I serious doubt whether anyone has ever heard of J. Kent Kroencke. He serves as the pastor of a small church in Illinois. According to a recent blog article, he has been theologically Reformed since his conversion, but he did not realize how negatively other Christians felt toward the "doctrines of grace" until he began serving as a pastor in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). At one frustrating moment in his ministry, he ripped Romans 9 from the pages of his Bible and threw it on the floor, although he humbly admits, "This was not one of my crowning moments as a pastor…." Recently, Mr. Kroencke has been contemplating the pursuit of more formal training at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, a choice that he admits may prove detrimental to his career in the SBC but he is convinced that "being a graduate of SBTS will be an asset to my soul and integrity as a pastor." So what does the growing trend of "Calvinist-bashing" in the SBC mean to current and future seminary graduates, like our brother Kroencke, who have passionately embraced "the doctrines of grace" as their worldview? Will increasing denominational hostilities, evidenced by the recent events in the Florida Baptist Convention, send them to greener pastures like the Acts 29 Network or Sovereign Grace Ministries or perhaps the Presbyterian Church in America? Here are Mr. Kroencke's reflections on this question:
On a personal note, I have began to prepare myself spiritually for the fact that leaving my church and going to Seminary is not going to be the end of this struggle for me…. This action by the State Convention of Florida tells me that this is just the beginning of a widening chasm in the Convention and that being a graduate of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary at Louisville (which holds to a reformed position in its Abstract of Principles) will not be an asset to my "career!" But I am most assured that being a graduate of SBTS will be an asset to my soul and integrity as a pastor. If someone like Dr. Tom Nettles or Dr. Albert Mohler is considered a heretic then I am gravely concerned about what the future holds for the Southern Baptist Convention. Will there be a Calvinism litmus test instituted at our mission boards? Can our state conventions distribute anti-Calvinist literature when our flagship seminary is unashamedly Calvinistic and headed up by a 5 point Seminary President? I sense a real conflict looming on the horizon brothers.
Has anyone noticed the recent proliferation of Reformed conferences throughout the United States over the past ten years? With the exception of the Founders Ministries conferences, virtually none of these have any sort of SBC connection, including the national conference for Ligonier Ministries that attracts 5,000 people every year to Orlando. So what? There are now more options than ever for those who find themselves being slandered, ridiculed, criticized, and persecuted for their commitment to a Reformed soteriology. You can mark this down! Our Sovereign Lord will open the windows of heaven and pour out rich blessings to these bright, energetic, young leaders of tomorrow who are brave enough to stand firmly upon the Truth. Let the fury of hell itself be unleashed against them, like Rome against Luther, and I can assure you that they will respond in like manner,
Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason…my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. God help me. Amen.
To my friends in the raging inferno of denominational politics—pastors and seminarians alike—I offer my prayer to God and my encouragement to all of you, from my seemingly insignificant assignment as a missionary in the small principality of Wales, nearly 4,000 miles away. Keep the faith! Be careful that the enemy does not use these trials as an occasion for stumbling. And as Paul encouraged the saints in Colossae, "Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person."
Bill,
This action by the State Convention of Florida tells me that this is just the beginning of a widening chasm in the Convention and that being a graduate of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary at Louisville (which holds to a reformed position in its Abstract of Principles) will not be an asset to my “career!â€
How have we gotten to the ABSURD POSITION in the SBC where a Southern Baptist Pastor would say “being a graduate of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary… will not be an asset to my career!”?
If this “CANCER of Anti-Calvinism†is not surgically removed from the Southern Baptist Body… it will kill the Convention!
Grace to all,
Being “Reformed” within the SBC, despite being seminary trained (whether at SBTS or elsewhere), is a definite “black mark” for your career unless you have built relationships with the higher-ups AND have demonstrated a willlingness to tow the party line.
Brothers, we are not professionals.
Greg: For those who don’t know you very well, Greg, you might want to turn the flame-thrower down just a touch. I know it’s hard to watch what’s going on, especially since you live near the epicenter of recent events, and not get worked up to a lather; but it could be counter-productive if we resort to the same sort of name-calling to make ourselves heard. You know I love you, brother!
James: I’m very saddened that some of the more prominent Calvinists within the SBC have distanced themselves from Founders for those EXACT reasons. Excellent point! And refusing to tow the party line will get you fired in some circles, or should I rephrase that: it might cause your position to be eliminated due to a staffing audit and/or budgetary considerations.
UberGoober: I love that name, man! Where did that come from? Something one of your offspring calls you? YOU are right . . . well, at least theoretically speaking. Someone should write a book about that!
Bill:
Great post! Thanks!
Bill,
I really did not think I had used flame throwing rhetoric beyond coining the term “Hyper Anti-Calvinistâ€â€¦ as a turn on their insistence on calling all Calvinist “Hyperâ€â€¦
However if you say it was over the top then it probably was, so I deleted the article from my blog… and with that… I will retire from this little skirmish…
re: the name…I saw myself on home video. You know me…you have to admit it fits, no?
Greg: I was not referring to your comment to this post, so please don’t take offense and leave. It was only after I read your blog post that I came back and wrote my note to you. I am sorry if I didn’t make that clear. There’s plenty of room for speaking the truth to those who seek to stamp out Reformed theology from the SBC, but we just have to be careful that our speech is seasoned with salt, not vinegar. I struggle with this, too, so if anyone out there feels that I have stepped over the line, please say so. I can take it, really!!
Bill,
Thanks for giving me the heads up on your response to my posting. I have learned some hard fought lessons about reformation in the past 12 years that I have been preaching. The essence of the fight in the local churches is not Calvin vs Arminius or Augustine vs Pelagian or how ever you want to frame the issue, it is theological thinking vs. Non-theological thinking. Most rank and file Baptist are not prepared to have these sort of discussions. When they are broached its as if we are speaking a different language. Biblical training in a systematic manner is so foreign to their ears that it is taken as a strange teaching. I can certainly sympathize with many of the people who are struggling with this issue, since almost every Calvinist that I know has wrestled with these soul terrifying doctrines as they came to light in their life.
However, what I cannot abide is the SBC leadership fanning the flames of ignorance and fear amongst the local churches. I was excited to hear that Lifeway was going to address Calvinism with their special new division, but was deflated when I saw that the core of their “research” was a poll of SBC pastors. In Baptist fashion, it is implied that since there are less Calvinist it must mean that the Calvinist are wrong. As my pastor always described Baptist business meetings, “Its like 2 wolves and a sheep voting on lunch!”
In response to the other comments concerning how we are to address this issue, I for one will do my best to keep my blog above board in relation to its civility. One of the greatest challenges that I have faced is training Christians to have civil and Biblical discussions about controversial issues. Civil discussion is a lost art among most people and anti-Calvinist literature is not a step in the right direction, to be sure. Isn’t ironic that the SBC issued a white paper on freemasonry in 1993 that stated that there are serious heresies within freemasonry, yet in the same breath the resolution stated that it is an issue of “liberty” and “conscience”? Is the tent big enough for Masons but not Calvinist?
…so..the SOUTHERN BAPTIST convention doesn’t look favorably on those who graduate from the SOUTHERN BAPTIST Theological Seminary?
Well it certainly looks odd when you see it in writing…
J Kent: I really appreciate your joining us, especially since you are the main figure in my post! I wonder if you would permit a further observation concerning “the essence of the fight” for a moment? Recognizing the absolute horror of what passes for evangelism in the SBC, I’m thinking that it goes even deeper than “theological vs. non-theological thinking,” but rather spiritual (not in a worldly sense, but as motivated by the Spirit) vs. non-spiritual thinking.
In other words, I am suggesting that the real fight is coming from the unsaved membership and leadership in our churches. It sounds really mean-spirited on my part, to the ears of some, but our churches are full of unconverted people: I would estimate 90% of most SBC or any other conservative Gospel-preaching churches.
Does this resonate at all with the experience of other “born again” church leaders whose hearts have been captured by God’s grace?
Lynn: Well, that seems to be what J Kent Kroencke is saying, although he probably wouldn’t mind if I paraphrase him a bit: pursuing academic training from ANY seminary or Bible college that stands in the Reformed tradition will be detrimental to his future pastoral ministry within the SBC. Why? Because it alerts the “pastor search committee” to the strong possibility that their candidate is a Calvinist. One of the criticisms currently being leveled at Calvinists in the SBC is centered around their “tacit deception” of pulpit committees: i.e., as one put it, they should “lay all their cards on the table” and fully disclose their doctrinal convictions.
J Kent:
You are just down the road from where I lived as a kid for some years and where my grand-parents still reside (Tuscola). The Lord bless you as you continue to minister in central IL and as you consider seminary training at SBTS.
Bill,
I would agree completely that the core of the issue is unregenerate membership of Southern Baptist Churches, but I am also careful not fall into the trap of doubting the Salvation of anyone who does not agree with me theologically. I would, however, cast a suspicious eye on anyone who responds with the kind of venom that many pastors have seen throughout the convention. It comes down to 2 basic kinds of people that I have dealt with over the years:
Baptist “A” responds with doubt and surprise at the Doctrines of Grace, but gives their pastor the benefit of the doubt and allows him to reason from the scriptures concerning these “new” teachings. Even if, in the end, they do not accept one or more points (usually limited atonement) they understand that Calvinism is at least a valid, orthodox position that does not undermine fellowship. Not exactly a reformed paradise like Capitol Hill Baptist, but we can proceed as a church to minister to people.
Baptist “B” responds with doubt and surprise, but then quickly ascribes wicked intent to the pastor and absolutely refuses to look to the scriptures for resolution. I many churches the pastor is then marked for destruction with no regard for his family or the health of the church. I am not currently in this situation myself (although I am not leaving on the best of terms either!) but I have seen it happen to other men. I am shocked at those who cannot at the very least admit that there are some “troubling” passages concerning man’s lack of ability to “choose God” and God’s reservation of the right to choose whom He wants.
Any real encounter with God is painful to say the least. There are those who respond with repentance to this encounter and there are those who slip deeper into rebellion. It is a simple spiritual truth that we must, as Bill alludes to, deal with directly by narrowing the definition of church membership from out current inclusiveness. Pastors must give a wide berth to his sheep to allow the Holy Spirit to change them from the inside out, but when it becomes clear that there has been no regeneration, he must act accordingly to protect the purity of the church.
Lynn:
Bill’s summation of my position is spot on. I am incredibly excited about the privilege of attending an institution like SBTS. SBTS is a unique blend of academic rigor that never loses its connection with ministry. This is a rare quality indeed! However, after being on the field for 12 years as an associate pastor and a senior pastor, my eyes are wide open about the reality facing graduates of institutions like SBTS. My heart is sick over all of the fresh faced 20 somethings (I am 36) who are currently attending SBTS and have no real idea of what lies ahead of them. How many of them will be driven from churches, or even the ministry all together because they are not willing to bow the knee to our churches’ immature notions of what a pastor ought to be or preach? They have no idea that when church members cannot undermine a pastor’s biblical teachings, they go after his personal life and even his family. It can become ugly very quickly, but this is the “context” in which we preach these days (and it has probably always been this way!)
James:
Thanks for the kind words of encouragement. Despite my recent experiences, I have had an outpouring of support from most of my church and people that I have ministered to over the years. I am going to SBTS with a great deal of prayer support!
Bill and J. Kent:
While you guys higher up on the ladder wrestle with this issue, allow me to give you a glimpse of what I see from the cheap seats.
Maybe I’m being dense here, but isn’t the SB Theological Seminary affiliated with the SBC? Or is it like Southern Nazarene University which supposedly has no ties to the Nazarene church?
When I attended SNU I expressed concern to my pastor about my lesbian professor and the plethora of liberal text books. I was told that SNU wasn’t, “under the jurisdiction of the Nazarene church,” what ever that means. However…when I made it known that I was going to pursue the matter further w/in the ranks of the University, I was chastised by the leadership in my church. Turns out the pastor’s brother was the Vice President for Church Relations at SNU…but there was no jurisdiction??? Needless to say, I was a bit confused. This mess led us to the SB church.
But now I’m confused again. The Nazarene church encourages liberalism to be taught in “their” universities and a person will be reprimanded if they sound the alarm. Conclusion: They want liberal pastors/lay people?
Conversely, the SB Convention doesn’t like Reformed theology being taught in “their” reformed-leaning seminary (if, indeed, it is affiliated with the SBC), and anyone who graduates from SBTS could be gainfully unemployable and anyone with a reformed bent could be run out on a rail. Conclusion: The SBC wants liberal pastors/lay people?
Huh?
I agree with you J. Kent, it has probably always been this way. And if I, a mere lay person, can be allowed a simplistic observation: God will purify His church. It seems inevitable that those who are truly regenerate (or truly seeking God…what ever you want to cal it) would be: a) less in number, b) the focus of animosity, and c) forced to comply with the party-line or leave. Many are leaving.
And is that so bad? Institutions are man-made. Is the attempt to restore the SBC to its reformed roots or continuing to be affiliated with them of such importance? Please understand, I’m not trying to minimize this issue or the personal investments into the SBC made by so many godly men, but when this type of dissension erupts the end result is more harmful than beneficial.
Maybe trying to restore the SBC is not the answer. Maybe it’s time to grab up all those graduates from SBTS and move on.
Jesus didn’t reform the the erroneous legalism of the Pharisees and Sadducees. He pointed out their hypocrisy, errors and self-centered worship. Those who followed him left the folly of a Pharisaical religion and followed Jesus. The result: The early Apostolic church and the Gospel of Jesus Christ preached throughout the world.
Likewise, the Reformation didn’t reform the Catholic Church; that colossal institution still stands, unmoving and unchanging in its error. But the men who left (or were ‘run out on a rail’) realized, after much struggle and dissension, reform wasn’t possible. The result: God, through the reformers, once again rescued His people from hypocrisy and error. He also pulled the Bible from the chains of the Catholic church and put it in the hands of all men.
When the old institutions stop producing fruit and start misrepresenting the Gospel of Christ, and in the SBC’s case, when numbers, positions, and platforms supplant the desire to teach the true Gospel…well, the pattern seems clear to me.
But I’m just a simple lay person sitting in the cheap seats…and the lady in front of me has big hair so it’s hard to see…
Lynn,
I understand your point about just starting new churches and believe me that I have certainly thought of it, but you also need to know that I have never had the lofty goal of “reforming the convention” just the little bit here in the Midwest that God gave me charge over! I am no revolutionary, just a man with a strong conviction to preach the Gospel as accurately as I possibly can and this gets me in trouble more often than not.
The question about SBC affiliation is a tricky one really. There has always been great diversity in the SBC and “control” is kinda of a curse word in the Baptist lexicon. Yes, the semiaries (6 of them) are all funded by the convention and directly affiliated with the convention, but the trustees of the various Baptist entities have a lot of lee way over the operation of those entities (although much less now after last night BF and M resolution!). It is also difficult to say “THE” Southern Baptist Convention does not like Calvinism being taught because we have no real hierarchy in the convention, only factions that seem to get along now and again long enough to fund some missionaries! Calvinism has been on the rise for the past twenty years and it is starting to cause a backlash among many of the churches and the local churches are the focus of my issue, not “THE” convention. I am not sure if that addresses your comment or not, but I am willing to try again if you want!
One final note about God purifying the church. I understand that there will be a final cleansing when the judgement comes, but in the mean time we as Christians have been given both the authority and the commission to purge the church of false teachings. Both of Paul’s letters to Timothy center much around this very process and how Timothy, as a Pastor/Elder must do this very thing for the sake of the church. Believe me, a little yeast levens the whole loaf and letting unregenerate people control the church (and I think that term is very important and it is not equal to, necessarily, people seeking after God) will bring more spiritual harm than doing nothing.
J Kent:
I understand what you mean by unregenerate people running the church. I guess I was too nervous to make such a bold statement. But I see that that is exactly what is happening in many churches as they seek to increase their numbers and appeal to the masses.
Lynn:
You have said something very profound in “I guess I was too nervous to make such a bold statement.” We have gotten out of the habit of speaking plainly and with biblical terms, and for this I blame us pastors. When someone actually verbalizes these truths they sound strange to our ear compared to the things that someone like Joel Osteen says. We have lost the kind of love that it takes to speak truth to one another without dressing it up in “acceptable terms”
You are not alone in your nervousness, I have found that many people are privately convicted about behavior in the church but when it is go time to hold people accountable, the pastor is left high and dry more often than not. I cannot tell you how many times I had to be the “bad guy” all by myself. sigh.
Here is some encouragement for you Lynn, you seem to really have a good sense of discernment, now just add some loving but firm directness and you can be a huge agent for change! Don’t be afraid of what you know to be true as it is verified by the scriptures!
Pingback: The Thin Edge - Thin Edge’s Top 10 for 2007
Cheer up Folks: The present situation is analogous to the one in North Carolina in the 1700s. The General Baptists who believed Christ died for all were apparently first on the grounds, but they were not very evangelistic or missionary minded. Then came in 1755 5 sovereign grace ministers. 2, Peter Peterson Van Horn & Benjamin Miller from the Phila. Assn. visited some of the General churches & persuaded them to adopt particular redemption (?), that is, become aligned with the Phila. Assn. & its Confession of Faith. 46 yrs. later those churches had 872 baptisms, Shubal Stearns, along with his b-i-l Daniel Marshall founded the Sandy Creek Church and later the Sandy Creek Assn. Shortly, they went from 16 to 600 to 900 and began establishing churches all over the place. John Gano was the first pastor, I think, of Jersey Bap. Church. He preached from the same platform with George Whitefield in South Caolina, had a part in the first great awakening and was in Kentucky during the second..and died there in 1806. He also baptized Geo. Washington. A friend of mine pastored a church in Tenn. that came from the Sandy Creek Assn. Daniel Marshall would found the first baptist church in Georgia, the Kiokee Bap. Church. The most liberal, radical, conservative, creative balanced, flexible, magnetic group going in those days were the sovereign grace believers of the Sandy Creek, Philadelphia, Charleston, Kehukee, Ketocton, Elkhorn, Holston, and Georgia assns, They worked with and earned the respect of the leading intellectual lights of their day. Thos. Jefferson even supported a Baptist preacher who went to Illinois to oppose the spread of slavery. These so-called calvinists secured religious liberty, united the Separate & Regular Baptists, persuaded General Baptists who were neither evangelistic nor missionary to become Regular Baptists who were both, used educated & uneducated ministers, made the South a Baptist kingdom, persuaded people who differed on the atonement to work together, worked with politicians to secure not only religious liberty but others, started some of the early anti-slavery efforts (would to God they had done more; it might have saved 650,000 + from being killled on the battlefields of the Civil War), and began the great century of Missions, inspired by Luther Rice, who stated in his memoirs, “Predestination is in the Bible and you had better preach it.” So do your selves a favor and borrow a page that really belongs in our camp, “Heretic and lout, a thing to flout, he drew a circle and shut me out, but love and I had the wit to win, we drew a circle and took him in.” After all, that period between the great awakenings really got miserable in some places. Still, some stayed faithful and occupied until the Lord came. As they did, so must we.