I recently read a letter in the Religious Herald called “Again, the SBC is unfair” [May 31] and I agree with the writer that it is time that the BGAV was represented at the SBC level. I compliment President Frank Page for being the first president of the SBC to allow BGAV people to serve in many years and I hope through fairness this will become a pattern for the future.
I am somewhat disturbed because of the writer's opinion on taxation without representation and I believe it is appropriate to look within the souls of Virginia Baptists and examine our own patterns of representation on the mission board, committees and trustee boards.
The Baptist General Association of Virginia has four different giving patterns. Most of our monies come through WM1 and WM2, and these are designed for SBC churches to send monies to the SBC and also to the BGAV. Approximately 75 to 80 percent or better of the 1,400 churches in the BGAV are Southern Baptist/BGAV churches. Most of the monies received by the BGAV come from Southern Baptist churches. Approximately 10 percent of the monies received come from the CBF churches in Virginia.
I talked with two high level officials at the Baptist General Association of Virginia and told them that I did a study of the giving patterns versus the appointments over the past 10 to 12 years and found that even though the SBC churches give 75 to 80 percent of the monies, the individual appointments to the mission board are approximately 50 percent SBC and 50 percent CBF. The appointments to committees and trustees are even more alarming. Approximately 62.5 percent of all appointments to boards and trustees are from CBF-leaning churches. This means that the SBC churches pay the bills and the CBF churches control the BGAV. When I told this to the two individuals from the BGAV, they agreed and said that the BGAV was not getting enough nominations from pastors, associations and individuals.
Many times I have heard people say that it seems that the same people or churches are appointed. My concern is that if we as Virginia Baptists think that the SBC is unfair, we should not do the same thing. My question would be: Is the BGAV allowing the CBF to take over and control the BGAV? During the last 10 years the presidents of the BGAV have been nominated from Virginia Baptist Committed and nine of the last 10 presidents are from CBF-leaning churches. Virginia Baptist Committed seems to be a CBF-leaning organization that is dominating Virginia Baptist elections and appointments. Once again, the SBC pays the bills and the CBF runs the show. Is it time for people in our state convention to look for other ways to be represented in the elections of officers? Will the officials of the BGAV try to rectify this overwhelming discrepancy, or do they wish to become a CBF state convention?
The writer of the article I mentioned said that the BGAV was being taxed without representation at the SBC level. Maybe he was right. I believe that in our state we have a situation that is just as bad and we are “the pot calling the kettle black.” I call our situation religious financial socialism, and socialism has never worked. Only God works!
Dennis K. Myers, Petersburg