I returned from several days of travel on my annual "Texas Tour" that I take each Fall to find two press releases mentioning my name. A discussion took place between Charles Wade and Morris Chapman about having several leaders from the Southern Baptist Convention and Baptist General Convention of Texas meet to discuss differences.

Baptist Press, the official news agency of the SBC, reported that "for the second time in two months, leaders of the BGCT have rejected an invitation to meet with leaders of the SBC to reconcile differences between the two Baptist bodies."

As is my nature, I would like to take a moment to tell the truth since Baptist Press prints propaganda. After setting the record straight, I will propose a plan of reconciliation in which I can be happy to participate.

Debate or Meeting?

First the truth. Ken Hemphill, president of Southwestern Seminary and others invited Charles Wade, Jim Denison and me to a forum at Southwestern campus September 21 to "debate" Al Mohler, Paige Patterson and Jimmy Draper on the revised 2000 Baptist Faith and Message statement. Yes, we did decline.

We declined for several reasons. Since Wade was scheduled to be in Spain on that day, appearing without him would not have been appropriate for Jim and me. Also, the time to debate the 2000 BF&M was before they passed it, not after. Also, to meet on the campus of SWBTS, now a fundamentalist-led institution, would be like George Bush agreeing to debate Al Gore at the Democratic National Convention (or vice versa).

Another problem was they mailed my invitation to an Abilene, Texas, address, thus creating a very short response time. I learned of the invitation after Ken Hemphill's office called to ask my attendance. My secretary told them we did not know anything about it. Then they faxed my invitation to me with the Abilene address affixed. I suppose they did not know the TBC address.

Reconciliation not mentioned

The letter did not mention reconciliation. It emphasized that we would each speak followed by rebuttal from others. Sounds like a debate to me.

Wade tried to put together a meeting with Chapman, president of the SBC Executive Committee, and other SBC leaders on Oct. 19. When he asked me - along with others about a meeting, I declined. I told Wade that such a meeting would be counter-productive at this point. Problems between Texas Baptists and the SBC were 20 years in the making. They were not going to solve them by a meeting or a series of meetings. I stand by that statement and would now like to offer a "plan of reconciliation."

I would be happy to meet with Chapman, Patterson, Mohler, Draper and any other SBC leaders in October 2002. I will readily book the date.

"That is two years from now," you say? Yes, that is right. I will be happy to meet with SBC leadership in two years. Five would be better. It gives them time to prove they are serious about reconciliation. I will not meet with them before that because actions and deeds build trust and not words. There is nothing to discuss with SBC leaders until they prove they are sincere about reconciliation.

Why do I feel this way?

I feel this way because the problems between the SBC and Texas Baptists (and all traditional Baptists) are not the result of actions taken in the past few months. Since the fundamentalist takeover (or the so-called conservative resurgence) happened, 20 years of actions and words caused problems. I disagree with present SBC leaders. They successfully rode to power on lies.

Pressler told a Houston television station December 4, 1986: "We have a number of our institutions that were completely devoid of people who believed traditional Christian beliefs."

I feel this way because in 1999 when the BGCT affirmed the 1963 BF&M, SBC leaders did not affirm our right to interpret scripture. They did not thank us for $40 million Texas Baptist churches sent the SBC. Patterson stated:

"I am grateful that the BGCT leadership has made crystal clear for the sake of Texas Baptist churches where they stand on family and church issues. Now it is up to the churches to decide with whom they agree - with a liberal, culturally acceptable view of family and church, or with a Christ-honoring, Bible-believing perspective."

Richard Land said: "Let it be clearly understood that Dr. Glazener and those who support him in the intent of the BGCT's motion have a disagreement with the apostle Paul, not merely with the Southern Baptist Convention. As for me and my house, we are gong to stick with the Apostle Paul."

R. Albert Mohler, Jr. said: "The motion adopted by the BGCT is an intentional rejection of a clear teaching of the Bible. Their problem is not with the SBC. It's with the Apostle Paul."

I feel this way because trust is not built on words but on actions. Any injured party does not take the word of the abuser, but says, "show me you have changed and I will believe you."

Only a fool believes the words, "trust me, I have changed." Trust is built over time and kept promises, not words of reconciliation.

None of those statements mention reconciliation or express an attitude inclined toward reconciliation.

I feel this way because just this Summer during the SBC annual meeting, Chapman opposed a motion made by a messenger to the SBC to create a committee "to work toward reconciliation and restoration among Baptist groups." In speaking against such an attempt at reconciliation, Chapman said he saw no need for further dialogue because the majority of Southern Baptists are pleased with the direction conservatives have taken the SBC.

I would love for the BGCT and the SBC to have a close working relationship in spreading the Kingdom of God and carrying out the Great Commission. I will believe it when I see it!

I do not believe they truly want reconciliation now. They are just scared they are going to lose money. I have observed 20 years of actions and words. I was on staff of the SBC Christian Life Commission in 1979 and have been a keen observer of their words and actions.

Plan of reconciliation offered

Therefore, I offer a plan of reconciliation and I promise to meet with SBC leaders in October 2002, when I have SEEN the following:

1) A public apology for 20 years of lying. I need to hear Pressler and Patterson admit that many of their statements over the past 20 years were sheer fabrication.

2) Hundreds of former seminary professors deserve apologies but I will settle for five private and public apologies. I need to see apologies made to Winfred Moore, Richard Jackson, Daniel Vestal, Russell Dilday and Herbert Reynolds for malicious lies made about their personal character and commitment to Scripture.

3) A commitment followed by action that shows that not one seminary professor or missionary will have to sign the 2000 BF&M statement as a condition of employment.

4) Two years of inclusive appointments from Texas and other states and James Merritt's public statement that the persons will not have to agree with the 2000 BF&M to be considered for appointment. Last week he said they would appoint no one to any SBC committee who did not endorse the 2000 BF&M.

5) A public apology for all the God-called women who have left the SBC to fulfill the call of God these past 20 years.

6) Two years of Baptist Press releases that do not mention Wade's or my past or present relationship with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, which has nothing to do our positions of leadership and influence in the BGCT.

To SBC Leaders

SBC leaders truly wanting reconciliation and wanting to work with all Baptists will not have a problem with these six things. Should I observe them over a period, I will be happy to sit with them and work toward our mutual goal of carrying out the Great Commission.

Should I observe these actions, they will restore my trust in them. I will gladly meet with them about the importance of telling the world about Jesus.

I look forward to October 2002. The whole Baptist world will be excited should this meeting can take place. We would greatly help the Kingdom of God should this meeting take place. You have my word I will be there. Now show Texas Baptists and all traditional Baptists you are serious. We will rejoice if you are!

October 2000