all begins with the local church. The church adopts a budget. In that budget, the church includes an area for mission expenditures. The mission section usually contains the amount the church will send through the Cooperative Program. Some churches give a percentage of their receipts. Others give a specified amount.

A church’s gift through the Cooperative Program is sent to the state convention office -- not “headquarters.” The church is the headquarters of the Florida Baptist Convention and other state conventions across the country. The state conventions send a portion of the Cooperative Program receipts to the SBC Executive Committee to support denominational causes and missionaries. Approximately 95 percent of what we send to the SBC is distributed to the two mission boards and the six SBC seminaries.

The state convention then keeps a portion of the funds to support statewide ministries. In Florida, the Cooperative Program supports the work of our statewide ministries of missions, church starting, evangelism, migrant ministries, children’s homes, college students, and all that we do as Florida Baptists.

You may be asking, How do we determine what percentage is sent to the SBC and what percentage remains in Florida?

Each November during the Florida Baptist State Convention, messengers from the churches vote on a division of Cooperative Program dollars. This division varies by state. Florida Baptists voted to send 40 percent to the SBC in 2006 and rank near the top in denominational CP giving in both the amount and percentage.

Sixty percent is allocated to Florida Baptist causes, which includes 8.5 percent as priorities: pastoral assistance for mission pastors and church annuity for our Florida Baptist pastors. Also included in the 60 percent is an 11.835 percent designation which is distributed to our institutions and entities: Baptist College of Florida, Florida Baptist Children’s Homes, Florida Baptist Witness and Florida Baptist Financial Services.

The Great Commission is the heartbeat of the New Testament. How can we best keep it beating? By taking all of the Gospel, into all of the world, all of the time at the same time. Toward that end, the Cooperative Program is God-given and mission-driven.
--30—
John Sullivan is executive director-treasurer of the Florida Baptist Convention.


--------------------------------------------------------------------

Prayer in Jesus’ name remains an issue in military chaplaincy
by Ken Walker
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

WASHINGTON (BP)--Efforts are ongoing in Washington to guarantee the right of evangelical chaplains in all branches of the military to pray in Jesus’ name in all facets of their work.

The issue initially came to the forefront last October when U.S. Rep. Walter Jones, R.-N.C., and 68 other members of Congress urged President George Bush to issue an executive order protecting chaplains’ constitutional rights.

At a news conference in mid-December, Jones and three other congressmen unveiled a supporting petition signed by nearly 160,000 citizens.

A week later, 29 prominent evangelical leaders sent a letter asking that President Bush issue the executive order. Signers included Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, and Robert E. Reccord, president of the North American Mission Board.

The mid-December news conference led to a Jan. 19 conference call between Jones and White House domestic policy adviser Claude Allen to discuss the issue.

Although no executive order has been forthcoming, an evangelical chaplains group is pushing for a meeting with a high-ranking U.S. senator to further air their concerns over the rights of evangelical chaplains to pray in accordance with their faith.

“This is going to be a major thrust to see if we can get this fixed,” said Billy Baugham, director of the International Conference of Evangelical Chaplain Endorsers, based in Greenville, S.C. Baugham also serves as director of Associated Gospel Churches, a chaplaincy-endorsing agency for independent churches.

Prohibitions against praying in Jesus’ name have been a longstanding complaint lodged by several dozen current and former chaplains in their lawsuits against the Navy. The plaintiffs include 11 Southern Baptists.

Filed in 1999 and 2000, the cases are still working their way through the federal court system.

The Navy disputes the allegations. In a Jan. 10 Washington Post story, spokesman Lt. William Marks said the Navy has no regulation against praying to Jesus and has always encouraged chaplains to pray according to their faith during worship services.

In settings that are essentially secular in nature, though -- such as a retirement or memorial ceremony attended by personnel of many faiths -- the Navy asks they be inclusive and offer non-sectarian prayers, Marks told the Post. 

“If a chaplain can’t do that, he doesn’t have to,” Marks said. “We won’t force him to.”

Guidelines announced by the Air Force Feb. 9 also call for non-sectarian prayers in secular settings.

However, Baugham insists that the Navy has been restricting evangelicals’ prayers for some time. The Air Force, even while developing its new guidelines, and the Army appear to be following suit, he said.

Baugham noted that chaplain Jonathan Sterzbaugh, who is endorsed by the Associated Gospel Churches, called him from Iraq Jan. 30 to report he had been removed from preaching duties at chapel services.

Sterzbaugh also related that he had been ordered not to speak to the news media after responding to a reporter’s inquiry about the issue, Baugham said, adding, “This is a disgrace.”

The Washington Times reported Jan. 23 that Sterzbaugh said he was asked to modify his prayers for a slain sergeant in late December in Iraq.

Sterzbaugh also told the newspaper that in a speech last May at Fort Drum, N.Y., Army Lt. Col. Phillip Wright told the group that if anyone prayed in Jesus’ name, “I will crunch you.”

In an interview with the Times, Wright denied the statement, saying he had never told chaplains they cannot pray in Jesus’ name.

However, Baugham said two other people who were present at the speech verify Sterzbaugh’s claim.

In addition, Baugham cited a recent memo from Maj. Gen David Hicks, chief of chaplains for the Army, in which Hicks said the definition of pluralism “suggests that we fetter our own needs to enhance the needs of others.”

“Therefore it is incumbent upon professional chaplains to understand the needs of the audience before which they pray,” the memo said. “In public ceremonies the needs of the audience may need to be considered over the needs of the chaplain who stands as a representative of the command.”

Baugham underscored the importance of petitions, letters and other support that has been generated in behalf of evangelical chaplains in recent months.

“The issue is, we have to get to a critical mass,” Baugham said. “When critical mass is reached, these things have an awesome impact because it gives a sense of where the majority of people are. Apparently we’re right at that point because a lot of people are listening to us.”

At this point, it is not clear how the issue will be resolved. However, Baugham said Jones agreed that an executive order wouldn’t be necessary if Allen could persuade Bush to direct Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to order the military to relax its stance.

“We’ll be following up with the White House and continuing the dialogue,” said Kathleen Joyce, press spokesperson for Jones. “This is not settled by any means. Rep. Jones has been hearing from military chaplains for three years. That’s why he feels very passionate about this.”

Baugham said the practice of prohibiting prayers in Jesus’ name reflects a new kind of approach to pluralism. In the past there was a mutual respect for various beliefs, but Baugham said current policy emphasizes not offending anyone.

“If your prayer offends someone, you can’t say it,” Baugham said. “The question is: Whose ox is being gored? No one can gore anybody’s ox, but it’s okay to gore the evangelical ox.”

Attorney Art Schulcz, who represents most of the plaintiffs in the lawsuits against the Navy, said an executive order or other directive could have a definite impact on his clients’ cases.

“It would undermine the Navy’s defense,” Schulcz said. “When &#91;the military&#93; says we want you to pray, chaplains can only pray as a representative of their faith group. They can’t be representatives of the government.”

Preventing evangelicals from praying in Jesus’ name violates the U.S. Constitution’s free exercise and establishment clauses of the First Amendment and is viewpoint discrimination, Schulcz said.

One of the former chaplains involved in the lawsuits against the Navy welcomes the attention generated by the congressional action but called the court delays mind-boggling.

“The government is brutalizing us,” said Jim Weibling, pastor of First Baptist Church of Pearland, Texas, just south of Houston. “There are laws being broken all the way through. It just languishes in the courts and nothing is being done.

“I think it’s absolutely unconscionable. Because it takes so long for anything to happen in the courts, the perpetrators are continuing with their behavior. They’ve been doing it for 20 years and the courts keep turning a blind eye.”
--30--



--------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Force religion guidelines garner both praise & criticism
by Erin Curry Roach
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (BP)--The Air Force’s latest effort to regulate the free exercise of religion within its ranks was met with mixed reaction as some conservatives praised new Air Force guidelines as a step in the right direction while others voiced concern that the guidelines still discourage the use of prayer in Jesus’ name in public settings.

The revised interim guidelines, released Feb. 9, follow a similar set made public last August outlining the basic principles Air Force officials expect all military and civilian airmen to follow concerning the practice of religion. The guidelines were initiated by charges of religious bias at the Air Force Academy that emerged a year ago.

In response to the first interim guidelines, a contingent of 71 representatives and two senators had asked President Bush to issue an executive order protecting the religious freedom of chaplains in the armed services, saying “it is becoming increasingly difficult for Christian chaplains to use the name of Jesus when praying.” But the White House did not act on the issue.

Air Force officials then made changes based on feedback from diverse groups and more careful consideration of the U.S. Constitution, but the most obvious change is the length of the guidelines -- from four pages to one in order to clarify religious respect issues with “leaner, broader verbiage,” according to an Air Force news release.

“The basic intent of the guidelines has not changed from the first version, however, we found, with the assistance of internal and external feedback, that we could more effectively express them,” Capt. David Small, secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs, said. “We’ve also changed language where comments indicated that the original language had been misunderstood.”

Rabbi Arnold Resnicoff, a former naval chaplain who helped draft the revised guidelines, told Jewish Week that the bottom line has not changed -- clergy may not invoke the name of Jesus Christ while offering prayer at official government ceremonies.

The document does, however, say that the Air Force “will respect the rights of chaplains to adhere to the tenets of their religious faiths and they will not be required to participate in religious activities, including public prayer, inconsistent with their faiths,” leaving room for some conservatives to hope that means Christian chaplains will not be required to abandon their practice of calling on the name of Jesus when they pray.

“This is an important move by the Air Force to protect the free speech rights of chaplains to pray according to their faith,” Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, said in response to the guidelines. “We are delighted that the Air Force has clarified this issue and has moved to protect the rights of chaplains in a manner that is both appropriate and constitutional.”

Sekulow added that he believes the guidelines should serve as a model for the other branches of the military. Focus on the Family also applauded the revision.

“If they are applied properly, they will safeguard the free exercise of religion guaranteed to all citizens, both military and civilian,” Tom Minnery, senior vice president of government and public policy, said. “... We hope these guidelines will bring an end to the frontal assault on the Air Force by secularists who would make the military a wasteland of relativism, where robust discussion of faith is impossible.”

Rep. Walter Jones, R.-N.C., who wrote the letter to Bush signed by members of Congress last October, said the new guidelines are a “step in the right direction.”

“I think more progress can be made in assuring that Christian military chaplains can pray in the name of Jesus Christ and all military chaplains can pray according to their faith,” he said, adding that he will work for further changes in the guidelines.

But others were outraged by the revision, including a former Air Force officer who said the military branch essentially fooled evangelicals into thinking improvements were made.

“These new guidelines are a sham, and they’re deceptive,” said Lt. Gordon Klingenschmitt, now a Navy chaplain who went on a hunger strike in front of the White House during the Christmas season to press for changes in the Navy’s policy toward free expression of religion. “They’re not new at all, and they still prohibit prayers ‘in Jesus’ name’ and authorize commanders to exclude chaplains who pray ‘in Jesus’ name’ solely based on the content of their prayers.”

Mikey Weinstein, an Air Force Academy graduate who filed a federal lawsuit last October to halt proselytizing in the Air Force, called the revisions “a terrible disappointment and colossal step backward.”

“The revised guidelines on religion released today by the U.S. Air Force are simply ‘dead on arrival,’” Weinstein said Feb. 9. “They blatantly fail to deal with fundamental issues -- namely the protection of the Constitutional guarantee of the separation of church and state, and protection for junior officers and enlisted airmen from coercive proselytizing and evangelizing by their superiors.

“... The Air Force has clearly demonstrated that it aims to pacify the Religious Right, even if this means turning a cold shoulder to the Constitutional law of the land,” he added. “The revised guidelines would seemingly allow for public prayer at mandatory military formations and, likewise, apparently establish the ‘special’ rights of chaplains to pray in the name of Jesus Christ at these same mandatory military formations. However, these confusing, internally inconsistent new guidelines provide no protection for the rights of those who don't practice a majority faith and those who choose to not worship at all.”

Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League to fight anti-Semitism, also expressed disappointment in the guidelines.

“Taken as a whole, these revisions significantly undermine the much-needed steps the Air Force has already taken to address the religious intolerance at the U.S. Air Force Academy,” Foxman said. “Unfortunately, they reopen the door to the serious and prevalent misconduct which the USAF acknowledged and said it would correct. This is a lost opportunity to establish meaningful guidelines that would serve as a much-needed model not only for the Air Force but for all the branches of military service.”

Lt. Gen. Roger Brady, Air Force deputy chief of staff for personnel, said the interim guidelines are simply a proposal for the Air Force’s permanent policy and more changes could be made.

“This is an open and honest debate, so another interim period is appropriate prior to this &#91;set of guidelines&#93; being made the final version,” he said. “We’ll reach our goal for all Air Force members to understand their responsibilities as airmen and their rights as Americans. When coupled with respect for each other, the freedoms we enjoy strengthen our ability to perform our shared purpose to defend the United States.”
--30--
With reporting by Tom Strode. To view the revised interim guidelines, visit www.af.mil/library/guidelines.pdf. The old interim guidelines released in August can be found at the following Web address for comparison: www.af.mil/library/guidelines2005.pdf. 


--------------------------------------------------------------------

Lincoln’s stance for truth secured his place in history, pastor says
by Erin Curry Roach
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

EULESS, Texas (BP)--Abraham Lincoln is undoubtedly one of history’s most compelling figures, and his life has been studied extensively by thousands of scholars, including a Southern Baptist pastor who at one time owned more than 300 books about the nation’s 16th president.

“In about 1968 I bought a book by Lord Charnwood, a Britisher, on the life of Lincoln in a book sale, and I read the book and was thoroughly intrigued,” Bill Anderson, interim pastor at First Baptist Church in Euless, Texas, told Baptist Press.

Anderson, former pastor of Calvary Baptist Church in Clearwater, Fla., said for years he has limited himself to reading just two Lincoln books per year, or else he’d be tempted to read them all the time.

“I’ve counseled young pastors through the years to pick out one life and master it -- pick out any person wherever, whatever part of the world, and master it. And I chose Lincoln,” Anderson said.

Scholars have debated over the years whether Lincoln was a Christian, and his numerous public references to Scripture indicate he had a certain understanding of God’s Word. Anderson said Lincoln began as more of a deist, “but he came in the end, I believe, to conclusively become a Christian.”

“Lincoln was asked by a nurse in the last several months of his life, as he was visiting some prisoners, ‘Mr. President, are you a Christian?’” Anderson recounted. “And he said, ‘What does that mean?’ and she gave him a clear-cut description: It means to confess your sins to Jesus, to believe that He’s the Savior of the world, to invite Him into your heart personally and to take your life over.

“And he said to her, ‘If that is what it means to be a Christian, I can say that I am certainly a Christian.’”

Lincoln and his wife were regular churchgoers, Anderson said, and, as was the custom in their day, they rented pews at First Presbyterian Church in Springfield, Ill., and Fourth Presbyterian Church in Washington.

“It is not commonly known that he was to have been baptized in the Fourth Presbyterian Church in Washington the Sunday after he was killed,” Anderson noted.

One striking element of Lincoln’s life, Anderson said, was his great knowledge of the Bible.

“It’s really astonishing that a man would have enough time to learn as much of the Bible as he did. One quick reference there: When the &#91;Civil War&#93; was over at Appomattox, his own leaders asked him to give them freedom to go kill &#91;Jefferson&#93; Davis, and he quoted the obscure passage of the Old Testament where it’s the Absolom rebellion period and David is coming back on to his throne and Joab comes and says, ‘Let me kill Absolom,’ and David says, ‘What have I to do with you, you sons of Zeruiah, that you would be adversaries to me today? There shall not any blood be spilled in Israel today because do I not now know that I am the king?’” Anderson said, referring to 2 Samuel 19.

“Well, the biographer says that Lincoln yelled at one of his generals that verse -- ‘What have I to do with you, you sons of Zeruiah, that you’d be adversaries to me today? Do I not know that I am the king today? Why pursue Jefferson Davis when I’m the king?’

“It’s an obscure text, but he knew it well,” Anderson said. 

Also, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address, which was very brief, was “a pure Bible lesson from start to finish,” Anderson said. In it, Lincoln discusses the tragedy of the Civil War and says, “The Almighty has His own purposes,” and reminds the nation that “the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.”

Certainly Lincoln’s life itself was a testament to his faith, Anderson said, referring to a remark by Edwin Stanton, who served as Lincoln’s secretary of war. Stanton loathed Lincoln in the early days, Anderson said, but after the president was assassinated and was laying on a bed in Petersen’s boarding house, Stanton reportedly looked at him and said, “There is the most Christ-like figure who ever lived.”

In most polls, Lincoln would rank as either the first or second greatest American president, Anderson said, with George Washington being the other. Also, the Library of Congress measures the popularity of a person by the number of articles about him and references to him, Anderson said. By that method, the top three most prominent individuals in history are Jesus of Nazareth, William Shakespeare and Abraham Lincoln, he said.

“I think, one, he is the David and Goliath story. Here’s a man who came out of nowhere,” Anderson said. “When he was interviewed about his past, he quoted Thomas Gray’s ‘Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard’ and he said, ‘My past is represented by the short and simple annals of the poor.’ He had no background.

“... Number two, he was formally uneducated. Number three, when he was elected to be president, two out of three Americans believed that slavery was permissible and advisable. He beat some great men in that presidential race, and that’s another fantastic story,” Anderson said, referring to Doris Kearns Goodwin’s bestseller “Team of Rivals,” which he is reading now.

Americans are fascinated by Lincoln too because of his morality, Anderson said.

“He said if slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong. He was not subtle about it,” the pastor said. “In the Lincoln-Douglas debates, he said this sentence: If you believe in slavery, vote for Senator Douglas. If you’re against slavery, vote for me. It’s that clear. I think that’s the thing -- his unaffected and obviously deeply -felt basic morality.”

But recently, some have tried to malign Lincoln’s morality with the charge that he was bisexual, something broadly discussed in the book “The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln” by C.A. Tripp, who makes the case that Lincoln slept in the same bed with his law partner, William Herndon, before he was president. But, Anderson said, that was a common practice in those days when a lack of beds meant men slept with men and strangers with strangers, especially when traveling.

“That charge was never made until recently and I believe it’s preposterous and has no historical basis whatsoever,” Anderson said about the question of Lincoln’s sexuality.

What fascinates Anderson most about Lincoln is what he calls his “native genius.” Before he went to seminary, Anderson was an English teacher in a public school for a year, and he marvels at Lincoln’s mastery of the English language despite hardly any formal training.

“His English, to me, is absolutely remarkable for a man who only went to school all told less than one year,” Anderson said. “I think he was a linguistic genius.”

Anderson gave as an example Lincoln’s famous letter to Lydia Bixby, the woman who lost five sons in the Civil War.

“I feel how weak and fruitless must be any words of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming,” Lincoln wrote. “But I cannot refrain from tendering to you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save. I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours, to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of Freedom.”

That letter is regarded by some to be as close to perfect English as has ever been spoken, Anderson said.

For a person who would like to start with one good book about the life of Abraham Lincoln, Anderson recommended Stephen Oates’ “With Malice Toward None.”

“A country never forgets a man who risks his life for truth. The value of a man’s life is that he’s willing to risk his life for truth,” Anderson said.
--30--



--------------------------------------------------------------------

MARRIAGE DIGEST: Fla. high court appears OK with marriage amendment; Idaho proposal passes state House
by Michael Foust
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (BP)--Having failed to place a state constitutional marriage amendment on the ballot in Florida this year, supporters of such a proposal appear to be gaining momentum in their effort to put it on the ballot in 2008.

The Florida Supreme Court heard oral arguments Feb. 8 in a request by the American Civil Liberties Union to keep the proposed amendment off the '08 ballot. But according to the Associated Press, the justices seemed to disagree with the ACLU's argument that the amendment violates the state Constitution by covering more than one subject. The amendment would ban both "gay marriage" and Vermont-style civil unions.

"I'm having trouble seeing where the single-subject violation is despite your excellent advocacy," Chief Justice Barbara Pariente told the ACLU lawyer, according to AP.

A victory would be significant for amendment supporters, who failed to collect the necessary 611,000 signatures by a Feb. 1 deadline, instead gathering 456,000. On Feb. 8, the group supporting the amendment, Florida4Marriage.org, announced a "155,000 signatures in 155 days" campaign, with the goal of collecting the remainder of the signatures required for qualifying the amendment for 2008.

Mathew Staver, president of the conservative legal group Liberty Counsel, represented Florida4Marriage.org.

"While most initiatives create something new, the Florida Marriage Protection Amendment protects something old," Staver said in a statement. "It does not change existing law. It preserves the status quo. The status quo is marriage. The single purpose of the amendment is to protect marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman."

The amendment would protect the traditional definition of marriage and prevent any state court from legalizing "gay marriage." Massachusetts' highest court issued a ruling in 2003 redefining marriage to include homosexuals. That state has no marriage amendment.

AMENDMENT PASSES IDAHO HOUSE -- The Idaho House of Representatives passed a state constitutional marriage amendment by a vote of 53-17 Feb. 6, sending it to the state Senate, where it fell short of passage last year. A Senate committee approved the amendment by a vote of 5-4 on Feb. 10, according to KTVB-TV in Boise.

The amendment requires the passage of two-thirds of the members in each chamber. If the Senate adopts it, the amendment would go on the November ballot. 

"You cannot make people moral by legislation. But all of our social laws are legislated morality," state Rep. Lawerence Denney, a Republican and amendment supporter, said during floor debate, according to the Idaho Statesman. "Laws against murder and rape, robbery and incest, are all social laws. These laws are boundaries that we as a society say must not be crossed.

"If we don't set boundaries, and let everyone do what is right in their own eyes, we lose our entire structure; we have chaos."

LESBIAN ARMY 'WEDDING' -- In another example of the cultural divide between the U.S. and Europe, a lesbian couple in the British Army has "wed" under the country's new civil partnership law. Although "gay marriage" technically is not legal in Great Britain, the new law provides homosexual couples with the legal benefits of marriage.

It was the first homosexual "wedding" within the British Army, which allows homosexuals to serve openly. United States policy prohibits homosexuals from serving openly in the military.
--30--
For more information about the national debate over "gay marriage," visit <a href="http://www.bpnews.net/samesexmarriage">http://www.bpnews.net/samesexmarriage</a>

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Olympics match Baptist chaplain with Costa Rican skier
by Tim Ellsworth
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

TURIN, Italy (BP)--It might not be as widely known as the Jamaican bobsled team, but the Costa Rican cross-country skiing team has been a fixture at the Winter Olympics for more than two decades.

Steve Sellers, a Southern Baptist pastor in Canada, serves as the coach for the lone member of the ski team, Arturo Kinch.

“We came before the Jamaican bobsled team,” Sellers said. “It goes all the way back to 1980 in the Olympics in Lake Placid. So &#91;Kinch&#93; was two Olympics before the Jamaican bobsled team.”

In addition to his role as Kinch’s coach, Sellers also will serve as a chaplain during the Olympic Games in Turin, Italy. The Games officially begin tonight with the opening ceremony, with athletes from across the world chasing Olympic gold for the next 16 days.

Sellers hopes some of the athletes may encounter God amid their quest for Olympic glory.

He recalls his experience as Olympic chaplain in 1998, when numerous athletes from Eastern European countries stopped by the chapel center every night for a Bible discussion group.

“All these different athletes were there for the Olympics, but a lot of them were really investigating the Lord,” Sellers said. “It was an exciting time. We’re hoping things like that will materialize again, but only God can make that happen.”

Sellers began serving as a chaplain during the Olympics in 1998 in Nagano, Japan. This year he’s one of 10 chaplains who will staff the chapel center, which serves the two Olympic villages.

As chaplain, he’ll lead Bible studies for those who want to attend, listen to those who want to talk and pray with those who have needs.

“You’ve got to watch your evangelistic practices,” Sellers said. “For me, that’s the idea, but you have to be careful in that setting. The organizers don’t want you out there proselytizing.”

Sellers is pastor of Alpine Christian Ministries church in Canmore, Alberta, Canada. For the past 12 years he’s also served as chaplain for the National Sports Center in Calgary, where athletes from around the world come to train and compete.

That included Kinch, who came to Calgary in 2002 for a competition. A mutual friend put Kinch in touch with Sellers, and the two became friends. Kinch asked Sellers to serve as his coach.

The son of a missionary couple in Costa Rica, Kinch moved to Colorado in 1974 to attend Rockmont College, now Colorado Christian University. His main sport was soccer, but he went out for the ski team to get in shape.

“He really took to it,” Sellers said. “He loved it and was really good at it, so he kept it going.”

This year in Turin will mark the fifth Winter Olympics in which Kinch has competed as a cross-country skier.
--30--


--------------------------------------------------------------------

‘Da Vinci Code’ panel anchors 20/20 Collegiate Conference
by Kyle Smith
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

WAKE FOREST, N.C. (BP)—A roundtable discussion of “The Da Vinci Code” highlighted Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary’s second annual 20/20 Collegiate Conference, Feb. 3-4 in Wake Forest, N.C.

More than 1,000 people, ranging from high school and college students to curious visitors, attended conference sessions designed to explore the implications of a Christian worldview amid the difficult questions that can arise on a college campus.

The roundtable discussion, which dealt with issues raised by The Da Vinci Code involving the reliability of Scripture, featured Norman Geisler, CEO and dean of Southern Evangelical Seminary in Matthews, N.C.; Bart Ehrman, chairman of the department of religious studies at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill; Richard Hays, associate professor of New Testament at Duke University’s Divinity School; and Andreas Kostenberger, professor of New Testament at Southeastern.

In addition to the roundtable discussion, the conference featured four plenary sessions taught by Southeastern President Daniel Akin and Geisler; elective seminars taught by members of the Southeastern faculty and local pastors; and a concluding session for students’ questions to Akin and Southeastern professors David Nelson and Bruce Little.

The four panelists, though they did not reach a consensus on many issues -– most notably regarding biblical inerrancy and the role of women in the church -– did agree that The Da Vinci Code, which purports to be historical, does not represent history accurately.

The book makes numerous claims that the panelists described as historically inaccurate and untenable, among them the assertion that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a secret marriage relationship that produced a child. The book also claims that Jesus was not regarded as God until the fourth-century Council of Nicaea.

“We all four, I’m sure, are going to agree that there are egregious errors,” Ehrman said, noting numerous inaccuracies that Brown espouses, such as the claim that the Roman emperor Constantine had a say in the canonization of the New Testament or that 80 gospels were in circulation in the church’s early history.

“The myth perpetrated by The Da Vinci Code may make good storytelling … but it is just that, a myth,” Kostenberger said, adding that someone must “hold Dan Brown accountable for selling fiction as historical fact.”

Hays was even less complimentary of the book. Calling The Da Vinci Code “dreadful literature,” “full of egregious historical errors,” “a teeth-grinding experience” and “deeply confused theologically,” Hays noted that it also has a readily observable anti-Catholic bias.

“It is characterized from start to finish by a virulent anti-Catholicism, a terrible bias against the Catholic church as an institution,” said Hays, a United Methodist. “I find this a deeply morally offensive view on these grounds, and I should make clear that I’m not a Roman Catholic.

“What does the runaway popularity of this novel say about our culture? Everybody loves a conspiracy. Many people in the U.S. would like to believe Christianity is a myth that was cooked up,” Hays said.

Geisler, who admitted he was “dragged kicking and screaming” into reading the novel for the purpose of the roundtable discussion, said The Da Vinci Code, while terribly inaccurate, does raise “the fundamental issue of the historicity of the New Testament.”

“If the New Testament is an authentic book, historically reliable and giving us the truth, then, of course, this book is a bunch of hogwash,” Geisler said. He also noted, “If you can’t trust the New Testament … then you can’t trust anything from ancient history.”

The question of whether Christianity devalues women, however, opened a rift of opinion among the panelists.

“I myself don’t think traditional Christianity has celebrated the feminine,” Ehrman stated. “I absolutely agree that The Da Vinci Code gets most of this wrong, but not because the church has been a liberating experience for women. If men and women are not allowed equal roles, that implies superiority and inferiority.”

Kostenberger disagreed, noting that men and women have equal value and intrinsic worth that is not related to their position because they are made in God’s image. Additionally, sinful abuse in the past does not invalidate Scripture’s complementarian model for male headship, he said.

“It is true that many of the church fathers and the institutional church have devalued the contributions of women, but we should not judge Christianity by these shortcomings, but by what the Bible teaches,” Kostenberger said. He added that “we should stop putting men against women and follow the Apostle Paul’s formula in Ephesians 5 of men loving their wives as Christ loved the church.”

The most contested question for the panelists, however, involved the New Testament from a historical and reliability standpoint. While Kostenberger and Geisler contended strongly for biblical inerrancy, both Hays and Ehrman rejected the concept.

“While the New Testament Gospels do bear witness to the historical record of Jesus, they bring a theological witness, not a historical witness, to record,” Hays stated, adding that the New Testament contains “factual discrepancies that cannot be swept under the rug by any honest reader.”

Ehrman, an agnostic who said he formerly held to inerrancy while a student at Moody Bible College, said he changed his position during his studies at Princeton University, realizing that “God did not want me to throw away my mind.” He urged students to read the New Testament to judge for themselves whether it contains errors.

Geisler, who spoke after Hays, challenged his contention that the New Testament contains factual discrepancies. “I couldn’t disagree more,” Geisler said. “The Gospels might not be history, but they are historical.”

Geisler added that in his many years of study, he had yet to encounter an insoluble contradiction such as Hays and Ehrman were alleging.

To speak of Scripture’s errors, Geisler continued, is to impugn the character of the God who gave them. “To say that there is a mistake in the Gospels is to me a very arrogant thing for human beings to say,” he said. “Let God be found true and every man be found a liar. To say there are errors is to charge God Almighty with any error, and I don’t think anyone wants to do that.”

The 20/20 Conference, Akin said after the sessions, hit its mark in challenging students to know and defend their faith.

“In the 21st century, Christians must be willing to do some good, hard thinking,” the seminary president said. “We cannot be shallow in our faith. Both with our heart and our mind we need to know what and why we believe.”

Through the 20/20 Conference, Akin said, “I believe we are equipping a new generation of young champions for Christ who will be prepared to engage the culture with courage and competence.”

Many of the students in attendance, like Megan McConnell, concurred that the 20/20 Conference was a beneficial experience.

“I came to 20/20 because I go to Providence Baptist Church &#91;in Raleigh&#93; and they strongly suggested that we come to get a better idea of a biblical worldview and to get a lot of truth explained,” said McConnell, a 22-year-old North Carolina State University student. “I think a really important thing that &#91;moderator David Nelson, an SEBTS theology faculty member&#93; said at the end was that you learn that you have a lot left to learn. So I definitely have realized that there’s a lot out there and a lot of things to be examined and to continue learning.”

McConnell said that she thought The Da Vinci Code discussion will be helpful in giving her opportunities to discuss her faith with those who have read the book and have questions about its content.

Likewise, Clark Leonard, a 19-year-old N.C. State student, said he encounters people with a different worldview on his campus every day.

“I work at the newspaper, so just hearing people talk -– there’s a lot of stuff that you can tell is not from the same worldview,” said Leonard, who added that he hopes that what he learned at the conference will be useful in relating to these people.
--30--



--------------------------------------------------------------------

FIRST-PERSON: Originalism vs. modernism
by Kelly Boggs
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

ALEXANDRIA, La. (BP)--According to an Associated Press report, it seems that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer frequently makes decisions about the constitutionality of a law based on criteria that is subjective and speculative.

“I tend to emphasize purpose and consequences,” Breyer said Feb. 6 during a speech given at the University of Chicago Law School. “Others emphasize language and a more literal reading of the text, history and tradition -– believing that those help you reach a more objective answer.” 

Appointed to the high court in 1994 by President Clinton, Breyer used two 2005 decisions that involved the Ten Commandments to help illustrate his judicial philosophy. 

Breyer said he decided a Ten Commandments display in two Kentucky courthouses was unconstitutional because he believed they would lead to religious conflict, AP said. But he found that removing a Ten Commandments display that had been on the grounds of the Texas State Capital since the early 1960s would not cause conflict; thus, he ruled it constitutional.

Nowhere in the speech did Breyer indicate how he came to his conclusions regarding the possible consequences of the Kentucky or Texas cases. Neither did the justice offer any insight into the process he utilizes in determining the purpose or possible outcomes of certain laws. 

Using Breyer’s method of judicial reasoning, one could conclude that he chose not to divulge the details of his “process” because to do so would show the utter subjectivity of the decisions. And further, the consequences of doing so could result in renewed ridicule and criticism of said decisions. 

One insight that can be gleaned from Breyer’s address is that there are two clear and distinct views when it comes to applying the Constitution to our current situation. 

One view, as Breyer mentioned, focuses on the original meaning of the words used in the Constitution. Known as originalism or constructionism, this philosophy also considers the context in which the Constitution was drafted as well as decisions rendered by previous originalists/constructionists jurists. 

Originalism/contructionism views the Constitution as an anchor to which the United States government and society are securely tethered. Hence, it was designed to not only withstand, but also to protect against, the fickle winds of cultural trends.   

Those that hold the view of Justice Breyer are known as modernists or instrumentalists. They believe the Constitution is a living document that matures and develops along with society. Modernists/instrumentalists interpret the Constitution as if it were being ratified today.

In the modernist/instrumentalist view, the Constitution meant one thing in 1882, but it means something very different in 2006. 

Rather than an anchor that holds our nation secure, in the philosophy of the modernist/instrumentalist, the Constitution is nothing more than an inflatable swimming pool float that is blown about by the changing winds of culture. 

The results of the subjective, speculative jurisprudence practiced by justices like Breyer are schizophrenic decisions like the ones handed down in the Ten Commandment cases in Kentucky and Texas.  

Originalists/constructionists believe the framers of the U.S. Constitution wrote down what they meant and they meant what they wrote. 

According to originalists/constructionists, the framers understood that culture would change and society would shift. That is precisely why they included a provision that would enable the Constitution to be amended when deemed necessary. This procedure for change is articulated in Article V of the Constitution.

When a justice like Breyer is contemplating a particular case, he or she subjectively ponders what the authors of the Constitution might have written about a specific practice if they were alive today. They somehow believe they can actually read the minds of men who have been dead for almost two centuries. 

Further, those who share Breyer’s philosophy also attempt to predict the possible consequences of a particular law. Whether or not a practice is addressed in the Constitution is irrelevant. However, speculation on the possible outcome of a certain statute is germane. 

So, by some sort of judicial divination, justices like Breyer act based on what they believe the authors of the Constitution might possibly think today and what could possibly occur if a law is struck down or upheld. 

It seems that those who share Breyer’s philosophy place more faith in their subjective ability to read the minds of dead people and speculations about the future than they do in the actual time-tested Constitution of the United States.   
--30--
Boggs is editor of the Baptist Message newspaper in Louisiana. 


--------------------------------------------------------------------

Dallas pastor Mac Brunson may leave historic pastorate; Fla. church to consider him as successor to Jerry Vines
by James A. Smith Sr., Florida Baptist Witness
Date: February 10, 2006 - Friday

POSTED 02/13/06

JACKSONVILLE (BP)--Members of First Baptist Church of Jacksonville will vote on a new pastor for the first time in more than 65 years Feb. 19 when "Mac" Brunson, pastor of First Baptist Church of Dallas, will preach in view of a call, the Jacksonville congregation’s pulpit committee chairman announced Feb. 12.

The announcement comes only five days after Jerry Vines –- pastor of First Baptist Jacksonville for more than 23 years -– preached his final sermon to the congregation, which has been led by a series of co-pastors, starting with Homer Lindsay Sr., and continuing with Homer Lindsay Jr. and Vines.

Brunson, 48, has been senior pastor of First Baptist Dallas since 1999, and also serves as chancellor of the church’s Criswell College. He made announcements about the call of the Jacksonville church in each of the church’s three morning worship services Feb. 12. 

Brunson expressed “great grief” that “the press and certain people have robbed me of a sacred obligation I have of talking to my congregation.” 

Speaking to his congregation about the initial reports based on rumor, Brunson said, “That’s the press. That’s the mouth of people. You’re going to have that ‘til Jesus comes and then Jesus is going to clear that up,” Brunson stated in the final morning service Sunday.

“Instead of grieving about the press or gossips,” Brunson asked his congregation to turn their attention to John 21 to discover that God “has a plan or purpose for your life individually, my life personally, and this congregation collectively. It centers around two words -– follow me.”

Brunson told the Dallas congregation that he had declined an offer in 2004 to become co-pastor of a prominent church, without naming the church, and then explained that when the First Baptist Jacksonville pulpit committee contacted him, he initially declined to be considered, but began reconsidering later in 2005 because of the persistence of the committee. He decided he would not make a decision until after Christmas.

During a trip to the Holy Land, Brunson said he became convinced that God was leading him to Jacksonville. While traveling at night on the back of a camel up Mount Sinai, Brunson said he prayed for two hours that the God who spoke to Moses through a burning bush would offer him so much as a matchstick of light to direct his path.

“There were these two great congregations, the convention looking on and watching and I’ve got my family. I’ve got to know what your will is for my life,” Brunson said he told God. “Some of you folks think I’ve been plotting and planning this for the last five years –- that it’s some great devious scheme of some kind. The fact is you’re just mistaken. You’re looking at a man who has wrestled and struggled with this and sought godly wisdom, godly counsel.”

Brunson was pastor of Green Street Baptist Church in High Point, N.C., from 1992-1999, and served previously in churches in Virginia and South Carolina. He was president of the Southern Baptist Pastors’ Conference in 2003 and president of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina from 1997-1999.

He was one of the featured speakers at this year’s Pastors’ Conference at First Baptist Jacksonville, and Vines called him out of the audience to pray at the beginning of the Feb. 7 service in which Vines preached his last sermon. While never mentioning any future plans, some viewed the act as an implicit signal of Brunson’s future call to Jacksonville after months of speculation in Florida and Texas that he would be Vines’ successor.

“These are exciting times in our church and next Sunday is going to be an historical day in the life of the First Baptist Church of Jacksonville,” Judson Whorton, chairman of the pulpit committee, told the congregation. “This will be the first time that our members will have the opportunity to vote on a new pastor, and this has not been done in more than 65 years. So it truly will be historical.”

Whorton told the congregation the Dallas pastor would be “preaching in view of a call” in both morning and evening services and the church would hold a special business meeting following the morning service to vote on him.

“We want you to be much in prayer for that service, we want you to invite people and we want you to be here,” he said.

The recommendation of Brunson had the unanimous approval of the pulpit committee, according to a statement posted Feb. 12 to the Jacksonville church’s website.

No timetable was given for when Brunson would begin his ministry in Jacksonville, although Rodney Brooks, assistant pastor for worship, followed Whorton’s announcement by telling the congregation: “From here until the time the Lord calls our new pastor … we have some wonderful Bible preachers and teachers lined up for us every Sunday.” Brooks named some of the guest preachers –- O.S. Hawkins, Paige Patterson, Jimmy Scroggins, Anthony George and David Allen.

“Dr. Brunson is a terrific preacher, and we hate to lose him,” longtime First Baptist Dallas leader Jack Pogue told the Fort Worth Star Telegram Feb. 11. “If they like good preaching in Jacksonville, they have picked a wonderful man for the job.”

Brunson and his wife, Debbie, have three children. He is a graduate of Furman University and Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
--30--
--With additional reporting by Tammi Ledbetter of The Southern Baptist Texan.


