;){kind=logo}
Why I Support Bill Wagner for SBC President
Posted by David Rogers in Baptist Life
Jesus said, “From everyone who has been given much, much will be required” (Luke 12:48). Without a doubt, we as Southern Baptists have been entrusted with a great responsibility with respect to the carrying out of the Great Commission.
As individual local congregations, there are many things we are called upon and expected to do well. We must be faithful in the proclamation of the Word, making disciples of the Lord Jesus, and effective and compassionate ministry to the community that surrounds us. We ought to also have a vision and a plan to contribute strategically towards the advance of God’s Kingdom, not only in our Jerusalem, but also our Judea, Samaria, and unto the ends of the earth.
The reason we join together as a Convention, though, is to do better those things jointly that we would not be able to do quite so well individually. This includes especially the work of the IMB, the NAMB, and the six convention-funded seminaries.
I have a strong conviction that it is a mistake to take the values of the world, and its organizations, and superimpose them on the work of the church. Because of that, I am somewhat loath to use the following illustration. However, since I think it helps to communicate the idea I want to get across, I ask you to bear with me.
In the realm of secular politics, we traditionally divide between matters of domestic and foreign policy. At election time, some candidates are considered to be especially qualified on matters of domestic policy, and others more so on matters of foreign policy. In recent years, though, we have seen how matters of foreign policy have become more and more important in the overall scheme of things.
I believe there is a somewhat parallel situation that exists in regard to our work as Southern Baptists. Yes, the various agencies and institutions of the Convention work to support and enhance the ministry of the local churches. But, in a very real way, as a Convention of autonomous congregations, each one is ultimately responsible itself for how it carries out ministry on a local level. Where the role of the Convention really becomes crucial, though, is on a global level.
Following this analogy, I believe it is time for a SBC President with a strong record in “foreign policy.” God has not called us as a Convention to turn inward and focus primarily on our own needs and programs. He has called us to be a light to the world.
In secular foreign policy, there are two ruts into which we can possibly get sidetracked. One is isolationism, and the other is imperialism. The responsible alternative, from my point of view, is that of solidarity and friendly interchange with the world community, under the overarching guiding principles of democracy, freedom, human rights, justice, and peace.
By the same token, there is a danger that we, as Southern Baptists, get so inwardly focused, and out of touch with the realities of the world, that we drift towards a de facto isolationism or imperialism in the way we relate to the Church around the world.
It is for this reason that I believe it is time for an SBC President with career international missionary experience. I believe it is also time for a President who has a good grasp of the complexity and importance of relating in a positive, God-glorifying manner to the broader Body of Christ around the world.
Bill Wagner’s experience uniquely qualifies him in this regard. His track record as a 31-year Southern Baptist foreign missionary, denominational statesman, seminary professor, author, and missiologist speaks for itself.
I wholeheartedly endorse every point of Wagner’s “Contract with Southern Baptists” that he has presented as a “platform” for his candidacy. This “contract” contains a balanced list of critical items that address, following our present analogy, what we might call both “domestic” and “foreign” issues. Two points that stand out to me as especially significant, though, are the following:
- To rebuild relationships with leaders of Baptist Unions and Conventions from other countries of the world.
- To enlarge the tent so that all conservative Southern Baptists will find a home in the S.B.C. Southern Baptists should seek to cross geographical, cultural, racial and theological barriers so that those who desire to win the World to Christ can work together for the aim of World Evangelization.
Lest anyone question whether such is the case, let me make perfectly clear that Bill Wagner is no theological liberal or moderate. In addition to affirming the entirety of the Baptist Faith & Message 2000, and ascribing to the inerrancy of Scripture, he also includes as a key point in his “contract” the following:
- To support the conservative resurgence and to encourage Southern Baptist schools to continue to retain and to teach Biblical basics to their students.
There is certainly much more that could be said about Bill Wagner and his ideas for the SBC. In a lot of ways, perhaps, there is not a big difference between his views on most issues and those of Frank Cox, the other front-runner from among the announced candidates up to this point. This does not stack up to be a race, like many of those during the formative years of the Conservative Resurgence, between “conservatives” and “moderates,” but rather between two (or possibly more) bona fide “conservatives.”
However, for the reasons I outline here, I believe that Wagner’s candidacy ought to be taken very seriously. And, even if he doesn’t end up winning the election, I believe that, as Southern Baptists, we would do well to listen seriously to what he has to say. In secular politics, a candidate who may not be strong on foreign policy will do well to surround him/herself with advisors who do have expertise on these matters.
In Southern Baptist life, Bill Wagner is, without a doubt, one of these people, and a key leader among us. I sincerely hope he does not end up becoming “a lone voice crying in the wilderness.”
Go to: William Wagner for SBC President: Information Website
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
Dear David,
Our Bart Barber got his throat squeezed for his overtly political admissions last week. However, in comparing political confessions, Bart is from Mars, Bill is from Venus.
I received an email from his “campaign manager” several weeks ago wondering if I would like to interview your candidate. SBCToday evidently was sent the same invitation and slid right into place. Then our Brother Les interviewed him as well. I thought two was enough.
But then you too may hail from Venus, David. Making such a close parallel of the SBC President with national presidential campaigns is, in my view, a bit caricatured.
Complete with a “domestic policy” and a “foreign policy”, with the “foreign policy” edging out matters here at home similar to national politics is an analogy you may better have served your candidate to have heeded you own caution: “I am somewhat loath to use the following illustration…”
I don’t know. I am wondering where the choking coalition is, who so vociferously wrapped their fingers around Bart’s throat for playing politics. Let’s see if they show up.
There is little doubt: Dr. Wagner is a fascinating man. Indeed he also has some of the stated qualifications you highlight in your official endorsement. Since it is highly probable, however, others may engage on those qualifications, I would just note a couple of things.
First, I see no intrinsic necessity for, as you state, ‘a SBC President with a strong record in “foreign policy”’ to be elected. Were you speaking of being President of the IMB, perhaps.
Even less do I embrace the reasoning you seem to offer for such being the case:
So, I am supposed to believe that electing a non-missionary is an act of “turn[ing] inward and focus[ing] primarily on our own needs and programs”?
Our good Pastor brother who nominated you last year for 1st VP, if I remember correctly, argued that all the missions money in the world is useless if we did not have church-planters as yourself on the field planting churches. Granted. But that is an axe that slings both ways. All the church planters in the world are useless unless we have missions-money to send them: “How can they go unless they be sent?”
It is for that reason that a man who identifies with the overwhelming majority of grassroots Baptists and their beliefs, embodies sending, champions CP giving and possesses the necessary influence to garner inspiration for 40,000+ churches to continue sending that stands a cut above –in terms of candidacy, mind you; definitively not character–a missionary with missionary experience. Of course, we both know whom I believe to be that person presently. And not because I share Georgia peaches with him, either ;^)
Secondly, the platform Dr. Wagner is espousing appears to be, from my perspective, a much more aggressive role for the President of the SBC than in times past. A “contract” with Southern Baptists? Please. Is Dr. Wagner reminiscing about the Gingrich Republican takeover of the House a decade or so ago?
For my money, we do not need such a strategic, sophisticated plan for the Presidential office. Talking about increasing the volume on the political microphone within the SBC! If this paradigm shift takes place, we will have campaigning on steroids for every future election.
And one can kiss goodbye the standing tradition of a courteous acclamation to a second year term as President. Not a chance. Every year will be election year in the SBC. What a circus we would all enjoy, I’m sure.
Nope: my hope is simple: give me a guy who identifies with the overwhelming majority of grassroots Baptists and their beliefs, is committed to Trustees who possess both integrity and deeply embedded Southern Baptist convictions, embodies sending, champions CP giving and possesses the necessary influence skills and anointed abilities to garner inspiration for 40,000+ churches to continue sending honorable missionaries such as yourself, David, to go to the ends of the earth.
Grace. With that, I am…
Peter
P.S. I do apologize for the lengthy post and will avoid doing so again.
Dear Peter,
While I am often inspired by your prose and command of the English language, you have made a couple of whopper assumptions here yourself. While I have not made up my mind about the election for President(SBC)yet, I do not think so far that your argument sways me as you try here:
“It is for that reason that a man who identifies with the overwhelming majority of grassroots Baptists and their beliefs, embodies sending, champions CP giving and possesses the necessary influence to garner inspiration for 40,000+ churches to continue sending that stands a cut above –in terms of candidacy, mind you; definitively not character–a missionary with missionary experience. Of course, we both know whom I believe to be that person presently. And not because I share Georgia peaches with him, either ;^)”
What are your candidates beliefs, and how do we know that stand with “grass roots” SBC’ers? I dare say that most of our 40,000 churches have never heard of him, do not know him, and most messengers will only make up their mind when they arrive at the Convention. That is a lot of stuff you are packing up for us to chew on – unfortunately I don’t think you can sell any of it.
Of course this also fits with the assumption that David’s candidate does “non of the above” – that is he is not in tune with grassroots SBC’ers, he does not seek Trustees with integrety, blah blah blah. Again, the same problem issues again. I never heard of Dr. Wagner until this year. I’ve read his web site and looked at his bona fides, as well as his platform. But I still don’t know him, and I doubt most messengers will either.
Your candidate has a problem in that while he might have all those things you say he does, he seems to have come with the blessings of the “establishment” which lately at Convention has come under some criticism. Presidents are not anointed, they are elected. That does not mean that your man is not a good man, nor does it mean that he will fail to do a good job if elected, doing all those things you say he will. Not that I want a President with a lot of power either – I’m glad about that – but I want one who will use the influence of the “bully pulpit” to not rest upon the laurels of the status quo, but is willing to be prophetic, not only to the nation, but to us as well. I hope your man is willing to do that – but at this point I do not know.
By the way – I appreciate your long posts. Like you, I really do not know how to be “short and sweet” – verbosity is my middle name. Also I like my ice-cream with some chocolate syrup and a cherry on top in opposition to canned peaches (sorry – I am just funnin ya here brother)
Rob
Peter,
Not a direct quote, but, if I recall correctly Bart’s post, a more or less dynamic equivalent paraphrase: “As long as we’re being political, better off overt than covert.” Not that I am big-time into denominational politics, per se. As a matter of fact, personally, I’ve always had a sort of aversion to that type of thing.
But there are a few issues at stake in this election that do matter, from my limited perspective. And, if my grain of sand through these words here can make a small positive contribution, then why not?
Regarding the “contract,” I personally prefer an election in which the focus is on issues, rather than personalities. Although I have met Dr. Wagner, and know his son Mark, who is an IMB colleague in Western Europe, it is mainly his proposed “contract” that attracts me regarding his candidacy. That is also what sets him apart from other candidates. I wish all the messengers could be aware of the proposed “platform” of the various candidates in denominational elections, and vote knowledgeably, in accordance with their personal convictions.
Also, I see the potential contribution of Bill Wagner as SBC President as distinct from the role of IMB President. Historically, the Executive Committee has represented the SBC in the way we relate to Baptists around the world, through participation in the BWA. Now that we, as Southern Baptists, have withdrawn from the BWA, we are in somewhat of a limbo in regard to our relationships, on an organizational level, with our brothers and sisters around the world.
For some, this is no big deal. We’ve got our own problems to worry about on the “home front” anyway. That attitude is what I call “isolationism.” For others, the other countries of the world are only relevant in the sense that that is where we send our missionaries to evangelize, plant churches, and “plant our Southern Baptist flag.” That attitude is what I call “imperialism.”
As I understand it, a very important aspect of the Great Commission is that of “the whole Church taking the whole Gospel to the whole world.” That is, it is something we do in cooperation and solidarity with others.
And no, I do not think that electing a non-missionary would necessarily be an “act of turn[ing] inward and focus[ing] primarily on our own needs and programs.” At different stages of history, I believe that relative priorities change.
As I understand it, for example, the issues that drove the Conservative Resurgence, having already been largely settled, are not as important today, politically speaking, as they were 15, 20 or 30 years ago. Now, if we were in danger of losing ground on those issues, they would become more crucial once again. But, what is important now, is, with a united doctrinal foundation, how do we make the most strategic impact in the world for the fulfillment of the Great Commission.
Due to various circumstances, our relationships as Southern Baptists with the rest of the Body of Christ around the world, are at a point today in which they require our careful attention. In recent years, we have lost some goodwill and trust with some who have been, or ought to be, our close ministry partners. IMB field workers and administration no doubt have a role to play in building bridges and maintaining good “diplomacy.” But, in the long run, we will be expected to carry out the values passed down to us through the office of the SBC President, committee appointments, and trustee system.
It is in this sense that the positive influence of an SBC President who embodies these values can be felt. Also, the platform (or “bully pulpit,” as Rob calls it) to speak to Southern Baptists, as well as represent us, in a diplomatic sense, in talks with others.
That is not to say that other issues, such as sending missionaries, and “championing” CP giving, are unimportant. However, as Rob observes, I do not see how Dr. Wagner lags behind other candidates on these issues. Also, though I have not chosen to focus in on these particular issues, the other “planks” of Dr. Wagner’s “platform” regarding more “domestic” issues are well worth checking out as well. I am merely pointing out here those particular issues that stand out personally to me.
Rob,
Hey, brother. Thank you for your response. I am humbled that some of the things I write are meaningful to you. Moreover, I’m not surprised I may have exposed my soft underbelly through my assumptions. What is surprising is there were only two of them!
The first seems to be the assumption that Dr. Cox fits the criteria I set up that would make a good President. I concede guilt, I must confess.
But understand, that assumption seems to stand undeniably welded to anyone who names a candidate for office. Very few messengers personally know or are acquainted with either the ministry or the man who is nominated, no matter the public persona.
And, know I realize that thinking Baptists as yourself probably will not “buy the goods” I’m peddling. Fine. Know again: it is not I who will be selling the cheese to the masses. Rather it is Junior Hill.
Will Southern Baptists who are the probable messengers in Indy buy what Brother Hill is peddling? I think they will at least taste it. That’s my view anyway.
My main thrust, Rob, was to contrast the criteria for a suitable President of the SBC. Dr. Wagner does not have to embody the direct opposite as you seem to imply: ‘Of course this also fits with the assumption that David’s candidate does “non of the above”…’
Rather, it may be just which candidate is closer to the criteria, not absolutely lacks it.
Of course, that’s assuming–darn those assumptions!–that one accepts the criteria I mentioned. Which, by the way, is again part of the purpose of my post to David. The sophisticated strategic “Contract with America” political look-a-like is just not my idea of an SBC President. With David, it may be yours.
Finally, I will offer a sort of “Pepsi Challenge”. Take a look at our good Dr. Wagner’s video. Then listen to Frank Cox. Taste them both. If you honestly believe Dr. Wagner is equipped with better mechanisms that could inspire SB Churches to give and give sacrificially to global missions, cooperate together and identify more with grassroots Southern Baptists than Frank Cox, were I you, I’d vote for Dr. Wagner.
Grace to you. With that, I am…
Peter
David,
I appreciate your response. I encourage you to note the response to Rob for I think you both touched on similar aspects of my comment.
I will add that I do not think you appreciate the extreme tones of the political nature of Dr. Wagner’s nomination. Bart mentioned politics being a valid pursuit. He did not imply politics was THE pursuit which I think Dr. Wagner’s platform implies.
Moreover, I once again reiterate that the SBC Presidency does not call for such sophisticated strategies. From my perspective, the office already has enough on its plate without needlessly placing responsibilities on it for which it was never intended.
Grace. With that, I am…
Peter
I find that having an SBC president who was actually involved on the front line of missions as a good thing from all perspectives. Wasn’t missions the reason we have an SBC in the first place?
I prefer that over a mega church pastor who must constantly be concerned with numbers reported of his church membership which seem to change daily.
I can not support Dr. Wagner I do not beleive that the views that he expresses are of that of grass root Southern Baptist. I beleive that if he is elected he will take us backward not forward.
I will also encourage our pastors to not support him.
[...] I publicly endorsed Bill Wagner for president of the SBC, I am convinced that Johnny Hunt will do an excellent job. I am pleased to see that in the [...]