I want to know JESUS About the SBC Contact  
   
 
 Information and Inspiration on Issues of Importance to Baptists
Baptist2Baptist
Sixth and Final Report of the SBC Funding Study
The Fifth and Final Report of the SBC
Stand For Marriage
Final Report of Ad Hoc CP Committee
Final Report of Ad Hoc CP Committee (Appendices)
Cooperative Program Advance Plan
Fourth Report of the SBC Funding Study Committee
Review of NOBTS's Sole Membership Charter Amend.
Response to reservations about sole membership
Reservations Concerning a Charter Amendment Prop.
Sole Membership - A Florida Laymanís Perspecti
A Letter to Dr. Denton Lotz
Letter from Albert W. Wardin
The Relation of the SBC to its Entities
SBC Funding Study - State of Giving
What is Sole Membership?
Sole Membership
Letter to Missouri Churches
Questions and Answers
Behind the Scenes at the SBC
Response by Morris H. Chapman to the BGCT
Does It Matter What Missionaries Believe?
Letter to the Baptist Standard
On Facts and Fallacies
Letter by SBC EC President to Dr. James L. Hill
A View from the Other Side
Carter's rift with SBC not a new development
SBTS Response to BGCT Seminary Study Committee
Response to BGCT Seminary Study Committee Report
SBTS Response to BGCT Seminary Study Committee
Exec. Comm. Interacts with BGCT Funding Proposal
The Pastor's Point of View on the BGCT
Feasibility Study for Name Change
Report of the SBC Peace Committee
Doctrine, Cooperation, and Association
Report to the Fellowship of Deacons
Too High a View of Scripture?
The Truth about the SBC and Texas
Christ, The Bible, and Human Experience
Bibliolatry ó A Fraudulent Accusation
BFM - Still Thoroughly Baptist!
Texas First, Texas Only - Not the Spirit
Anti-SBC Leaders Threaten Cooperative Program
Southern Baptists and Women Pastors
The Root of the SBC Controversy
Your Church Reaching the World for Christ
Together We're Carrying Out the Great Commission
Doctrinal integrity paramount for Serminary
Have Baptists replaced Jesus with a book?
Why theology matters for the Great Commission task
A survey of the 2000 BFM
Baptists, the Bible and confessions
Southern Seminary and the Abstract of Principles
An Open Letter to Southern Baptists
A Statement About the Baptist Faith & Message
An Example of the Need to Change The BFM
Incredible Vanishing Corporations
Committee on Cooperation - Report and Findings
An Open Letter from Dr. Allen to Dr. Wade
Why Cooperate?
The Southern Baptist Convention is Alive and Well
Letter by SBCEC President to TX Church Leaders
  Home > Reports, Articles & Papers
Selected Quote

"There should be an 'Abstract of Principles', or careful statement of theological belief, which every professor in such an institution must sign when inaugurated, so as to guard against the rise of erroneous and injurious instruction in such a seat of sacred learning."

James P. Boyce
from "Three Changes in
Theological Institutions"
- summarized by John Broadus, 1856



Response by Morris H. Chapman to the BGCT Executive Board Resolution of February 26, 2002
by Morris H. Chapman
March 1, 2002

A Letter to Charles R. Wade, Executive Director
Baptist General Convention of Texas

March 1, 2002

Dr. Charles R. Wade, Executive Director
Baptist General Convention Of Texas
333 N. Washington
Dallas, TX 75246-1798

Dear Charles:

During its February 26, 2002, meeting, the BGCT Executive Board passed a resolution urging Southern Baptist Convention leaders to "cease and desist from seeking to undermine the mission endeavors of state conventions in general and the Baptist General Convention of Texas in particular." It expressed "dismay and offense," and further stated that I had attempted to "persuade Baptist churches in Texas to redirect Cooperative Program giving away from the BGCT budget."

Though I certainly wish to speak fraternally, I am compelled to speak frankly as well. I believe you have misconstrued both my statements and my intent in the matter addressed. We are all aware that the letter I sent was not written in a vacuum - it was a direct response to actions of the BGCT we strongly believe to be adverse to the interests of the SBC.

I have consistently urged that we should continue to cooperate according to historic principles. The Executive Committee's position is that all churches should be encouraged to give undesignated Cooperative Program offerings through the state convention. We have resisted creating any other track for giving because we believe it harms the idea of the Cooperative Program and breaks faith with our state convention partners. Of course, we believe it is also a breach of faith for state conventions to identify as Cooperative Program gifts those contributions that are not to be distributed exclusively to the SBC and state convention budgets. I have steadfastly advocated for Southern Baptists staying with the traditional Cooperative Program giving method and remaining firm partners with the thousands of Southern Baptist churches in all fifty states who are committed to Cooperative Program missions. The Southern Baptist Convention has never suggested that Southern Baptist churches in Texas should not support both the SBC and their state convention. On the other hand, we have long been aware that anti-SBC persons in Texas, including many of your elected leaders, have openly discouraged support for the SBC. We have repeatedly stated for the record that this threatens the long-standing partnership between the SBC and the BGCT.

Charles, you commend the Texas WMU for urging the "SBC to refrain from seeking to directly influence our Texas Baptist Churches in their decisions regarding the giving of funds." Frankly, I think that statement may capture the essence of the problem to some degree. The churches are not possessions of the BGCT, or the SBC, or any other extra-church body.

As recently as last fall, I plainly restated that if Southern Baptist churches in Texas were dissuaded from supporting the SBC portion of the Cooperative Program or denied a straightforward vehicle for SBC mission support, then the Southern Baptist Convention would be forced to find ways to partner with those churches.

The churches in Texas apparently do not want the separation from the SBC that some BGCT leaders do. They demonstrated by their giving choices last year that they intended to be supportive of world missions and ministries through the SBC. Judging by the options they chose, most apparently objected to the BGCT budget formula, which they, and we, judge to have anti-SBC features. In the face of their demonstrated loyalty, your only response was to make it even more difficult for them to be supportive of SBC causes, requiring either that they give by default to the BGCT preferred budget, which retains almost 74% of the receipts from the churches for the BGCT, and excludes a number of SBC ministry entities, or write in their own division percentages.

My purpose in writing the letter about which your resolution was drafted was to point out that the remittance form designed by the BGCT, which only mentions the SBC as a special missions offering option, was, in effect, influencing churches to greatly diminish support of the SBC. You should not be surprised that the churches who were forced to check the "other" box, but wished to give to the Cooperative Program as in the past, were encouraged to write in a division amount that fully supported the work of the SBC.

If the churches give through the Baptist General Convention of Texas and select the "BGCT Cooperative Giving Budget" on the remittance form, they would severely limit their gifts to SBC ministries. Therefore, if they desire to fully support SBC seminaries, mission boards, and other work as they have in past decades, they had to direct their gifts utilizing the "Other" option. The illustration used in the printed piece was of a 50%-50% division. We could have chosen any division as an illustration. We have been happy enough with the 67%-33% division. No one can tell individual Southern Baptist churches how to give their money. But we can encourage the churches in a particular direction, precisely as you do in the remittance form with the parenthetical statement: We encourage a contribution of at least 67% to the BGCT.

It has ever been our desire to have a trust-based, traditional partnership in the Cooperative Program with the BGCT, and we have expressed this to state convention leaders. That is still our desire. While we do not own the Southern Baptist churches in Texas, or in any other part of the country, we do partner with them, and wish that partnership to be fruitful for the cause of Christ.

I appeal to you once again for a return to the traditional and mutually supportive relationship between the SBC and the BGCT that has prevailed until recent times.

Sincerely yours in Christ,
Morris H. Chapman

Back to Top of PageBack to Top
Print PagePrinter Friendly version

 
Copyright © 1999-2014, Southern Baptist Convention.
All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use
Website Comments?