Dear Reader,
Have you ever been caught in a no-win situation? If so, you can perhaps identify with my position currently. A few weeks ago, we reported that the board of the Woman's Missionary Union of Virginia had, partly in response to a request from 19 pastors in the Piedmont Baptist Association, appointed an ad hoc committee to investigate their concerns regarding the treatment of personnel at Crossroads Camp, which is owned and operated by WMUV.
Since that time, the committee has begun its work and is being understandably and appropriately tight-lipped at this point. I have responded to some of you in writing or on the phone who have questioned whether the committee, given its connection to the WMU, can be objective. I can only say that the persons on the committee represent some of the best we have in Virginia Baptist life.
My conviction, particularly after speaking with Margaret Wayland, chairperson of the ad hoc committee, is that the committee is approaching its work without bias and without prejudice. Anyone wishing to contact the ad hoc committee may do so in writing by sending their concerns to Margaret Wayland, Woman's Missionary Union of Virginia, P.O. Box 8435, Richmond, VA 23226 or to Marilee White, Baptist General Association of Virginia, P.O. Box 8568, Richmond, VA 23226 Attn: Margaret Wayland.
So what is my dilemma? To what extent do we report information that comes to us? Some expect to be fully informed of all issues affecting Virginia Baptist life while others expect that the Religious Herald will refrain from printing reports that cast Virginia Baptists and our partners in an unflattering light. I am attempting to be faithful to our mission of interpreting, informing and inspiring Virginia Baptists while being aware of their competing and sometimes contradictory expectations. The evidence is that no matter what we decide, somebody will be upset with us.
In the matter of WMUV, I am counseled by some to let the committee do its work without drawing attention to it. Their point is that the questions raised should be handled by the officially sanctioned committee rather than reviewed openly. Their view is based on the conviction that it is not in the best interest of the WMUV or the Kingdom to air dirty laundry openly.
On the other hand, others make the point that we should demonstrate fastidious integrity by admitting that, as human entities, occasionally our laundry gets dirty. They point out that the objective is not to display dirty laundry but to clean it. True, by doing our laundry openly, observers can view the dirt. But more importantly, they will also witness the cleansing. They will also be less suspicious that dirty laundry is being hidden when they observe the openness with which it is treated.
So what is the appropriate position for the state Baptist paper to take? Despite a recent assertion made to me, I am not attempting to capitalize on a situation to sell more papers. Our mission is much more significant than that.
As I have prayed and searched for what is right in this matter, the truth seems to lie between the extremes. Yes, Virginia Baptists need to be informed; but, no, they don't need to know every little detail. Some things are not edifying. Yes, we need to be responsible and sensitive to the feelings of Virginia Baptists and our partners, but our purpose is not public relations. We are not here to spin information to put it in the best light possible or to withhold unpleasant news and publish only the good. Some state Baptist papers have become mere information outlets for their respective state conventions. Fortunately, Virginia Baptists have always been independent enough to demand a state paper that is equally independent.
No, we don't need to report every failure, flaw and miscalculation. But, if these become patterns and if they impact the Kingdom work we are called to accomplish, they need to be examined. When in a 10-year span about 25 people have left the employ of one of our partners, many of them being fired or feeling forced out; when former employees speak to us of their concerns about leadership practices; and when a church's WMU claims that it cannot get complete information from the state office about bylaws, policies, procedures and disbursements, how do we respond?
For now, I believe the most responsible action for us to take is to trust the ad hoc committee and the trustees of the WMUV to listen attentively and objectively to the concerns of those who have stories to tell. We need to trust them to make it safe for current employees to speak without fear of reprisal. We need to trust that they will probe inconsistencies. We need to trust that they will consider all the evidence and prayerfully and without coercion take appropriate action. We need to trust that they will take into account what is best for WMUV, all Virginia Baptists and the kingdom of Christ. They are, after all, trustees. Mrs. Wayland has pledged that our trust will not be misplaced.
It is a very difficult thing for ad hoc committee members to be charged with investigating the leadership of an organization they hold in high esteem. It is also very difficult for the leaders to have their decisions and practices questioned and investigated. We need to remember them in our prayers. We need also to remember those who are coming forward to speak of their experiences. Having spoken with some of them, I have heard their pain.
Meanwhile, the Religious Herald staff will continue to listen, ask questions and share information. I cannot promise that the staff and I will always make the right call in knowing what needs to be shared within the pages of the Religious Herald, but I can promise that through prayer and with compassion we will make every attempt to reach the correct conclusions.