Archive for February, 2006
Baptist Press Coverage of Tom Hatley’s Statements
February 16th, 2006 | Comments Off | Posted in » Baptist Issues
Here are the links to today’s Baptist Press coverage of Tom Hatley’s statements regarding the Wade Burleson removal controversy….
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=22668 (basically an interview with Tom over issues)
http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=22669 (contains Tom’s full statement regarding the matter)
After reading these, I really don’t feel I’ve learned much more about the situation, except that the trustees are apparently establishing a new committee to address internal conflict and accountability to each other (note: I thought our trustees’ primary accountability was to the SBC!), but that’s about all the new news I found there.
Conflicting Information…
February 16th, 2006 | Comments Off | Posted in » Baptist Issues
Okay, I’ve taken a bit of time to review both the updated article in the Texan and Wade’s response to events of yesterday (the article and his conversation with Tom Hatley). One thing stands out… conflicting information.
The big difference I see is over “inaccuracies” in the Texan article about internal discipline by the board of trustees.
Wade’s post today (“And Now You Know, The Rest of the Story”) states:
I needed to ask Tom three questions. I did, and I appreciate the clarification I received from him.
(Question 1). Is the statement in Tammi’s article as follows, “IMB trustee chairman Thomas Hatley of Rogers, Ark., told the Southern Baptist TEXAN the committee determined the matter of disciplining a trustee could be handled internally,” a misquote of what you actually said? (Update: 4:30 Central Time February 16th, 2006. The above sentence has been changed by the Texan).
I discovered that Tom did not mean to imply that the Board would discipline me, and that if I read the article carefully, I would notice the sentence was not in quotations. In other words, this was the reporter’s words, not his. In no way was he referrring to me specifically. I thanked Tom for this explanation, and I told him that people reading the article, including Baptist editors nationwide were adding a subtitle that said, “Trustees to seek discipline internally” and made it sound like the Board would seek discipline behind closed doors. I would never agree to that because this public matter now needed to be addressed publicly.
The Texan article (“Executive committee of IMB trustees propose withdrawing motion for SBC to remove Burleson; preferring internal discipline approach”) states:
Burleson claimed that based on a Feb. 15 conversation with Hatley, the TEXAN account first released Feb. 13 was inaccurate in regard to how the board might handle his case internally. Hatley, however, confirmed to the TEXAN that he was quoted accurately, clarifying only that a decision to handle the matter internally was not driven simply by a desire to discipline Burleson.
Interesting, huh? Appears to me that Tom is either being misunderstood by Wade or the Texan (or both), or worse… that he’s telling two different stories. Perhaps just as sinister a thought is that the Texan could be lacking in journalistic integrity (based on the change in the wording of the article by the Texan).
I’ll have to look over the Baptist Press Stories in a bit to find out if any further information clarifying this issue can be found there (I just noticed their current top two stories are in regard to this matter).
Updated Article in the Texan
February 16th, 2006 | Comments Off | Posted in » Baptist Issues
The original article discussing the IMB Trustee Executive Committee’s decision to rescind action to remove Wade Burleson as a trustee has been updated. Here’s the link: Executive committee of IMB trustees propose withdrawing motion for SBC to remove Burleson; preferring internal discipline approach.
From a cursory review, it doesn’t appear that much has changed in the article. When I have a chance to review it further, I’ll add some more comments.
(STILL waiting on Tom Hatley’s official statement on the matter, supposedly forthcoming yet today in the Baptist Press News.)
The Rest of the Story (according to Wade)
February 16th, 2006 | Comments Off | Posted in » Baptist Issues
Wade has posted some more information on his blog (wadeburleson.com) detailing his conversation with Tom Hatley (IMB trustee chairman) in response to yesterday’s news article in the Texan. Apparently, Tom provided clarification for some of the statements in the article.
Highly recommended reading. The most interesting thing to me is that the main reason trustees voted for his removal in January was because there was a concern that censure might not be effective (that Wade would continue to blog even if asked not to do so). Due to deadlines necessary to remove a trustee, if efforts to censure Wade failed, trustees would have had to wait unti 2007 to remove him (which would be their next step).
My interpretation of this? Some of the trustees (unclear how many, given the discrepency in voting numbers from the January vote to remove him) wanted Wade’s blog shut down immediately, but decided to remove him because of the uncertainty of censure’s effectiveness. It seems as if he’s a thorn in their side simply because he provides details of IMB trustee happenings to a far wider audience than they’re comfortable with, spurring grassroots opposition to organize and make their voices heard regarding controversial policies. The move, in essence, seems politically based… just silence the opposition.
Does anyone think I’m off base on this interpretation?
Seems to me that the next logical step by those who disagree with Wade is a policy prohibiting blogging. Such a move would go beyond unpopular, but would it surprise me? Sadly, no.
Anyway, still waiting on Tom Hatley’s formal statement on the matter. Supposed to be out today…
Wade Speaking in Columbia, Missouri…
February 16th, 2006 | 1 Comment | Posted in » Baptist Issues, Upcoming Events
Was doing a bit of web searching this morning, and ran across this article in The Pathway (the newsletter of the Missouri Baptist Convention, which supplanted the Word and Way a couple years back… another controversy altogether). Apparently, Pastor Wade Burleson will be visiting Columbia, Missouri, on February 24th to speak about IMB trustee issues.
Sounds like a great opportunity to get some more information on the issues, especially in light of yesterday’s announcement that the IMB trustee executive committee will be recommending to rescind action to remove Wade as a trustee. Still awaiting an official statement from Tom Hatley (trustee chairman) and a response from Wade.
Wade Will Keep Blogging…
February 15th, 2006 | Comments Off | Posted in » Baptist Issues
Wade Burleson has informed his readers that he will keep blogging about IMB issues. Good news, as he is currently our only source of information about IMB trustee issues outside of official press releases (which usually do not tell the whole story).
He also notes in the article that he has spoke with Tom Hatley (IMB trustee chairman), and that the article in the Texan does contain some things that need clarification. So… don’t get too worked up about it until we see his official statements on the matter (supposedly coming tomorrow).
Will be interesting to see Tom’s statements and any clarifying statements from the Texan…
Nominations…
February 15th, 2006 | Comments Off | Posted in » Baptist Issues
An article by Morris Chapman regarding the nominating process appears on the SBC website. It details how trustees and executive committee members are selected.
Interesting reading, but what’s most interesting to me is the list of names at the bottom, and the asterisks indicating “non-church / denominational-related” individuals (put differently, laypersons). Notice how few there are?
Now, I don’t know if things are as they are simply because pastors are typically more involved in this kind of thing, if laypersons simply aren’t interested in serving, or what… but it is interesting that there are so few laypersons serving (at least in the positions that will be open). If you just looked at that, you’d think you almost had to be a pastor or SBC staffer to serve.
Anyway, food for thought…